Buried in the Sunset (Marbakka [A] vs. Texas_D [J]) - Reluctant Admiral 4.1

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17760
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: Buried in the Sunset (Marbakka [A] vs. Texas_D [J]) - Reluctant Admiral 4.1

Post by John 3rd »

You guys are sure turning out the turns. Now that you are a couple months into the Mod, how is it going? Always looking for feedback!
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
marbakka
Posts: 410
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2012 1:02 pm

RE: Buried in the Sunset (Marbakka [A] vs. Texas_D [J]) - Reluctant Admiral 4.1

Post by marbakka »

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

You guys are sure turning out the turns. Now that you are a couple months into the Mod, how is it going? Always looking for feedback!

I like it, but bear in mind that I don't really have anything to compare it too since I'm so new. I do like the stack limits. I think that adds something to the game.

TexasD says he likes it as well. He particularly mentioned the larger naval assault units.
marbakka
Posts: 410
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2012 1:02 pm

RE: Buried in the Sunset (Marbakka [A] vs. Texas_D [J]) - Reluctant Admiral 4.1

Post by marbakka »

Combat Report - 2/14/1942

My convoy out of SF will be ready to go in 2 days, I think. Enterprise and Lexington will have to hustle when they get to Pearl or they may not be joining (they have to replenish pilots/aircraft as well).

What I'm pretty sure is the last element of the KB is fading off into the mist toward Truk. I hate not knowing where the KB is, but at least I know I have a breather in the Solomon's for a bit. If I had to guess, I'd say that he will reload and then come hit Fiji/Noumea hard. Let's hope the timing isn't such that that happens just as I'm bringing in all those troops.
marbakka
Posts: 410
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2012 1:02 pm

RE: Buried in the Sunset (Marbakka [A] vs. Texas_D [J]) - Reluctant Admiral 4.1

Post by marbakka »

Combat Report - 2/15/1942

My AVG ambush over Changsha wasn't really all that I wish it had been, but I certainly came out on top. I will leave them there for a few days to see if they continue to be successful.

He bombarded Port Moresby with 2 BBs, a CA, and escorts. I guess he's tired of losing ships every time he tries to land more troops.

He is building an airfield at Ferguson Island near Milne Bay. I have a feeling that will be a thorn in my side pretty far into the war.

Both of my carrier groups will arrive in port tomorrow. Saratoga and Yorktown will arrive in San Francisco. Enterprise and Lexington will arrive in Pearl Harbor. Both groups need to repair a bit, and the latter group probably has a week or more of repairs. In the meantime, I'll be running pretty heavy ASW operations out of San Francisco in preparation for our massive convoy's departure. I am also filling replenishment fleets for the route to SOPAC.

Meanwhile, I'm trying to get the port in Luganville built up.
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17760
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: Buried in the Sunset (Marbakka [A] vs. Texas_D [J]) - Reluctant Admiral 4.1

Post by John 3rd »

ORIGINAL: marbakka

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

You guys are sure turning out the turns. Now that you are a couple months into the Mod, how is it going? Always looking for feedback!

I like it, but bear in mind that I don't really have anything to compare it too since I'm so new. I do like the stack limits. I think that adds something to the game.

TexasD says he likes it as well. He particularly mentioned the larger naval assault units.

Thanks. If you spot anything or have ideas please email, PM, or comment on the RA Threads.
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
marbakka
Posts: 410
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2012 1:02 pm

RE: Buried in the Sunset (Marbakka [A] vs. Texas_D [J]) - Reluctant Admiral 4.1

Post by marbakka »

Combat Report - 2/16/1942

- For the first time in probably a month and a half, there were no bombers over Changsha. Instead, he sent every Oscar within range to take a shot at the AVG units flying CAP. The results were disappointingly even, though the total casualties were low. My boys are off their game and I'll move them to the back to rest a bit.
- The only big news of the day were ground battles in Port Moresby and Changsha
- Port Moresby saw yet another deliberate attack. He evidently lacks engineer squads with his attack, because my fort level remains at 2 and thus, they continue to hold out like champions. The AV is down to 527(IJ) vs 221(Allied) with 1 to 2 odds.
- A surprise in Changsha! I had seen evidence of troop movement (mostly in SigInt), but I concluded that he was rotating units out of the city. Instead, he has just continued to build up his forces there. Today's deliberate attack came as a surprise, though he didn't fare terribly well:
Attacking force 199238 troops, 1925 guns, 580 vehicles, Assault Value = 6415

Defending force 134169 troops, 701 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 3619

Japanese engineers reduce fortifications to 2

Japanese adjusted assault: 4632

Allied adjusted defense: 3563

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 1 (fort level 2)

Japanese Assault reduces fortifications to 2

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(+), experience(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
20093 casualties reported
Squads: 325 destroyed, 1346 disabled
Non Combat: 4 destroyed, 238 disabled
Engineers: 31 destroyed, 172 disabled
Guns lost 135 (18 destroyed, 117 disabled)
Vehicles lost 114 (3 destroyed, 111 disabled)


Allied ground losses:
6359 casualties reported
Squads: 52 destroyed, 461 disabled
Non Combat: 6 destroyed, 128 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 28 disabled
Guns lost 69 (2 destroyed, 67 disabled)


Assaulting units:
36th Division
13th Tank Regiment
39th Division
6th Division
40th Division
116th Division
13th Division
110th Division
27th Division
41st Division
9th Armored Car Co
22nd Division
34th Division
15th Division
35th Division
17th Division
4th Ind.Mixed Brigade
3rd Division
32nd Division
15th Ind.Medium Field Artillery Regiment
2nd Ind. Engineer Regiment
1st Mortar Battalion
4th Mortar Battalion
51st Ind.Mtn.Gun Battalion
14th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
52nd Ind.Mtn.Gun Battalion
2nd Ind. Mountain Gun Regiment
11th Army
8th Ind. Engineer Regiment
6th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
If I counted right, that is 16 divisions in Changsha! And all that without any discernible weakness in other parts of China. I'm not sure what to make of this or how to respond. I have another 1000 AV to the SE that I can move in, but the city is pretty much bone dry on supplies, so that is about all I can do. I'll be doing some recon over the Hankow area to double check that I'm correct in saying that he has not reduced his defenses in this area. If he has, then my Ichang army is rested and ready to go again.
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17760
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: Buried in the Sunset (Marbakka [A] vs. Texas_D [J]) - Reluctant Admiral 4.1

Post by John 3rd »

He will be facing that stacking penalty. I imagine after each attack his units fall into chaos. Look at the amount of casualties he took! It really is a nasty addition put into this game by JWE Inc..
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
marbakka
Posts: 410
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2012 1:02 pm

RE: Buried in the Sunset (Marbakka [A] vs. Texas_D [J]) - Reluctant Admiral 4.1

Post by marbakka »

Combat Report - 2/17/1942

I've got to stop saying to myself "Well that was a nice boring day" before the round is actually over.

It was a nice boring day until SURPRISE! a flight of 31 Betties which are apparently based in Munda showed up over Luganville and 3 of the ships trying to unload there (DD, xAKL, xAK). I'm annoyed that such a large force of bombers already has coverage over here. It looks like the only way I can move troops/supplies in is under carrier air cover until I get an airfield there. The 8th Marines are in trouble with low supplies and not all of their equipment able to be unloaded. I've also got to find a new home for the big shipment of just under 30000 troops that is loaded on the WC and headed here. I may just put them in there anyway since I'll have carriers coming with them.

I have a strong feeling that the KB will be coming to the Suva area next. He has seen too many tasty targets over here not to come hunting.


I've been working on the assumption that Australia needs both fuel and supplies shipped to it. Is that correct or is fuel sufficient for them to produce their own supplies? (newb question, I know)
marbakka
Posts: 410
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2012 1:02 pm

RE: Buried in the Sunset (Marbakka [A] vs. Texas_D [J]) - Reluctant Admiral 4.1

Post by marbakka »

Luganville forces will divert to Pago when they arrive in SOPAC if necessary

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

He will be facing that stacking penalty. I imagine after each attack his units fall into chaos. Look at the amount of casualties he took! It really is a nasty addition put into this game by JWE Inc..

I'm still not sure I understand how exactly those stack penalties work during attacks. Changsha's limit is 250,000. I think between the two of us there are something like 350000. So who gets the penalty? The attacker? Defender? both?
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20557
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

RE: Buried in the Sunset (Marbakka [A] vs. Texas_D [J]) - Reluctant Admiral 4.1

Post by BBfanboy »

I'm no expert, but I think Australia is only self-sufficient for maintenance of peacetime forces. To build bases or conduct combat it needs additional supplies. Remember that "supplies" includes all the equipment, vehicles, guns, aircraft etc. needed to replace losses and build new units. Low supplies = no replacements. And if you want to replenish your fleet or launch bombing attacks from there, you draw on the supplies of ammo and avgas.

Oz can get along if it is not being attacked and you need to help islands with low supplies. But don't forget you can also haul from Capetown too, once it gets the monthly convoys building its stock. Check the reinforcement schedule to see when yours is due to arrive.

PS - have never played the RA mod but it might be one in which the amount carried by your cargo ships is restricted compared to the stock scenarios. A huge challenge to organize the shipping - not really fair to a newbie if this scenario has it. The scenario notes should tell you.
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
marbakka
Posts: 410
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2012 1:02 pm

RE: Buried in the Sunset (Marbakka [A] vs. Texas_D [J]) - Reluctant Admiral 4.1

Post by marbakka »

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
Oz can get along if it is not being attacked and you need to help islands with low supplies. But don't forget you can also haul from Capetown too, once it gets the monthly convoys building its stock. Check the reinforcement schedule to see when yours is due to arrive.

My CT convoys come way too far apart. I usually have the port bone dry within a couple days of the convoy emptying into the port. Right now it is all going to India.
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20557
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

RE: Buried in the Sunset (Marbakka [A] vs. Texas_D [J]) - Reluctant Admiral 4.1

Post by BBfanboy »

Good in a way - that you are using that supply. I ran the fuel reserve dry the first month and had to haul from Abadan to replenish. It won't let you go from off-map to off-map that is not connected by the off-map channels, so I set it to go from Abadan to a hex near the northern edge of the strip that borders the west side of the map and watch for the tanker TF to appear on-map, then send it to CT.

I never ran the CT supplies dry though, I think because I transferred some cargo ships to the West Coast USA ports when I saw I had too many for CT supply. By the time they got there the cargo in US ports and Vancouver was in the millions.If you find you have lots of supply building on the West Coast move some ships there.

That is Scenario 1 before the latest release though - RA may have different supply rates and the new mod may have reduced the supply buildup on WC NA.

It also occured to me that putting too many cargo ships into troop convoys will cause cargo shortages. Just another way the game slows down our moves by making us balance all the competing needs of logistics. It took me a while to find the right balance of shipping all over the map, even using the easy Scenario 1 version. You will find your optimum level eventually - good luck!
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
marbakka
Posts: 410
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2012 1:02 pm

RE: Buried in the Sunset (Marbakka [A] vs. Texas_D [J]) - Reluctant Admiral 4.1

Post by marbakka »

Combat Report - 2/18/1942

- Ouch! Another attack in Changsha. He somehow got 1 to 130 odds in my favor. However, the casualties weren't anything like that. He lost 15 and had 408 squads disabled compared to my 10 disabled. He won't be turning to leave, I don't think, but it'll be a few days before attacks again. [:-]

Enterprise and Lexington escaped the Battle of the Coral Sea and the Battle of the Timor Sea with no damage, but the long voyage from the WC all the way down and around Australia and back took a toll. Lexington requires nearly 20 days in the shipyard to get fully repaired. Enterprise will be dockside for a week or so. I'm not sure either of these will be able to help escort my troops to SOPAC. Lex only has 1 major engine damage point, so I may send her out unrepaired. I would have to pull a BB off the yard to fit her on anyway.

Prince of Wales is a problem. She hasn't repaired at all in 4 days. She has 92 SYS 36 FLT and 26 ENG damage. I could scuttle her, but it has occurred to me that if I leave her floating there in the port, she might soak up a bomb or two the next time the KB rolls around. What is the advantage of scuttling?
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20557
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

RE: Buried in the Sunset (Marbakka [A] vs. Texas_D [J]) - Reluctant Admiral 4.1

Post by BBfanboy »

Scuttling saves you 10% on VP loss.
You probably have a full dockyard and would have to raise PoWs priority for the dockyard to expend points on her. Also, the repair system tries first to repair flotation damage and that may be very slow without actually drydocking.
Just fit her with a long schnorkel and send her to Columbo. [8|]
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
marbakka
Posts: 410
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2012 1:02 pm

RE: Buried in the Sunset (Marbakka [A] vs. Texas_D [J]) - Reluctant Admiral 4.1

Post by marbakka »

Combat Report - 2/19/1942

I'm terrified. Somewhere during the replay I heard the "main body spotted" sound, but the only thing I can find is a CV supposedly reported at Kendari. Doubtful at best.

What I see clear as day is the combat TF that is pursuing my transports that left Luganville the day before yesterday. The important one - with the equipment for all the troops at Luganville - is, of course, the slowest and most likely to get caught and sunk. It has 4 DDs that had better be amazing. His SAG is 4 hexes away, but I've redirected them toward Suva at Full Speed.

Meanwhile, I had my Suva surface ships (just a couple light cruisers) escorting the badly damaged La Triumphant to Sydney. That worthless DD is sent on ahead with only a DD to escort it while I've turned the cruisers and a couple DDs back to Suva to hopefully protect my shipping there. Another force led by CLs Mauritius and De Ruyter will leave Sydney immediately.

I should have been better prepared for a simple SAG threat. Most of my surface assets in SOPAC are still repairing from the Battle around PM or escorting wounded ships to major shipyards.
marbakka
Posts: 410
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2012 1:02 pm

RE: Buried in the Sunset (Marbakka [A] vs. Texas_D [J]) - Reluctant Admiral 4.1

Post by marbakka »

Combat Report - 2/20/1942

Japan captures Cocos Islands. I wonder how he intends to use that base or if it is just a routine capture.

His combat TF retreated to a position just north of Luganville. I think he is planning on leaving it there to react to anything trying to supply that port.
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20557
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

RE: Buried in the Sunset (Marbakka [A] vs. Texas_D [J]) - Reluctant Admiral 4.1

Post by BBfanboy »

If you have Cocos Island you can use it to base patrol planes and see any moves into the IO west of Oz or NW of Cocos through the strait between Java and Sumatra. By taking it he increases his chances of a surprise raid or amphib landing in Oz or India.

His patrol planes can go 25 hexes - not enough to see all the way to Oz from Cocos Is., but enough to cause you to route Capetown convoys further south and N. Oz convoys close to the coast. This reduces the amount of area his raiders have to look for victims. He can also fuel up short ranged ships like DDs there. Many Japanese players use DDs in twos or threes to raid unescorted convoys.
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
marbakka
Posts: 410
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2012 1:02 pm

RE: Buried in the Sunset (Marbakka [A] vs. Texas_D [J]) - Reluctant Admiral 4.1

Post by marbakka »

Combat Report - 2/21/1942

To my surprise, Port Moresby held out nicely through another battle. They did take some critical losses, though, so I'm not optimistic about the next attempt.

AVG performed admirably above Changsha. SigInt shows some of the units in Changsha planning for attacks in northern China. I'm wondering if he may be shifting to a "north first" strategy since he has had trouble in central China.
marbakka
Posts: 410
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2012 1:02 pm

RE: Buried in the Sunset (Marbakka [A] vs. Texas_D [J]) - Reluctant Admiral 4.1

Post by marbakka »

Combat Report - 2/22/1942

A Japanese sub struck and sunk AVP Swan just off of Suva. She was headed to Luganville so that I could base some search planes up there and get eyes on the rest of the Solomons. The number of enemy subs in this area has increased significantly, and I can't really match it with an equal increase in ASW. I do have a surface group coming over from Aussie, but I'm not sure how much those DDs will be of use.

Our massive troop/AG convoy from the WC to Suva left port yesterday. It is SUPPOSED to be traveling in three groups: 2 CV TFs, an ASW fleet (2 hexes behind), and the 4 or 5 transport TFs (2 hexes behind the ASW fleet). Instead, I have 2 CV TFs, an ASW fleet, and then a string of hexes with 1 transport TF each. It feels so...safe.
marbakka
Posts: 410
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2012 1:02 pm

RE: Buried in the Sunset (Marbakka [A] vs. Texas_D [J]) - Reluctant Admiral 4.1

Post by marbakka »

Combat Report - 2/23/1942

Pretty much nothing to report this turn.

He had a sub lay mines in Noumea, but my guys are already on it.
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”