Ocean of (Allied) Blood.

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

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

User avatar
bigred
Posts: 4045
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:15 am

RE: IJAAF w/new beta

Post by bigred »

A recap of the turn. I am stalled at Marcus and wake.

Ponepa was shelled by a Mutsu SAG that ran into a USN DD TF.



Image
Attachments
a1a.jpg
a1a.jpg (868.81 KiB) Viewed 217 times
---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
tm.asp?m=2597400
User avatar
bigred
Posts: 4045
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:15 am

RE: IJAAF w/new beta

Post by bigred »

At the end of the 1st day I have a ScreenPrint of the shelling at Tonguo and the resupply effort at Finchaven which was a success w/ damage to the Alabama. Also note how my CAP over US Alabama gets the job done until the next post.

Image
Attachments
a2a.jpg
a2a.jpg (561.25 KiB) Viewed 217 times
---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
tm.asp?m=2597400
User avatar
bigred
Posts: 4045
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:15 am

RE: IJAAF w/new beta

Post by bigred »

Now at the end of 2nd day air combat the Alabama gets hammered.

Image
Attachments
a2b.jpg
a2b.jpg (352.92 KiB) Viewed 217 times
---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
tm.asp?m=2597400
User avatar
bigred
Posts: 4045
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:15 am

RE: IJAAF w/new beta

Post by bigred »

I thought I had a SC cover force for this amphib TF near Buna. I must have screwed up. Good news is the IJN TF decided to take it's time going home and My TBFs loaded out.

Image
Attachments
a1.jpg
a1.jpg (855.4 KiB) Viewed 217 times
---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
tm.asp?m=2597400
User avatar
bigred
Posts: 4045
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:15 am

RE: IJAAF w/new beta

Post by bigred »

44-4-20: In part two of todays action I reinforced Chang Mai by air Transport. Note the new units. Seems FatR is making a major effort in the area.

Image
Attachments
a2.jpg
a2.jpg (992.86 KiB) Viewed 217 times
---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
tm.asp?m=2597400
User avatar
crsutton
Posts: 9590
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 8:56 pm
Location: Maryland

RE: IJAAF w/new beta

Post by crsutton »

ORIGINAL: bigred

44-4-20: In part two of todays action I reinforced Chang Mai by air Transport. Note the new units. Seems FatR is making a major effort in the area.

Image


Nice to see you are still slogging away. Would post screenies of major ship losses to date for both sides? Air losses and types? Top pilots and so on...
I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg
User avatar
bigred
Posts: 4045
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:15 am

RE: IJAAF w/new beta

Post by bigred »

Would post screenies of major ship losses to date for both sides? Air losses and types? Top pilots and so on...

Image
Attachments
a1.jpg
a1.jpg (993.84 KiB) Viewed 217 times
---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
tm.asp?m=2597400
User avatar
bigred
Posts: 4045
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:15 am

RE: IJAAF w/new beta

Post by bigred »

Pilots not so good. Lost all my best pilots in 43 over Burma in the effort to reclaim Burma and destroy the 25th army, which did occur.

Image
Attachments
a2.jpg
a2.jpg (302.91 KiB) Viewed 217 times
---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
tm.asp?m=2597400
User avatar
bigred
Posts: 4045
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:15 am

RE: IJAAF w/new beta

Post by bigred »

44-4-22:intel

Image
Attachments
a1.jpg
a1.jpg (155.91 KiB) Viewed 217 times
---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
tm.asp?m=2597400
User avatar
bigred
Posts: 4045
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:15 am

RE: IJAAF w/new beta

Post by bigred »

bb damage and experience

Image
Attachments
a2.jpg
a2.jpg (72.9 KiB) Viewed 217 times
---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
tm.asp?m=2597400
User avatar
bigred
Posts: 4045
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:15 am

RE: IJAAF w/new beta

Post by bigred »

FatR: The results at Ponape were disappointing for me..
Ground combat at Ponape (119,113)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 22678 troops, 436 guns, 886 vehicles, Assault Value = 676

Defending force 13412 troops, 225 guns, 44 vehicles, Assault Value = 240

Allied engineers reduce fortifications to 3

Allied adjusted assault: 377

Japanese adjusted defense: 353

Allied assault odds: 1 to 1 (fort level 3)

Allied Assault reduces fortifications to 3

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

Japanese ground losses:
1741 casualties reported
Squads: 78 destroyed, 46 disabled
Non Combat: 2 destroyed, 51 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 14 disabled
Guns lost 38 (8 destroyed, 30 disabled)
Vehicles lost 9 (6 destroyed, 3 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
440 casualties reported
Squads: 2 destroyed, 33 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 13 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 17 disabled
Vehicles lost 13 (1 destroyed, 12 disabled)

Assaulting units:
754th Tank Battalion
111th(Sep) Infantry Regiment
627th Tank Destroyer Battalion
18th Combat Engineer Regiment
25th Infantry Division
34th Combat Engineer Regiment
3rd USMC Tank Battalion
766th Tank Bn /5
3rd USN Naval Construction Battalion
231st USN Base Force
38th USN Naval Construction Battalion
I Corps Artillery
216th Coast AA Regiment
225th Field Artillery Battalion
26th USN Naval Construction Battalion
113th USAAF Base Force
82nd Mortar Battalion
30th USN Naval Construction Regiment

Defending units:
1st South Seas Det.
24th Infantry Regiment
Sasebo 3rd SNLF
5th South Seas Det.
35th Ind.Mixed Bde /1
37th Ind.Mixed Bde /1
52nd Construction Battalion
6th Base Force
19th JAAF AF Bn
1st JNAF AF Unit
70th Field AA Battalion
24th JNAF AF Unit
Ponape Naval Fortress
80th JAAF AF Bn /1
38th JNAF AF Unit
24th Air Flotilla /1
71st Field AA Battalion
31st Mountain Gun Regiment
55th JNAF AF Unit /2
4th Naval Construction Battalion
2nd Medium Mortar Battalion
51st Nav Gd /1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground combat at Ponape (119,113)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 22394 troops, 436 guns, 885 vehicles, Assault Value = 639

Defending force 10595 troops, 217 guns, 36 vehicles, Assault Value = 123

Allied adjusted assault: 334

Japanese adjusted defense: 181

Allied assault odds: 1 to 1 (fort level 3)

Allied Assault reduces fortifications to 2

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), forts(+), disruption(-), preparation(-)
experience(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
1925 casualties reported
Squads: 65 destroyed, 36 disabled
Non Combat: 4 destroyed, 59 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 18 disabled
Guns lost 49 (29 destroyed, 20 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
159 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 12 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 6 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 13 disabled
Guns lost 5 (1 destroyed, 4 disabled)

Assaulting units:
627th Tank Destroyer Battalion
111th(Sep) Infantry Regiment
34th Combat Engineer Regiment
754th Tank Battalion
18th Combat Engineer Regiment
25th Infantry Division
3rd USMC Tank Battalion
766th Tank Bn /5
82nd Mortar Battalion
3rd USN Naval Construction Battalion
231st USN Base Force
38th USN Naval Construction Battalion
113th USAAF Base Force
I Corps Artillery
225th Field Artillery Battalion
216th Coast AA Regiment
26th USN Naval Construction Battalion
30th USN Naval Construction Regiment

Defending units:
Sasebo 3rd SNLF
35th Ind.Mixed Bde /1
24th Infantry Regiment
5th South Seas Det.
37th Ind.Mixed Bde /1
31st Mountain Gun Regiment
55th JNAF AF Unit /2
6th Base Force
80th JAAF AF Bn /1
Ponape Naval Fortress
24th JNAF AF Unit
51st Nav Gd /1
4th Naval Construction Battalion
2nd Medium Mortar Battalion
1st South Seas Det.
70th Field AA Battalion
24th Air Flotilla /1
52nd Construction Battalion
19th JAAF AF Bn
71st Field AA Battalion
38th JNAF AF Unit /1

---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
tm.asp?m=2597400
User avatar
bigred
Posts: 4045
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:15 am

RE: Ponape falls

Post by bigred »

44-4-25: at the end of this 2 day turn Ponape will switch to allied control. The 25th US infantry division, which has led the assault, will have an experience rating of 69 at the end of this battle.

Image
Attachments
a1.jpg
a1.jpg (650.55 KiB) Viewed 217 times
---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
tm.asp?m=2597400
User avatar
bigred
Posts: 4045
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:15 am

RE: Ponape falls

Post by bigred »

Ponape will fall on this screenprint!!! My Marcus island invasion probably will fail...

Image
Attachments
a2.jpg
a2.jpg (510.94 KiB) Viewed 217 times
---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
tm.asp?m=2597400
User avatar
bigred
Posts: 4045
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:15 am

RE: Wake falls

Post by bigred »

Станислав
I hate the new air coordination rules...

Image
Attachments
b1.jpg
b1.jpg (53.23 KiB) Viewed 217 times
---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
tm.asp?m=2597400
User avatar
bigred
Posts: 4045
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:15 am

RE: On the chin!!!

Post by bigred »

44-4-28: FatR takes one on the Chin!!!

Image
Attachments
a1.jpg
a1.jpg (702.7 KiB) Viewed 217 times
---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
tm.asp?m=2597400
User avatar
bigred
Posts: 4045
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:15 am

RE: On the chin!!!

Post by bigred »

44-4-29: These air combat screen shots represent about 40% of total IJ LBA attacks in the SOPAC/SWPAC area.
Станислав
I hate the new air coordination rules...

Image
Attachments
a1a.jpg
a1a.jpg (837.96 KiB) Viewed 217 times
---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
tm.asp?m=2597400
User avatar
bigred
Posts: 4045
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:15 am

RE: On the chin!!!

Post by bigred »

+40000VPs for allies. Jumped 550points since 44/4/22.

Image
Attachments
a1.jpg
a1.jpg (62.32 KiB) Viewed 217 times
---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
tm.asp?m=2597400
User avatar
crsutton
Posts: 9590
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 8:56 pm
Location: Maryland

RE: On the chin!!!

Post by crsutton »

Well, you look to be doing fine. The fun thing is that due to the early setbacks and learning curve vs a good player, your game will most likely go all the way into 1946. This in itself will be very interesting as I have not seen it happen yet.

As I am sure you noticed every surface warship arriving after 1/44 comes with excellent experience. You just get a flood of Fletchers with great night exp and working torpedoes. Because they have armor and no other DD in the game does, they just are deadly. In low moon conditions, I do not ever bother using larger ships in surface actions. I just flood him with Allied DDs. The high experience modern Allied warships really have started to dominate all surface actions.

Also, I just turned over to 1/45. All of a sudden all Allied green replacement pilots come with much higher skills right off the bat. Navy pilots come right out of school with an average exp of 50 and 50 air skill. Makes it easy to train them up and I am just buried in good pilots for a change. Keep the faith, baby!
I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg
User avatar
bigred
Posts: 4045
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:15 am

RE: On the chin!!!

Post by bigred »

As I am sure you noticed every surface warship arriving after 1/44 comes with excellent experience. You just get a flood of Fletchers with great night exp and working torpedoes. Because they have armor and no other DD in the game does, they just are deadly. In low moon conditions, I do not ever bother using larger ships in surface actions. I just flood him with Allied DDs. The high experience modern Allied warships really have started to dominate all surface actions.
Interesting comments since I have noted the same about surface combat w/ the USN DDs. No need to risk the CA/BB on these attritional battles. Check out this result from today.

Image
Attachments
a1.jpg
a1.jpg (765.31 KiB) Viewed 217 times
---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
tm.asp?m=2597400
JocMeister
Posts: 8258
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:03 am
Location: Sweden

RE: On the chin!!!

Post by JocMeister »

I take it you are playing with the newest BETA? [:D]
Image
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”