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: Moulman abandoned

Post by bigred »

ORIGINAL: Itdepends

He's been getting very busy- it's been a week or more for him to turn around most of the turns from our game as well. Also the better the turn runs for the Allies the longer it takes him to do his part. [:D]
yep, I guess he is still thinking about those 7 jap CVLs I just sank...
---bigred---

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

RE: Paras detrain 52 BDE!!!

Post by bigred »

I had a dream attack this turn by the Indian para units against the IJA 52nd Mixed BDE caught alone in target hex while in strat mode. 10-1 troop kill ratio and the IJN retreated into another hex!!!.

Image
Attachments
a1.jpg
a1.jpg (670.48 KiB) Viewed 234 times
---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
tm.asp?m=2597400
mattep74
Posts: 90
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 12:46 pm

RE: 19th to 22nd February 1942

Post by mattep74 »

You know, a few years after the war Hollywood would make The Battle for Pearl Harbor about the heroes on Hawaii and John Wayne as a commander who refuses to surrender but fights to the last

And in 2001 Pearl Harbor starring Ben Affleck would come out were he is on a supersub that takes care of the entire KB[:D]

The defense of Hawaii would be put in the American mytology like the Alamo
Itdepends
Posts: 937
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 9:59 am

RE: 19th to 22nd February 1942

Post by Itdepends »

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

RE: Sunk IJN CVs

Post by bigred »

A look at sunk IJN CVs. Looks like over half the Jap CV fleet has been sunk. I suspect FatR has lost his ability to stand up to the allied CV fleets.

After last CV battle at Bangkok FatR made another mistake and retreated his CVs into Bangkok port. (edit- the AI retreated the CVs into port) This is a summation of total reported hits on ships in port second day of this turn. I note the weather was partly cloudy instead of rain. 0 moon.

I received no reported hits on first night of turn.

Japanese Ships
CV Junyo, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires, heavy damage
CVE Chuyo, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage
CV Hiyo, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires, heavy damage
xAP Kasado Maru, Bomb hits 1
CVE Chuyo, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage
CVE Chuyo, Bomb hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
CV Junyo, Bomb hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
CV Hiyo, Bomb hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
CVE Chuyo, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage
CVE Chuyo, Bomb hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
CV Junyo, Bomb hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
CV Hiyo, Bomb hits 1, on fire, heavy damage

Image
Attachments
a2.jpg
a2.jpg (95.96 KiB) Viewed 234 times
---bigred---

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

RE: 44-8-20

Post by bigred »

Made a shock attack at Truk...

Image
Attachments
8-20.jpg
8-20.jpg (587.34 KiB) Viewed 234 times
---bigred---

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

RE: 44-8-22

Post by bigred »

Well I honored FatR and he just doesn't seem to care...He tried to sink his namesake...[:D]



Image
Attachments
a3.jpg
a3.jpg (126.24 KiB) Viewed 234 times
---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
tm.asp?m=2597400
User avatar
Crackaces
Posts: 3858
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 3:39 pm

RE: 44-8-22

Post by Crackaces »

After last CV battle at Bangkok FatR made another mistake and retreated his CVs into Bangkok port

That might not have been an action ordered by FatR but the game reassigning a port due to ?damage? Without conjecture I have experienced recently TF's reassigning their home port after an engagement where ships from the TF are sunk/badly damaged ... I have no clue what algorithm causes this behavior but I have observed it ...
"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so"
User avatar
bigred
Posts: 4045
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:15 am

RE: 44-8-22

Post by bigred »

ORIGINAL: Crackaces
After last CV battle at Bangkok FatR made another mistake and retreated his CVs into Bangkok port

That might not have been an action ordered by FatR but the game reassigning a port due to ?damage? Without conjecture I have experienced recently TF's reassigning their home port after an engagement where ships from the TF are sunk/badly damaged ... I have no clue what algorithm causes this behavior but I have observed it ...
yes, I heard of this also in one of the beta upgrades. FatR has mentioned to me in private email aggravation on this issue in the past several days.. Seems to be a dangerous move to move CVs close to a friendly port w/in range of enemy LBA. It could happen to me later.
---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
tm.asp?m=2597400
User avatar
Crackaces
Posts: 3858
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 3:39 pm

RE: 44-8-22

Post by Crackaces »

ORIGINAL: bigred
ORIGINAL: Crackaces
After last CV battle at Bangkok FatR made another mistake and retreated his CVs into Bangkok port

That might not have been an action ordered by FatR but the game reassigning a port due to ?damage? Without conjecture I have experienced recently TF's reassigning their home port after an engagement where ships from the TF are sunk/badly damaged ... I have no clue what algorithm causes this behavior but I have observed it ...
yes, I heard of this also in one of the beta upgrades. FatR has mentioned to me in private email aggravation on this issue in the past several days.. Seems to be a dangerous move to move CVs close to a friendly port w/in range of enemy LBA. It could happen to me later.

Exactly! One has to be very very careful about engaging in air/naval battles where the enemy can ambush forces suddenly returning to port . especially if that port has no flak protection because the ships flak seems to be borked in port? Now if lots of flak exists at the port .. it could be interesting .. but it seems without flak/CAP defense .. it is a very good thing to force the algorithm to return the TF to a local port and then smash them with a port attack ...
"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so"
JocMeister
Posts: 8258
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:03 am
Location: Sweden

RE: 44-8-22

Post by JocMeister »

ORIGINAL: Crackaces
especially if that port has no flak protection because the ships flak seems to be borked in port? Now if lots of flak exists at the port ..

This is my experience too. Ship flak doesn´t fire when disbanded in port but whatever AA in the base will of course.
Image
User avatar
bigred
Posts: 4045
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:15 am

RE: 44-8-21

Post by bigred »

1.

Image
Attachments
8-21.jpg
8-21.jpg (614.91 KiB) Viewed 234 times
---bigred---

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

RE: 44-8-21

Post by bigred »

2.

Image
Attachments
a1.jpg
a1.jpg (62.51 KiB) Viewed 234 times
---bigred---

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

RE: 44-8-21

Post by bigred »

3. Action is hot and heavy..

Image
Attachments
8-21a.jpg
8-21a.jpg (753.66 KiB) Viewed 234 times
---bigred---

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

RE: 44-8-21

Post by bigred »

4.

Image
Attachments
8-21b.jpg
8-21b.jpg (673 KiB) Viewed 234 times
---bigred---

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

RE: 44-8-21

Post by bigred »

5.

Image
Attachments
8-21d.jpg
8-21d.jpg (662.69 KiB) Viewed 234 times
---bigred---

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

RE: 44-8-22

Post by bigred »

1.

Image
Attachments
8-22.jpg
8-22.jpg (587.34 KiB) Viewed 234 times
---bigred---

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

RE: 44-8-22

Post by bigred »

2.

Image
Attachments
8-22a.jpg
8-22a.jpg (602.15 KiB) Viewed 234 times
---bigred---

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

RE: 44-8-22

Post by bigred »

b.

Image
Attachments
8-22b.jpg
8-22b.jpg (632.77 KiB) Viewed 234 times
---bigred---

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

RE: 44-8-22

Post by bigred »

c.

Image
Attachments
8-22c.jpg
8-22c.jpg (636.12 KiB) Viewed 234 times
---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
tm.asp?m=2597400
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”