Rumble in the Southwest witpqs-A vs Andav-J 2011-11-29 to 2017-02-08

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

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

User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: 1943 July 31

Post by witpqs »

Well... too late now!

Let's hope that the bombardment during the night suppresses opposing fires, and that bombing during the day maintains the disruption. Cross your fingers - turn just sent. [:'(]
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: 1943 July 31

Post by witpqs »

PS: This is one consequence of losing so many battleships at Pearl Harbor. I just have to make some hard choices.
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

1943 August 01

Post by witpqs »

1943 August 01

The Empire captured:


The Allies captured:


There were Imperial amphibious operations at:


There were Allied amphibious operations at:
Truk

Now two of the Australian divisions are upgraded and we are sending them on the road to Lashio. All three Australian divisions and two tank units (from SE Prome) will assist in clearing a supply path to the beleaguered Chinese.

CV Stewart Island has arrived at balboa and sets off toward the war. 4th USMC Division has arrived at Aden. They are prepping for Moulmein but I am undecided on where I will use them.

Here is what we are up against at Truk.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground combat at Truk (112,108)

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 14266 troops, 196 guns, 2 vehicles, Assault Value = 478

Defending force 29782 troops, 404 guns, 820 vehicles, Assault Value = 1082

Japanese ground losses:
15 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Allied ground losses:
8 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Vehicles lost 10 (2 destroyed, 8 disabled)

Assaulting units:
46th Naval Guard Unit
1st Ind.Tank Co
48th Naval Guard Unit
42nd Naval Guard Unit
Sasebo 5th SNLF /1
Guards Mixed Brigade
41st Infantry Rgt /2
15th Naval Construction Battalion
Truk Naval Fortress
4th Port Unit
10th JNAF AF Unit
24th Air Flotilla
57th JNAF AF Unit
4th Base Force
11th Air Fleet
5th JNAF Coy
5th RF Gun Bn /2

Defending units:
Auckland (Mtd) Rifl Regiment
3rd Marine Division
762nd Tank Battalion
Q Alexandra's (Mtd) Regiment
763rd Tank Battalion
24th Infantry Division
Otago (Mtd) Rifles Regiment
3rd Pioneer Battalion
1st AmphTrac Engineer Battalion
3rd NZ Division

Our troops are in good shape and all ashore. We are over stacked 37,000 to 25,000 and supply is good, although obviously the burn rate will be very high at almost +50% over stacked. The transports will stop unloading additional supply and stand back a hex to avoid the CD guns. They and a dedicated supply convoy with AK ships will send in single or pairs of ships (with escort) resupply the troops as needed.

The first attack is tomorrow. Aerial killers from Enterprise and Saratoga will sweep at 25,000ft, but recon shows that all the fighters are gone. Only two 'other' types on the ground, and they are likely disabled. The sweep will go in anyway, just in case.

Flak and fighters (we did not sweep today in case of IJN carrier appearance) took down 11 out of 32 B-25D1 flying low against the port (CD guns) from Ponape. The 4EB also made their appearance, and the battleships collectively took more than 50 hits during their 10,000 yard bombardment (one BB alone took 40).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Naval bombardment of Truk at 112,108 - Coastal Guns Fire Back!

Japanese aircraft
no flights

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-44-IIa Tojo: 2 damaged
Ki-44-IIa Tojo: 2 destroyed on ground
H8K2 Emily: 1 damaged
A6M5 Zero: 2 damaged
G3M3 Nell: 1 damaged
H6K4-L Mavis: 1 damaged

317 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.

Allied Ships
BB New Mexico, Shell hits 40, on fire
BB Idaho
BB Oklahoma, Shell hits 13

Japanese ground losses:
383 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 9 destroyed, 14 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 1 disabled
Guns lost 9 (1 destroyed, 8 disabled)

Airbase hits 2
Airbase supply hits 4
Runway hits 11

OS2U-3 Kingfisher acting as spotter for BB New Mexico
Truk Naval Fortress firing at BB New Mexico
BB New Mexico firing at Truk Naval Fortress
BB Idaho firing at Truk
BB Oklahoma firing at Truk Naval Fortress
Truk Naval Fortress firing at BB Oklahoma


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Idaho apparently did not fire a round and will turn around and hit Truk ASAP. At a range greater than 10,000 yards! CA Salt Lake City will also hit Truk tonight from 20,000 yards.

We sank one mine tender and three midget subs (a fourth of which sank an LCI). Here is the list of our ships sunk today at Truk.

Image
Attachments
19430802..ipsSunk.jpg
19430802..ipsSunk.jpg (222.01 KiB) Viewed 183 times
User avatar
obvert
Posts: 14051
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 11:18 am
Location: PDX (and now) London, UK

RE: 1943 August 01

Post by obvert »

Any chance of seeing the invasion CRs with the hits to those ships (and others?)? Curious how effective the CD fire was without BBs in the lineup.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill
JocMeister
Posts: 8258
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:03 am
Location: Sweden

RE: 1943 August 01

Post by JocMeister »

You really have to embed BBs into anything landing or its going to look like that each turn I think. [:(]

On the good side BBs are almost invulnerable to the fire and even suffering many, many hits only suffer a few SYS points in damage. So you can basically send them in time and time again! [:)]
Image
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: 1943 August 01

Post by witpqs »

Here's the whole combat report. I did not 'embed' it in the post because of length, so just click on it. [:)]
Attachments
combatreport.txt
(63.19 KiB) Downloaded 36 times
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: 1943 August 01

Post by witpqs »

Looks like the next turn will be tomorrow.
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: 1943 August 01

Post by witpqs »

As we have no turn today I thought I would bring you some wisdom from a great philosopher.
Jazz according to Yogi Berra

Interviewer: Can you explain jazz?

Yogi: I can't, but I will. 90% of all jazz is half improvisation. The
other half is the part people play while others are playing something they never played with
anyone who played that part. So if you play the wrong part, its right. If you play the right part, it
might be right if you play it wrong enough. But if you play it too right, it's wrong.

Interviewer: I don't understand.

Yogi: Anyone who understands jazz knows that you can't understand it. It's too complicated.
That's whats so simple about it.

Interviewer: Do you understand it?

Yogi: No. That's why I can explain it. If I understood it, I wouldn't
know anything about it.

Interviewer: Are there any great jazz players alive today?

Yogi: No. All the great jazz players alive today are dead. Except for the ones that are still alive.
But so many of them are dead, that the ones that are still alive are dying to be like the ones that
are dead. Some would kill for it.

Interviewer: What is syncopation?

Yogi: That's when the note that you should hear now happens either before or after you hear it. In
jazz, you don't hear notes when they happen because that would be some other type of music.
Other types of music can be jazz, but only if they're the same as something different from those
other kinds.

Interviewer: Now I really don't understand.

Yogi: I haven't taught you enough for you to not understand jazz that well.
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: 1943 August 01

Post by witpqs »

Another teaser. Turn expected sometime today/tonight, but we traded some emails yesterday. Walter knows that the attack is ordered at Truk, and mentioned that forts are only at 3. He expects the base to fall pretty quickly given the relative force level and the amount of armor. From looking at the list of IJ units there I also figure that some of them are partial units flown in from either Rabaul or Tulagi and so should be lacking in heavy equipment. I've also seen a whole bunch of what are obviously sub transport missions (first from Tulagi and now from Rabaul), and those can't carry much equipment either.
JocMeister
Posts: 8258
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:03 am
Location: Sweden

RE: 1943 August 01

Post by JocMeister »

I think he might be a bit pessimistic. No doubt you will secure it but unless many of his units are just shells it might take a week or two. A lot will depend on the first attack and if you manage to drop the forts or not!

Fingers crossed! [:)]

Image
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: 1943 August 01

Post by witpqs »

He said he thinks the first attack will drop the forts to zero, which I do think is pessimistic. But, as you point out he knows the details of his forces and I only have seen the basic numbers from the bombardment.

I do have a command HQ in range plus a corps HQ on scene, and all involved units are 100% prepared so my units should perform well. And they all have '43 standard squads, which is a big deal. Add in the armor... Maybe he's right. Dunno.
JocMeister
Posts: 8258
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:03 am
Location: Sweden

RE: 1943 August 01

Post by JocMeister »

I have never seen forts dropped by more than 1 per attack. Is possible to do more?

Image
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: 1943 August 01

Post by witpqs »

I think that a shock attack will drops the forts by however much the odds exceed the forts (like 6 to 1 with 4 forts will drop it by 2, I think) or something like that. Deliberate attacks I thought only 1 per turn but that might not be hard and fast. I ordered a deliberate attack but of course I have no idea what the final odds will look like.
JocMeister
Posts: 8258
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:03 am
Location: Sweden

RE: 1943 August 01

Post by JocMeister »

Ah, that must be why I never seen it. I almost never use shock attacks. [:)]
Image
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

1943 August 02

Post by witpqs »

1943 August 02

The Empire captured:


The Allies captured:


There were Imperial amphibious operations at:


There were Allied amphibious operations at:




At Truk the attack went very well, almost reaching 2 to 1.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground combat at Truk (112,108)

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 14233 troops, 196 guns, 2 vehicles, Assault Value = 474

Defending force 29943 troops, 404 guns, 820 vehicles, Assault Value = 1089

Japanese ground losses:
35 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Allied ground losses:
Vehicles lost 1 (1 destroyed, 0 disabled)

Assaulting units:
46th Naval Guard Unit
Guards Mixed Brigade
48th Naval Guard Unit
Sasebo 5th SNLF
1st Ind.Tank Co
42nd Naval Guard Unit
41st Infantry Rgt /2
15th Naval Construction Battalion
5th JNAF Coy
4th Base Force
57th JNAF AF Unit /1
11th Air Fleet
24th Air Flotilla
4th Port Unit
Truk Naval Fortress
10th JNAF AF Unit
5th RF Gun Bn /2

Defending units:
763rd Tank Battalion
Auckland (Mtd) Rifl Regiment
3rd Marine Division
Q Alexandra's (Mtd) Regiment
24th Infantry Division
762nd Tank Battalion
Otago (Mtd) Rifles Regiment
3rd Pioneer Battalion
1st AmphTrac Engineer Battalion
3rd NZ Division


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground combat at Truk (112,108)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 29313 troops, 404 guns, 804 vehicles, Assault Value = 1088

Defending force 19666 troops, 226 guns, 29 vehicles, Assault Value = 471

Allied adjusted assault: 2171

Japanese adjusted defense: 1126

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

Allied Assault reduces fortifications to 2

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

Japanese ground losses:
1234 casualties reported
Squads: 18 destroyed, 109 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 48 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Guns lost 40 (8 destroyed, 32 disabled)
Vehicles lost 14 (3 destroyed, 11 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
659 casualties reported
Squads: 17 destroyed, 30 disabled
Non Combat: 5 destroyed, 26 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Guns lost 11 (3 destroyed, 8 disabled)
Vehicles lost 110 (20 destroyed, 90 disabled)

Assaulting units:
Auckland (Mtd) Rifl Regiment
763rd Tank Battalion
762nd Tank Battalion
Q Alexandra's (Mtd) Regiment
24th Infantry Division
3rd Marine Division
Otago (Mtd) Rifles Regiment
3rd Pioneer Battalion
1st AmphTrac Engineer Battalion
3rd NZ Division

Defending units:
Sasebo 5th SNLF
46th Naval Guard Unit
48th Naval Guard Unit
1st Ind.Tank Co
Guards Mixed Brigade
42nd Naval Guard Unit
41st Infantry Rgt /2
4th Base Force
15th Naval Construction Battalion
57th JNAF AF Unit /1
4th Port Unit
Truk Naval Fortress
11th Air Fleet
24th Air Flotilla
10th JNAF AF Unit
5th JNAF Coy
5th RF Gun Bn /2
The troops will rest tomorrow, but still have plenty of supply to attack after resting. The 24th ID is at 40 disruption and might benefit. As far as naval bombardment, 20,000 yards seems to be the range. Although the fortress was targeted, not infantry. I suppose that's another benefit of having robust CD defense.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Naval bombardment of Truk at 112,108 - Coastal Guns Fire Back!

35 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.

Allied Ships
CA Salt Lake City

Japanese ground losses:
11 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

CA Salt Lake City firing at Truk Naval Fortress
Truk Naval Fortress firing at CA Salt Lake City


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Naval bombardment of Truk at 112,108 - Coastal Guns Fire Back!

12 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.

Allied Ships
BB Idaho

Japanese ground losses:
11 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Truk Naval Fortress firing at BB Idaho
BB Idaho firing at Truk Naval Fortress


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
An AKA, AK, and 2x LST sank on the way home from damage sustained at Truk the prior turn. CV Nanumea is two days from the fleet. The group of cruisers and destroyers back from Pearl will arrive tomorrow and probably some will bombard for the next ground attack.

Here are the air losses. The P-40K and P-47 are doing well, but I do fear that the Empire can sustain those losses for a long, long time.

Image
Attachments
19430803..rLosses.jpg
19430803..rLosses.jpg (193.69 KiB) Viewed 183 times
JocMeister
Posts: 8258
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:03 am
Location: Sweden

RE: 1943 August 02

Post by JocMeister »

Thats a great result! Glad I was the pessimistic one ey?! [:D]
Image
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: 1943 August 02

Post by witpqs »

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

Thats a great result! Glad I was the pessimistic one ey?! [:D]
You and me both. I have two USMC divisions 100% prepped and on ships 1 hex away just waiting to rotate in. Plus an empty convoy with them to simultaneously pluck off the first of the evacuee divisions! Either I won't need them or I can use one rotation to speed the fall. What I'm thinking right now is wait until that USA division has disruption down at least to the teens (prefer single digits) then shock attack.
JocMeister
Posts: 8258
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:03 am
Location: Sweden

RE: 1943 August 02

Post by JocMeister »

Why the shock attack?
Image
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: 1943 August 02

Post by witpqs »

Ah - because that first deliberate attack was very close to 2 to 1. Forts were dropped from 3 to 2. The next attack will drop the forts to 1 if deliberate, which means a 3 to 1 will take the base. A shock attack will provide extra oomph to (likely) seize the base on that attack instead of the one following.

I want to get Truk and get organized for the Marianas.
JocMeister
Posts: 8258
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:03 am
Location: Sweden

RE: 1943 August 02

Post by JocMeister »

I should know this stuff really! [:D]

So a 3-1 automatically gets the base?
Image
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”