Rise of the Sheep! JocMeister(A) vs. Obvert(J)

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

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

User avatar
ny59giants
Posts: 9902
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:02 pm

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by ny59giants »

1072 is magic number for Port 3. You have more than enough.
[center]Image[/center]
JocMeister
Posts: 8258
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:03 am
Location: Sweden

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by JocMeister »

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

1072 is magic number for Port 3. You have more than enough.

Thanks! [&o] How do you make that out? Are you looking at 20.1.2.2 SHIP REARMAMENT AT PORTS TABLE?

I just can´t figure it out!
Image
User avatar
ny59giants
Posts: 9902
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:02 pm

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by ny59giants »

Thanks! [&o] How do you make that out? Are you looking at 20.1.2.2 SHIP REARMAMENT AT PORTS TABLE?

I just can´t figure it out!

Yes I am (pg 285). The 16in/50 Mk 7 says the Reload cost is 5400. Go over to the Port-3 column, it shows the NS needed is 1072. For those size shells, you need lots and lots of NS until you get the port up to size 7.
[center]Image[/center]
JocMeister
Posts: 8258
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:03 am
Location: Sweden

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by JocMeister »

Aaah, I understand now. I got confused by the column saying Port-X + Navsupport. I thought I had to add some value to the port in order to get the right numbers.

Thanks for clearing it up for me! [:)]
Image
User avatar
ny59giants
Posts: 9902
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:02 pm

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by ny59giants »

I'll add the consultant fee to your tab.
[center]Image[/center]
JocMeister
Posts: 8258
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:03 am
Location: Sweden

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by JocMeister »

If you manage to get the bill past the polar beers I´ll make sure you get your payment! [:D]
Image
User avatar
Lokasenna
Posts: 9304
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:57 am
Location: Iowan in MD/DC

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by Lokasenna »

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

If you manage to get the bill past the polar beers I´ll make sure you get your payment! [:D]

Past some of these? Doesn't look so hard....
Image
JocMeister
Posts: 8258
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:03 am
Location: Sweden

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by JocMeister »

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

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by witpqs »

As a game mechanics issue, do remember that ports have ops points also. AFAIK the bigger the port, the more they have. So, even if 16" guns can be reloaded there on account of the needed naval support being present, you won't know until you try just how many turns it will take to reload how many ships with 16" guns. And that will be influenced by what other port activity is taking place.
User avatar
Lokasenna
Posts: 9304
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:57 am
Location: Iowan in MD/DC

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by Lokasenna »

ORIGINAL: witpqs

As a game mechanics issue, do remember that ports have ops points also. AFAIK the bigger the port, the more they have. So, even if 16" guns can be reloaded there on account of the needed naval support being present, you won't know until you try just how many turns it will take to reload how many ships with 16" guns. And that will be influenced by what other port activity is taking place.

You've got the engineers and the supply. I'd just build the port.

Also that's more VPs ;).
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by witpqs »

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

ORIGINAL: witpqs

As a game mechanics issue, do remember that ports have ops points also. AFAIK the bigger the port, the more they have. So, even if 16" guns can be reloaded there on account of the needed naval support being present, you won't know until you try just how many turns it will take to reload how many ships with 16" guns. And that will be influenced by what other port activity is taking place.

You've got the engineers and the supply. I'd just build the port.

Also that's more VPs ;).
I'm reading both sides of this AAR these days, so I don't want to give advice, but I feel free to give technical/game engine types comments. [8D]
JocMeister
Posts: 8258
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:03 am
Location: Sweden

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by JocMeister »

Thanks witpqs. Good info. As soon as the forts flip to the next level I´ll get started on the port. its (6) port so it should be fast getting it there with some 2500 engineers.
Image
User avatar
zuluhour
Posts: 5246
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 4:16 pm
Location: Maryland

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by zuluhour »

Dumb question, when can the AEs rearm at sea?
User avatar
EHansen
Posts: 360
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2013 1:31 am

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by EHansen »

It should be 1/1/45 but only small caliber ammo, mostly AA ammo.
User avatar
zuluhour
Posts: 5246
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 4:16 pm
Location: Maryland

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by zuluhour »

Thanks! I read up a little as well. I pick up the "manual" to check out "A" and become mesmerized by thought "B" and end up forgetting what I opened it for in the first place.[:D] and besides the darn thing is fragile now. It was kind of vague though, something like "late war". 
JocMeister
Posts: 8258
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:03 am
Location: Sweden

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by JocMeister »

I think its only up to 5 inch by sea. Might be wrong though!
Image
JocMeister
Posts: 8258
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:03 am
Location: Sweden

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by JocMeister »

[font="Verdana"]26th June -45 [/font]
______________________________________________________________________________

Quite turn. Which was good because I´m too tired to really report much! Man work is exhausting! [:D]

------------------------
Korea
------------------------

Nothing to report. Usual bombings at Gunzan and bombardment at Masan.

------------------------
China
------------------------

Nothing to report.

Well, that it. [X(] More action to come in two days. Promise! [:D]
Image
JocMeister
Posts: 8258
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:03 am
Location: Sweden

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by JocMeister »

[font="Verdana"]27th June -45 [/font]
______________________________________________________________________________

Things seem to loosen up in Korea.

------------------------
Korea
------------------------

All of the sudden the 4Es starts to get some good shots in. Despite Thunderstorms even!
Morning Air attack on Gunzan , at 102,52

Weather in hex: Thunderstorms

Raid detected at 80 NM, estimated altitude 12,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 34 minutes

Allied aircraft
Liberator B.VI x 12
Liberator GR.VI x 3
B-24J Liberator x 12
A-26B Invader x 28
B-24D1 Liberator x 12
B-24J Liberator x 3
B-25J11 Mitchell x 12
P-38J Lightning x 18
P-38L Lightning x 62
PB4Y-1 Liberator x 15
PB4Y-2 Privateer x 41


Allied aircraft losses
B-24J Liberator: 1 damaged
A-26B Invader: 1 damaged
B-25J11 Mitchell: 1 damaged
PB4Y-1 Liberator: 1 damaged
PB4Y-2 Privateer: 2 damaged


Japanese ground losses:
315 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 15 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 23 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on 19th Division, at 102,52 (Gunzan)

Weather in hex: Thunderstorms

Raid detected at 71 NM, estimated altitude 10,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 24 minutes

Allied aircraft
B-24J Liberator x 145
P-38L Lightning x 2


Allied aircraft losses
B-24J Liberator: 3 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
530 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 16 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 61 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 9 disabled
Guns lost 18 (1 destroyed, 17 disabled)



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on 23rd Division, at 102,52 (Gunzan)

Weather in hex: Thunderstorms

Raid detected at 67 NM, estimated altitude 7,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 23 minutes

Allied aircraft
B-24J Liberator x 34

Allied aircraft losses
B-24J Liberator: 1 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
324 casualties reported
Squads: 2 destroyed, 13 disabled
Non Combat: 2 destroyed, 16 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Vehicles lost 1 (1 destroyed, 0 disabled)



We finish the day with a good ground bombardment. No allied losses at all! [:)]
Ground combat at Gunzan (102,52)

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 108476 troops, 2030 guns, 3366 vehicles, Assault Value = 4995

Defending force 210406 troops, 2494 guns, 728 vehicles, Assault Value = 7019

Japanese ground losses:
964 casualties reported
Squads: 9 destroyed, 74 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 7 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 5 disabled
Guns lost 20 (5 destroyed, 15 disabled)
Vehicles lost 4 (2 destroyed, 2 disabled)

Might be able to do an deliberate here again soon. I´ll wait for a few days while I sort out some other stuff...stay tuned! [8D]

------------------------
China
------------------------

Mopping up continues all around China. After three days of fighting at Wuchang the defenders start to crumble.
Ground combat at Wuchang (84,51)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 12127 troops, 176 guns, 130 vehicles, Assault Value = 482

Defending force 6111 troops, 67 guns, 10 vehicles, Assault Value = 163

Allied adjusted assault: 205

Japanese adjusted defense: 81

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

Allied Assault reduces fortifications to 1

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

Attacker: leaders(+), leaders(-) Uhm. Okay...

Japanese ground losses:
638 casualties reported
Squads: 4 destroyed, 39 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled
Engineers: 3 destroyed, 3 disabled
Guns lost 12 (1 destroyed, 11 disabled)


Allied ground losses:
22 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 2 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled

------------------------
Startegic Bombing
------------------------

Missions again the HI refuse to fly for the 3rd day in a row. B29-1 strike at some LI in Korea taking out 22 LI. No NFs encountered.

Image
JocMeister
Posts: 8258
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:03 am
Location: Sweden

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by JocMeister »

Too tired to do the update tonight. Some interesting things coming up tomorrow though. Last Allied amphibious OP of the war. [:)]

Stay tuned for tomorrow. TGIF...
Image
User avatar
koniu
Posts: 2763
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 4:19 pm
Location: Konin, Poland, European Union

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by koniu »

Kaishu? or maybe HI

PS. Don`t tell it will be surprise[:)]
"Only the Dead Have Seen the End of War"
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”