Fools Rush In Where Angels Fear To Tread: Panjack (A) vs. Q-Ball (J)

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

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

Panjack
Posts: 507
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 2:08 am
Location: Southern California

RE: Fools Rush In Where Angels Fear To Tread: Panjack (A) vs. Q-Ball (J)

Post by Panjack »

Yes, good ideas about the Blenheims. I used some a week ago but LRCAP shot down most of them. But it's worth giving a couple of them another shot.

The landing at Vizagapathnam being a blocking move seems to make sense as it involves (allegedly) 2000 troops, 18 guns, and 2AFV so they don't seem intended to move very far and fast.

In other fronts...

Intel says a couple of units are planning for Perth, and Q-Ball has taken all the bases on the north coast of Oz. In addition, intel also says,

[font="Courier New"]1942-02-26 2/7th Tank Regiment is loaded on a Aden Cargo class xAK moving to Port Hedland
[/font]
Does that suggest Q-Ball might be planning to drive to Carnarvon or down toward Perth across the desert?!



Image
Attachments
20141030..20Tanks.jpg
20141030..20Tanks.jpg (129.64 KiB) Viewed 197 times
User avatar
Lokasenna
Posts: 9304
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:57 am
Location: Iowan in MD/DC

RE: Fools Rush In Where Angels Fear To Tread: Panjack (A) vs. Q-Ball (J)

Post by Lokasenna »

It's possible that he's just stopping there before heading onwards.

You can drive tanks across the wasteland there, but I wouldn't recommend it. It would take forever and if you see him, you can bomb him into dust.
User avatar
Sangeli
Posts: 1132
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 5:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

RE: Fools Rush In Where Angels Fear To Tread: Panjack (A) vs. Q-Ball (J)

Post by Sangeli »

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

It's possible that he's just stopping there before heading onwards.

You can drive tanks across the wasteland there, but I wouldn't recommend it. It would take forever and if you see him, you can bomb him into dust.
Actually the movement speed here is pretty good. 30 miles a day over the desert and 15 over rough desert for tanks. The units are definitely vulnerable to bombers but you have to spot them first; in moving through open desert you would have to have recon planes in the exact hex. But even with all of that, its still not a recommended move for the Japanese when you can just land units directly easily enough. But keep this in mind as the Allies because the overland attack route can be quite attractive.
User avatar
Lokasenna
Posts: 9304
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:57 am
Location: Iowan in MD/DC

RE: Fools Rush In Where Angels Fear To Tread: Panjack (A) vs. Q-Ball (J)

Post by Lokasenna »

ORIGINAL: Sangeli

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

It's possible that he's just stopping there before heading onwards.

You can drive tanks across the wasteland there, but I wouldn't recommend it. It would take forever and if you see him, you can bomb him into dust.
Actually the movement speed here is pretty good. 30 miles a day over the desert and 15 over rough desert for tanks. The units are definitely vulnerable to bombers but you have to spot them first; in moving through open desert you would have to have recon planes in the exact hex. But even with all of that, its still not a recommended move for the Japanese when you can just land units directly easily enough. But keep this in mind as the Allies because the overland attack route can be quite attractive.

I'm more thinking of the supply flow. Even just a couple of bombing raids could prove disastrous to individual tank units once they got about halfway, maybe more, to Carnarvon or that dot base.
User avatar
obvert
Posts: 14051
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 11:18 am
Location: PDX (and now) London, UK

RE: Fools Rush In Where Angels Fear To Tread: Panjack (A) vs. Q-Ball (J)

Post by obvert »

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

It's possible that he's just stopping there before heading onwards.

You can drive tanks across the wasteland there, but I wouldn't recommend it. It would take forever and if you see him, you can bomb him into dust.

+1

This is an often used SIGINT deception trick as well. Send teh TF to various different spots and only a few days before it lands does it have it's actual destination.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill
Panjack
Posts: 507
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 2:08 am
Location: Southern California

RE: Fools Rush In Where Angels Fear To Tread: Panjack (A) vs. Q-Ball (J)

Post by Panjack »

March 7-10, 1941
------------------
The most significant event was the landing of a Japanese division at Diamond Harbour and the taking of that base the next day. Otherwise, Chinese units have been reorganizing trying to reestablish pools of units that can move elsewhere problems occur, Indian and British units have been moving to cover various RR bases between SE India and Bombay/Karachi, and units are moving (slowly) to Noumea.

March 10 marked the end of an operation that likely worked out as well as can be expected. Below are two xAKs: one docked at Subic Bay and the other at Bataan. They arrived after a long, and indirect, trip from PH. They arrived about 3 days apart and both were unobserved the whole way from PH to the PIs. But the very first day the first ship arrived at Subic Bay it was apparently observed by Japanese fighters flying over Clark. Detection on the ship then went from zero to 4/4 and Subic Bay went from zero to 9/10. For a couple of days the ship was unmolested (and unloading SO slowly) as I'm supposing Q-Ball either didn't notice the ship or didn't think it was important. But then the bombing began just as the second ship arrived at Bataan. A couple of days of bombing by level bombers failed to score at hit but then Vals came in and plastered the poor ships.

The two xAKs managed to offload maybe 3k in supplies before they met their end. All bases I still hold in the PI were down to almost zero supplies before the ships arrived so I'm sure the supplies are quite appreciated by Allied troops still holding out.

Image
Attachments
20141031..woships.jpg
20141031..woships.jpg (107.38 KiB) Viewed 197 times
User avatar
obvert
Posts: 14051
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 11:18 am
Location: PDX (and now) London, UK

RE: Fools Rush In Where Angels Fear To Tread: Panjack (A) vs. Q-Ball (J)

Post by obvert »

ORIGINAL: Panjack

March 7-10, 1941
------------------
The most significant event was the landing of a Japanese division at Diamond Harbour and the taking of that base the next day. Otherwise, Chinese units have been reorganizing trying to reestablish pools of units that can move elsewhere problems occur, Indian and British units have been moving to cover various RR bases between SE India and Bombay/Karachi, and units are moving (slowly) to Noumea.

March 10 marked the end of an operation that likely worked out as well as can be expected. Below are two xAKs: one docked at Subic Bay and the other at Bataan. They arrived after a long, and indirect, trip from PH. They arrived about 3 days apart and both were unobserved the whole way from PH to the PIs. But the very first day the first ship arrived at Subic Bay it was apparently observed by Japanese fighters flying over Clark. Detection on the ship then went from zero to 4/4 and Subic Bay went from zero to 9/10. For a couple of days the ship was unmolested (and unloading SO slowly) as I'm supposing Q-Ball either didn't notice the ship or didn't think it was important. But then the bombing began just as the second ship arrived at Bataan. A couple of days of bombing by level bombers failed to score at hit but then Vals came in and plastered the poor ships.

The two xAKs managed to offload maybe 3k in supplies before they met their end. All bases I still hold in the PI were down to almost zero supplies before the ships arrived so I'm sure the supplies are quite appreciated by Allied troops still holding out.

It was a nice effort. I had an opponent do the same and he kept at it for weeks. I didn't like at first that they were somehow getting through, then I realized that the supply they brought would last all of a few days and sinking them gave me 5-10 VPs while training up my DB pilots. That group got into the 60s in exp pretty quickly with all of the work! [:)]
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill
Panjack
Posts: 507
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 2:08 am
Location: Southern California

RE: Fools Rush In Where Angels Fear To Tread: Panjack (A) vs. Q-Ball (J)

Post by Panjack »

March 11-13
----------------------

A large Japanese transport TF is moving up the Bay of Bengal towards, I guess, Madras (still in Allied hands) or Vizagapatnam (occupied by Japan). At the same time, a group of TFs are moving west along the top of Oz and are about to turn the corner at Exmouth. Q-Ball has been reconning Carnarvon so I suppose he might be landing there and then moving down to Perth by land. Perth is only lightly defended and, according to intel, a handful of Japanese units are planning to attack that city.

I don’t know for sure where the KB is, but on March 11 all subs in the Oosthaven area suddenly reported being sighted from the air (having previously been unsighted), and in one case a sub reported being sighted by a dive bomber. The next day all subs again reported being sighted. But on the following day, March 13, the sub I had move further north was the only sub to report being sighted while the ones in the south were not sighted. So my guess, based on this flimsy evidence, is that this carrier(s) is moving north and is moving fairly slowly perhaps as it is escorting an invasion taskforce. Perhaps it is headed toward the Bombay/Karachi area trying to beat the deadline for the Japanese invasion bonus.

The first significant surface battle of the war occurred up in the Aleutians, of all places. For quite a long time my Alaska navy has harassed the Japanese-held islands from Attu to Adak. Allied DDs have sunk transports and CLs have been regularly bombarding the islands. Q-Ball retaliate a couple of weeks ago by sinking two DDs. Making a long story short: both Q-Ball and I decided to send more firepower to the Aleutians and so on March 12 we had:

[font="Courier New"]Night Time Surface Combat, near Adak Island at 162,52, Range 2,000 Yards


Japanese Ships
CL Jintsu, Shell hits 1
CL Isuzu, Shell hits 5, and is sunk
CL Kuma
DD Michishio
DD Arashio, Shell hits 1
DD Shiratsuyu
DD Shigure, Shell hits 1
DD Yugure, Shell hits 1, on fire
DD Fubuki

Allied Ships
BB Idaho
BB New Mexico
BB Mississippi, Shell hits 2
DD Bagley, Shell hits 1
DD Mugford
DD Jarvis
DD Smith
DD Worden
DD Gilmer, Shell hits 5, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk[/font]
Panjack
Posts: 507
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 2:08 am
Location: Southern California

RE: Fools Rush In Where Angels Fear To Tread: Panjack (A) vs. Q-Ball (J)

Post by Panjack »

ORIGINAL: obvert
It was a nice effort. I had an opponent do the same and he kept at it for weeks. I didn't like at first that they were somehow getting through, then I realized that the supply they brought would last all of a few days and sinking them gave me 5-10 VPs while training up my DB pilots. That group got into the 60s in exp pretty quickly with all of the work! [:)]
I was hopeful that it would work out much better, but I didn't know the ability of fighters to see things from so far away (but I guess fighters at 20k feet can see quite some distance!) I had a couple more ships queued up across the ocean ready to sail to the PI if things worked out, but they have turned back and it appears Q-Ball is now using search planes on the approach to the PI (as one of the xAKs in the middle of the ocean has now been detected).
User avatar
obvert
Posts: 14051
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 11:18 am
Location: PDX (and now) London, UK

RE: Fools Rush In Where Angels Fear To Tread: Panjack (A) vs. Q-Ball (J)

Post by obvert »

ORIGINAL: Panjack
ORIGINAL: obvert
It was a nice effort. I had an opponent do the same and he kept at it for weeks. I didn't like at first that they were somehow getting through, then I realized that the supply they brought would last all of a few days and sinking them gave me 5-10 VPs while training up my DB pilots. That group got into the 60s in exp pretty quickly with all of the work! [:)]
I was hopeful that it would work out much better, but I didn't know the ability of fighters to see things from so far away (but I guess fighters at 20k feet can see quite some distance!) I had a couple more ships queued up across the ocean ready to sail to the PI if things worked out, but they have turned back and it appears Q-Ball is now using search planes on the approach to the PI (as one of the xAKs in the middle of the ocean has now been detected).

In a port hex the recon will pick them up easily, since he's probably getting 4-5 flights a day over Manilla and Bataan while the siege is still going on.

Japan has great search options early and WAY more recon planes than the Allies in 42. It's tough to go unnoticed if he's being diligent in his coverage.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill
Panjack
Posts: 507
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 2:08 am
Location: Southern California

RE: Fools Rush In Where Angels Fear To Tread: Panjack (A) vs. Q-Ball (J)

Post by Panjack »

For the past 10 days or so I've had transports unloading at Noumea, maybe 4 at a time. But during this period Japanese subs (often two at a time in the hex) have sunk 2 xAP, 2 xAK, and 2 xAKL! I have 100 mines in the hex, a handful of ASW ships (only one decent one however), and cats providing day and night search in the hex. But the sinkings continue. [:(]

Is there some secret I don't know about how to do this, or is this just the cost of doing business at this point of the game (March 1942)?
User avatar
Sangeli
Posts: 1132
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 5:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

RE: Fools Rush In Where Angels Fear To Tread: Panjack (A) vs. Q-Ball (J)

Post by Sangeli »

ORIGINAL: Panjack
Is there some secret I don't know about how to do this, or is this just the cost of doing business at this point of the game (March 1942)?
Float planes and air detection really. That's the best way to prevent sub attacks.
User avatar
Lokasenna
Posts: 9304
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:57 am
Location: Iowan in MD/DC

RE: Fools Rush In Where Angels Fear To Tread: Panjack (A) vs. Q-Ball (J)

Post by Lokasenna »

ORIGINAL: Sangeli

ORIGINAL: Panjack
Is there some secret I don't know about how to do this, or is this just the cost of doing business at this point of the game (March 1942)?
Float planes and air detection really. That's the best way to prevent sub attacks.

Well, and having the ASW escorts within the same TF as the ships you're losing. Unescorted ships are easy prey.
Panjack
Posts: 507
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 2:08 am
Location: Southern California

RE: Fools Rush In Where Angels Fear To Tread: Panjack (A) vs. Q-Ball (J)

Post by Panjack »

March 21, 1942
---------------


Western Oz has been invaded. Here's what landed at Geraldton on the first day:
[font="Courier New"]Assaulting units:
20th Ind Engineer Regiment
8th Tank Regiment
21st Division
56th Recon Regiment
1st Ind Engineer Regiment
4th Engineer Co
48th Division
6th Tank Regiment
56th Field Artillery Regiment
43rd Const Co
16th Army
21th JNAF AF Unit [/font]
Whether other units landed later is unknown, but the list above does not include all the ID intel says were preparing for Perth.

I'm concerned about an end-around to Kalgoorlie that would cut off Perth. I have two recon units (soon to be) on the northern roads to hopefully stumble across any units trying to sneak around.

Here's my thinking about Western Oz: it's too hard to defend given how isolated it is and the fact that Perth is so easily cut off. Although supply has been coming through Perth, I can easily get it to Oz via other ports. I'm reluctant to pull anything of note out of Sydney, Melbourne, or Brisbane given the (unlikely but still possible) chance of an invasion in Southern Oz. I prefer that any extra units in these areas go to Noumea to start making possible offensive moves up the Solomons.

My tentative plan is to bomb Japanese units moving in the open. I only have 30 Hudson I's at Kalgoorlie and a unit of Wirraways at Perth but they should be able to do some damage. I'll look around for better bombers elsewhere. Kalgoorlie is up to a 3 level air base to facilitate air operations. I might try to get it to a level 4 and then bring in a few B-17s to bomb cities taken by Japan.

Perth itself has almost nothing in it, but Kilgoorlie has the 3rd Aussie Division and the 13th Aussie Bde, and other units, for a total of 450 AV. I have an anti-tank unit and the 754th US Tank Battalion (with 51 M3 Stuarts) on their way to Kilgoorlie via RR. But I'm not sure whether it even makes any sense to defend Kilgoorlie as if Japanese units get on the RR line behind it, it would be a long walk for my units back to Southern Oz.


Image
Attachments
20141108..06kilg.jpg
20141108..06kilg.jpg (150.12 KiB) Viewed 197 times
Panjack
Posts: 507
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 2:08 am
Location: Southern California

RE: Fools Rush In Where Angels Fear To Tread: Panjack (A) vs. Q-Ball (J)

Post by Panjack »

China Update:

The Bulge (below) is still slowly developing. I think I'll have enough units to stop this advance, but far too many units are having to defend this area.

To the east of Changsha was a very close call: I let the two units defending this hex slowly lose morale until they became so depressed they refused to pick up their weapons. Two days of Japanese attacks completely routed the units and they fled to Changsha, possibly leaving the road to the city open. The Japanese attacking units included tanks and they were clearly rolling toward the city.

This is what happens when you neglect to check your units often enough:
[font="Courier New"]Ground combat at 83,52 (near Changsha)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 27402 troops, 219 guns, 169 vehicles, Assault Value = 1031

Defending force 15527 troops, 81 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 319

Japanese adjusted assault: 631

Allied adjusted defense: 203

Japanese assault odds: 3 to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(+), disruption(-), fatigue(-)
morale(-), experience(-)

Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
25 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 7 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Allied ground losses:
5167 casualties reported
Squads: 159 destroyed, 19 disabled
Non Combat: 200 destroyed, 30 disabled
Engineers: 6 destroyed, 10 disabled
Guns lost 11 (4 destroyed, 7 disabled)
Units retreated 3

Defeated Allied Units Retreating!

Assaulting units:
9th Tank Regiment
3rd Tank Regiment
6th Division
61st Infantry Brigade
27th Division
51st Ind.Mtn.Gun Battalion

Defending units:
37th Chinese Corps
58th Chinese Corps
29th Group Army[/font]

What a disaster!

But luckily I had sent relief to the hex and it arrived the day after the horrible defeat, just in time to stop the tanks. I'm hoping these two units (with 400 AV) can hold back the Japanese for a couple of turns before more relief arrives.

Near Kukong more Japanese units are piling into a hex on the road up to Hengyang so I'm force to move units into the hex also.

A new offensive seems to be developing around Kweilin and Luichow. Nothing has happened here before, but 7 Japanese units suddenly appeared near Wuchow and at least one unit is moving to the west. This seems like a lousy place to defend.

Although China has been pretty stable so far, the whole Chinese army is getting worn down and supply is falling, falling, falling. East of Sian, in a single key contested hex, up to 100 bombers hit my units daily! This is not making them happy.

Image
Attachments
20141108..31close.jpg
20141108..31close.jpg (187.51 KiB) Viewed 198 times
User avatar
Lokasenna
Posts: 9304
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:57 am
Location: Iowan in MD/DC

RE: Fools Rush In Where Angels Fear To Tread: Panjack (A) vs. Q-Ball (J)

Post by Lokasenna »

RE: Australia -

Get yourself some B-17s there. He will struggle to provide fighter cover far from Geraldton, and now's your chance to bomb him. Once he takes other airbases, he can supply coverage.


What's at Perth? How are the forts? If you don't have enough to defend, just GTFO, in my opinion. Not worth losing LCUs for territory you can easily take back later and that you don't need right now.



You could try to hold Kalgoorlie, but it's probably a losing proposition. I'd stall there until your units can rail out.
Panjack
Posts: 507
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 2:08 am
Location: Southern California

RE: Fools Rush In Where Angels Fear To Tread: Panjack (A) vs. Q-Ball (J)

Post by Panjack »

Unfortunately, one of our HRs is no ground bombing by 4Es. But I do hope to hit is airbases with B-17s. Can I use B-17s effectively at a 3 level airbase?

Perth will soon have 4 forts, but only 33 AV (!) is in the city.

Edit: dumb me, Perth has a level 4 airbase.
User avatar
Lokasenna
Posts: 9304
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:57 am
Location: Iowan in MD/DC

RE: Fools Rush In Where Angels Fear To Tread: Panjack (A) vs. Q-Ball (J)

Post by Lokasenna »

ORIGINAL: Panjack

Unfortunately, one of our HRs is no ground bombing by 4Es. But I do hope to hit is airbases with B-17s. Can I use B-17s effectively at a 3 level airbase?

Perth will soon have 4 forts, but only 33 AV (!) is in the city.

Edit: dumb me, Perth has a level 4 airbase.

No, you need a level 5 AF to use B-17s to maximum effect.
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20691
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

RE: Fools Rush In Where Angels Fear To Tread: Panjack (A) vs. Q-Ball (J)

Post by BBfanboy »

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

ORIGINAL: Panjack

Unfortunately, one of our HRs is no ground bombing by 4Es. But I do hope to hit is airbases with B-17s. Can I use B-17s effectively at a 3 level airbase?

Perth will soon have 4 forts, but only 33 AV (!) is in the city.

Edit: dumb me, Perth has a level 4 airbase.

No, you need a level 5 AF to use B-17s to maximum effect.
AFAIK, a level 4 airfield lets you carry only half the bomb load. I don't know for sure but level 3 might not let you carry any load - i.e. you could only use HBs on search and recon missions.
The level of airfield also affects op losses. Level 5 is still a minimum for a HB with full bomb load, and, IMO, the AF should be built to at least 7 for HB and 8 for B-29s.
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
User avatar
Lokasenna
Posts: 9304
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:57 am
Location: Iowan in MD/DC

RE: Fools Rush In Where Angels Fear To Tread: Panjack (A) vs. Q-Ball (J)

Post by Lokasenna »

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

ORIGINAL: Panjack

Unfortunately, one of our HRs is no ground bombing by 4Es. But I do hope to hit is airbases with B-17s. Can I use B-17s effectively at a 3 level airbase?

Perth will soon have 4 forts, but only 33 AV (!) is in the city.

Edit: dumb me, Perth has a level 4 airbase.

No, you need a level 5 AF to use B-17s to maximum effect.
AFAIK, a level 4 airfield lets you carry only half the bomb load. I don't know for sure but level 3 might not let you carry any load - i.e. you could only use HBs on search and recon missions.
The level of airfield also affects op losses. Level 5 is still a minimum for a HB with full bomb load, and, IMO, the AF should be built to at least 7 for HB and 8 for B-29s.

You need a level 5. You can fly them off of smaller fields, but they will run you out of stacking space really quickly. You can fly them off of a level 2 field, as far as I know, so long as you have the supply for the bombs. No difference between that and a level 4.

I believe the calculation is Level 4 + (1 per 6000 lbs in the max load rounding down). A B-17 with 6800 max load requires level 5. A B-29 with 20000 max load requires level 7.
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”