The Bitter End - Topeverest (A) vs Admiral Kamikaze (E)
Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition
RE: March 15, 1945 - A BARN BURNING Counterpulse!
post 320 attachment also just brings up the same page.
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
- topeverest
- Posts: 3381
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
- Location: Houston, TX - USA
RE: March 15, 1945 - A BARN BURNING Counterpulse!
test again...can I get a picture in here.


- Attachments
-
- cv1a.jpg (303.69 KiB) Viewed 289 times
Andy M
- topeverest
- Posts: 3381
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
- Location: Houston, TX - USA
RE: March 15, 1945 - A BARN BURNING Counterpulse!
looks like it is finally working...and now the moneyball...


Andy M
- topeverest
- Posts: 3381
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
- Location: Houston, TX - USA
RE: March 15, 1945 - A BARN BURNING Counterpulse!
DD's get a special delivery on the American CV's
Fish for dinner?

Fish for dinner?

- Attachments
-
- cv death.jpg (335.9 KiB) Viewed 289 times
Andy M
- topeverest
- Posts: 3381
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
- Location: Houston, TX - USA
RE: March 15, 1945 - A BARN BURNING Counterpulse!
All the CVs in one basket, and only some old DDs for protection?
The Gods of War love to expose weaknesses like that! [:(]
The Gods of War love to expose weaknesses like that! [:(]
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
RE: March 15, 1945 - A BARN BURNING Counterpulse!
I thought there was an air operations limit? That would preclude 18 aircraft carriers from operating together as they could not launch anything but CAP since they could not hope to coordinate a strike from this many carriers in one TF.
RE: March 15, 1945 - A BARN BURNING Counterpulse!
I think there is no limit as of '45 (or is it '44??), maybe that's just for the Allies?ORIGINAL: Bif1961
I thought there was an air operations limit? That would preclude 18 aircraft carriers from operating together as they could not launch anything but CAP since they could not hope to coordinate a strike from this many carriers in one TF.
Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home
- topeverest
- Posts: 3381
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
- Location: Houston, TX - USA
RE: March 15, 1945 - A BARN BURNING Counterpulse!
Back online here. Had a major computer malfunction which took weeks to resolve and then I was pretty busy in real life. So back to the AAR I come.
To the points above. I have not found a limitation to CV's in a TF. In fact, I regularly put up to 30 CVE's in a transport TF for CAP warfare. It is mainly out of laziness because I don't bother to build a bunch of smaller CVE TF's. The allies did not lose a single CV in the combat sequence.
regarding the barn burning turn, the empire pulsed in a dozen of his fasted DD's from truk to and made it past two SCTF's without combat but had to fight a bunch of DE's and won. Then it made it to the CV's near Manus / successfully entered surface combat. It was a one in a million attack, but they do succeed in getting to their targets. perhaps if he was willing to burn a CA or couple CL's he might have sunk one or more of the fleet CV's. As it was, the weather cooperated perfectly, because the TF of CV's were in range of the attack, and all were under storm both pulses. The empire lost 3DD's but the rest got away.
To the points above. I have not found a limitation to CV's in a TF. In fact, I regularly put up to 30 CVE's in a transport TF for CAP warfare. It is mainly out of laziness because I don't bother to build a bunch of smaller CVE TF's. The allies did not lose a single CV in the combat sequence.
regarding the barn burning turn, the empire pulsed in a dozen of his fasted DD's from truk to and made it past two SCTF's without combat but had to fight a bunch of DE's and won. Then it made it to the CV's near Manus / successfully entered surface combat. It was a one in a million attack, but they do succeed in getting to their targets. perhaps if he was willing to burn a CA or couple CL's he might have sunk one or more of the fleet CV's. As it was, the weather cooperated perfectly, because the TF of CV's were in range of the attack, and all were under storm both pulses. The empire lost 3DD's but the rest got away.
Andy M
- topeverest
- Posts: 3381
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
- Location: Houston, TX - USA
RE: March 15, 1945 - A BARN BURNING Counterpulse!
Almost got my not so pretty little behind a tagged in all the wrong ways!


- Attachments
-
- PLA.jpg (32.05 KiB) Viewed 289 times
Andy M
- topeverest
- Posts: 3381
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
- Location: Houston, TX - USA
RE: April 18, 1945 - Methodical allied advance
Since last update, the allies have made material progress in New Guinea. Attached is a world map highlighting the progress.


- Attachments
-
- wm.jpg (194.53 KiB) Viewed 289 times
Andy M
- topeverest
- Posts: 3381
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
- Location: Houston, TX - USA
RE: April 18, 1945 - Port Blair
The port Blair invasion left Colombo this turn and should make landfall in 5 turns. The armada includes 5 CV's and 14 CVL CVE with 4 BB and 300 amphibious types carrying 4 divisions. The empire doesn't really have a chance on this one. It will be measured in time to take.


- Attachments
-
- ccc.jpg (91.06 KiB) Viewed 289 times
Andy M
- topeverest
- Posts: 3381
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
- Location: Houston, TX - USA
RE: April 18, 1945 - Thailand overland
Thailand overland has ground to a halt with modest gains (as expected). following is a picture. We are in stalemate.
I am curious if taking a base to 100% damage limits its ability to distribute supplies to the surrounding hexes. Is that true?

I am curious if taking a base to 100% damage limits its ability to distribute supplies to the surrounding hexes. Is that true?

- Attachments
-
- yyy.jpg (112.2 KiB) Viewed 289 times
Andy M
- topeverest
- Posts: 3381
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
- Location: Houston, TX - USA
RE: April 18, 1945 - New Guinea and Solomons
The bulk of the American fleets have been here doing business the way only can be done in 1945. Lots of momentum here. Within the month, the allies will be shifting to clear a supply line through the Marshalls and then on to Marianna's. Suva is mostly stocked with troops and supplies and ships at this point. we need to complete the isolation of Lunga and on we will go.
Empire has pulsed in a couple more DD fleets, none of which has made it to major fleet targets or disrupted any operation materially. Empire has freely admitted that the Philippines will be the ultimate battle - win or lose. (We agreed the allies have to come to Luzon)

Empire has pulsed in a couple more DD fleets, none of which has made it to major fleet targets or disrupted any operation materially. Empire has freely admitted that the Philippines will be the ultimate battle - win or lose. (We agreed the allies have to come to Luzon)

- Attachments
-
- 888.jpg (667.62 KiB) Viewed 289 times
Andy M
- topeverest
- Posts: 3381
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
- Location: Houston, TX - USA
RE: April 18, 1945 - Upcoming Gilberts Campaign
Gilberts will take off in mid to late may, after all primary objectives in NG and S are achieved. Allies will bypass, isolate and bomb major bases to oblivion.


- Attachments
-
- qqq.jpg (179.54 KiB) Viewed 289 times
Andy M
- topeverest
- Posts: 3381
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
- Location: Houston, TX - USA
RE: April 19, 1945 - CV Battle in offering
Allies take Munda...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Munda (111,134)
Allied Deliberate attack
Attacking force 49323 troops, 1016 guns, 861 vehicles, Assault Value = 1454
Defending force 9630 troops, 79 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 253
Allied adjusted assault: 974
Japanese adjusted defense: 154
Allied assault odds: 6 to 1 (fort level 2)
Allied forces CAPTURE Munda !!!
Japanese aircraft
no flights
Japanese aircraft losses
H6K5 Mavis: 3 destroyed
Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), forts(+), leaders(+), disruption(-), fatigue(-)
experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker:
Japanese ground losses:
1384 casualties reported
Squads: 8 destroyed, 77 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 8 disabled
Engineers: 41 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 31 (17 destroyed, 14 disabled)
Allied ground losses:
672 casualties reported
Squads: 5 destroyed, 97 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 7 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 21 disabled
Guns lost 6 (1 destroyed, 5 disabled)
Assaulting units:
110th Combat Engineer Battalion
2nd Marine Division
38th Infantry Division
11th NZ Brigade
1st Marine Division
3rd NZ Brigade
3rd Marine Division
6th Infantry Division
12th NZ Brigade
8th NZ Brigade
32nd USN Naval Construction Regiment
33rd Aviation Base Force
III US Amphib Corps
Bobcats USN Naval Construction Battalion
857th Engineer Aviation Battalion
XXI US Bomber Cmnd
Defending units:
58th Ind.Mixed Brigade
70th Ind.Mixed Brigade
65th Construction Battalion
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Munda (111,134)
Allied Deliberate attack
Attacking force 49323 troops, 1016 guns, 861 vehicles, Assault Value = 1454
Defending force 9630 troops, 79 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 253
Allied adjusted assault: 974
Japanese adjusted defense: 154
Allied assault odds: 6 to 1 (fort level 2)
Allied forces CAPTURE Munda !!!
Japanese aircraft
no flights
Japanese aircraft losses
H6K5 Mavis: 3 destroyed
Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), forts(+), leaders(+), disruption(-), fatigue(-)
experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker:
Japanese ground losses:
1384 casualties reported
Squads: 8 destroyed, 77 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 8 disabled
Engineers: 41 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 31 (17 destroyed, 14 disabled)
Allied ground losses:
672 casualties reported
Squads: 5 destroyed, 97 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 7 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 21 disabled
Guns lost 6 (1 destroyed, 5 disabled)
Assaulting units:
110th Combat Engineer Battalion
2nd Marine Division
38th Infantry Division
11th NZ Brigade
1st Marine Division
3rd NZ Brigade
3rd Marine Division
6th Infantry Division
12th NZ Brigade
8th NZ Brigade
32nd USN Naval Construction Regiment
33rd Aviation Base Force
III US Amphib Corps
Bobcats USN Naval Construction Battalion
857th Engineer Aviation Battalion
XXI US Bomber Cmnd
Defending units:
58th Ind.Mixed Brigade
70th Ind.Mixed Brigade
65th Construction Battalion
Andy M
- topeverest
- Posts: 3381
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
- Location: Houston, TX - USA
RE: April 19, 1945 - Rabaul Reduced Further
Don't have it yet, but soon...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Rabaul (106,125)
Allied Deliberate attack
Attacking force 83511 troops, 1440 guns, 5122 vehicles, Assault Value = 3721
Defending force 15217 troops, 142 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 344
Allied engineers reduce fortifications to 7
Allied adjusted assault: 2170
Japanese adjusted defense: 1599
Allied assault odds: 1 to 1 (fort level 7)
Allied Assault reduces fortifications to 7
Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), forts(+), disruption(-), experience(-)
Attacker:
Japanese ground losses:
3107 casualties reported
Squads: 68 destroyed, 144 disabled
Non Combat: 80 destroyed, 67 disabled
Engineers: 4 destroyed, 23 disabled
Guns lost 30 (16 destroyed, 14 disabled)
Units destroyed 1
Allied ground losses:
359 casualties reported
Squads: 17 destroyed, 47 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 16 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Guns lost 12 (1 destroyed, 11 disabled)
Vehicles lost 58 (4 destroyed, 54 disabled)
Assaulting units:
192nd Tank Battalion
2nd USMC Amphb Tank Bn /1
Canterbury Yeomanry Regiment
41st Infantry Division
5th Armoured Division
13th Armoured Division
Nelson/Marlb. (Mtd) Regiment
3rd Infantry Division
98th Infantry Division
Waikito (Mtd) Rifle Regiment
Nth Auckland (Mtd) Regiment
6th Armoured Division
194th Tank Bn /26
5th USMC Tank Battalion
7th Mot Infantry Division
708th Amphib Tank Battalion
1st Australian Para Bn /5
6th USMC Tank Battalion
Fiji Brigade
Auckland (Mtd) Rifl Regiment
2nd USMC Tank Battalion
Manawatu's (Mtd) Regiment
757th Tank Bn /26
Canada Command
37th Infantry Div /2
Defending units:
41st Naval Guard Unit
52nd Division
53rd Naval Guard Unit
Rabaul Engineer Battalion
4th Fleet
3rd JNAF AF Unit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Rabaul (106,125)
Allied Deliberate attack
Attacking force 83511 troops, 1440 guns, 5122 vehicles, Assault Value = 3721
Defending force 15217 troops, 142 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 344
Allied engineers reduce fortifications to 7
Allied adjusted assault: 2170
Japanese adjusted defense: 1599
Allied assault odds: 1 to 1 (fort level 7)
Allied Assault reduces fortifications to 7
Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), forts(+), disruption(-), experience(-)
Attacker:
Japanese ground losses:
3107 casualties reported
Squads: 68 destroyed, 144 disabled
Non Combat: 80 destroyed, 67 disabled
Engineers: 4 destroyed, 23 disabled
Guns lost 30 (16 destroyed, 14 disabled)
Units destroyed 1
Allied ground losses:
359 casualties reported
Squads: 17 destroyed, 47 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 16 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Guns lost 12 (1 destroyed, 11 disabled)
Vehicles lost 58 (4 destroyed, 54 disabled)
Assaulting units:
192nd Tank Battalion
2nd USMC Amphb Tank Bn /1
Canterbury Yeomanry Regiment
41st Infantry Division
5th Armoured Division
13th Armoured Division
Nelson/Marlb. (Mtd) Regiment
3rd Infantry Division
98th Infantry Division
Waikito (Mtd) Rifle Regiment
Nth Auckland (Mtd) Regiment
6th Armoured Division
194th Tank Bn /26
5th USMC Tank Battalion
7th Mot Infantry Division
708th Amphib Tank Battalion
1st Australian Para Bn /5
6th USMC Tank Battalion
Fiji Brigade
Auckland (Mtd) Rifl Regiment
2nd USMC Tank Battalion
Manawatu's (Mtd) Regiment
757th Tank Bn /26
Canada Command
37th Infantry Div /2
Defending units:
41st Naval Guard Unit
52nd Division
53rd Naval Guard Unit
Rabaul Engineer Battalion
4th Fleet
3rd JNAF AF Unit
Andy M
- topeverest
- Posts: 3381
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
- Location: Houston, TX - USA
RE: April 19, 1945 - Port Blair
Another 6 turns I predict


- Attachments
-
- ggg.jpg (183.04 KiB) Viewed 289 times
Andy M
- topeverest
- Posts: 3381
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
- Location: Houston, TX - USA
RE: April 19, 1945 - CV fight
Here is the scoop. The odds aren't great, but no guts - no glory. It is 1945, and allied airframes are vastly superior. We will see if it is enough to compensate for the 3/2 empire air superiority.


- Attachments
-
- yyy.jpg (273.8 KiB) Viewed 289 times
Andy M
RE: April 19, 1945 - CV fight
Nav Search rarely gets the type and number of ships right. I would bet that some of the Japanese CVs counted are CVEs or CLs, etc. The thing that makes me suspicious is that there are no DDs or BBs reported in the TF.
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

