Castles in the Sand - Spidery(J) vs MrKane(A) no MrKane please

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

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

Spidery
Posts: 1821
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 5:47 am
Location: Hampshire, UK

RE: Castles in the Sand - Spidery(J) vs MrKane(A) no MrKane please

Post by Spidery »

March 15th 1944

Very mixed turn. Nail a sub, Miri airfields are closed, I expect he will close Brunei tomorrow. Guam lose a fort level but destroy his engineers.

Shambles at Miri as Spitfire VIII's sweep and are followed up by about 240 Liberators with escorts. A reasonable amount of CAP is still airborne against the bombers but it can't close or do much damage. Miri airfield is closed and I lose 31 Ki-46-III KAI night fighters on the ground along with 30 day fighters[:@].

Allied attacks near Lashio are ambushed by Ki-84r that do well against the Spitfire Vc on sweep[:)] but are not able to do much damage to the bombers[:(].

Total air loss for the day 141 versus 56 with the Allies losing only 5 liberators so this is not even 2::1[:(].

SC Ch 37 sinks SS Raton near Singapore[8D] (night experience leaps from 45 to 55).

SS Barb is badly damaged near Leyte[8D] but probably not fatally[:(].

The KB is no longer spotted but its rough location is known because I have a total of 9 claimed hits from aircraft on subs[8|].

Allies attack at Guam again and reduce forts to 7[:(] but at a cost[:)]. In particular, I think their combat engineer battalion was obliterated which may handicap their ability to further reduce forts.
Attacking force 30698 troops, 512 guns, 693 vehicles, Assault Value = 1093

Defending force 29574 troops, 407 guns, 565 vehicles, Assault Value = 666

Allied engineers reduce fortifications to 7

Allied adjusted assault: 732

Japanese adjusted defense: 3053

Allied assault odds: 1 to 4 (fort level 7)

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

Japanese ground losses:
691 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 46 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 15 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 4 disabled
Guns lost 21 (3 destroyed, 18 disabled)
Vehicles lost 5 (1 destroyed, 4 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
1362 casualties reported
Squads: 27 destroyed, 43 disabled
Non Combat: 33 destroyed, 57 disabled
Engineers: 81 destroyed, 18 disabled
Guns lost 30 (10 destroyed, 20 disabled)
Vehicles lost 114 (50 destroyed, 64 disabled)
Units destroyed 1

P1Y2-S to 8/44.
Spidery
Posts: 1821
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 5:47 am
Location: Hampshire, UK

RE: Castles in the Sand - Spidery(J) vs MrKane(A) no MrKane please

Post by Spidery »

The Allies have been bombarding Guam a lot. There are two units there with anti-shipping guns. The 3rd Special Base Force with 8 CD guns and 10 DP guns and the Kure 7th SNLF with 24 DP guns. During the replay the 3rd SBF usually fires (and misses) at the enemy but the 7th SNLF never seems to. It may be a range thing as the DP guns can reach 17 while the CD guns have ranges of 32 or 21.
User avatar
MrBlizzard
Posts: 636
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 7:34 pm
Location: Italy

RE: Castles in the Sand - Spidery(J) vs MrKane(A) no MrKane please

Post by MrBlizzard »

ORIGINAL: Spidery

The Allies have been bombarding Guam a lot. There are two units there with anti-shipping guns. The 3rd Special Base Force with 8 CD guns and 10 DP guns and the Kure 7th SNLF with 24 DP guns. During the replay the 3rd SBF usually fires (and misses) at the enemy but the 7th SNLF never seems to. It may be a range thing as the DP guns can reach 17 while the CD guns have ranges of 32 or 21.
If you like you can check it : in the animation it is showed the distance at which the bombardment TF fire
Blizzard
Spidery
Posts: 1821
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 5:47 am
Location: Hampshire, UK

RE: Castles in the Sand - Spidery(J) vs MrKane(A) no MrKane please

Post by Spidery »

Deleted, managed to repeat the report from the 15th
Spidery
Posts: 1821
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 5:47 am
Location: Hampshire, UK

RE: Castles in the Sand - Spidery(J) vs MrKane(A) no MrKane please

Post by Spidery »

March 16th 1944 Edit: fixed the date

SC Ch 5 lost to SS Balao off Leyte. Just minor damage inflicted on some Allied subs (unless some of the aircraft hits are real).

B-24j strike Lanchow manpower at night. Ki-45 KAId have their first engagement and do okay[:)] trading 7 losses for 11 B-24j downed (6 in air-air, 1 flak, 4 ops). No damage to industry.

Thunderbolts sweep Brunei but no follow up from bombers. N1K2-J gets its first combat. 27 N1K1-J, 14 Ki-43-IV, 5 Ki-84r, 6 N1K2-J for 21 P-47D2 and 1 P-47D25. 52::22 losses. It was all going well until the last sweep caught a weakened and tired defense[:(].

Allies bomb troops in Burma and some Ki-84r arrive and he loses a few fighter-bombers. The planes were on LRCAP over Taung Gyi (range 5 from Chiang Mai) with a max range of 5 but decided to stray 3 hexes North.

Altogether, 65 for 52 VP in the air[:)].

Allied bombardment at Guam is a disaster for them[8D]
Attacking force 996 troops, 98 guns, 84 vehicles, Assault Value = 939

Defending force 28669 troops, 401 guns, 566 vehicles, Assault Value = 630

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

Allied ground losses:
Guns lost 38 (32 destroyed, 6 disabled)
Vehicles lost 18 (13 destroyed, 5 disabled)
It looks like he was resting some of his tubes. I have 3 powerful artillery units here, a group of 4 30cm, the 3rd special base force with CD and DP guns, and a medium artillery unit of 10cm and 15cm tubes. I expect they all targeted the same Allied unit which is why it was so expensive for them.
Spidery
Posts: 1821
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 5:47 am
Location: Hampshire, UK

RE: Castles in the Sand - Spidery(J) vs MrKane(A) no MrKane please

Post by Spidery »

March 17th 1944

Allies close Brunei with massive sweeps and strikes by Liberators. I had evacuated all night fighters so not so much lost on the ground.

Unescorted, and without sweeps, Liberators day strike at Tsuyung and some Ki-84r on CAP perform well. I think trading at least 1 for 1.

Day air loss: 28 N1K1-J, 26 Ki-84r, 19 N1K2-J, 14 Ki-43-IV for 15 F4U-1A, 11 P-38J, 11 F4U-1, 1 Spitfire VII, 1 P-38H, 1 F6F-3 and 13 B-24J. 97 to 73 VP on the day with all the little losses added in.

I will now have to abandon Miri and Brunei. At least that will mean I can send more fighters to the Burma area. I have about 30,000 liquids on Borneo so need to see if there is anyway I can get this out. May be able to draw some from Jesselton or use some for refueling operations.

Two Allied BB groups bombard Guam (from 15,000 yards - thanks MrBlizzard). The first is of little value but the second concentrates on the facilities and does a lot of damage to auxiliary forces:
Japanese ground losses:
663 casualties reported
Squads: 2 destroyed, 4 disabled
Non Combat: 35 destroyed, 24 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 4 disabled
Guns lost 28 (11 destroyed, 17 disabled)
Vehicles lost 22 (9 destroyed, 13 disabled)
A unit of 4 12cm AA gun is destroyed and will reform for the defense of Tokyo.

Allied forces have withdrawn from Taung Gyi; is he re-locating to increase the attack on Lashio? Or has he pulled back so he can upgrade devices?

A7M2 to 3/45
Spidery
Posts: 1821
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 5:47 am
Location: Hampshire, UK

RE: Castles in the Sand - Spidery(J) vs MrKane(A) no MrKane please

Post by Spidery »

My air forces are all in a complete mess and I need to find some time to disentangle them. Fighter groups with low morale have been evacuated to Singapore, Manila, and Cebu. Transports are lifting surplus aviation support from Tarakan, Miri, Brunei and it needs to be re-distributed to appropriate bases. Lots of aviation support arriving at Tokyo.

Main air bases in the Philippines.

(A) is a route he could follow to base hop past the Southern Philippines without ever getting close to a major base.

(B) is another route he might be able to bypass defenses.

Aim is to get Singapore, Cebu and Manila as level 9 airfields with about 600+ aviation support.


Image
Attachments
PhilAir.jpg
PhilAir.jpg (144.02 KiB) Viewed 423 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Castles in the Sand - Spidery(J) vs MrKane(A) no MrKane please

Post by Lowpe »

Do all those little ASW TF work? Doesn't it consume a ton of fuel?
User avatar
obvert
Posts: 14051
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 11:18 am
Location: PDX (and now) London, UK

RE: Castles in the Sand - Spidery(J) vs MrKane(A) no MrKane please

Post by obvert »

I just looked back through your econ roundup for the last month.

Considering what's been going on with your oil/fuel centers, you've got a pretty good reserve. Well done!

Adding up your HI fuel usage and the ships use per day and multiplying that 29,235 by 365 I get 10,670,775 though. You may want to start some severe conservation measures now before the oil slows to a trickle.

If you're still moving some you might consider using a bunch of convoys grouped in a mega convoy to minimize contacts and maximize escort efficiency. I remember Greyjoy used these a lot against Q-Ball and they worked pretty well.

Also consider starting to minimize refueling of ships and start refueling the smaller ones from some big ones (until they run dry) you don't need to use for the remainder. A lot of fuel is usually tied up there in bunkers. I had whole refueling fleets of Aden class xAK around the HI.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill
Spidery
Posts: 1821
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 5:47 am
Location: Hampshire, UK

RE: Castles in the Sand - Spidery(J) vs MrKane(A) no MrKane please

Post by Spidery »

March 18th 1944

DD Hayashimo takes a torpedo from SS Angler near Legaspi. With 4/47/0 damage she should make it to Naga without problems to be patched up.

Liberators bomb Miri and destroy 14 planes on the ground being repaired. Little chance of saving the remainder.

Allies are stepping up the campaign against Lashio and the troops in the jungle near there. Not having much effect really.

BB bombard Guam again.

DD Akishimo commissioned.
Spidery
Posts: 1821
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 5:47 am
Location: Hampshire, UK

RE: Castles in the Sand - Spidery(J) vs MrKane(A) no MrKane please

Post by Spidery »

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Do all those little ASW TF work? Doesn't it consume a ton of fuel?

They get a load of attacks on Allied subs and quite a few hits but hardly ever sink anything so I don't know if that counts as working or not.

The ones in shallow waters are small PB boats or sub-chasers or E boats with Mod 2-DC. They are on a 1 hex patrol location with no reaction which means they only seem to use fuel when they launch an attack which happens occasionally to a passing sub.

The ones active of Samar are 2 or 3 good ASW craft with a 1 or 2 hex reaction that means I am getting 2 or 3 attacks per day (or night). These do use some fuel but I think it is worth it. However, I may rein in the reaction as it isn't really needed in a target rich environment.

Spidery
Posts: 1821
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 5:47 am
Location: Hampshire, UK

RE: Castles in the Sand - Spidery(J) vs MrKane(A) no MrKane please

Post by Spidery »

ORIGINAL: obvert

I just looked back through your econ roundup for the last month.

Considering what's been going on with your oil/fuel centers, you've got a pretty good reserve. Well done!

Adding up your HI fuel usage and the ships use per day and multiplying that 29,235 by 365 I get 10,670,775 though. You may want to start some severe conservation measures now before the oil slows to a trickle.

If you're still moving some you might consider using a bunch of convoys grouped in a mega convoy to minimize contacts and maximize escort efficiency. I remember Greyjoy used these a lot against Q-Ball and they worked pretty well.

Also consider starting to minimize refueling of ships and start refueling the smaller ones from some big ones (until they run dry) you don't need to use for the remainder. A lot of fuel is usually tied up there in bunkers. I had whole refueling fleets of Aden class xAK around the HI.

I have been running supply out to interesting places and then returning with resources and "do not fuel" set so I am now emptying most of the inefficient ships and quite a lot of other transport ships. For the transport run from Fusan I have stopped using CS convoys so I can run those dry. Certainly, I have enough tankers to move all the remaining fuel/oil without any need to refuel them.

Tracker grossly overestimates fuel usage as it doesn't seem to allow for ships in task forces in port without orders or ships on 1-hex patrols.

I have been watching it fairly closely and am using 4000 to 6000 fuel per day (plus what I extract from ship bunkers). I expect oil to run out mid 1944 and fuel to run out March 1945; it is difficult to predict how much fuel will be in ports that can't be accessed - I am guessing 2,000,000. I expect then to have enough HI and supply to last until about August 1945. This of course depends upon the Allied offensives.
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Castles in the Sand - Spidery(J) vs MrKane(A) no MrKane please

Post by Lowpe »

ORIGINAL: Spidery

Tracker grossly overestimates fuel usage as it doesn't seem to allow for ships in task forces in port without orders or ships on 1-hex patrols.

On the Industry/Chart page?
User avatar
obvert
Posts: 14051
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 11:18 am
Location: PDX (and now) London, UK

RE: Castles in the Sand - Spidery(J) vs MrKane(A) no MrKane please

Post by obvert »

ORIGINAL: Spidery

ORIGINAL: obvert

I just looked back through your econ roundup for the last month.

Considering what's been going on with your oil/fuel centers, you've got a pretty good reserve. Well done!

Adding up your HI fuel usage and the ships use per day and multiplying that 29,235 by 365 I get 10,670,775 though. You may want to start some severe conservation measures now before the oil slows to a trickle.

If you're still moving some you might consider using a bunch of convoys grouped in a mega convoy to minimize contacts and maximize escort efficiency. I remember Greyjoy used these a lot against Q-Ball and they worked pretty well.

Also consider starting to minimize refueling of ships and start refueling the smaller ones from some big ones (until they run dry) you don't need to use for the remainder. A lot of fuel is usually tied up there in bunkers. I had whole refueling fleets of Aden class xAK around the HI.

I have been running supply out to interesting places and then returning with resources and "do not fuel" set so I am now emptying most of the inefficient ships and quite a lot of other transport ships. For the transport run from Fusan I have stopped using CS convoys so I can run those dry. Certainly, I have enough tankers to move all the remaining fuel/oil without any need to refuel them.

Tracker grossly overestimates fuel usage as it doesn't seem to allow for ships in task forces in port without orders or ships on 1-hex patrols.

I have been watching it fairly closely and am using 4000 to 6000 fuel per day (plus what I extract from ship bunkers). I expect oil to run out mid 1944 and fuel to run out March 1945; it is difficult to predict how much fuel will be in ports that can't be accessed - I am guessing 2,000,000. I expect then to have enough HI and supply to last until about August 1945. This of course depends upon the Allied offensives.

Sounds like you have it covered. What ports are currently inaccessible to getting the fuel/oil? Are these the DEI bases in range of Java?
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill
Spidery
Posts: 1821
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 5:47 am
Location: Hampshire, UK

RE: Castles in the Sand - Spidery(J) vs MrKane(A) no MrKane please

Post by Spidery »

Sounds like you have it covered. What ports are currently inaccessible to getting the fuel/oil? Are these the DEI bases in range of Java?

I think it is a comment you made towards the end of your AAR. But all the little ports in China, Japan, etc. take 1000 * port size in fuel demand even if no task forces are based there. That fuel isn't available for HI production. I think you had nearly a 500,000 in fuel at a point when your HI was shutting down.

Then there is fuel in the Marianas and on Borneo island that I can only really get at for refueling subs and most of my subs are in the East at the moment.

Actually, I don't think it is as bad as I guessed. Tracker currently reports 6.2 million fuel and 5.5 million of that is in Japan so only 700,000 is not at home.
Spidery
Posts: 1821
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 5:47 am
Location: Hampshire, UK

RE: Castles in the Sand - Spidery(J) vs MrKane(A) no MrKane please

Post by Spidery »

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

ORIGINAL: Spidery

Tracker grossly overestimates fuel usage as it doesn't seem to allow for ships in task forces in port without orders or ships on 1-hex patrols.

On the Industry/Chart page?

Yes.
User avatar
obvert
Posts: 14051
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 11:18 am
Location: PDX (and now) London, UK

RE: Castles in the Sand - Spidery(J) vs MrKane(A) no MrKane please

Post by obvert »

ORIGINAL: Spidery
Sounds like you have it covered. What ports are currently inaccessible to getting the fuel/oil? Are these the DEI bases in range of Java?

I think it is a comment you made towards the end of your AAR. But all the little ports in China, Japan, etc. take 1000 * port size in fuel demand even if no task forces are based there. That fuel isn't available for HI production. I think you had nearly a 500,000 in fuel at a point when your HI was shutting down.

Then there is fuel in the Marianas and on Borneo island that I can only really get at for refueling subs and most of my subs are in the East at the moment.

Actually, I don't think it is as bad as I guessed. Tracker currently reports 6.2 million fuel and 5.5 million of that is in Japan so only 700,000 is not at home.

Yes. It is tough that you can't allocate to 0 for fuel in port when you want to discontinue use of a port. 700k is much better than 2,000k though! [:)]

I'm just impressed with your preparation and determination. It's the worst nightmare for Japan to lose the DEI so early, but you've taken the blows and kept prepping. This is what it takes to last into 45 and still have fun while getting driven to a small red circle on the map around the HI. There are a lot of bad days, but if you stay positive the few good ones can keep you going. [:)]
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill
Spidery
Posts: 1821
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 5:47 am
Location: Hampshire, UK

RE: Castles in the Sand - Spidery(J) vs MrKane(A) no MrKane please

Post by Spidery »

I'm just impressed with your preparation and determination. It's the worst nightmare for Japan to lose the DEI so early, but you've taken the blows and kept prepping. This is what it takes to last into 45 and still have fun while getting driven to a small red circle on the map around the HI. There are a lot of bad days, but if you stay positive the few good ones can keep you going.

Thank-you.

From the start my planning was to last into '46 so the early loss of the DEI trims 6 months off that.

I don't really understand the issue about "determination". Unless the Allies throw in the towel, almost every game will result in Japan engaged in a desperate delaying action with too few, too poor, forces without adequate supplies. It is only a question of when that happens.

MrKane's decision to send his subs out has made the game more enjoyable as it means every turn I can see some chances to strike at his forces and watch my ASW forces have a chance to sink one of his subs.

I do wish I could find more opportunities to take the offensive but MrKane is very good about not exposing his ships and base AA is so deadly that strikes at bases seem pointless.
User avatar
obvert
Posts: 14051
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 11:18 am
Location: PDX (and now) London, UK

RE: Castles in the Sand - Spidery(J) vs MrKane(A) no MrKane please

Post by obvert »

ORIGINAL: Spidery
I'm just impressed with your preparation and determination. It's the worst nightmare for Japan to lose the DEI so early, but you've taken the blows and kept prepping. This is what it takes to last into 45 and still have fun while getting driven to a small red circle on the map around the HI. There are a lot of bad days, but if you stay positive the few good ones can keep you going.

Thank-you.

From the start my planning was to last into '46 so the early loss of the DEI trims 6 months off that.

I don't really understand the issue about "determination". Unless the Allies throw in the towel, almost every game will result in Japan engaged in a desperate delaying action with too few, too poor, forces without adequate supplies. It is only a question of when that happens.

MrKane's decision to send his subs out has made the game more enjoyable as it means every turn I can see some chances to strike at his forces and watch my ASW forces have a chance to sink one of his subs.

I do wish I could find more opportunities to take the offensive but MrKane is very good about not exposing his ships and base AA is so deadly that strikes at bases seem pointless.

I agree.

You'll probably get some good chances as he moves into range of your big bases. Also kamis again change the game.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Castles in the Sand - Spidery(J) vs MrKane(A) no MrKane please

Post by Lowpe »

I think the closer the Allies get to the HI, and the more flush they are with planes and ships, the more reckless they get.

In addition, Japan has interior lines and lots of bases to spring surprises from.

Plus, with China gone I think Spidery is in great shape for the end game. Especially with his plane development.







Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”