Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR

Post descriptions of your brilliant successes and unfortunate demises.

Moderator: Shannon V. OKeets

User avatar
ashkpa
Posts: 1513
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2014 3:11 am

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR

Post by ashkpa »

JF42 Axis Builds
GE (39): 3x pilots, 2x FIG2, 2x LND2, TERR, INF, MTN, INF HQ, MECH, ARM
IT (10): pilot, FIG2, sub-fu, INF HQ
JP (23): 3x pilot, CVP1, FIG2, 3x CP, CV2-fu, CV1-fu, CV2-fd, sub-fu, sub-fd, INF-div
Pat
User avatar
Centuur
Posts: 9079
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 12:03 pm
Location: Hoorn (NED).

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR

Post by Centuur »

ORIGINAL: brian brian

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

No Soviet reaction to the attack on Cernauti.

If I was the Soviets I would raise a hearty round of Vodka toasts over this one, which along with the advance into Bessarabia in general, netted the Russians 11 Build Points for little tactical advantage for Army Group Rumania, due to the production rules in WiF. Four more infantry armies will now meet the onrushing panzers in the summer of 1942.

Agreed. Germany should have taken all of Bessarabia this turn, since that would have given the USSR only a 0,25 extra multiplier on production if they want to take out Bessarabia in the first turn of the war. Now, the Soviets have 0,5 production multiplier extra...
Peter
User avatar
rkr1958
Posts: 30552
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 10:23 am

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR

Post by rkr1958 »

Turn 15. Jan/Feb 1942. End of Turn. Production. Allies.

CW (28 BPs): FTR(3) x 2, Pilot(2) x 2, INF HQ(5), Terr(2) x 2, CP(1) x 3, AMPH 2nd(3), TRS 2nd(3)

France (0 BPs):

USA (54 BPs): O-Chit(15), CV 2nd(3), TRS 2nd(3), BB 2nd(4), CA 2nd(3), CV 1st(2), TRS 1st(2), CP(1) x 2, RN CA Repair(1) x 2, CVP(1) x 2, FTR(3) x 2, Pilot(2) x 3, GAR(2) x 2

USSR (39 BPs): INF(3) x 3, INF HQ(5), ARM HQ(8), ARM(6), MECH(5), MIL(2) x 3
Ronnie
User avatar
rkr1958
Posts: 30552
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 10:23 am

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR

Post by rkr1958 »

Turn 15. Jan/Feb 1942. Conquest. Malaya Completely Conquered by Japan.

Image
Attachments
99Conques..byJapan.jpg
99Conques..byJapan.jpg (666.31 KiB) Viewed 263 times
Ronnie
User avatar
rkr1958
Posts: 30552
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 10:23 am

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR

Post by rkr1958 »

Turn 15. Jan/Feb 1942. Conquest. Hong Kong Completely Conquered by Japan.

Image
Attachments
99Conques..byJapan.jpg
99Conques..byJapan.jpg (933.46 KiB) Viewed 263 times
Ronnie
User avatar
rkr1958
Posts: 30552
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 10:23 am

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR

Post by rkr1958 »

Turn 15. Jan/Feb 1942. Conquest. French Indo China Completely Conquered by Japan.

Image
Attachments
99Conques..byJapan.jpg
99Conques..byJapan.jpg (790.04 KiB) Viewed 263 times
Ronnie
User avatar
rkr1958
Posts: 30552
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 10:23 am

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR

Post by rkr1958 »

Turn 15. Jan/Feb 1942. Victory Totals. Optional Rules.

Image
Attachments
99Victory..alRules.jpg
99Victory..alRules.jpg (771.16 KiB) Viewed 263 times
Ronnie
User avatar
rkr1958
Posts: 30552
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 10:23 am

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR

Post by rkr1958 »

Turn 15. Jan/Feb 1942. Global Maps.

Image
Attachments
99GlobalMaps.jpg
99GlobalMaps.jpg (1.44 MiB) Viewed 263 times
Ronnie
User avatar
ashkpa
Posts: 1513
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2014 3:11 am

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR

Post by ashkpa »

MA42 Axis Reinforcements.


Image
Attachments
MA42Reinforcements.jpg
MA42Reinforcements.jpg (426.98 KiB) Viewed 263 times
Pat
User avatar
rkr1958
Posts: 30552
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 10:23 am

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR

Post by rkr1958 »

Turn 16. Mar/Apr 1942. Deploy Units. CW.

Image
Attachments
00CWDeployUnits.jpg
00CWDeployUnits.jpg (297.93 KiB) Viewed 263 times
Ronnie
User avatar
rkr1958
Posts: 30552
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 10:23 am

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR

Post by rkr1958 »

Turn 16. Mar/Apr 1942. Deploy Units. USA.

Image
Attachments
00USADeployUnits.jpg
00USADeployUnits.jpg (506.2 KiB) Viewed 259 times
Ronnie
User avatar
rkr1958
Posts: 30552
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 10:23 am

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR

Post by rkr1958 »

Turn 16. Mar/Apr 1942. Deploy Units. USSR.

Image
Attachments
00USSRDeployUnits.jpg
00USSRDeployUnits.jpg (251.18 KiB) Viewed 259 times
Ronnie
User avatar
rkr1958
Posts: 30552
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 10:23 am

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR

Post by rkr1958 »

Turn 16. Mar/Apr 1942. Trade.

The only change from last turn was that the USA stopped (deleted) sending 4 oil points to the CW.

Image
Attachments
00Trade.jpg
00Trade.jpg (143.93 KiB) Viewed 259 times
Ronnie
User avatar
rkr1958
Posts: 30552
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 10:23 am

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR

Post by rkr1958 »

Turn 16. Mar/Apr 1942. Initiative.

Image
Attachments
00Initiative.jpg
00Initiative.jpg (235.22 KiB) Viewed 259 times
Ronnie
User avatar
rkr1958
Posts: 30552
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 10:23 am

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR

Post by rkr1958 »

Turn 16. Mar/Apr 1942. Axis #1. Weather.

Image
Attachments
01AXWEATHER.jpg
01AXWEATHER.jpg (650.94 KiB) Viewed 259 times
Ronnie
User avatar
rkr1958
Posts: 30552
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 10:23 am

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR

Post by rkr1958 »

Updated to Public Beta Version 2.3.0.

Image
Attachments
01Updated..eta2300.jpg
01Updated..eta2300.jpg (358.32 KiB) Viewed 259 times
Ronnie
User avatar
ashkpa
Posts: 1513
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2014 3:11 am

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR

Post by ashkpa »

Break due to graduation of my youngest son from college. I'm done with those bills - now it's time for him to find a job. Got to experience a Missouri freezing rain storm at rush hour last Friday evening. That was no fun to drive in.
On to the game.

MA41-i1:
Axis actions: Germany and Japan take lands and Italy takes a combined.
JP flys out to the Coral Sea and the Japanese Coast.
It flies a fighter to BoB and the two subs in Gibraltar to the N. Atlantic.

It will initiate in both zones (will fly a lot of planes out to the BoB 1-box)
In the N. Atlantic there were no allied reactions. First, search rolls were 8/3 so the allies have 5 SP to spend.
Second, Who will react out to the BoB.

Image
Attachments
MA42i1na..combats.jpg
MA42i1na..combats.jpg (704.97 KiB) Viewed 259 times
Pat
User avatar
rkr1958
Posts: 30552
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 10:23 am

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR

Post by rkr1958 »

Pat,

I'm afraid that my upgrade to the latest Public Beta might have been too hasty. Check out my bug post on a naval combat bug in the tech forum: tm.asp?m=4204395 I'm afraid this is a fatal bug that will cause games to halt during the naval combat phase. I'm not sure and only have this one example but that's my fear.

I like all the fixes in 2.3.0 but I'm afraid naval combat could be messed up. If it is I don't want to waste a turn.

What do you think?

Should we play through and risk it?

Wait for a hot patch?

Revert back to the last MWiF version?

After we decide which version to use my answers are:

First, search rolls were 8/3 so the allies have 5 SP to spend. I wish to use all the allied surprise points to maximize the chance that the allies will clear the Italian subs (destroy, abort) out of the Bay of Biscay.

Second, Who will react out to the BoB. I believe there are 4 CW fighters that can fly out. These 4, and any other CW fighters that can reach, to the 0-box of the Bay of Biscay.


P.S. I just discovered that game files saved with this newest version, 2.3.0 will NOT work with the previous version 2.2.8 EVEN if you edit the game file and change the version from 2.3.0 to 2.2.8. If you do that and try to open it in MWiF 2.2.8, MWiF will crash and you will have to kill it either in task manager or by rebooting your machine.
Ronnie
User avatar
rkr1958
Posts: 30552
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 10:23 am

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR

Post by rkr1958 »

Pat and I have decided to wait to after Christmas to decide how to proceed. Specifically, do we wait for a hot patch to the naval abort bug that's broken the latest version (2.3.0 Public Beta) or, if one's not forthcoming revert back to 2.2.8.

Hopefully we'll get some response to my latest inquiry into such, reference tm.asp?m=4203363#

Ronnie
WIF_Killzone
Posts: 277
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:51 pm

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR

Post by WIF_Killzone »

I think it was the Russians buying for time. Those railed factories will be up and running in no time.
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Report”