JFB in charge of the USN??? BtS Lite ver. 4.5 Kitakami (A) vs Falken (J)

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

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

User avatar
Dirtnap86
Posts: 98
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2016 3:22 pm

RE: JFB in charge of the USN???

Post by Dirtnap86 »

Chinese units have a lot of raw AV, but their lack of armored units and AT weapons mean that if they encounter even stuff as light as the IJA armored cars, they're up the creek with no paddle. Getting them dug into x3 terrain, or any urban terrain means the IJA has to bring divisions or tanks to clear them out.

As far as disablements/destroyed. I think a device or squad has to be disabled before it can be destroyed. If you see lots of disablements, turn after turn, that means the enemy is well supplied and can recover those disablements quickly. It also means they have enough support to do so as well.
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20585
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

RE: JFB in charge of the USN???

Post by BBfanboy »

ORIGINAL: Dirtnap86

Chinese units have a lot of raw AV, but their lack of armored units and AT weapons mean that if they encounter even stuff as light as the IJA armored cars, they're up the creek with no paddle. Getting them dug into x3 terrain, or any urban terrain means the IJA has to bring divisions or tanks to clear them out.

As far as disablements/destroyed. I think a device or squad has to be disabled before it can be destroyed. If you see lots of disablements, turn after turn, that means the enemy is well supplied and can recover those disablements quickly. It also means they have enough support to do so as well.
Given that units can be destroyed in one pass during an overwhelming landing on an atoll, I think they do not have to have the squads disabled first. But in most cases in happens as you suggest - they get ground down with few destroyed squads until the unit has over 50% disablements, and then the destroyed tally starts to rise sharply.
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
ny59giants
Posts: 9902
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:02 pm

RE: JFB in charge of the USN???

Post by ny59giants »

Chinese devices have had production increased by over 50% so it should help.
[center]Image[/center]
User avatar
Kitakami
Posts: 1318
Joined: Thu May 02, 2002 11:08 pm
Location: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami

RE: JFB in charge of the USN???

Post by Kitakami »

Feb. 13th, 1942:

The Mauling of Manila has resumed. IJN Hvy CarDiv 3 found and sunk AMC Aramis and DD Mameluck, as they were delivering Kiwi engineers to Suva. Japanese attacks in China began to get more effective. IJA artillery pounds Singapore. British cruisers bombard Moulmein, and hit IJA supply stores. The turn went to Japan.

Pilot losses were light. This is one of the things I check every turn, and try to minimize.


Image
Attachments
pilotlosses.jpg
pilotlosses.jpg (122.9 KiB) Viewed 304 times
Tenno Heika Banzai!
User avatar
Kitakami
Posts: 1318
Joined: Thu May 02, 2002 11:08 pm
Location: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami

RE: JFB in charge of the USN???

Post by Kitakami »

Air losses were light on both sides, and many of the destroyed Allied planes were in Manila when it got bombarded.

Image
Attachments
airlosses.jpg
airlosses.jpg (77.89 KiB) Viewed 304 times
Tenno Heika Banzai!
User avatar
Kitakami
Posts: 1318
Joined: Thu May 02, 2002 11:08 pm
Location: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami

RE: JFB in charge of the USN???

Post by Kitakami »

Naval losses for the turn were a costly French AMC, a French DD, and a cargo ship and a sub I scuttled in Manila. Neither would have sailed one hex before sinking.

Image
Attachments
navallosses.jpg
navallosses.jpg (75.07 KiB) Viewed 304 times
Tenno Heika Banzai!
User avatar
Kitakami
Posts: 1318
Joined: Thu May 02, 2002 11:08 pm
Location: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami

RE: JFB in charge of the USN???

Post by Kitakami »

Lost base: Makassar.


Malaya:

Falken has decided to let his troops at Singapore rest from the constant attacks, and is now using his artillery to soften my troops up. It seems to be working.

Japanese Bombardment attack at Singapore (50,84) DAY ONE

Attacking force 1987 troops, 182 guns, 75 vehicles, Assault Value = 1009
Defending force 43379 troops, 524 guns, 310 vehicles, Assault Value = 612

Allied ground losses:
* 115 casualties reported
*** Squads: 3 destroyed, 2 disabled
*** Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 2 disabled
*** Engineers: 2 destroyed, 1 disabled
*** Vehicles lost 1 (1 destroyed, 0 disabled)

Japanese Bombardment attack at Singapore (50,84) DAY TWO

Attacking force 1987 troops, 182 guns, 75 vehicles, Assault Value = 1090
Defending force 43573 troops, 526 guns, 309 vehicles, Assault Value = 620

Allied ground losses:
* 87 casualties reported
*** Squads: 4 destroyed, 5 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled


The DEI:

There is peace and quiet in Palembang. Can't really complain about it, can I?

Amphibious Assault at Makassar (65,106)

Japanese ground losses:
*** Guns lost 2 (2 destroyed, 0 disabled)

Japanese Deliberate attack at 67,93 (near Tandjoengselor) DAY ONE

Attacking force 3639 troops, 20 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 109
Defending force 1470 troops, 12 guns, 2 vehicles, Assault Value = 19
Japanese adjusted assault: 3
Allied adjusted defense: 9
Japanese assault odds: 1 to 3

Japanese ground losses:
* 16 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled

Allied ground losses:
* 55 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 7 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Tenno Heika Banzai!
User avatar
Kitakami
Posts: 1318
Joined: Thu May 02, 2002 11:08 pm
Location: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami

RE: JFB in charge of the USN???

Post by Kitakami »

The Philippines:

Manila got to be on the receiving end of naval and artillery bombardments. Not good. The base will fall soon. Yet, there is a cost to pay for the naval rifles vaporizing my troops: 12x resources and 5x heavy industry were damaged, adding to the repair costs of the 20x repair yards that were already damaged.

Night Naval bombardment of Manila at 79,77 DAY ONE

Allied aircraft losses
*** Stearman 75M: 8 damaged, 2 destroyed on ground
*** SOC-1 Seagull: 1 damaged, 1 destroyed on ground
*** O-47A: 6 damaged, 1 destroyed on ground
*** B-10B: 1 damaged
Japanese Ships
* BB Mutsu
* BB Nagato
Allied ground losses:
* 572 casualties reported
*** Non Combat: 18 destroyed, 23 disabled
*** Engineers: 1 destroyed, 4 disabled
*** Guns lost 19 (15 destroyed, 4 disabled)
*** Vehicles lost 12 (4 destroyed, 8 disabled)

Airbase hits 14
Airbase supply hits 8
Runway hits 29

Japanese Bombardment attack at Manila (79,77) DAY ONE

Attacking force 756 troops, 73 guns, 66 vehicles, Assault Value = 595
Defending force 64122 troops, 523 guns, 208 vehicles, Assault Value = 1623

Japanese ground losses:
*** Vehicles lost 6 (1 destroyed, 5 disabled)
Allied ground losses:
* 24 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled

Naval bombardment of Manila at 79,77 DAY TWO

Allied aircraft losses
*** O-47A: 1 damaged, 1 destroyed on ground
*** Stearman 75M: 3 damaged, 1 destroyed on ground
*** SOC-1 Seagull: 1 damaged
Japanese Ships
* BB Yamashiro
* BB Fuso
* CA Chokai
* CA Maya
Allied ground losses:
* 914 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 14 disabled
*** Non Combat: 14 destroyed, 51 disabled
*** Engineers: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
*** Guns lost 17 (5 destroyed, 12 disabled)
*** Vehicles lost 6 (2 destroyed, 4 disabled)

Heavy Industry hits 1
Resources hits 3
Manpower hits 1
Fires 2079
Airbase hits 11
Airbase supply hits 4
Runway hits 20
Port hits 1
Port supply hits 1

Japanese Bombardment attack at Manila (79,77) DAY TWO

Attacking force 804 troops, 77 guns, 70 vehicles, Assault Value = 622
Defending force 63465 troops, 519 guns, 206 vehicles, Assault Value = 1613

Japanese ground losses:
*** Guns lost 5 (2 destroyed, 3 disabled)
Allied ground losses:
* 39 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled

Time to disband the remains of the air forces here. Airfield damage got to 100. Supplies running VERY low now.
Tenno Heika Banzai!
User avatar
Kitakami
Posts: 1318
Joined: Thu May 02, 2002 11:08 pm
Location: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami

RE: JFB in charge of the USN???

Post by Kitakami »

China:

Falken's land attacks have begun to hurt. I kept him off balance for a while, but the real grind has just begun. Since I have never been on the receiving end here, I am somewhat at a loss as to what to do. These are my thoughts, though:

- The cities in clear will be lost. Yet, I think it is advantageous to the Allies to delay those losses as much as practicable.
- The real defensive positions are in 3x terrain. I have paired HQs with their subordinate troops to maximize defense.
- The name of the game is supplies. I will fight hard in Burma to delay the closing of the Burma Road.

To sum it all up, I am playing to delay, delay, delay and, when I am done delaying the Japanese advance, I need to find a way to delay it some more.

Japanese Deliberate attack at Chengchow (88,44) DAY ONE

Attacking force 88932 troops, 1011 guns, 290 vehicles, Assault Value = 1303
Defending force 54582 troops, 312 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 707
Japanese engineers reduce fortifications to 2
Japanese adjusted assault: 1166
Allied adjusted defense: 535
Japanese assault odds: 2 to 1 (fort level 2)
Japanese Assault reduces fortifications to 2

Japanese ground losses:
* 1953 casualties reported
*** Squads: 44 destroyed, 68 disabled
*** Non Combat: 3 destroyed, 21 disabled
*** Engineers: 2 destroyed, 16 disabled
*** Guns lost 27 (1 destroyed, 26 disabled)
Allied ground losses:
* 1789 casualties reported
*** Squads: 92 destroyed, 44 disabled
*** Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 60 disabled
*** Engineers: 2 destroyed, 21 disabled
*** Guns lost 44 (7 destroyed, 37 disabled)

Japanese Deliberate attack at Chengchow (88,44) DAY TWO

Attacking force 87349 troops, 1010 guns, 290 vehicles, Assault Value = 1174
Defending force 52560 troops, 305 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 622
Japanese adjusted assault: 989
Allied adjusted defense: 503
Japanese assault odds: 1 to 1 (fort level 2)
Japanese Assault reduces fortifications to 1

Japanese ground losses:
* 3197 casualties reported
*** Squads: 143 destroyed, 107 disabled
*** Non Combat: 2 destroyed, 45 disabled
*** Engineers: 1 destroyed, 25 disabled
*** Guns lost 24 (1 destroyed, 23 disabled)
Allied ground losses:
* 2646 casualties reported
*** Squads: 47 destroyed, 77 disabled
*** Non Combat: 4 destroyed, 77 disabled
*** Engineers: 0 destroyed, 16 disabled
*** Guns lost 27 (2 destroyed, 25 disabled)

Japanese Deliberate attack at Pucheng (86,57) DAY ONE

Attacking force 15279 troops, 111 guns, 102 vehicles, Assault Value = 451
Defending force 17282 troops, 126 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 472
Japanese adjusted assault: 213
Allied adjusted defense: 357
Japanese assault odds: 1 to 2

Japanese ground losses:
* 262 casualties reported
*** Squads: 4 destroyed, 19 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled
*** Engineers: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Allied ground losses:
* 257 casualties reported
*** Squads: 2 destroyed, 39 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 6 disabled
*** Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
*** Guns lost 3 (1 destroyed, 2 disabled)

Japanese Deliberate attack at Chuhsien (88,56) DAY ONE

Attacking force 29135 troops, 256 guns, 74 vehicles, Assault Value = 579
Defending force 20076 troops, 84 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 347
Japanese engineers reduce fortifications to 1
Japanese adjusted assault: 211
Allied adjusted defense: 427
Japanese assault odds: 1 to 2 (fort level 1)

Japanese ground losses:
* 1652 casualties reported
*** Squads: 3 destroyed, 121 disabled
*** Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 6 disabled
*** Engineers: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled
*** Vehicles lost 2 (2 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Allied ground losses:
* 505 casualties reported
*** Squads: 2 destroyed, 40 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 14 disabled
*** Engineers: 0 destroyed, 6 disabled
*** Guns lost 5 (2 destroyed, 3 disabled)

Japanese Deliberate attack at Wuchow (76,57) DAY ONE

Attacking force 18962 troops, 188 guns, 116 vehicles, Assault Value = 399
Defending force 19134 troops, 127 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 426
Japanese adjusted assault: 584
Allied adjusted defense: 235
Japanese assault odds: 2 to 1 (fort level 2)
Japanese Assault reduces fortifications to 1

Japanese ground losses:
* 1120 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 91 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 9 disabled
*** Engineers: 4 destroyed, 34 disabled
*** Vehicles lost 5 (1 destroyed, 4 disabled)
Allied ground losses:
* 655 casualties reported
*** Squads: 8 destroyed, 91 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 18 disabled
*** Engineers: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled

Japanese Deliberate attack at Wuchow (76,57) DAY TWO

Attacking force 18112 troops, 188 guns, 116 vehicles, Assault Value = 324
Defending force 18371 troops, 127 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 346
Japanese adjusted assault: 444
Allied adjusted defense: 208
Japanese assault odds: 2 to 1 (fort level 1)
Japanese Assault reduces fortifications to 0

Japanese ground losses:
* 692 casualties reported
*** Squads: 5 destroyed, 84 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
*** Engineers: 0 destroyed, 14 disabled
Allied ground losses:
* 903 casualties reported
*** Squads: 28 destroyed, 33 disabled
*** Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 17 disabled
*** Engineers: 0 destroyed, 6 disabled
*** Guns lost 4 (1 destroyed, 3 disabled)
Tenno Heika Banzai!
User avatar
Kitakami
Posts: 1318
Joined: Thu May 02, 2002 11:08 pm
Location: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami

RE: JFB in charge of the USN???

Post by Kitakami »

Burma:

Besides the low-intensity air war (when both sides sweep different hexes, and there is no CAP, combat is sparse), and the Allied bomber training runs, the one event of note was an Allied naval bombardment of Moulmein. The objective was to knock some steam off the IJA units in Burma by destroying their supply. I believe the mission was successful.

Night Naval bombardment of Moulmein at 55,55 DAY TWO

Allied Ships
* CA Exeter
* CA Cornwall
* CL Belfast
* CL Glasgow
* CL Enterprise

Manpower hits 1
Fires 131
Airbase hits 10
Airbase supply hits 5
Runway hits 31
Port hits 7
Port fuel hits 2
Tenno Heika Banzai!
User avatar
Kitakami
Posts: 1318
Joined: Thu May 02, 2002 11:08 pm
Location: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami

RE: JFB in charge of the USN???

Post by Kitakami »

The Pacific:

IJN Hvy CarDiv 3 reappeared near Suva and sank a small transport TF. My mistake, I should have been more careful. Although the combat result shows disabed squads, the whole Eng unit was destroyed.

Morning Air attack on TF, near Suva at 131,161 DAY ONE

Japanese aircraft
*** A6M2 Zero x 20
*** B5N2 Kate x 12
Allied Ships
*** DD Mameluck
*** AMC Aramis

Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Suva at 131,161 DAY ONE

Japanese aircraft
*** A6M2 Zero x 31
*** B5N2 Kate x 19
*** D3A1 Val x 20
Allied Ships
*** AMC Aramis, Bomb hits 3, Torpedo hits 4, and is sunk
*** DD Mameluck, Bomb hits 2, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
Allied ground losses:
* 613 casualties reported
*** Non Combat: 8 destroyed, 37 disabled
*** Engineers: 12 destroyed, 23 disabled
*** Vehicles lost 5 (2 destroyed, 3 disabled)
Tenno Heika Banzai!
User avatar
Kitakami
Posts: 1318
Joined: Thu May 02, 2002 11:08 pm
Location: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami

RE: JFB in charge of the USN???

Post by Kitakami »

Feb 15th, 1942:

News fresh from the grapevine: Chengchow has finally fallen. If intel is to be believed, 1x Manpower, 39x resources, and 39x light industry were damaged.

But not everything is dire news. Once in a while, being a patient hunter pays off. Two days of unescorted IJN naval bomber attacks at Palembang hurt... a lot! Reports state that 23x Nell and 7x Betty were lost to Hurricane CAP last turn.

Will post a more detailed report as soon as I digest the turn.
Tenno Heika Banzai!
User avatar
Kitakami
Posts: 1318
Joined: Thu May 02, 2002 11:08 pm
Location: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami

RE: JFB in charge of the USN???

Post by Kitakami »

Executive summary, Feb 21st, 1942:

Just a heads up. Festivities and relatives from abroad have taken a heavy toll on available time. The game has continued, but my ability to sit and write about it has gone down the drain. Hopefully things will get back to normal after New Year's.

To sum things up, it is now February 21st, and Manila, Singapore and Palembang still hold. Things have been quiet in China since the fall of Chengchow (it was an expensive proposition for Japan). Also, I see my esteemed opponent building up airbases and ports, maybe more than he should... more supply spending... good!

Will try to give more detailed info soon.


Tenno Heika Banzai!
User avatar
Kitakami
Posts: 1318
Joined: Thu May 02, 2002 11:08 pm
Location: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami

RE: JFB in charge of the USN???

Post by Kitakami »

March 1st, 1942:

Year's end (and visitors from abroad for a month) played havoc with my free time, so I have not updated this in quite a while. Although January and the first week of February will still be full, at the very least I will try to write a bit about how the war is going.

Pilot losses have been kind of light so far, with the exception of last turn, which I will explain in a later post. Last turn I lost 10% of KIA losses so far.

Image
Attachments
PilotLosses.jpg
PilotLosses.jpg (125.53 KiB) Viewed 304 times
Tenno Heika Banzai!
User avatar
Kitakami
Posts: 1318
Joined: Thu May 02, 2002 11:08 pm
Location: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami

RE: JFB in charge of the USN???

Post by Kitakami »

Plane losses still favor the Allies (and then some). The critical stage seems to have passed, and I now have some plane groups in reserve, not just front line and training. Not where I want to be yet, but slowly getting there.

Image
Attachments
Planelosses.jpg
Planelosses.jpg (267.68 KiB) Viewed 304 times
Tenno Heika Banzai!
User avatar
Kitakami
Posts: 1318
Joined: Thu May 02, 2002 11:08 pm
Location: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami

RE: JFB in charge of the USN???

Post by Kitakami »

A number of minor bases have been lost, but only two major ones have been, and both in China: Chengchow and Wuchow. Chengchow was taken at a cost of much Japanese blood. Wuchow, not so much. After a hiatus, the lead units of the Japanese attack on Loyang have arrived.

Manila is almost out of supply. Naval and air bombardment has seen to it. But naval rifles have also destroyed 15 Res, 8 LI, all 10 HI, and all 20 Repair Yards. Thank you for the idea of holing up in Manila instead of Bataan. Japanese units there are not in the best of shapes, as you can see:

Image
Attachments
Manila.jpg
Manila.jpg (192.01 KiB) Viewed 304 times
Tenno Heika Banzai!
User avatar
Kitakami
Posts: 1318
Joined: Thu May 02, 2002 11:08 pm
Location: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami

RE: JFB in charge of the USN???

Post by Kitakami »

Singapore still has some supply, as it can only be bombarded by air, not by sea. There is only one IJA Inf Div here that is in good shape. The others, well... see for yourselves:

Image
Attachments
Singapore.jpg
Singapore.jpg (178.56 KiB) Viewed 304 times
Tenno Heika Banzai!
User avatar
Kitakami
Posts: 1318
Joined: Thu May 02, 2002 11:08 pm
Location: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami

RE: JFB in charge of the USN???

Post by Kitakami »

Palembang is a stalemate. I do not think attacks will begin again until either Manila or Singapore fall, and the troops there have time to rest a bit before being thrown into the grinder again.

Burma is another stalemate. Allied sweepers control the air, and heavy and medium bombers keep the IJA with their heads down, but that is about it.

There have been no further Japanese advances south of the Solomons, nor in the Central Pacific. My esteemed opponent did take Attu, though, but I have seriously reinforced Adak.
Tenno Heika Banzai!
User avatar
Kitakami
Posts: 1318
Joined: Thu May 02, 2002 11:08 pm
Location: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami

RE: JFB in charge of the USN???

Post by Kitakami »

<duplicate post>
Tenno Heika Banzai!
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17762
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: JFB in charge of the USN???

Post by John 3rd »

You cannot leave us just hanging here...
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”