Carry out Operation Husky

After Action Reports
User avatar
devoncop
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2006 12:06 pm

RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon

Post by devoncop »

ORIGINAL: ChuckBerger

Am I reading this right, have you lost 3 cruisers and something like 27 destroyers?? Axis air power was not capable of this kind of effectiveness at this point in the war. I wonder about naval power in this game, between this AAR and Warspite's AAR on the desert campaign, it seems naval/air and naval/ground interactions are substantially out of whack.
and

I would not be so sure about things being out of kilter. As Warspites opponent in the CFNA I can't see his AAR for obvious reasons so don't know what his views are but the damage my ground troops took from his naval bombardments were my own fault for not utilising the Luftwaffe properly early enough. This was my first campaign playing TOAW IV and I am making a lot of mistakes.

The eventual effectiveness of the JU87s seems to have negated the naval power v land forces issue in our game. A post mortem will no doubt discuss whether it would have been possible for Warspite to protect his fleet differently but I would not judge the game mechanics on the experience of 2 novice players.

As far as this scenario is concerned do the allies have all available fighters and fighter bombers on air superiority missions to maximise Luftwaffe losses? Also having ships away from mutually supporting stacks ...particularly smaller destroyers makes them much more vulnerable. When I tried a second hard strike against stacks containing battleships and heavy cruisers I had much less success.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I shall defend to the death your right to say it"
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42129
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon

Post by warspite1 »

ORIGINAL: devoncop

ORIGINAL: ChuckBerger

Am I reading this right, have you lost 3 cruisers and something like 27 destroyers?? Axis air power was not capable of this kind of effectiveness at this point in the war. I wonder about naval power in this game, between this AAR and Warspite's AAR on the desert campaign, it seems naval/air and naval/ground interactions are substantially out of whack.
and

I would not be so sure about things being out of kilter. As Warspites opponent in the CFNA I can't see his AAR for obvious reasons so don't know what his views are but the damage my ground troops took from his naval bombardments were my own fault for not utilising the Luftwaffe properly early enough. This was my first campaign playing TOAW IV and I am making a lot of mistakes.

The eventual effectiveness of the JU87s seems to have negated the naval power v land forces issue in our game. A post mortem will no doubt discuss whether it would have been possible for Warspite to protect his fleet differently but I would not judge the game mechanics on the experience of 2 novice players.

As far as this scenario is concerned do the allies have all available fighters and fighter bombers on air superiority missions to maximise Luftwaffe losses? Also having ships away from mutually supporting stacks ...particularly smaller destroyers makes them much more vulnerable. When I tried a second hard strike against stacks containing battleships and heavy cruisers I had much less success.
warspite1

The way that the AI was attacking and then devoncop initially, seemed to suggest the RN were impervious and could roam the coastline at will. With the use of the right aircraft (I'm not sure what, if anything else has changed) the position of the RN is completely different. They simply can't afford to stay at sea or they will be liable to get sunk or damaged.

As my opponent says, we are a couple of novices at TOAW so I wouldn't draw too many definitive conclusions from our game - but the initial fear about the RN being too powerful is wrong [;)]
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
tverse
Posts: 349
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2016 10:53 pm

RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon

Post by tverse »

ORIGINAL: ChuckBerger

Am I reading this right, have you lost 3 cruisers and something like 27 destroyers?? Axis air power was not capable of this kind of effectiveness at this point in the war. I wonder about naval power in this game, between this AAR and Warspite's AAR on the desert campaign, it seems naval/air and naval/ground interactions are substantially out of whack.

I can’t really say if the naval power is out of whack or not. All I can say is that I have left the air assist on for the whole game in an effort to simulate the lack of coordination between land and air forces. However, in the naval losses several of those posted did have allied air support I just did not always show it. I know that does not address the effectiveness of axis air power.
AAR Carry out Operation Husky
tm.asp?m=4420472
tverse
Posts: 349
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2016 10:53 pm

RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon

Post by tverse »

AM – July 29, 1943 (T40)

Overview.

CCB/2nd Arm – Unfortunately these units have picked a poor time to reorganize
and they cannot be moved out of the way to bring in other troops.

Patton is irate to have his advance slowed down.


Image
Attachments
turn40overview.jpg
turn40overview.jpg (309.45 KiB) Viewed 937 times
AAR Carry out Operation Husky
tm.asp?m=4420472
User avatar
devoncop
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2006 12:06 pm

RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon

Post by devoncop »

You are still ahead of schedule so Patton looking down (or up) wherever he is now ...would be happy.

The air assistant is lethally bad imo. Both myself and Warspite noticed it would routinely change aircraft assignments each turn with no logic. If nothing else it should be prioritising air superiority with your Navy active over and interdiction as the Axis are barely moving.

"I do not agree with what you say, but I shall defend to the death your right to say it"
tverse
Posts: 349
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2016 10:53 pm

RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon

Post by tverse »

ORIGINAL: devoncop

You are still ahead of schedule so Patton looking down (or up) wherever he is now ...would be happy.

The air assistant is lethally bad imo. Both myself and Warspite noticed it would routinely change aircraft assignments each turn with no logic. If nothing else it should be prioritising air superiority with your Navy active over and interdiction as the Axis are barely moving.


The Air assistant does have some questionable assignments...I've had it rest perfectly healthy units when I could have used them, but as I said early I choose not to use it as a simulation of history. It does however interdict as the Axis try to withdraw.
AAR Carry out Operation Husky
tm.asp?m=4420472
tverse
Posts: 349
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2016 10:53 pm

RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon

Post by tverse »

PM – August 1, 1943 (T47)

US Army Takes Messina.

After several days of “knock down drag out” fighting all of Sicily is now Allied territory.

Note: I did hold the CW units back to allow Patton his minor victory



Image
Attachments
turn47end.jpg
turn47end.jpg (487.93 KiB) Viewed 937 times
AAR Carry out Operation Husky
tm.asp?m=4420472
tverse
Posts: 349
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2016 10:53 pm

RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon

Post by tverse »

Conclusion


Image
Attachments
turn47conclusion.jpg
turn47conclusion.jpg (479.15 KiB) Viewed 937 times
AAR Carry out Operation Husky
tm.asp?m=4420472
tverse
Posts: 349
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2016 10:53 pm

RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon

Post by tverse »

A Final Thought from the Author of the Book.

This ends the AAR . I hope you enjoyed the approach which was more about the story than about how well I played the scenario.

Thanks for viewing.


Image
Attachments
turn47fi..thought.jpg
turn47fi..thought.jpg (458.01 KiB) Viewed 937 times
AAR Carry out Operation Husky
tm.asp?m=4420472
User avatar
Curtis Lemay
Posts: 14823
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 3:12 pm
Location: Houston, TX

RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon

Post by Curtis Lemay »

ORIGINAL: ChuckBerger

Am I reading this right, have you lost 3 cruisers and something like 27 destroyers?? Axis air power was not capable of this kind of effectiveness at this point in the war. I wonder about naval power in this game, between this AAR and Warspite's AAR on the desert campaign, it seems naval/air and naval/ground interactions are substantially out of whack.
This scenario probably has never had its Naval AD adjusted yet.

Nevertheless, it is a wargame: Players can make completely different choices with their forces than the historical participants.
My TOAW web site:

Bob Cross's TOAW Site
tverse
Posts: 349
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2016 10:53 pm

RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon

Post by tverse »

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: ChuckBerger

Am I reading this right, have you lost 3 cruisers and something like 27 destroyers?? Axis air power was not capable of this kind of effectiveness at this point in the war. I wonder about naval power in this game, between this AAR and Warspite's AAR on the desert campaign, it seems naval/air and naval/ground interactions are substantially out of whack.
This scenario probably has never had its Naval AD adjusted yet.

Nevertheless, it is a wargame: Players can make completely different choices with their forces than the historical participants.

You might be right about the Naval not adjusted yet. Here is a picture of my total naval losses at the end.


Image
Attachments
shiplosses.jpg
shiplosses.jpg (81.59 KiB) Viewed 948 times
AAR Carry out Operation Husky
tm.asp?m=4420472
User avatar
devoncop
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2006 12:06 pm

RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon

Post by devoncop »

Many thanks for this fascinating AAR/history lesson !

Really enjoyed following it.

Ian
"I do not agree with what you say, but I shall defend to the death your right to say it"
tverse
Posts: 349
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2016 10:53 pm

RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon

Post by tverse »

ORIGINAL: devoncop

Many thanks for this fascinating AAR/history lesson !

Really enjoyed following it.

Ian

Glad to hear it.
AAR Carry out Operation Husky
tm.asp?m=4420472
Nicholas Bell
Posts: 552
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2006 5:21 pm
Location: Eagle River, Alaska

RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon

Post by Nicholas Bell »

Thanks for the great AAR. Nice job integrating actual history. It's been my lunchtime reading as of late.
User avatar
cpt flam
Posts: 2353
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2011 4:34 am
Location: caen - France

RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon

Post by cpt flam »

Thank a lot for your work!
User avatar
MikeJ19
Posts: 3774
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 10:13 pm
Location: Ottawa, Canada

RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon

Post by MikeJ19 »

Great job and thanks for the history lesson. What are you doing next?
Mike

Retired Gunner
tverse
Posts: 349
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2016 10:53 pm

RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon

Post by tverse »

ORIGINAL: MikeJ19

Great job and thanks for the history lesson. What are you doing next?


Right now I’m just playing a few different scenarios for grins. Not sure what I’ll do next.

I’m just glad some folks enjoyed the review. This style is not for everyone....but that is what’s nice about forums. ...the variety.
AAR Carry out Operation Husky
tm.asp?m=4420472
User avatar
MikeJ19
Posts: 3774
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 10:13 pm
Location: Ottawa, Canada

RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon

Post by MikeJ19 »

Have fun. I agree it is very nice seeing the different approaches to the battles and the reports.
Mike

Retired Gunner
gwgardner
Posts: 7246
Joined: Fri Apr 07, 2006 1:23 pm

RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon

Post by gwgardner »

One of the most entertaining and informative AARs I've ever read. Thanks.

Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”