Catfished! A grudge match - Cheesesteak (J) v. Aaffins (A) BTS

[RangerJoe]

Yes, but the MTBs can hopefully use up OPS points which could then cause the enemy bombardment group to remain within range of LBA.

[aaffins]

I think PTs seem like quite a good idea, wouldn't the river reduce the evasion abilities of the IJN warships, similar to other straights such as Malacca and Manila Bay entrance?

Unfortunately I don't believe I have any RN MTBs available and USN PTs can't be used at a British base I guess?

[RangerJoe]

You need US supplies for American PT Boats, I do believe.

Of course, a sub or two with sub laid minefields could also be a surprise.

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: aaffins

I think PTs seem like quite a good idea, wouldn't the river reduce the evasion abilities of the IJN warships, similar to other straights such as Malacca and Manila Bay entrance?

Unfortunately I don't believe I have any RN MTBs available and USN PTs can't be used at a British base I guess?

Be careful making assumptions about rivers. They are unique in that they are hexsides.

I discovered to my great chagrin, that mines are useless in rivers, where one would assume their concentration in a small area would enhance their lethality.

The same may be true of attempted interceptions in rivers.

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

ORIGINAL: aaffins

I think PTs seem like quite a good idea, wouldn't the river reduce the evasion abilities of the IJN warships, similar to other straights such as Malacca and Manila Bay entrance?

Unfortunately I don't believe I have any RN MTBs available and USN PTs can't be used at a British base I guess?

Be careful making assumptions about rivers. They are unique in that they are hexsides.

I discovered to my great chagrin, that mines are useless in rivers, where one would assume their concentration in a small area would enhance their lethality.

The same may be true of attempted interceptions in rivers.

I think between shoals and the narrow width the ability to maneuver in rivers would be highly limited, so PTs would not be able to get the right distance for a shot at the side of a ship and trying to intercept the enemy would lead to collisions. And mines in a narrow channel would leave no path for friendly shipping, so it would not be wise to have mines there. With that in mind, I think the game designers decided to not have them be a factor in rivers.

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

ORIGINAL: aaffins

I think PTs seem like quite a good idea, wouldn't the river reduce the evasion abilities of the IJN warships, similar to other straights such as Malacca and Manila Bay entrance?

Unfortunately I don't believe I have any RN MTBs available and USN PTs can't be used at a British base I guess?

Be careful making assumptions about rivers. They are unique in that they are hexsides.

I discovered to my great chagrin, that mines are useless in rivers, where one would assume their concentration in a small area would enhance their lethality.

The same may be true of attempted interceptions in rivers.

I think between shoals and the narrow width the ability to maneuver in rivers would be highly limited, so PTs would not be able to get the right distance for a shot at the side of a ship and trying to intercept the enemy would lead to collisions. And mines in a narrow channel would leave no path for friendly shipping, so it would not be wise to have mines there. With that in mind, I think the game designers decided to not have them be a factor in rivers.

Not to mention the effects of the river currents as well as the potential washing away of the river bed. This is besides flooding as well as low water levels.

[aaffins]

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

ORIGINAL: HansBolter





Be careful making assumptions about rivers. They are unique in that they are hexsides.

I discovered to my great chagrin, that mines are useless in rivers, where one would assume their concentration in a small area would enhance their lethality.

The same may be true of attempted interceptions in rivers.

I think between shoals and the narrow width the ability to maneuver in rivers would be highly limited, so PTs would not be able to get the right distance for a shot at the side of a ship and trying to intercept the enemy would lead to collisions. And mines in a narrow channel would leave no path for friendly shipping, so it would not be wise to have mines there. With that in mind, I think the game designers decided to not have them be a factor in rivers.

Not to mention the effects of the river currents as well as the potential washing away of the river bed. This is besides flooding as well as low water levels.

Interesting and informative discussion. Seems like my options for keeping bombardments away from Calutta are limited.

[aaffins]

4/9/42

Tonight's bombardment is perhaps the worst yet, a total of 5 cruisers destroy 7 a/c and damage the airfield. It's not the individual results, it's the cumulative attrition on my aircraft pools. Will have to consider moving to alternate fields. Luckily next door Howrah is inland and built up. Slightly to the north Jamshedpur and Ranchi are quickly expanding. These are the key bases in good terrain where I plan to defend the rail line into Calcutta. All are at least Lvl 3 forts, garrisoned with at least a brigade; Howrah has the 18th Brit Div.
The RAF continues the bombing campaign against Asansol. I believe the field is closed for the moment. No engineering or AAA units detected as yet.
Further east the Burmese get hammered in open terrain. We're not going to be able to break out on the main road, back to the jungle.

In China he cleverly sends two divisions on a flanking maneuver after being stopped at Tuyun and captures Kweiyang. So he's on the doorstep to Chungking, but without Tuyun he doesn't exactly have a great supply line. I have a unit w/ a construction regiment entrenching in the terrain 2 hexes SW of Chungking as a roadblock.
An ill-advised attack over at Ankang nets him over 7,000 casualties and the 9th Tank Regt. evaporates.

No sweep over Kalgoorlie today and two USAAF squadrons take advantage, claiming 16 Netties along with a couple Zero escorts. He loses an additional 7 planes (reported) to the AAA we have massed.

Good turn for the Allies all in all.

[CaptBeefheart]

I'd sure consider basing a lot of aircraft at Howrah. That's a nice field to rail to when Calcutta is getting hammered.

If you want Quentin McHale (i.e. U.S. PTs), you'll need to have an Aus or U.S. unit present in a base and use PP to convert it to a U.S. base (e.g. Aus units will allow conversion of the base to SW Pac). You'll then be able to build PTs and barges at the base.

EDIT: I should clarify that the U.S. unit would have to be one you shipped over from a U.S. command, not Merrill's Marauders or another one that starts in theater.

Cheers,
CB

[aaffins]

McHale's Navy! A classic. Unfortunately I don't think switching Calcutta's command HQ makes sense just to allow for PT boats; it'd cost 1,300 PPs.

[Alfred]

ORIGINAL: aaffins

McHale's Navy! A classic. Unfortunately I don't think switching Calcutta's command HQ makes sense just to allow for PT boats; it'd cost 1,300 PPs.

You don't have to.

The most accurate and complete answers to questions are most commonly found in either dev or my posts. For PT boat creation, see my post in this thread:

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.a ... t&#4150895

The sea approach from Chittagong is shallow hexes. That is ideal operating water for PT boats.

As to minefields, this is not really a river situation. The "river" exists only to allow passage from Diamond Harbour to Calcutta. A TF transiting goes fully into both the DH and Calcutta hexes. The usual characteristics of a minefield in a base hex should apply.

Alfred

[CaptBeefheart]

Alfred is correct, you could switch the HQ of one of those bases to the west of Calcutta for a lot less PP and sail them over.

I had no idea on the transport method of creating PTs. Thanks for bringing that up, Alfred.

Cheers,
CB

[Bearcat2]

US minefields on the West coast were controlled mines electrically detonated. The minefields were laid and maintained by civilians contracted by the Corp of Engineers, they were attached to the river bed. An example of the "problems" encountered was by fishermen complaining that their nets were being caught in the minefield at Astoria.

[aaffins]

Wow, great information as always, thank you Alfred. I think perhaps my best approach with Perth in Japanese hands would be to create a large cargo TF at SF and sail it to India via the Atlantic and unload at perhaps Madras, then hop over with local support.

[aaffins]

4/10/42

IJN BBs serve as minesweepers off Bataan:
BB Yamashiro, Mine hits 1
BB Yamato, Mine hits 2
BC Hiei, Mine hits 2, heavy damage
BB Ise, Mine hits 1

Perhaps not their best deployment? Intel is claiming Yamashiro is sunk, which seems spurious, but this certainly is not bad.

This is: CM Abdiel gets sunk by an IJN bombardment group trying to lay her mines at Calcutta, leaving me bereft of minelayers in the Far East theater. It had appeared the enemy was standing off for a turn but I guess not.
We lose another 4 a/c at Calcutta to the bombardment...evac of our a/c to begin soon...the few fighters we can put up are swept aside fairly easily and a Liz squadron does significant damage

I get a tanker convoy I forgot to reroute away from Perth sunk, disappointing

[Alfred]

You still have SS.  All SS can lay mines, provided you have the right ones in the pools.
 
Alfred

[aaffins]

4/11/42

CL Ceres and DD Isis sortie from Calcutta to try to get rid of the 'goalkeeper' DDs he has blocking the river mouth at Diamond Harbor. They exchange shells with minimal damage.

7 CLs and a couple CAs bombard Calcutta tonight. With the airfield evacuated they hit the port. We have a few ships trapped, most notably a couple older RN CLs that were damaged weeks ago.

His leading ground elements - 90th Div, 55th Inf Regt and 9th Tank - reach Ranchi. This is the first place he'll meet real ground resistance from me as it's on the rail line into Calcutta I plan to protect. We have the British 70th Div as well as a US armored battalion and Aussie Inf Brig among other assorted units. AV advantage of 864 to 581 with Lvl 3 forts, so he won't be taking the base without reinforcements.
He's actually made a tactical error, I believe, by not guarding Asansol behind him. An Indian cavalry unit moved in and will occupy the base next turn. I'm moving in my strategic reserve - Aus 18th Brig. and Brit 7th Armoured Brig. - by rail to reinforce. This will cut off his leading element and perhaps we can even destroy them. I don't see any ground units really in a good position to reinforce.

Clark Field falls, back to Bataan for the last stand.

[aaffins]

4/12/42

I haven't contested the skies in India or SW Oz in recent days, letting Zeroes sweep. Today we decide to put our CAP up hoping he's been lulled and we might bag some bombers. Doesn't really work, although we do get quite an aerial battle. We seem to basically break even with large numbers up, but once our initial CAP gets worn down his follow on groups have numerical superiority and typically will gain an advantage. We lose about 35 planes all told and think we took around 20 fighters with us. He is having to fly at pretty long range from Perth to Kalgoorlie so maybe some additional ops losses. On the positive side, our flak claimed 4 Betties at Kalgoorlie. The DBB Allied flak is really something else.

Albany and Corunna Downs fall.

[aaffins]

4/13/42
Really ugly turn for me.

The CA Portland and six USN DDs have been tracking an apparent IJN TF we've been getting whiffs of around Johnston I. Was hoping for a resupply intercept since we were successful at that a few weeks ago. Enemy turns out to be CAs Seiki and Miyago and 3 DDs. Unfortunately we clash in some sort of storm and it ends up a knife fight at under 2,000 yards. We know what that means...long lances. The first engagement results in 2 DDs sunk. I guess he had some hyper aggressive commander (Tanaka?) because he pursued us back towards Pearl and Portland gets torpedoed 4 times in the second engagement and sinks. Ultimately we lose all but 2 DDs. Probably took one with us. The perils of surface combat with the early war IJN I guess.

A bit further east some small Japanese carriers raid my SLOC between SF and Pearl. Unfortunate side effect of not having a credible naval threat. Ranger will arrive soon, so then I'll have at least have 2 CVs and could fight a CVE/CVL or two. He hits the convoy carrying the 6th Marine Regiment and we lose more than half the unit. Of all the convoys I've run kind of stinks that that happens to be the one he gets.

In China, I'm trying to move some AV from around Ichang to Chungking. An IJN unit (which we discover is the 22nd Div) is blocking the road near Chihkiang, I decide to have a go across the river, but no dice, 1:2 odds with over 300 squads disabled. So that's not great. This Chunking situation is starting to become worrisome.

An overzealous squadron of Betties does attack a small cargo convoy at Suva and gets shredded by P-39s. Silver linings?

[Bif1961]

Sounds like the good, the bad and the ugly turn. I got into a knife fight with 3 American Modern BBs, 2 CAs and 5 DDs against my 3 CAs, 2 CLs and 6 DDs. In a two night fight starting at 2,000 yards only one of my long lances hit anything. I lost 2 CAs and 2 DDs for 1 CA and 1 DD, but he wasn't able to bombard my base so a tactical loss and a strategic victory in Nov 42.