Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

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

User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Fight is on...



Image
Attachments
a.jpg
a.jpg (299.93 KiB) Viewed 482 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

They keep coming...but now there are no Zeroes....happy days.[:'(]



Image
Attachments
a.jpg
a.jpg (280.97 KiB) Viewed 482 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Western Australia...

Banshee pilots aren't doing great, but it is a steady drain of afvs…



Image
Attachments
a.jpg
a.jpg (111.85 KiB) Viewed 482 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

America sub drivers delivering the critical intel.[:)]



Image
Attachments
a.jpg
a.jpg (219.47 KiB) Viewed 482 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Banzai![X(]

Image
Attachments
a.jpg
a.jpg (426.88 KiB) Viewed 482 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Denied!

Image
Attachments
a.jpg
a.jpg (126.13 KiB) Viewed 482 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Turning into a war of artillery...the 155s in the FA battalion arrived today, and will participate tomorrow.




Image
Attachments
a.jpg
a.jpg (353.03 KiB) Viewed 482 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

The boom of massed 25# artillery is only masked slightly by the revving Stuarts....Go! Go! Go!

Image
Attachments
a.jpg
a.jpg (520.35 KiB) Viewed 482 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

The Hussars breakthru...they are in the Japanese supply train!





Image
Attachments
a.jpg
a.jpg (530.33 KiB) Viewed 482 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Butchers Bill
Ground combat at 56,40 (near Chittagong)

Allied Shock attack

Attacking force 16269 troops, 203 guns, 181 vehicles, Assault Value = 652

Defending force 7672 troops, 104 guns, 52 vehicles, Assault Value = 27

Allied adjusted assault: 337

Japanese adjusted defense: 20

Allied assault odds: 16 to 1

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

Japanese ground losses:
1736 casualties reported
Squads: 183 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 90 destroyed, 13 disabled
Engineers: 9 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 21 (17 destroyed, 4 disabled)
Vehicles lost 11 (7 destroyed, 4 disabled)
Units retreated 2

Allied ground losses:
138 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 20 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled

Defeated Japanese Units Retreating!

Assaulting units:
7th Hussars Regiment
18th British Division
19th Indian Division
63rd Indian Brigade
6th Medium Regiment

Defending units:
Imperial Guards Division
55th Cavalry Regiment




Image
Attachments
a.jpg
a.jpg (166.27 KiB) Viewed 482 times
Ambassador
Posts: 1756
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 5:15 pm
Location: Brussels, Belgium

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Ambassador »

Great ! How many squads and guns did the Hussars kill ?

For the bombing of Cloncurry, did it cost him more than the 16VP-worth of damaged RC ?

EDIT : sorry, I should have waited a couple minutes, I would have had my answers.
Well done !
User avatar
PaxMondo
Posts: 11130
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:23 pm

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by PaxMondo »

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

They keep coming...but now there are no Zeroes....happy days.[:'(]
He definitely is lacking something in his coordination efforts ... that was $$$$

[&o][&o][&o]
Pax
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Chittagong...being evacuated...

A task force of 2 light cruisers and 2 destroyers can easily make Akyab from Calcutta, joined by 2 more light cruisers from Viz (which would indeed be a stretch)…

IJN has one heavy cruiser at Chittagong...which can be visited by squadrons of MTBs easily.



Image
Attachments
a.jpg
a.jpg (486.59 KiB) Viewed 482 times
T Rav
Posts: 417
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 6:59 am

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by T Rav »

Not just Hussars, Winged Hussars!

Great video RJ
User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 19526
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: Who knows?

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by RangerJoe »

ORIGINAL: T Rav

Not just Hussars, Winged Hussars!

Great video RJ

Thank you.

I like their videos to their songs and the fact that they mostly do songs about history. I just don't play them loud.
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing! :o

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
:twisted: ; Julia Child


Image
User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 19526
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: Who knows?

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by RangerJoe »

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Butchers Bill
Ground combat at 56,40 (near Chittagong)

Allied Shock attack

Attacking force 16269 troops, 203 guns, 181 vehicles, Assault Value = 652

Defending force 7672 troops, 104 guns, 52 vehicles, Assault Value = 27

Allied adjusted assault: 337

Japanese adjusted defense: 20

Allied assault odds: 16 to 1

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

Japanese ground losses:
1736 casualties reported
Squads: 183 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 90 destroyed, 13 disabled
Engineers: 9 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 21 (17 destroyed, 4 disabled)
Vehicles lost 11 (7 destroyed, 4 disabled)
Units retreated 2

Allied ground losses:
138 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 20 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled

Defeated Japanese Units Retreating!

Assaulting units:
7th Hussars Regiment
18th British Division
19th Indian Division
63rd Indian Brigade
6th Medium Regiment

Defending units:
Imperial Guards Division
55th Cavalry Regiment




Image

Very nice! Don't mess with the CAVALRY! [&o]

How much experience gain did the Commonwealth troops gain?

Very good in the air as well, think of how many engines that is and how they could otherwise be used.
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing! :o

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
:twisted: ; Julia Child


Image
User avatar
Encircled
Posts: 2097
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 3:50 pm
Location: Northern England

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Encircled »

Surprised he's evacuating Chittagong

He must have nearly nothing there

But another good turn for you
GetAssista
Posts: 2836
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 6:13 am

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by GetAssista »

Congrats on the good turn! Serious bloody nose dished out. It was to be expected, right [;)]
ORIGINAL: Lowpe
Banzai![X(]
Not recombining the ID (56th in this case) before attacking anything strong is a serious mistake for Japan. Take your time, ship in missing parts, wait for PPs, but do recombine the ID. Those parts are so fragile on offence when separated... I don't know how exactly this is coded in game but offence behaves completely different to defense. Parts of ID generally perform as an ID in defending even when not recombined, but they are all glass cannons when on offence.
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20697
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by BBfanboy »

ORIGINAL: GetAssista

Congrats on the good turn! Serious bloody nose dished out. It was to be expected, right [;)]
ORIGINAL: Lowpe
Banzai![X(]
Not recombining the ID (56th in this case) before attacking anything strong is a serious mistake for Japan. Take your time, ship in missing parts, wait for PPs, but do recombine the ID. Those parts are so fragile on offence when separated... I don't know how exactly this is coded in game but offence behaves completely different to defense. Parts of ID generally perform as an ID in defending even when not recombined, but they are all glass cannons when on offence.
Regiments lack firepower. Making a Division or Brigade adds heavy weapons that give greater punch in offence. In defence, forts and the defensive advantage are enough to make a Regiment much tougher.
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
Ambassador
Posts: 1756
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 5:15 pm
Location: Brussels, Belgium

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Ambassador »

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

ORIGINAL: GetAssista

Congrats on the good turn! Serious bloody nose dished out. It was to be expected, right [;)]
ORIGINAL: Lowpe
Banzai![X(]
Not recombining the ID (56th in this case) before attacking anything strong is a serious mistake for Japan. Take your time, ship in missing parts, wait for PPs, but do recombine the ID. Those parts are so fragile on offence when separated... I don't know how exactly this is coded in game but offence behaves completely different to defense. Parts of ID generally perform as an ID in defending even when not recombined, but they are all glass cannons when on offence.
Regiments lack firepower. Making a Division or Brigade adds heavy weapons that give greater punch in offence. In defence, forts and the defensive advantage are enough to make a Regiment much tougher.
A big effect of not recombining the divisions is that enemy firepower may be concentrated on one of the subcomponents and cause a disproportionate amount of disabled then destroyed squads, when a full division has a bigger buffer to absorb disablements. Especially problematic if the player has the habit of doing shock attacks...

More importantly, this defeat must have cost him around 50 VP, so in order to achieve AV he’ll need to score 200 more. The more he pushes his attacks all around, the harder it gets...[8D]
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”