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 »

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

I added several more SSTs to my current game, planning to be able to lift an entire battalion.
I discovered that troop loading on SSTs is heavily restricted.
At Pearl's level 8 port I could only load SST TFs with 3 boats.
Increasing to 4 boats greyed out the Load Troops function.
I had to load the paras into 3 boat TFs consecutively and then combine the TFs once loaded to achieve my goal of lifting the entire battalion.

Just something to be aware of.

I did read your post where you got some of them to load...but you are playing a different mod.
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

ORIGINAL: CaptBeefheart

I gave up on coastwatcher reports years ago. They've all got stills in operation or are growing wacky tobacco.

Has anyone gotten any utility out of the coasties?

Cheers,
CB

I think when they report a port is empty it is correct as of the report time.
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

Japan once again relocating their tanks to a different sector...



Image
Attachments
a.jpg
a.jpg (280.63 KiB) Viewed 910 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

No beasts lost...



Image
Attachments
a.jpg
a.jpg (158.95 KiB) Viewed 910 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

Big map fleet movement

Image
Attachments
a.jpg
a.jpg (171.06 KiB) Viewed 910 times
anarchyintheuk
Posts: 3958
Joined: Wed May 05, 2004 7:08 pm
Location: Dallas

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

Post by anarchyintheuk »

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

No beasts lost...



Image

KB's ordinance guy seems a bit aggressive.


Image
Attachments
1024pxMot..ch_ML_59.jpg
1024pxMot..ch_ML_59.jpg (359.41 KiB) Viewed 910 times
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20554
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

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

Post by BBfanboy »

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

ORIGINAL: CaptBeefheart

I gave up on coastwatcher reports years ago. They've all got stills in operation or are growing wacky tobacco.

Has anyone gotten any utility out of the coasties?

Cheers,
CB

I think when they report a port is empty it is correct as of the report time.
I wondered about this so I checked the Japanese Ops Report which showed only two of my ports empty. But ...

- One Port had 6 ships repairing and a tanker unloading, the TK was there from the start of the turn.
- The Other Port had four ships repairing, 2 in Readiness, a TF of 4 ships loading resources and a large TF finishing unloading and still docked at turn end. All those ships were there for the whole turn.

Coastwatcher reports are occasionally accurate, but that seems very random.
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
RangerJoe
Posts: 19230
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: Who knows?

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

Post by RangerJoe »

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

ORIGINAL: CaptBeefheart

I gave up on coastwatcher reports years ago. They've all got stills in operation or are growing wacky tobacco.

Has anyone gotten any utility out of the coasties?

Cheers,
CB

I think when they report a port is empty it is correct as of the report time.
I wondered about this so I checked the Japanese Ops Report which showed only two of my ports empty. But ...

- One Port had 6 ships repairing and a tanker unloading, the TK was there from the start of the turn.
- The Other Port had four ships repairing, 2 in Readiness, a TF of 4 ships loading resources and a large TF finishing unloading and still docked at turn end. All those ships were there for the whole turn.

Coastwatcher reports are occasionally accurate, but that seems very random.

Don't you know that palm sap naturally ferments to about 4% alcohol but after a day it starts to turn to vinegar? However, that is probably safer than the water to drink.
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
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

ORIGINAL: CaptBeefheart

I gave up on coastwatcher reports years ago. They've all got stills in operation or are growing wacky tobacco.

Has anyone gotten any utility out of the coasties?

Cheers,
CB

I think when they report a port is empty it is correct as of the report time.
I wondered about this so I checked the Japanese Ops Report which showed only two of my ports empty. But ...

- One Port had 6 ships repairing and a tanker unloading, the TK was there from the start of the turn.
- The Other Port had four ships repairing, 2 in Readiness, a TF of 4 ships loading resources and a large TF finishing unloading and still docked at turn end. All those ships were there for the whole turn.

Coastwatcher reports are occasionally accurate, but that seems very random.

My theory crushed!
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

Ceylon...continuing the air lift of the 99th and 100th Brigades back to India.



Image
Attachments
a.jpg
a.jpg (143.97 KiB) Viewed 910 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

April 11, 1942

Continue hitting the tanks...I don't know why they are still there.



Image
Attachments
a.jpg
a.jpg (179.27 KiB) Viewed 904 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

It is a little sloppy down here...

11 units at Rockhampton yesterday with 19704 troops, 165 guns, and 57 vehicles from combat report, today there are: 11 units, 25320 troops, 174 guns, and 60 vehicles.

So it seems nothing really unloaded...bringing in supply or evacuating.

Not really sure what I am going to do here...put movement pips all over the place to sow confusion with Japan and enable a few quick retreat options for the Allies.

7-9 days for the American fleet to finish their April upgrades in this area.



Image
Attachments
a.jpg
a.jpg (358.76 KiB) Viewed 904 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

Kind of uncomfortable getting spotted here...



Image
Attachments
a.jpg
a.jpg (265.35 KiB) Viewed 904 times
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20554
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

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

Post by BBfanboy »

Not sure if a 3/3 level detection would reveal all ship types. He may just get DDs and a TK instead of the CV.
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
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

April 12, 1942

This AVD was sent out to see if it could do any damage with two 4" guns at a large convoy...but nope. Only fired two salvoes that missed.



Image
Attachments
a.jpg
a.jpg (258.67 KiB) Viewed 904 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

Bound to happen...one hit.



Image
Attachments
a.jpg
a.jpg (236.35 KiB) Viewed 904 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

Tanks heading north to cut the Lanchow road?



Image
Attachments
a.jpg
a.jpg (450.21 KiB) Viewed 904 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

1-1 attack...



Image
Attachments
a.jpg
a.jpg (352.88 KiB) Viewed 904 times
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20554
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

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

Post by BBfanboy »

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Bound to happen...one hit.



Image
I avoid that direct line to PH like the plague ...
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
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

Pretty pleased with this result...Japan might bombard and shock attack again,but this time all the armor will be in combat mode.



Ground combat at Rockhampton (95,152)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 17235 troops, 114 guns, 42 vehicles, Assault Value = 587

Defending force 24630 troops, 447 guns, 681 vehicles, Assault Value = 760

Japanese adjusted assault: 278

Allied adjusted defense: 211

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: preparation(-), experience(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
2552 casualties reported
Squads: 69 destroyed, 65 disabled
Non Combat: 37 destroyed, 8 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 4 disabled
Guns lost 12 (4 destroyed, 8 disabled)
Units destroyed 1

Allied ground losses:
26 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled
Non Combat: 2 destroyed, 27 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Guns lost 14 (3 destroyed, 11 disabled)
Vehicles lost 40 (18 destroyed, 22 disabled)

Assaulting units:
II./4th Infantry Battalion
65th Brigade
148th Infantry Regiment
8th Tank Regiment
144th Infantry Regiment
4th Div /1
47th Field AA Battalion
45th Field AA Battalion
48th Field AA Battalion
35th JNAF AF Unit
22nd Air Flotilla
97th JAAF AF Bn

Defending units:
2/10th Armoured Regiment
2/5th Armoured Regiment
182nd Infantry Regiment
193rd Tank Battalion
41st Infantry Division
2/11th Armoured Car Regiment
2/4th Armoured Regiment
2/8th Armoured Regiment
754th Tank Battalion
13th Australian Brigade
I Australian Corps
2nd Medium Regiment
108th Anti Tank Regiment
97th Coast AA Regiment
21/22 Field Regiment


Image
Attachments
a.jpg
a.jpg (230.79 KiB) Viewed 904 times
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”