Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Interesting.[:)]
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Apparently you are running a mod with reduced cargo capacities but the tender's cargo capacities have to remain the same as the original so they can function properly. That is, rearming the ships that they are supposed to rearm.
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.
I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!
“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
; Julia Child

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!
“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
The C2 Lassen were the only AEs big enough to load the Iowa Class BBs, but I am unclear if the effort to allow AKEs to load the Yamatos also allowed lower capacity AEs/AKEs to load the Iowas.ORIGINAL: RangerJoe
ORIGINAL: Lowpe
I am not so sure that is needed...initially. My convoy routes currently are very long and as long as I don't lose the ships, they can provide better utility currently hauling supplies off map. As more and more cargo ships arrive they can be converted over to ammo ships.
Thru 1942 our offensive ability is limited...but our demand for supplies is not.
Hog Island
Harriman
Regulus
Capella
C2 Lassen
All these classes can go either AE or AKE. I currently have 16 AKE and 7 AE and only 5 AD. I would prefer to have more ADs.
12 days for Wasp, 16 days for North Carolina. Destroyers trickling in very consistently. Simply amazing strength.[:)]
Take a look at the cargo capacity after the change - it should be 5400 tons with no liquid storage.
At any rate, be aware that the C2 Lassen class do not arrive in a steady stream - there are a bunch of them early in 1942 and then almost none for about a year. Upgrading the AA on the cargo version will eliminate the AE conversion option. Conversion to an xAP will likely do so as well.
In 1943 you get the odd new AE of the C2 class but I still find the ones I converted tremendously useful. There were many bases where I was basing BBs for bombardment of enemy island strongholds, and the large capacity of the AEs meant I could load the BBs several times before needing to replenish the supply. Staging the AEs loading supply while the BBs were away bombarding kept the whole thing running smoothly. I needed 3-4 AEs to keep up with business. I had some AKEs in the area to load cruisers and DDs.
The only advantage I have found in an AD over AE/AKEs is that the AD can help repair minor damage on the DDs. Both can supply torps. At any rate, more ADs do arrive and I did not find I needed them all that much against the AI.
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
... I am unclear if the effort to allow AKEs to load the Yamatos also allowed lower capacity AEs/AKEs to load the Iowas...
There was no attempt to make it easier to reload the Yamato class. It is one of the quite significant bugs (yes there is more than 1) introduced in the betas post the official patch #7.
Alfred
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
I previously used up to 10 AKEs to keep up round the clock bombardments from dot base in the Pacific as Japan. So that is my rule of thumb...I guess with Americans and later in the war it might even be more since you have so many ships.
I really dislike loading the Yamato from AKEs, it takes away from a whole series of decisions Japan needs to make strategically. Makes the game poorer, imho.[:(]
I really dislike loading the Yamato from AKEs, it takes away from a whole series of decisions Japan needs to make strategically. Makes the game poorer, imho.[:(]
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
June 6th, 1942
Lack of supplies, from Ankang down south have doomed our defense against the IJA tank spearhead. I also weakened the point defense further down by moving a fully dug in corp out and faced the initial attack (months ago when the IJ thrust was up the Canton road and west out of Ichang) with only 3 dug in corps instead of 4. Plus none of them were the US TOE corps which is what is needed.
Our equalizer, I had hoped was the 43rd Cavalry with Stuarts, but they end up fighting 8+ Tank Regiments and simply get disabled after one fight.

Lack of supplies, from Ankang down south have doomed our defense against the IJA tank spearhead. I also weakened the point defense further down by moving a fully dug in corp out and faced the initial attack (months ago when the IJ thrust was up the Canton road and west out of Ichang) with only 3 dug in corps instead of 4. Plus none of them were the US TOE corps which is what is needed.
Our equalizer, I had hoped was the 43rd Cavalry with Stuarts, but they end up fighting 8+ Tank Regiments and simply get disabled after one fight.

- Attachments
-
- a.jpg (427.01 KiB) Viewed 973 times
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Another attack at Clark AFB...
Ground combat at Clark Field (79,76)
Japanese Deliberate attack
Attacking force 21920 troops, 424 guns, 827 vehicles, Assault Value = 622
Defending force 32127 troops, 371 guns, 201 vehicles, Assault Value = 963
Japanese adjusted assault: 607
Allied adjusted defense: 1258
Japanese assault odds: 1 to 2 (fort level 0)
Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), preparation(-), experience(-)
Attacker:
Japanese ground losses:
1876 casualties reported
Squads: 4 destroyed, 136 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 19 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 15 disabled
Vehicles lost 41 (3 destroyed, 38 disabled)
Allied ground losses:
235 casualties reported
Squads: 21 destroyed, 7 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Guns lost 4 (2 destroyed, 2 disabled)
Assaulting units:
22nd Division
7th Ind.Tank Brigade
Guards Tank Division
15th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
9th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
14th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
1st Hvy.Artillery Regiment
8th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
3rd Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
2nd Mortar Battalion
20th Ind. Mtn Gun Battalion
2nd Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
10th Ind. Mountain Gun Regiment
2nd Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
21st Army
Defending units:
57th PS Infantry Regimental Combat Team
21st PA Infantry Division
31st Infantry Regiment
4th Marine Regiment
26th PS Cavalry Regiment
31st PA Infantry Division
11th PA Infantry Division
2nd PA Constabulary Division
Clark Field AAF Base Force
I Philippine Corps
88th PS Field Artillery Regiment
Provisional GMC Grp
Far East USAAF
301st PA Field Artillery Regiment
Ground combat at Clark Field (79,76)
Japanese Deliberate attack
Attacking force 21920 troops, 424 guns, 827 vehicles, Assault Value = 622
Defending force 32127 troops, 371 guns, 201 vehicles, Assault Value = 963
Japanese adjusted assault: 607
Allied adjusted defense: 1258
Japanese assault odds: 1 to 2 (fort level 0)
Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), preparation(-), experience(-)
Attacker:
Japanese ground losses:
1876 casualties reported
Squads: 4 destroyed, 136 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 19 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 15 disabled
Vehicles lost 41 (3 destroyed, 38 disabled)
Allied ground losses:
235 casualties reported
Squads: 21 destroyed, 7 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Guns lost 4 (2 destroyed, 2 disabled)
Assaulting units:
22nd Division
7th Ind.Tank Brigade
Guards Tank Division
15th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
9th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
14th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
1st Hvy.Artillery Regiment
8th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
3rd Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
2nd Mortar Battalion
20th Ind. Mtn Gun Battalion
2nd Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
10th Ind. Mountain Gun Regiment
2nd Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
21st Army
Defending units:
57th PS Infantry Regimental Combat Team
21st PA Infantry Division
31st Infantry Regiment
4th Marine Regiment
26th PS Cavalry Regiment
31st PA Infantry Division
11th PA Infantry Division
2nd PA Constabulary Division
Clark Field AAF Base Force
I Philippine Corps
88th PS Field Artillery Regiment
Provisional GMC Grp
Far East USAAF
301st PA Field Artillery Regiment
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Lost a lone cargo ship, an Isthmian, not sure how she ended up south of Fanning, I guess her Captain lost his nerve...or he got the wrong orders.


- Attachments
-
- a.jpg (410.71 KiB) Viewed 973 times
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
No attacks, but his Iboats do a really good job at detection. I don't think mine ever approached this level...I think it means the IJ operate in packs of glen boat equipped subs? No HR about using other floats on the iboats too, but at this stage that should only effect the range.


- Attachments
-
- a.jpg (430.32 KiB) Viewed 973 times
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Happy with how our Australian defense went here...not happy with the American Bases. Tennant Creek is empty. Alice Springs is 4 (91%) AF with 40k supply.
Our lead element to take Tennant Creek is deceptively weak...HQc, AA, Base Force, Brigade and Battalion.

Our lead element to take Tennant Creek is deceptively weak...HQc, AA, Base Force, Brigade and Battalion.

- Attachments
-
- a.jpg (410.56 KiB) Viewed 973 times
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Disruption among the marines, in an assortment of xAPs, is around 10. Should land in 2-3 days.
There is one AMC, the Pansy, a Qboat with 0 cargo capacity, but does she provide an offloading bonus to the other ships?

There is one AMC, the Pansy, a Qboat with 0 cargo capacity, but does she provide an offloading bonus to the other ships?

- Attachments
-
- a.jpg (386.48 KiB) Viewed 973 times
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Northern Burma...we are 9 miles into our two Jungle hex movements to get to the rail line cutting off Myitkyina from Mandalay. Be curious to see how our supplies hold up.
Japan has 1/10 DL on Imphal at the moment.
Strong IJ concentration at Chittagong.
Dimapur is a 7 (91) AF and can rail in 1200 supplies. Building up all the airbases.

Japan has 1/10 DL on Imphal at the moment.
Strong IJ concentration at Chittagong.
Dimapur is a 7 (91) AF and can rail in 1200 supplies. Building up all the airbases.

- Attachments
-
- a.jpg (264.35 KiB) Viewed 973 times
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Status of our stricken R class battleships.


- Attachments
-
- a.jpg (197.13 KiB) Viewed 973 times
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Moving the only free squadron of P38s to New Zealand and then to Australia in time for the Broome offensive, if they make it.
Perhaps this run, will be for the Long Island to make in the future...

Perhaps this run, will be for the Long Island to make in the future...

- Attachments
-
- a.jpg (497.07 KiB) Viewed 973 times
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Wake Island...a major oversight by Japan, I think.


- Attachments
-
- a.jpg (212.32 KiB) Viewed 973 times
-
GetAssista
- Posts: 2836
- Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 6:13 am
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Of course there is a supply path - to Ankang. Absence or presence of actual supply does not enter this criterium.ORIGINAL: Lowpe
Too bad, I had hoped they would not retreat for lack of a supply path
Only loaded AGC can help with unloading AFAIK. Other ships are on their own, and at the hands of local navsupport and port size sans damageORIGINAL: Lowpe
There is one AMC, the Pansy, a Qboat with 0 cargo capacity, but does she provide an offloading bonus to the other ships?
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Thanks Get![&o] I had thought having 0 supply at Ankang might invalidate the supply path routing from there....
Re-read the rules on amphibious landings and clearly was confused a bit....
Re-read the rules on amphibious landings and clearly was confused a bit....
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
June 7th, 1942
Addu is an atoll, so the invasion fleet will mosey on up 1 hex away and await for the invasion tomorrow. Hopefully we will be undetected...
Light Cruiser SAG will take up a blocking position in front of the invasion, while subs patrol the route from Colombo, Illustrious and Formidable will stand ready and will either bomb the base in no detection is present, or be set for naval attacks or both even.
The 2nd Marine Regiment will storm ashore as best they can from a dozen xaps...prep is 93% I believe.
If situation deteriorates we can retreat to Diego Garcia or Mombasa.

Addu is an atoll, so the invasion fleet will mosey on up 1 hex away and await for the invasion tomorrow. Hopefully we will be undetected...
Light Cruiser SAG will take up a blocking position in front of the invasion, while subs patrol the route from Colombo, Illustrious and Formidable will stand ready and will either bomb the base in no detection is present, or be set for naval attacks or both even.
The 2nd Marine Regiment will storm ashore as best they can from a dozen xaps...prep is 93% I believe.
If situation deteriorates we can retreat to Diego Garcia or Mombasa.

- Attachments
-
- a.jpg (378.77 KiB) Viewed 973 times
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Getting close to resuming air operations in this theater....Hurricanes are being produced, but for now every plane that can carry supplies is flying them to China.


- Attachments
-
- a.jpg (319.7 KiB) Viewed 973 times
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Will start moving on Chittagong, mostly with restricted troops...while pushing into northeastern Burma.
Starting to think about how to retake Ceylon, but I think that is probably back burner...
Darwin and Broome operations are moving forward...
Kalgoorlie is assembling...
Baker to Tabby is assembling...
Continue pushing our logistics heavily...
So many clicks!
Starting to think about how to retake Ceylon, but I think that is probably back burner...
Darwin and Broome operations are moving forward...
Kalgoorlie is assembling...
Baker to Tabby is assembling...
Continue pushing our logistics heavily...
So many clicks!


