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: T Rav

OK Lowpe, I have to ask... are you old Army or Marine? I've not heard the phrase "range cards" for decades! That was old Army T Rav...

No I wasn't...but surrounded by them. 2 sons currently in Army Reserve, 1 was SF USMA grad so lots and lots of exposure there...and all our parents served. Father in law helped design the main gun turrets on the Iowa class, his Father a welder at the Philly Naval Yard, one Uncle kia at Hurtgen Forest, another dumped into Leyte Gulf when the Princeton went down (he lived), my Father was Air Force.

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

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

Post by Lowpe »

The bane of Japan has started arriving: Fletchers! (muh-ha-ha)[X(]

Image
Attachments
admiral.jpg
admiral.jpg (109.94 KiB) Viewed 624 times
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20559
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

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

Post by BBfanboy »

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Hmm...



Image
I have seen several of those 0 day upgrades. Must be bolt-ons that can be done in a day. Any plastic surgeon could do it! [:D]

Also, AGs don't serve minelayers IIRC, but an AKE/AE should.

Check ahead a few upgrades on Keokuk - she might convert to something later or get an upgrade to a different mine. If there are no other upgrades, she can always be a picket ... or a single mine minesweeper.
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
T Rav
Posts: 417
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 6:59 am

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

Post by T Rav »

That's a lot of military service for one family!
User avatar
Nomad
Posts: 7273
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2001 8:00 am
Location: West Yellowstone, Montana

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

Post by Nomad »

I am not sure what you are trying to get to about the MK-16 mine and the Keokuk mine layers. You will start producing the MK-16 starting December 1942 and produce them throughout the war.
I agree that the build rate is low, but you will get some mines over time.
User avatar
CaptBeefheart
Posts: 2617
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2003 2:42 am
Location: Seoul, Korea

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

Post by CaptBeefheart »

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


48. Gameplay Change: Allow ship withdrawals at any on map level-9 port and some
smaller ports with no enemy nearby. Ships can always be withdrawn from any offmap port or from any TF that is currently off map. Ships that are not badly damaged
can be withdrawn from some on-map ports or from TFs in certain on-map regions.
For on map, ship may not be on fire, total damage may not exceed 99 and no
individual damage type (system, floatation, engine) may exceed 50. Ships may not
be withdrawn from any on-map location where the enemy has air superiority. The
intent is to prevent withdrawal as a method of saving a ship that stands a good chance
of being lost or further damaged. On map withdrawal ports are set based on the
historical exit locations for ships leaving the Pacific:

1. Any level 9 port.

2. National home ports of the United States, Canada, India, Australia, and New
Zealand (with no port level requirement)

3. Any level 7 or larger port on the US or Canadian West Coast.

4. Any level 7 or larger Indian port East of Ceylon (including Ceylon itself)

5. Any level 7 or larger port in South Eastern Australia, plus Perth.

6. Any level 7 or larger port in New Zealand.

Thanks for the correction on the "no enemy nearby" rule. I haven't run across such a situation but it certainly could happen. The offmap TF withdrawal is good to know, also. I was going to say Pearl's port usually doesn't go above 8 but I see that's been figured out.

ARs at a zero-level port should work fine to drop the non-major damage.

Cheers,
CB
Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

ORIGINAL: Nomad

I am not sure what you are trying to get to about the MK-16 mine and the Keokuk mine layers. You will start producing the MK-16 starting December 1942 and produce them throughout the war.
I agree that the build rate is low, but you will get some mines over time.

[&o]

My lying eyes! Or my lying brain...I guess I saw 12 there and stopped reading & autocorrected to 12/41![:D]
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

ORIGINAL: T Rav

That's a lot of military service for one family!

I didn't even get in to cousins! [:D]
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

September 14, 1942

Relentless bombing and tanks and constant attacks have worn down my Ankang area road positions. I have no more fresh troops to allocate up here. Certainly supply is very difficult too.

If Japan were pushing in just one area I would be ok...but with the huge tank army down south China is just too stretched.

China is cracking...tanks.

Ground combat at 81,39 (near Tienshui)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 28406 troops, 299 guns, 240 vehicles, Assault Value = 545

Defending force 16235 troops, 101 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 266

Japanese adjusted assault: 266

Allied adjusted defense: 172

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
997 casualties reported
Squads: 6 destroyed, 75 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Vehicles lost 3 (1 destroyed, 2 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
690 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 79 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 7 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 3 disabled

Assaulting units:
6th Ind.Mixed Brigade
19th Tank Regiment
41st Division
36th Division
18th Tank Regiment
2nd Hvy.Artillery Regiment
6th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
12th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion

Image
Attachments
a.jpg
a.jpg (678.62 KiB) Viewed 624 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

A very good air attack...

Morning Air attack on 85th Chinese Corps, at 81,44 , near Ankang

Weather in hex: Heavy cloud

Raid spotted at 17 NM, estimated altitude 10,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 5 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-21-Ic Sally x 20
Ki-21-IIa Sally x 29
Ki-27b Nate x 1
Ki-49-Ia Helen x 30

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-21-Ic Sally: 1 damaged
Ki-21-IIa Sally: 2 damaged
Ki-49-Ia Helen: 2 damaged

Allied ground losses:
521 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 31 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 13 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Aircraft Attacking:
20 x Ki-21-Ic Sally bombing from 5000 feet
Ground Attack: 4 x 250 kg GP Bomb
29 x Ki-21-IIa Sally bombing from 5000 feet
Ground Attack: 4 x 250 kg GP Bomb
30 x Ki-49-Ia Helen bombing from 5000 feet
Ground Attack: 4 x 250 kg GP Bomb
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

Gilberts...

will I be able to launch my Tabby invasion prior to the KB showing up? Don't know.

Image
Attachments
a.jpg
a.jpg (609.01 KiB) Viewed 624 times
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

Also, AGs don't serve minelayers IIRC, but an AKE/AE should.

No tenders work with mines, unless it has been patched somewhere. Port size and naval support only.
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

The impact of flying troops in to Lashio, rather than supplies...



Image
Attachments
a.jpg
a.jpg (196.67 KiB) Viewed 624 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

Deeper Dive on Lashio....

This is Obvert's fortress Lashio defense, which really starts on Dec 8th. Good terrain, far enough from IJ bases to make fighter interceptions of transports very unlikely. Close enough for a Command HQ to 100% prep...along with a very rare HQc & AA in the area.

The BFF was basically shattered, not surprising as it's TOE is almost all small arms and a handful of mortars and they are rallying one hex behind Lashio.

The 1st Burma is fairly shattered too...with two fractions holding the road northeast of Lashio, while this fraction has good artillery in it.

The Burma Corps HQc gets removed in the next two months sometime, and that will be a potent loss and I need to scrounge around and find a replacement HQc to go along with the Command HQ that is the real force multiplier.



So, the original troops holding have been shattered, but I have managed to fly in two brigades and now the 1/4 of the monster 6th Chinese -- of course sacrificing supplies.

Noticed a neat little trick, the 6th Chinese can hold the base, while the parent unit can draw fresh troops as replacements to be flown in. Chinese troops have much reduced VP levels, and have very deep pools, making this a great tactic. Replaceable cannon fodder.[;)]

Of course the Chinese are very poor offensively...but now there is close to 600 AV present, and Japan would need to mount a very large AV force here 1800+ to make a dent.

Image
Attachments
a.jpg
a.jpg (160.36 KiB) Viewed 624 times
User avatar
ny59giants
Posts: 9902
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:02 pm

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

Post by ny59giants »

Fletchers you get in '42 have poor night experience, so use them wisely until you can increase it. Love them in various SC TFs, especially with your modern BB/CLs. I use the Bristols in my Air TFs as they have best AA at this point in the war. A group of four for each Air TF.

Have some subs north and west of Truk to monitor and hopefully get lucky with what reinforcements he is probably sending to CenPac.
[center]Image[/center]
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

September 15, 1942

Truk is invested with submarines...watching dl levels on all my pickets....

Image
Attachments
b.jpg
b.jpg (32.49 KiB) Viewed 624 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

Iboats have mostly moved out of the Gilberts, and now have set up screens at likely repair bases where search ASW is not possible or at long distances only.



Image
Attachments
a.jpg
a.jpg (126.59 KiB) Viewed 624 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

As always, lots of sub action...

Image
Attachments
admiral.jpg
admiral.jpg (212.35 KiB) Viewed 624 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

Hard hitting!



Image
Attachments
animatedarmorimage.jpg
animatedarmorimage.jpg (193.26 KiB) Viewed 624 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

More on Lashio...

Japan now up to 1000 AV or so...but troops are bypassing Lashio into the nasty terrain north and east in an attempt to rescue their cut off units...

I have to abandon my Chittagong air operations, as I suspect there is a big bombardment fleet coming....we do have cd guns etc...but they should be here shortly. Will set up some torpedo bombers on night attack.

Forgot to take a picture...

Elsewhere, Japan cap traps the regiment moving to north of Magwe...we lose a fair number of 2E bombers, but they lose a dozen fighters. Not great...but well done, at least my figters did well...

Morning Air attack on 24th Infantry Regiment, at 60,44 , near Shwebo

Weather in hex: Severe storms

Raid spotted at 32 NM, estimated altitude 40,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 7 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 17
A6M5 Zero x 21
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 27
Ki-44-IIa Tojo x 7

Allied aircraft
Hurricane IIb Trop x 15
Hurricane IIc Trop x 10

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 2 destroyed
A6M5 Zero: 4 destroyed
Ki-43-IIa Oscar: 3 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
Hurricane IIb Trop: 1 destroyed
Hurricane IIc Trop: 2 destroyed

Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”