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 »

The main event:
a.jpg
a.jpg (672.52 KiB) Viewed 1065 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

RangerJoe wrote: Fri Aug 11, 2023 12:21 pm Too bad about those transports getting hit but that does happen in the game.

But I really like how your PT boats scared the Yamato and a destroyer to death! :lol:
Sloppy play on my part, just click/turn fatigue. :oops:

Victorious has to leave the battle front and withdraw...she is in the South China Sea, above Brunei so barring a sub attack should make it in time.
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

The Benedict Arnold Group is heading for Sorong...no point in potentially flying into a hornets nest or ambush. Risk reward analysis here...all those IJN ships are doomed unless I really screw up...no point in risking an Essex or her light carriers.

Reconfigured our ship routing, set up some traps, attempting to save some ships. Moving forward with two more divisions for China.
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

End of September:

Our destroyers catch and inflict heavy fires and heavy damage on three out of four ships here:
a.jpg
a.jpg (265.59 KiB) Viewed 938 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 4th IJA Division is routed again and forced to retreat away from Cam Ranh Bay. An armored unit pursues the shattered troopers....
A20BismarckSea.jpg
A20BismarckSea.jpg (525.29 KiB) Viewed 935 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

That IJA tank unit, that has been bombed with no reported losses for about a week by strafing assault bombers (the G version), turns out to have 0 AV on the replay and is easily shattered and Battambang is ours. Our mainly Chinese assault takes a recently empty Raheng to the north. Won't be long to get Bangkok I think just movement time.
admiral.jpg
admiral.jpg (336.17 KiB) Viewed 934 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

Our subs hit the thundering herd that is retreating towards Java:

Submarine attack near Tockangbesi-eilanden at 71,111

Japanese Ships
xAK Tamaki Maru, Torpedo hits 1, heavy damage

Allied Ships
SS Haddock

xAK Tamaki Maru is sighted by SS Haddock
SS Haddock launches 2 torpedoes at xAK Tamaki Maru


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Tockangbesi-eilanden at 71,111

Japanese Ships
xAK Kyokko Maru, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage

Allied Ships
SS Haddock

SS Haddock launches 2 torpedoes at xAK Kyokko Maru
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

This is our LRCAP fight....Lightnings do incredibly well. But in the afternoon are hit harder by a squadron of Georges.

Morning Air attack on Kwangchowan , at 73,60

Weather in hex: Thunderstorms

Raid spotted at 27 NM, estimated altitude 39,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 8 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M8 Zero x 16

Allied aircraft
P-38H Lightning x 10

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M8 Zero: 8 destroyed

No Allied losses

CAP engaged:
475th FG/431st FS with P-38H Lightning (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
(10 plane(s) diverted to support CAP in hex.)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 10 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 37000 , scrambling fighters between 0 and 37000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 3 minutes
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20313
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

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

Post by BBfanboy »

Lowpe wrote: Fri Aug 11, 2023 12:25 pm IJN weakened substantially this last month, an IJN CVL isn't listed yet. These are victories that were enabled by our mad landing at Quinhon and the followup at Soc Trang:

a.jpg
New Mexico is avenged! Her 14" hit on Yamato is credited for doing the most to sink her!
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 »

Oct 1, 1943

The IJN Thundering Herd escaping....longer term they don't pose much of a threat anymore, the Atago could be nasty...but they are all victory points to be harvested hopefully at minimal cost.

There are still 2 DESRONs in amongst them with good levels of ammo and fuel...plus they have to run the sub gauntlet which has 0 DL.
a.jpg
a.jpg (526.66 KiB) Viewed 801 times
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20313
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

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

Post by BBfanboy »

Hope your DesRons are a bit bigger than 2 ships. IIRC that juicy Tanker convoy had 3 DDs and a PB for escorts.

Also meant to comment how your targeting of his DDs earlier probably helped a lot with all your sub victories thereafter. That 2 point tanker you mentioned was just chaff to eat up your ammo before the bigger ones came along. But you always bring up your ADs, AKEs and ASs to keep the boys busy! Good luck in the next wave!
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 »

Oct 2, 1943

PT boats actually hit with three torpedoes!
a.jpg
a.jpg (264.06 KiB) Viewed 724 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 goodness:
A20BismarckSea.jpg
A20BismarckSea.jpg (237.2 KiB) Viewed 723 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

Even more goodness....but another taskforce, that had a LSD evaded.
b.jpg
b.jpg (225.38 KiB) Viewed 722 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

Some bombardment goodness:
b1.jpg
b1.jpg (151.45 KiB) Viewed 721 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

IJA Burma garrison trying to escape:
b2.jpg
b2.jpg (566.14 KiB) Viewed 720 times
Ground combat at 64,58 (near Vinh)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 1794 troops, 12 guns, 354 vehicles, Assault Value = 202

Defending force 18743 troops, 84 guns, 151 vehicles, Assault Value = 163

Allied adjusted assault: 111

Japanese adjusted defense: 538

Allied assault odds: 1 to 4

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

Japanese ground losses:
1508 casualties reported
Squads: 3 destroyed, 30 disabled
Non Combat: 6 destroyed, 59 disabled
Engineers: 4 destroyed, 43 disabled
Guns lost 39 (6 destroyed, 33 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
Vehicles lost 30 (2 destroyed, 28 disabled)

Assaulting units:
194th Tank Battalion
2nd USMC Tank Battalion
4th USMC Tank Battalion
767th Tank Battalion

Defending units:
15th Ind Engineer Regiment
12th Indpt Infantry Regiment
22nd Port Unit
29th JAAF AF Coy
111th Ship Eng Coy
311th Ship Eng Coy
32nd Port Unit
211th Ship Eng Coy
2nd Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
26th Fld AA Gun Co
16th Army
25th Army
43rd Const Co
16th Guards Regiment
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

Big IJA victory on the road in the mountains....but these guys have been keeping the IJA tankers occupied for a solid month or more!

Ground combat at 72,49 (near Kweiyang)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 34699 troops, 480 guns, 1583 vehicles, Assault Value = 1328

Defending force 24698 troops, 67 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 327

Japanese adjusted assault: 1041

Allied adjusted defense: 303

Japanese assault odds: 3 to 1

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

Japanese ground losses:
509 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 34 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 7 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 6 disabled
Vehicles lost 31 (1 destroyed, 30 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
7399 casualties reported
Squads: 288 destroyed, 174 disabled
Non Combat: 179 destroyed, 69 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 6 disabled
Guns lost 24 (15 destroyed, 9 disabled)
Units retreated 5

Defeated Allied Units Retreating!
User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 17920
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: Who knows?

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

Post by RangerJoe »

Did you see the thread where someone had a Chinese unit with a lot of disabled devices in Reserve mode and the stack retreated while that unit in Reserve mode lost nothing?
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 »

RangerJoe wrote: Sun Aug 13, 2023 10:25 pm Did you see the thread where someone had a Chinese unit with a lot of disabled devices in Reserve mode and the stack retreated while that unit in Reserve mode lost nothing?
Yep , I had quite a lot of units in reserve mode...
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

Our submarines hit five different ships and expended 20 torpedoes missing the IJN Destroyer Mischishio. :oops:
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”