A Competitive GW (Solo) Scenario by the Numbers.

[rkr1958]

Turn 24. Jul/Aug 1943. Allied #1. Pacific.

Sea of Japan.
(1) The only strategic bombing capability the allies have in the Pacific are in 2 USN Carrier Air Groups, one aboard the USN CV Essex and the other aboard the USN CV Hornet.
(2) These 2 CVs escorted by 2 USN CAs & 8 destroyers were moved from Pusan to Sea of Japan [4].
(3) For there, the 2 CAG will try to suppress Japanese producton.
(4) Given that Japan only has 1 factory producing, assuming they don't use their Synth oil for production, then the US needs to only knock out 1 PP.
(5) However; for good measures these CAGs will attack Hiroshima (2 factory city & though the line is drawn to Kyoto); but only 1 CVP at a time (i.e., impulse).
(6) Given that Japan can't oppose a strike on Hiroshima (no AA in position), the allies have a 40% chance of knocking out Japanese production (i.e., 30% of 1 PP & 10% of 2 PP just for good measure).
(7) If the USN misses this impulse (40%), then they have another CVP & impulse to strike again.
(8) The IJN has a powerful & organized surface force in Fukuoka; but the 2 USN CVs escorted by their 2 CAs & 4 destroyers should be enough if the IJN decides to try to take them on.
(9) Of course, there's the 12% chance the IJN CA sorties (4 CAs) to the 4-box or 9% IJN BB/CA sortie to the [3] could surprise the USN carrier task forces.
(10) However; that's a risk the USN would be happy for the IJN to try to exploit given 60% chance for a naval air against the IJN (potential) surface raiders.
(11) Again in war, reasonable risks must be taken.

China Sea.
(12) USN, USAAF moves support by Nationalist Air force have the objectives of: (a) interdicting any IJN rat patrol reinforcements to Chinese coast, (b) ensure Shanghai is garrison (US & CW land forces will prioritize liberation back to China of the remaining coast hexes controlled by Japan in order to also minimize this risk), (c) max effort ground strike versus Japanese garrison in Port Arthur with the goal of flipping one or both units allowing the Soviets to break their pact with Japan.
(13) The USN has 5 CVPs with TAC (4 with 1 & 1 with 2).
(14) This gives a po = 0.475 (i.e., 47.5% chance of flipping a given unit), which means an overall chance of 72.5% of flipping at least 1 of the 2 (again allowing the USSR to break the pact but not until next impulse as DOW for this impulse has already passed).

01-AL-Pacific-China-Sea-Sea-of-Japan-NM.png (2.02 MiB) Viewed 133 times

[rkr1958]

Turn 24. Jul/Aug 1943. Allied #1. Pacific.

(1) USN CAGs lay a big goose egg.
(2) SBD-5 CAG on the CV Hornet from the Sea of Japan, who strat bomb Hiroshima's 2 factories, miss knocking out a PP by 1!
(3) The US will have one more chance with the TBF-1 aboard the CV Essex in the Sea of Japan to knock out 1 or both of Hiroshima's PPs next allied impulse assuming the IJN doesn't sortie to the Sea of Japan and surprise the USN.
(4) 4 CAGs off the CVs Saratoga, Enterprise & Wasp on 8 attempts fail to flip either IJA 2nd eng div or Saigon MIL army holding Port Arthur, but more significantly preventing the Soviets from backing their neutrality pact with them.
(5) All it would have taken is1 of the 2 (66%) to be flipped & the Soviets could break the pact next allied impulse.
(6) The allies do have an (CW) India Hurricane F/B(2) that likely will ground strike next allied impulse.
(7) If it does, it has a 36% chance of flipping at least 1 of the 2 defenders.
(8) Not as good as the USN pre odds, but definitely a decent chance.

USN Strategic Bombing. Hiroshima, Japan.

01-AL-Pacific-USN-STRAT-Hiroshima.png (345.34 KiB) Viewed 107 times

01-AL-Pacific-Sea-of-Japan-STRAT-Left.png (484.14 KiB) Viewed 106 times

USN Ground Strike. Port Arthur, Manchuria.

01-AL-Asian-GSTK-Port-Arthur.png (369.81 KiB) Viewed 105 times

01-AL-Pacific-Port-Arthur-GSTK-Left..png (275.3 KiB) Viewed 105 times

[rkr1958]

Turn 24. Jul/Aug 1943. Allied #1. Asian Theater. China.

CCP. Land Combat. Tisanshui, China.
(1) Not wanting to flip in order to "keep going & mopping up isolated & flipped IJA" Mao elects NOT to provide HQ support and risk 4% chance of loss and 6% chance of half flips.
(2) Unlike, last turn the "low" risk gamble pays off, Terauchi HQ-I is eliminated without loss or flip.
(3) Mao is thinking carefully as to his next target, likely the lone & flipped IJA car corps to his southwest.
(4) This would carry the same low risk as this land combat.
(5) Other land combat vs elite (single or multi-unit stacks) carry more serious risks, would definitely require HQ support from Mao and are best left to near the end of the turn.

01-Asian-LC-Tianshui-China.png (271.8 KiB) Viewed 103 times

China Map.
(6) Nationalist 5th army, way to the northwest in Lop Desert has no near supply so can only move 3-hexes per turn, which they do this impulse.
(7) Nationalist cav div near Chunking liberates several hexes (i.e., returns control back to China) in order to firm up their supply line for a move either toward liberating Ankang (northeast) or Ichang (east).
(8) US 4th inf div positions to be able to liberate Sian (RP & undestroyed blue factory) if at at least one of the isolated but organized IJA units don't move in first (which is expected).
(9) MacArthur HQ-I positions adjacent (east) of Tunkwang to take that city if such the unit is elite IJA 20th infantry army currently holding that city and/or open supply to the US 4th inf div allowing it to move without flipping.
(10) Liberation of Chinese coastal hexes to thwart any IJN rat transports that might get past the USN/RN in the China Sea was a priority.
(11) To secure Shanghai (objective) against such a threat, the US LXII garrison corps was debarked to the city from the China Sea.
(12) To provide mobility to in later impulses to flip the 4 IJA controlled coastal hexes in the vicinity, the 3rd Indian inf corps was also debarked from the China Sea to Shanghai.
(13) To the north in the Shantung Peninsula, the US army 2nd mot div, 40 mm AT div & the UK WDF tank corps managed to liberate all coastal hexes in that peninsula except for a swamp hex.
(14) As did the 40 mm AT div in this task (which flipped this impulse), the US 2nd mot div may likely be given that task (i.e., liberate the coastal swamp hex) next impulse.
(15) The UK WDF tank corps is likely to be assigned to MacArthur, who's position to continue to move west towards Sian or pivot southeast towards Wuhan.
(16) In the South, USMC corps commanded by Nimitz and RSA inf corps by Mountbatten moved to liberate Changsha, Hengyang, RP in between & open a route for that RP to Canton.
(17) A secondary objective for that joint army is to liberate Kweilin, held by the OOS & flipped IJA non-elite 23rd inf army, and open the road/rail route to RP to the southwest (previously liberated).
(18) The minor port of Amory, still Japanese controlled, also needs to be liberated.
(19) In all, 6 coastal hexes still controlled by the Japanese need to be liberated.
(20) The most critical, which is directly southeast of Shanghai, is be held by a CCP partisan until such time the allies can liberate it.

01-AL-Asian-China-Map.png (2.47 MiB) Viewed 103 times

[rkr1958]

Turn 24. Jul/Aug 1943. Allied #1. Middle East.

(1) Due to the severe German threat to Southern Russia, Georgia, Azerabijan, especially Soviet oil fields, the risk (likelihood) of Turkey's entry into the war and that threat to Syria, the Western Allies established their Middle East Land Command.
(2) This command, which drew from ground forces slated for the Western Front and other theaters, is currently composed of 14 ground units, 2 CW HQs necessary for FTC to enter Soviet Union (e.g.,Azerabijan & Georgia), 10 corps, 2 division with a total of 59 LCF.
(3) This diversion of critical land units was necessary to ensure the safety of Syria against a potential, but currently, neutral Turkey, garrison of Persia to allow Soviet units to be deployed to USSR proper and expeditionary forces (requiring FTC) to Azerabijan & possibly Georgia to stabilize defense & Soviet control of their critical oil fields and keeping Turkey (for as long as possible) neutral.

Western Allied Middle East (Initial) Land Command.

01-AL-Westerr-Middle-East-LND.png (56.01 KiB) Viewed 82 times

Persia (After Allied Naval Moves).

01-AL-Eastern-Persian-NM.png (1.53 MiB) Viewed 82 times

Persia (End of Impulse).

01-AL-Persian-EOI.png (1.75 MiB) Viewed 82 times

East Med/Syria (End of Impulse).

01-AL-Middle-East-Syria-EOI.png (1.11 MiB) Viewed 82 times

[rkr1958]

Turn 24. Jul/Aug 1943. Allied #1. Middle East.

East Africa.
(1) Two HQs currently assigned to the Middle East Land Command are Gort HQ-I & Wavell HQ-A.
(2) Gort this impulse was shipped from Casablanca, Morocco to the Red Sea[0] and debarked to Asmara, Eritrea.
(3) There's an RN TRS Gp organized & ready to ship (this turn) Gort on to Persia, who can then be railed to USSR, establishing FTC, along with up to 2 FTC land units.
(4) Wavell won't be able to make it to Persia at best by RTB during (likely end of) this turn.
(5) Allied command, especially RN naval command which hasn't moved this turn, will conduct a search for transport that can reach & embark Wavell this impulse in order to accomplish this.

01-AL-Middle-East-East-Africa-EOI.png (1.5 MiB) Viewed 81 times

Arabian Sea.
(6) US army Los Angles MIL corps originally slated for the Pacific, which is currently in the Arabian Sea, will be RTB at EOT to Persia (Bushei) to help garrison Persia until such time the US can get deploy and HQ for FTC to help in southern USSR.

01-AL-Middle-East-Arabian-Sea.png (1.07 MiB) Viewed 81 times

Hong Kong.
(7) AUS 2nd inf & UK XIV mot corps have immediately been reassigned from Western CBI (Asian/Pacific) land command to the newly stood up Middle East land command.
(8) The RN has identified immediate sea lift (i.e., Queens) to ship the AUS 2nd to Persian this turn, which along with Gort will (hopefully) be railed into the Southern USSR>

01-AL-Middle-East-Hong-Kong-EOI.png (706.96 KiB) Viewed 81 times

[rkr1958]

Turn 24. Jul/Aug 1943. Allied #1. Western Front.

1943 Early Summer Offensive.
(1) The Western Allied Middle East land command is funneling significant land strength to the Middle East to take pressure off the Soviet Union (especially in the south).
(2) This command required significant diversion of allied land units and sea lift, much of which was previously slated for the Western Front.
(3) The Western Allies are launching an early summer offensive also to take pressure of the Soviets by forcing Germany to dilute their land and air strength on the Eastern Front to the benefit of the Soviets; and hence the overall allied cause against the axis powers.
(4) The Western Allied summer offensive includes a strong attempt to open up a second front in the Bordeaux region with the objective of flanking the main Euro defenses in the Brittany bridgehead.
(5) This included an Abn drop on Bordeaux by USN 1st Abn army and a joint US/UK amphibious invasion directly east of Bordeaux (but across a sea inlet & not connected).
(6) A number of allied planners believe this location is too aggressive as it places the amphibious invading US/UK inf army subject to blitz, which little to no retreat, and hence annihilation.
(7) However; the pro planners felt this location was to best to protect the flank of the US Abn army dropping on Bordeaux.
(8) What do you (the community) think?
(9) In the Brittany bridgehead a massive US/CW blitz is made against a powerful SS army in the woods (SE1-Malo).
(10) The advantage for the US/CW is that the SS panzer army being in the woods don't get -4 for armor (they still get -1 for AT div).
(11) But neither do the US/CW get +5 blitz bonus, so this looks to favor Germany.
(12) The LCD odds are definitely low but the hope is to at least get a retreat and flip this powerful army to both advance the situation in the Brittany bridgehead but significantly take pressure off the flanking, second front invasions in/near Bordeaux.
(13) The US & CW have a number of HQs that can reorg if necessary.
(14) Again, a number of allied planners feel this blitz is too aggressive (& risky).
(15) Again, what do you (the community) think?
(16) Also, I couldn't reconcile (2) Bordeaux 12:6 = +5.500, which MWIF showed versus what I showed was +5?
(17) My calculation, which like MWIF includes the 2-str notional, is: Odds = 2 x (12/6) + 1 (for Abn units) + 1 (for including notional) -1 (for city) = 4 + 2 - 1 = 5 vs MWIF 5.5?
(18) P.S. This early summer offensive was accomplished with a US super combine (full land & full naval), French naval & CW land.
(19) The CW, especially RN, has additional amph & TRS available for follow in either the (hopefully) newly established Bordeaux bridgehead and/or Brittany bridgehead.
(20) Eisenhower HQ-A was shipped from the UK to the Brittany bridgehead to lead the combined US/CW blitz vs the SS panzer army.

Land Combat Declaration.

01-AL-Western-LCD-CL.png (18.94 KiB) Viewed 75 times

01-AL-Western-Front-LCD.png (1.9 MiB) Viewed 75 times

[rkr1958]

Turn 24. Jul/Aug 1943. Allied #1. Western Front.

USAAF Strategic Bombing. Austria Oil RP.
(1) Before resolution of the allied early summer offensive on the Western Front, need to backup to allied strategic bombing attacks, ground strikes & air-to-air battles.
(2) The USAAF targets Germany's vulnerable oil supply.
(3) The sturdy & A2A strong, USAAF B-17E flies (extended range) unescorted, can only be & is intercepted by the long range Luftwaffe Bf 110G.
(4) The air-to-air battle goes strongly in the US favor with the Bf 110G shot down, PIL killed & B-17E cleared.
(5) However, the strategic bombing rail D10 roll is a dismal "1".

01-AL-Western-STRAT-CL.png (25.13 KiB) Viewed 65 times

01-AL-Western-STRAT-A2A-AUS-Oil.png (276.08 KiB) Viewed 65 times

01-AL-Western-STRAT-RES-AUS-Oil.png (426.26 KiB) Viewed 65 times

[rkr1958]

Turn 24. Jul/Aug 1943. Allied #1. Western Front.

Land Combat Resolution (1/3). Bordeaux (1/3).

(1) Allied ground strike & airborne drop both opposed by Euro Axis.
(2) Ground strike misses and Airborne drop successfully drops both corps & the one div of the US army 1st Abn Army.

Ground Strike.

01-AL-Western-GSTK-A2A-Bordeaux.png (230.6 KiB) Viewed 56 times

01-AL-Western-GSTK-RES-Bordeaux.png (347.8 KiB) Viewed 56 times

Airborne Drop.

01-AL-Bordeaux-Abn-A2A.png (221.23 KiB) Viewed 56 times

01-AL-Bordeaux-Abn-Drop.png (329.05 KiB) Viewed 56 times

[rkr1958]

Turn 24. Jul/Aug 1943. Allied #1. Western Front.

Land Combat Resolution (1/3). Bordeaux (2/3).

Include Notional?
(1) Italy elects to include the 2-str notional, which produces the lower US Abn assault odds.
(2) By the way, I figured out my discrepancy calculating assault odds during land combat declaration versus MWIF.
(3) It was that I was only including +1 for US Abn units, which I should have included +1 for each corps & +0.5 for each div (or +2.5).
(4) So, with the notional the Abn assault odds = 2 x (12/6) + 2.5 (2 Abn corps, 1 div) + 1 (notional included) - 1 (city) = 4 + 2.5 + 1 - 1 = 6.5, which matches Odds with notional (Yes).

01-AL-Bordeaux-Inc-Notional.png (262.2 KiB) Viewed 52 times

Shore Bombardment & Ground Strike.
(5) [Bay of Biscay][3 & 4]->5 USN BBs->14 SBF/2 [woods] -> 7 SBF vs 6 DF->+2.333 + 6.5A = +8.833A
(6) The US & CW really weren't thinking through the impact of adding RAF ground support.
(7) They made a rookie error of not including -1 US & CW cooperation penalty in it's application.
(8) While both allocated RAF planes made it through, because of woods, extended range for the Lancaster, the -1 coop penalty cancelled out the RAF ground support.
(9) That is, 3 RAF (modified) factors got through vs 6 DF, which is +1; however when the -1 coop penalty is included the net effect is 0!
(10) On the upside, the USAAF fighter escort prevented the Luftwaffe from adding an additional 2 defense factors (defensive ground support).
(11) The USAAF fighter could have flow CAP, so including this level of RAF ground support was a tactical error.
(12) Those 2 RAF bombers flipped would likely be valuable/useful later in this turn.

01-AL-Western-Bordeaux-A2A-GSPT.png (233.8 KiB) Viewed 52 times

01-AL-Western-Bordeaux-GSPT.png (313.08 KiB) Viewed 52 times

[rkr1958]

Turn 24. Jul/Aug 1943. Allied #1. Western Front.

Land Combat Resolution (1/3). Bordeaux (3/3).
(1) USN 1st Abn army makes a daring daylight drop directly on Bordeaux, eliminates defending Italian MIL corps supported by 2-str notional, without loss or flip.

01-AL-Western-2-CL-Bordeaux.png (94.96 KiB) Viewed 48 times

01-AL-Western-2-LC-Bordeaux.png (246.6 KiB) Viewed 48 times

Land Combat Resolution (2/3). E1-Bordeaux.
(2) 2 French BBs add 5 SBF vs 1-str notional (clear & fine), which makes the original +11A amphibious assault automatic at +21A.
(3) Or does it?
(4) MWIF thinks so, but shouldn't adding in the French to this joint US/UK invasion include another -1 cooperation penalty in addition to -1 US/CW?
(5) What's the call/thoughts on this from you rules experts?

01-AL-Western-3-CL-E1-Bordeaux-60-26.png (31.48 KiB) Viewed 48 times

01-AL-Western-3-LC-E1-Bordeaux-60-26.png (264.26 KiB) Viewed 48 times

[rkr1958]

Turn 24. Jul/Aug 1943. Allied #1. Western Front.

Land Combat Resolution (3/3). NE1-Nantes, France.
(1) Allied combat planners overlook the possibility and likelihood of -1.5 in defensive HQ support from the Italian HQ-I Balbo.
(2) This planning (tactical error) reduced PWIN from the planned 44.3% to 31.4%.
(3) However; with the fractional & 2D10 rolls made the result would have been exactly the same!
(4) That is, the actual result with those rolls was "1/-" for LCR=9 vs "x/-" for LCR=11.
(5) That's little consolation to the allies who really wanted to at a minimum retreat & flip the 1st SS panzer army!

01-AL-Western-CL-NE1-Nantes-55-25.png (31.27 KiB) Viewed 40 times

01-AL-Western-LC-NE1-Nantes-55-25.png (255.22 KiB) Viewed 40 times

Land Combat Summary.
(6) The early allied summer offensive consisted of 2 assault (1 Abn + 1 amph invasion) in the Bordeaux region to open up a second & flanking bridgehead in France & 1 blitz (low odds) vs 1st SS panzer army.
(7) WINS: The allies won 2 of these 3 land combats against an expected 2.2 wins.
(8) BP Lost: The allies lost 2 BPs vs 8.46 Expected (-6.46), so that metric was outstanding.
(9) BP Killed: The allies killed 2 axis BPs vs 2.46 expected (-0.46).
(10) If both sides air losses are included (including strategic bombing raid) the final tally is 5 allied BPs lost vs 9 axis BPs killed.
(11) Not bad; however, there's growing concern at allied HQ about the US/UK army east of Bordeaux and that it's at risk of a blitz counter and (likely?) annhilation.

01-AL-Westren-LC-Pre.png (29.93 KiB) Viewed 40 times

[rkr1958]

Turn 24. Jul/Aug 1943. Allied #1. Western Front.

HQ Reorg.
(1) A massive allied reorg effort in the Brittany bridgehead by US HQs Bradley & Clark and CW HQ Alexander.
(2) In total they manage to reorg 7 land units (all surviving flipped land units) and 1 fighter wing.
(3) This was the plan all along with their low odds blitz vs the SS panzer army; however, with the expectation (hope) that they would at least achieve a retreat & flip against the army.

01-AL-Western-Reorg-CL.png (14.94 KiB) Viewed 39 times

01-Western-1-Bradley-HQ-Reorg.png (190.87 KiB) Viewed 39 times

01-Western-2-Clark-HQ-Reorg.png (244.64 KiB) Viewed 39 times

01-Western-3-Alexander-HQ-Reorg.png (217.03 KiB) Viewed 39 times

[rkr1958]

Turn 24. Jul/Aug 1943. Allied #1. Western Front.

USAAF Air Rebase.

01-AL-Western-US-ARB.png (23.67 KiB) Viewed 39 times

01-AL-US-Arctic-rebase.png (857.7 KiB) Viewed 39 times

Map.

01-AL-Western-Front-Map.png (2.27 MiB) Viewed 39 times

[rkr1958]

Turn 24. Jul/Aug 1943. Allied #1. Eastern Front.

Persia.
(1) French Naval Move. CP. Djibouti, Fr Somaliland -> Persian Gulf[0], rerouting 1 of 2 CW to Soviet Lend Lease BPs through the Persian Gulf (vs Red Sea->East Med).
(2) 2 of 3 CW lend lease BPs to the USSR now travel through the Persian Gulf to Persia leaving only 1 through the Red Sea->East Med.
(3) AUS inf & US cav corps debark to Persia, replacing a Soviet MIL army railed from Teheran to Batum & cav corps railed from Bandar Shaper to Astakhan.
(4) The Soviets 3rd rail was a MIL army from Tashkent to Saratov.
(5) Teheran is wide open to partisans with a partisan chance of (only) 1%.
(6) That partisan chance may go up if CW can achieve FTC and rail units into the USSR proper.

01-AL-Persian-EOI.png (1.75 MiB) Viewed 21 times

01-AL-Middle-East-Persian-Partisan.png (65.68 KiB) Viewed 21 times

Azerbaijan, Georgia & Southern Russia.
(7) The Red army moved to keep Germany off Turkey's border for as long as possible (hopefully for this entire turn), guard the Mtn passes as best they can into Georgia & protect Gronzy.
(8) The Soviets are begging for allied expeditionary forces into Azerbaijan and even Georgia.
(9) At best this turn they're looking at 1 led by Lord Gort.

01-AL-Eastern-Azerbaijan-Georgia-Southern-Russia-Map.png (1.84 MiB) Viewed 8 times

[rkr1958]

Turn 24. Jul/Aug 1943. Allied #1. Eastern Front.

Soviet Ground Strikes.
(1) The USSR launch max effort ground strikes versus Army Groups Center & North.
(2) The Luftwaffe have no fighters in range to oppose Red Air Force operations (ground strikes or support) over their main lines.
(3) The Soviet ground strikes were composed of 3 air & 2 artillery attacks.
(4) The air strikes focuses on German Command & Control (i.e., targeted 3 HQ-As!).
(5) The artillery on German armor & mech.
(6) These 5 ground strikes targeted 7 land & 1 air unit.
(7) A total of 4 (land) units were flipped vs 2.81 expected.
(8) The real payoff was that 2 of 3 HQs struck were flipped (Manstein & Rommel) vs the expected 1.1.

01-AL-Eastern-GSTK-CL.png (29.54 KiB) Viewed 6 times

Air Ground Strikes x 3.

01-AL-Eastern-GSTK-42-58.png (349.59 KiB) Viewed 6 times

01-AL-Eastern-GSTK-44-59.png (379 KiB) Viewed 6 times

01-AL-Eastern-GSTK-50-63.png (389.55 KiB) Viewed 6 times

[rkr1958]

Turn 24. Jul/Aug 1943. Allied #1. Eastern Front.

Soviet Ground Strikes (2/2).
[b]Artillery Ground Strikes.[/b]

01-AL-Eastern-GSTK-44-60.png (358.2 KiB) Viewed 5 times

01-AL-Eastern-GSTK-48-62.png (368.73 KiB) Viewed 5 times