Puzzlement in the Pacific - Mogami vs Cruft

Post descriptions of your brilliant successes and unfortunate demises.

Moderators: wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami

User avatar
Captain Cruft
Posts: 3741
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 12:49 pm
Location: England

Puzzlement in the Pacific - Mogami vs Cruft

Post by Captain Cruft »

Well, I'm one of the suckers who has signed up to play as the Allies against the "Emperor".

Scen 15
Non-historical, Dec 7th surprise
Sub doctrines off
Allied DC on
Very variable Reinforcements

I won't give full combat reports, just the highlights ...

Dec 10th, 1941

The Pearl Harbor attack has been and gone, damage was extensive of course. KB appears to be heading back home now as far as I can tell (no secondary attacks).

Other Dec 7th air attacks on Clark Field and Singapore as normal.

Landings so far (in no particular order):-

PI - Batan Island, Lingayen, Legaspi, Davao (shed loads of SNLFs here)
Malaya - Songhkia, Kuantan

All are accompanied by substantial surface forces but, strangely, no bombardments. Perhaps this is to save ammo?

Wake Island has not so far been approached. My guess is that rather than the historical landing I will instead face a larger assault in a few days time.

The rest of the Pacific area is quiet, including Rabaul.

Force Z goes out with a bang

I don't believe in the "running away with hindsight" strategy. Possibly this is foolish, we will see ...

The Prince of Wales and Repulse made it to Kuantan to contest the landings without suffering air attack. Unfortunately, when they got there they faced a much stronger force including the Mutsu, Nagato and the evil torpedo-festooned Kitakami.

Code: Select all

 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Night Time Surface Combat, near Kuantan at 24,47
  
 Japanese Ships
 BB Nagato, Shell hits 4
 BB Mutsu, Shell hits 2, Torpedo hits 1
 CA Mogami, Shell hits 4, Torpedo hits 1
 CA Mikuma
 CA Suzuya
 CL Isuzu, Shell hits 3
 CL Yura, Shell hits 3,  on fire
 CL Kitakami
 DD Hatsuharu
 DD Nenohi, Shell hits 5, and is sunk
 DD Fubuki
 DD Shinonome
 DD Usugumo
 DD Shirakumo
 DD Isonami
 DD Shirayuki
  
 Allied Ships
 BB Prince of Wales, Shell hits 12, Torpedo hits 1,  on fire
 BC Repulse, Shell hits 30, Torpedo hits 4,  on fire,  heavy damage
 CL Danae, Shell hits 13, Torpedo hits 2,  on fire,  heavy damage
 DD Tenedos, Shell hits 1
 DD Electra
 DD Express, Shell hits 11,  on fire,  heavy damage
  
 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Night Time Surface Combat, near Kuantan at 24,47
  
 Japanese Ships
 BB Nagato
 BB Mutsu
 CA Mogami, Shell hits 1
 CA Mikuma, Shell hits 4
 CA Suzuya
 CL Isuzu
 CL Yura,  on fire
 CL Kitakami
 DD Hatsuharu, Shell hits 9,  on fire,  heavy damage
 DD Fubuki
 DD Shinonome
 DD Usugumo
 DD Shirakumo
 DD Isonami
 DD Shirayuki
  
 Allied Ships
 BB Prince of Wales, Shell hits 25, Torpedo hits 2,  on fire,  heavy damage
 BC Repulse, Shell hits 34, Torpedo hits 2,  on fire,  heavy damage
 CL Danae, and is sunk
 DD Tenedos
 DD Electra
 DD Express, and is sunk
 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

The Repulse subsequently and unsurprisingly sank. Whether I can save the PoW is, shall we say, uncertain.

I was actually very pleased with this result, especially considering the "cautious" Adm Phillips was in charge. Two Jap destroyers sunk, one light cruiser looking very ill and maybe the Mutsu and Mogami will be out of action for a while ...

Elsewhere, there seem to be hundreds of subs in the DEI. They have managed to hit unescorted transports every day so far. As a result I am trying to bodge together an improvised convoy system with what's available in the area. This may mean I do not get to drain some of the more far-flung bases of their oil and resources though.

China is completely quiet so far, not even a recon flight to be seen. I am doing some re-arranging, not really sure about this area at all.

Burma, nothing yet.
User avatar
tsimmonds
Posts: 5490
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2004 2:01 pm
Location: astride Mason and Dixon's Line

RE: Puzzlement in the Pacific - Mogami vs Cruft

Post by tsimmonds »

All are accompanied by substantial surface forces but, strangely, no bombardments. Perhaps this is to save ammo?
He prolly doesn't want to break anything that he'll then have to pay to fix back up....
Fear the kitten!
User avatar
Captain Cruft
Posts: 3741
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 12:49 pm
Location: England

RE: Puzzlement in the Pacific - Mogami vs Cruft

Post by Captain Cruft »

ORIGINAL: irrelevant
All are accompanied by substantial surface forces but, strangely, no bombardments. Perhaps this is to save ammo?
He prolly doesn't want to break anything that he'll then have to pay to fix back up....

Aha! You could well be right.
User avatar
mogami
Posts: 11053
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: You can't get here from there

RE: Puzzlement in the Pacific - Mogami vs Cruft

Post by mogami »

Hi, (This note is for players who requested my turn 1 as well as for this AAR)

When making my prewar plans I considered POW and Repulse to be the most dangerous enemy surface ships. There is always the possibilty that they will arrive on a landing site and disrupt my landing. The historical covering force contains 2 Kongo class BB. I consider them outclassed by the POW, Repulse so I send the 2 Kongos to areas where they will not encounter enemy BB and replace them with Mutsu and Nagato. (Heavy armor and 16in rather then 14in main guns) These ships should be at Singapore (Freudian slip I mean Saigon) at start of turn 2 so you form the TF then and there and assign it to follow the transport TF.

The mission of the covering TF is to prevent enemy TF from reaching the landings. It would be nice if they destroy or damaged any enemy force encountered but their primary mission is to protect the transports. Hopefully LBA will finish off any enemy force in the following days.

Yes I do not attack airfields I want to use in the next few days.

"Well, I'm one of the suckers who has signed up to play as the Allies against the "Emperor". "

I am not the Emperor. I am the Combined staffs of the IJA and the IJN. (I also had a little input when the plans were made but my job is to carry out the operations decided on prewar. )
Image




I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
User avatar
Mr.Frag
Posts: 11195
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2002 5:00 pm
Location: Purgatory

RE: Puzzlement in the Pacific - Mogami vs Cruft

Post by Mr.Frag »

All are accompanied by substantial surface forces but, strangely, no bombardments. Perhaps this is to save ammo?

Just a follow on for folks ...

Bombarding does damage to both the port (increasing your unloading time) and the airfield (hampering your ability to immediately base aircraft there) and also causes losses to fuel (which you want desperately) and supply (which is handy to capture).

If you have the troops to take the place and you are not trying to prevent enemy aircraft from flying against you, ask yourself if the bombardment is actually helping or hurting you. Remember, it's going to be *your* base in a turn or so. [;)]

It also means your ships *protecting* your invasion transports may decide they are low on ammo and run home instead of staying on station and providing excellent AA fire support. A BB getting a bomb hit is something to smile about. An AP getting a bomb hit because said BB left is not. [;)]
User avatar
Capt. Harlock
Posts: 5379
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

RE: Puzzlement in the Pacific - Mogami vs Cruft

Post by Capt. Harlock »

Bombarding does damage to both the port (increasing your unloading time) and the airfield (hampering your ability to immediately base aircraft there) and also causes losses to fuel (which you want desperately) and supply (which is handy to capture).

If you have the troops to take the place and you are not trying to prevent enemy aircraft from flying against you, ask yourself if the bombardment is actually helping or hurting you. Remember, it's going to be *your* base in a turn or so.

Excellent reasons. However, I'm curious about what happens if the base to be invaded has Coastal Defense units. Can the bombardment be ordered to simply suppress the CD guns, or does it automatically engage all the usual targets?
Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo
User avatar
mogami
Posts: 11053
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: You can't get here from there

RE: Puzzlement in the Pacific - Mogami vs Cruft

Post by mogami »

Hi, against a base with CD place a few ships in transport TF to conduct counter battery fire.
All my TF landing against CD have at least 1 CA and several CL and DD. I know the DD get hit but that is why they are in the TF. (To take the hit in place of a AP)
There are bases with strong CD forces that I must conduct air attacks against prior to landing or sending in a bombardment TF. To make up for this I send increased number of engineer and supply.
Image




I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
User avatar
Captain Cruft
Posts: 3741
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 12:49 pm
Location: England

RE: Puzzlement in the Pacific - Mogami vs Cruft

Post by Captain Cruft »

Notes on the "Battle of Kuantan"

I had spotted the Mutsu but decided to go ahead anyway. The Royal Navy does not run away from a fight ... Also, as it happened, the two Jap BBs hardly fired a shot from their main guns - it was the Long Lances from the CAs, CLs and DDs that did the damage.

My only regret was not being able to setup a day action (where torpedos are less relevant). It was only the spectre of the Nells from Saigon that caused me to go in at night. To be honest I considered myself lucky that they hadn't already sunk me as per history.

Coastal Guns

It's interesting that even with the escorting cruisers the coastal guns at Davao still took quite a toll. There seems to be a very wide spread of random variation with these things.
User avatar
Captain Cruft
Posts: 3741
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 12:49 pm
Location: England

RE: Puzzlement in the Pacific - Mogami vs Cruft

Post by Captain Cruft »

A couple of other small things I forgot to mention:

MSW Penguin escaped from Guam, first time I've ever seen that.

If anyone is wondering about the title of the thread, it's me who's puzzled ... ;-)
User avatar
mogami
Posts: 11053
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: You can't get here from there

RE: Puzzlement in the Pacific - Mogami vs Cruft

Post by mogami »

Hi, One of the reasons I allow the Allied player to input orders is that I believe events in the SRA take place some hours after the Pearl Harbor strike. I think it is taking advantage of the special nature of turn 1 to bombard ports other then PH.
Image




I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
User avatar
Captain Cruft
Posts: 3741
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 12:49 pm
Location: England

RE: Puzzlement in the Pacific - Mogami vs Cruft

Post by Captain Cruft »

12th Dec 1941

The conquest is progressing slowly but scarily.

Landing at Aparri.
PTs out of Manila attack transports unloading at Legaspi, maul two PGs with torps then scarper.
Jap planes have appeared at Kuantan, Legaspi and Davao.
Malaya airforce is trying some night airfield/port attacks. Not very effective but hopefully I will lose less planes this way.
User avatar
mogami
Posts: 11053
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: You can't get here from there

RE: Puzzlement in the Pacific - Mogami vs Cruft

Post by mogami »

Hi, I've discovered a simple oversight. When I formed the first TF of transports to do landings I assigned a surface TF to "follow" the TF. So this TF had protection. However the TF that bring in follow on troops and supply are/were supposed to get this protection as well but my surface TF had followed the first transport TF and left the area uncovered.
I made the same mistake in UV a few times. Now I've made a note to change the covering force to change to hex so it does not depart. (Duh [X(])
Image




I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
User avatar
Captain Cruft
Posts: 3741
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 12:49 pm
Location: England

RE: Puzzlement in the Pacific - Mogami vs Cruft

Post by Captain Cruft »

Oh well that's game over then ... [8|]
User avatar
Captain Cruft
Posts: 3741
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 12:49 pm
Location: England

RE: Puzzlement in the Pacific - Mogami vs Cruft

Post by Captain Cruft »

13th Dec 1941

No new landings.
Aparri falls (I had abandoned it).

Japs bombard Cagayen with 2 BBs plus. The 93rd BS was still stationed there (like I said I don't believe in running away before you have to) and had been nit-picking at the landing sites via airfield/port attack. Only 1 B-17 was actually destroyed but the runway and facilities are a mess which the 3 men and a dog engineering team will take a while to restore. Therefore the squadron has been moved to safer pastures.
User avatar
Captain Cruft
Posts: 3741
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 12:49 pm
Location: England

RE: Puzzlement in the Pacific - Mogami vs Cruft

Post by Captain Cruft »

14th Dec 1941

Night surface action at Balikpapan, Adm Struble and his cruiser force completely fail to be awake. Japanese raiders comprising two Kongos etc. inflict a total defeat on the USN. Houston plus two DDs are sunk, Boise is crippled. Barely a shot fired in response.

Remnants of force have now been ordered to withdraw to safer waters. I hadn't seen the incoming BBs otherwise I would have scarpered anyway, grr.

Other than that 100+ Sallys out of Kompong Trach bomb Khota Baru (currently servicing the Aussie Hudsons originally stationed at Singapore). Once again the damage is not terminal but the engineers will not be sufficient to repair it any time soon. The Hudsons are therefore transferred out - this is consistent with my policy of standing and fighting and only withdrawing when forced.

Oh yes and the Imperial Guards heroically defeat the base force at Victoria Point to take the base.
User avatar
mogami
Posts: 11053
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: You can't get here from there

RE: Puzzlement in the Pacific - Mogami vs Cruft

Post by mogami »

My plan is not a rapid exploitation of my numbers. (Unless you realize that WITP is 1 day turns and PACWAR is 1 week turns and I am right where a PACWAR player would be on this date)
I let my units rest from time to time. I have to wait sometimes for slower units to move and catch up. (It takes short range aircraft a few days to relocate ) I don't stick my head out past my aircover. I try to gain the air advantage before moving. But I have a plan and a schedule and nothing to date has provoked any but minor changes that are expected before the game starts. (No plan survives contact with the enemy intact)
Image




I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
User avatar
Captain Cruft
Posts: 3741
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 12:49 pm
Location: England

RE: Puzzlement in the Pacific - Mogami vs Cruft

Post by Captain Cruft »

15th Dec 1941

Japanese landings at Jolo and Kamboanga (the base adjacent to the east).

Main event - an accidental (well at least on my part) engagement between the Manila PT boats and the battle fleet that raided Balikpapan yesterday. This was at Jolo, prior to the troop landings. PT boats are definitely not uber when they have no torpedoes - three were sunk, one due to receiving 8 x 14in shells from one of the Kongos (hmm).

Mogami obviously considers the little boats a threat since during the air phase the elite F1/Tainan Daitai were sent out from Davao at 100 ft to go get the buggers. Despite their 80+ exp level they only managed to land a few 20mm and 7.mm shells on target (no bomb hits). One Zero was shot down by flak, which made me smile, and another was apparently lost when landing (op loss). The few P-26s and P-35s on CAP also managed to get a few shots in which was nice.

In another small victory for the Allies P-40s out of Manila managed to CAP their way over to Naga (via the 2 hex auto thing) to defend against an IJA ground attack. Four Nates shot down for no loss :-) Unfortunately, a subsequent fighter sweep from Takao (3rd Daitai) paid the debt back exactly with 4 P-40s downed.

----

I am finding this game really interesting, especially since I am far more used to playing as Japan. Mogami is doing things somewhat similar to the way I play, even to the extent of moving airgroups to the same bases. What I find most gratifying is that the Allies are not completely toothless. They cannot slow down the advance significantly but, this is a war of attrition and we are attriting from the get go ...
User avatar
Captain Cruft
Posts: 3741
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 12:49 pm
Location: England

RE: Puzzlement in the Pacific - Mogami vs Cruft

Post by Captain Cruft »

16th Dec 1941

I missed the replay (my fault, I mangled the file on downloading) ...

---

Japanese sub I-166 sunk by US/British destroyer squadron to NE of Palembang.
KB or at least some part of it has been discovered hanging around to the north of Wake Island (wonder what that means?)
Jolo and Kamboanga fall.
New landing at Butuan in Mindanao.

Pearl Harbor airfield and facilities are finally repaired which means that damaged planes are becoming ready in increasing numbers. Strategic bombers will start moving forward soon, I just have nowhere useful to put them ;-)

The Allies are hopeful of an unexpected "victory" very soon. Details will follow when I know the result.
User avatar
Captain Cruft
Posts: 3741
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 12:49 pm
Location: England

RE: Puzzlement in the Pacific - Mogami vs Cruft

Post by Captain Cruft »

17th Dec 1941

Butuan falls.
Tavoy will be under attack tomorrow.
Night port attacks by Nells on Kuching, Balikpapan and Tjilitpap. Ships in all ports, no hits but yes we will evacuate where possible.

Main event - Carrier strike on Wake Island! At least Akagi and Shokaku involved (from air groups in combat screen). Couple of Vals shot down, medium amount of damage to airfield/port. Seems like an invasion could be imminent, very little I can do about it given the presence of the KB.

Oh and a sub has been spotted off the West Coast USA, who says B-18s are useless ...

---

One of the main problems preventing an Allied buildup at this stage is the lack of aviation support units. I have c.100 B-17s that basically cannot be deployed usefully. This is frustrating and I presume a lot of players strip the base forces out of DEI and Malaya for use elsewhere. I won't be doing that though, it's gamey ;-)

I am also pleased to note that Australia does produce a small excess of supply even without feeding it oil. When Sydney gets to 20,000 I'll be flooded with Hudson and Wirraway replacements so that will be game over for the Empire ... Even more excitingly I will be able to start upgrading the Hudsons to torpedo-carrying Beauforts.
User avatar
Captain Cruft
Posts: 3741
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 12:49 pm
Location: England

RE: Puzzlement in the Pacific - Mogami vs Cruft

Post by Captain Cruft »

18th Dec 1941

More of the same. Carrier attack at Wake is on 2nd USMC Def Bn, going for the uber 5.5in coastal guns perhaps?
Also a lot of ground attacks in Malaya, PI and China by IJA dive bombers, Lilies and even Sallies. Mogami is nothing if not thorough ... It's also good and largely risk-free training for the pilots.
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”