BACK IN BUSINESS - PzB goes East again(st) Andy Mac
Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition
-
Speedysteve
- Posts: 15975
- Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Reading, England
RE: Monsoon
Good point too Rapunzel. Forgot that was turned off. Makes a big difference for the Allies in Burma - especially with CV's and as you say air units - several of which are normally withdrawn
WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester
RE: Monsoon
ORIGINAL: castor troy
If CVs engage one on one in aircraft numbers (in 42) then I would rate the IJN at least as twice as dangerous as the Allied ones, pure reason for that: KATE armed with torps. Perhaps it´s 1:1 in 43 when you´ve got Hellcats but I bet not even 250 Hellcats on Cap would have saved me when the KB can easily send a 505 aircraft strike against my fleet (as has happened in my PBEM). You probably would need a 1000 Hellcat Cap and would still lose a couple of ships.
Interesting that this set of posts highlight my two biggest problems with AE. The first being the ease at which the Allies can conduct a counteroffensive in the CBI. I think there are a number of factors missing here. I highlighted some of them above but another is that Monsson is not nearly as devastating as it should be. The Bengal area is the part of India most affected by the Southwest Monsoon. Basically little if any air ops should be possible including transport. Second is that while Monsoon officially lasts from June through September, it takes at least a month for the ground to dry out. Movement of troops AND SUPPLIES should be about impossible during the Monsoon and until at least October. Troops outside of bases and in poor supply should have severe morale and disruption penalties.
The second thing I have have qualms about are some aspects of air combat. I am not saying the system is wrong or borked just that some of the results we see are a little off the historical mark.
Consider this:
The last USN carrier hit by an airborne torpedo was USS Hornet in late 1942
The only USN capital ship sunk by Nell/Betty launched torpedoes was USS Chicago (In what I consider to be a perfectly planned and executed attack that rivals PH)
Do we see this in AE? Obviously the answer is no. Now all that really means is that players have to adapt to what the game gives you. Still it does dampen the glow of an amazing game when you see the warts
"We have met the enemy and they are ours" - Commodore O.H. Perry
RE: Monsoon
I agree with Nomad's analysis on Burma, and that is also how I read the several separate Burma threads as well. That's all hindsight now for you, but a clear learning lesson for future games: IJ has to kill those Brit units early in the game.
As for the Allied air situation: do not overlook the large number of new units coming in. While replacements rates are not high, total production when including new units coming in fully equipped is surprisingly large. I'm not suggesting that the Allies have unlimited ac, but they have far more than simply the replacement ac.
This is historically accurate. The US in particular focused on rotating complete units in and out. So yes, the US only gets 35 P-40's and 25 P-39's early in the war, but she also picks up quite a few new squadrons. Allied players typically disband units early to keep a stockpile of ac available for their frontline ac. What this means is that in 42, the US cannot fight on all fronts. The player has to pick and choose. With Burma/India as it stands, and OZ as well, it would suggest to me that CENTPAC and NORPAC have to be pretty lightly defended with ac at this time. The allies don't have the squadrons or ac to equip them to be strong everywhere until mid/late 43.
EDIT: And I think that also says where the USN CV's have to be. He's got to be using them in place of LBA for CENTPAC and NORPAC.
Just my observations.
BTW: I think you're doing pretty dang well. Your exodus from OZ was really well done, and your losses there quite acceptable. You read the situation quite well and timed things (and taught us all about that move "feature"). Keep it up!
As for the Allied air situation: do not overlook the large number of new units coming in. While replacements rates are not high, total production when including new units coming in fully equipped is surprisingly large. I'm not suggesting that the Allies have unlimited ac, but they have far more than simply the replacement ac.
This is historically accurate. The US in particular focused on rotating complete units in and out. So yes, the US only gets 35 P-40's and 25 P-39's early in the war, but she also picks up quite a few new squadrons. Allied players typically disband units early to keep a stockpile of ac available for their frontline ac. What this means is that in 42, the US cannot fight on all fronts. The player has to pick and choose. With Burma/India as it stands, and OZ as well, it would suggest to me that CENTPAC and NORPAC have to be pretty lightly defended with ac at this time. The allies don't have the squadrons or ac to equip them to be strong everywhere until mid/late 43.
EDIT: And I think that also says where the USN CV's have to be. He's got to be using them in place of LBA for CENTPAC and NORPAC.
Just my observations.
BTW: I think you're doing pretty dang well. Your exodus from OZ was really well done, and your losses there quite acceptable. You read the situation quite well and timed things (and taught us all about that move "feature"). Keep it up!
Pax
-
castor troy
- Posts: 14331
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:17 am
- Location: Austria
RE: Monsoon
withdrawels OFF [X(][X(][X(]
RE: Monsoon
Nice to see so many new posters here, also a good discussion [:)]
How are things going Ken, still fighting these multiple player games I see! The challenge with these games is they are soo hard to complete when there are 3-5 players.
Withdrawals OFF was my big FUBAR before even starting the game, I thought this feature was ON as default.
Had already started the game with Andy before I figured out that it was OFF.... Probably the most costly mistake I'm going to make in AE and of course it can't be turned ON again[8|] Those British carriers alone has cost me the bulk of all serious losses in this game so far.
So yes, the lack of withdrawals, Allied hindsight and better troop preservation will enable the Allied to put up a better fight in Burma already from 1942.
But you should see the stacks of troops that Andy got in his bases or marching through the jungle, we're talking about 80-100 units.
I have never moved troops from China into Burma, so maybe a joing house rule demaning PPs for moving Indian and Japanese trrops in China to Burma would be a good house
rule for future games. It's a high tide and to late to implement in my games, but other players should evaluate what kind of game they want.
- I don't want a game that is decided in China, Manchukuo or Burma.
Hopefully jungle fever, malaria and general troop disruption and fatigue will be increased in future patches.
Allied troops should suffer higher jungle penalties in 42-43 than the Japanese and then evening out and improving in 44-46.
- What I'm thinking about here is e.g. that a British inf division marching through jungle outside a base hex during in 42-43 will gain 1 disruption and 1 fatigue point for each turn.
This can then be doubled during the monsoon. For Japan these values can e.g. be less sever (50% less?) in 42-43.
- Air operations during the monsoon should also be penalized with increased op losses and decreased coordination and strike efficiency.
No doubt I can attrit Andy severly in Burma, but it still doesn't feel right because this is not how I think this theatre should be modelled.
Thx PaxMondon, we don't win wars with great evacuations, but as in Dunkirk they are good for morale and troop preservation [:)]
I never felt I could simply abandon SE Australia, a fighting withdrawal to gain time and inflict casualties on the Allies was therefore a must!
How are things going Ken, still fighting these multiple player games I see! The challenge with these games is they are soo hard to complete when there are 3-5 players.
Withdrawals OFF was my big FUBAR before even starting the game, I thought this feature was ON as default.
Had already started the game with Andy before I figured out that it was OFF.... Probably the most costly mistake I'm going to make in AE and of course it can't be turned ON again[8|] Those British carriers alone has cost me the bulk of all serious losses in this game so far.
So yes, the lack of withdrawals, Allied hindsight and better troop preservation will enable the Allied to put up a better fight in Burma already from 1942.
But you should see the stacks of troops that Andy got in his bases or marching through the jungle, we're talking about 80-100 units.
I have never moved troops from China into Burma, so maybe a joing house rule demaning PPs for moving Indian and Japanese trrops in China to Burma would be a good house
rule for future games. It's a high tide and to late to implement in my games, but other players should evaluate what kind of game they want.
- I don't want a game that is decided in China, Manchukuo or Burma.
Hopefully jungle fever, malaria and general troop disruption and fatigue will be increased in future patches.
Allied troops should suffer higher jungle penalties in 42-43 than the Japanese and then evening out and improving in 44-46.
- What I'm thinking about here is e.g. that a British inf division marching through jungle outside a base hex during in 42-43 will gain 1 disruption and 1 fatigue point for each turn.
This can then be doubled during the monsoon. For Japan these values can e.g. be less sever (50% less?) in 42-43.
- Air operations during the monsoon should also be penalized with increased op losses and decreased coordination and strike efficiency.
No doubt I can attrit Andy severly in Burma, but it still doesn't feel right because this is not how I think this theatre should be modelled.
Thx PaxMondon, we don't win wars with great evacuations, but as in Dunkirk they are good for morale and troop preservation [:)]
I never felt I could simply abandon SE Australia, a fighting withdrawal to gain time and inflict casualties on the Allies was therefore a must!
"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower
RE: Monsoon
ORIGINAL: PzB
So yes, the lack of withdrawals, Allied hindsight and better troop preservation will enable the Allied to put up a better fight in Burma already from 1942.
But you should see the stacks of troops that Andy got in his bases or marching through the jungle, we're talking about 80-100 units.
...
Hopefully jungle fever, malaria and general troop disruption and fatigue will be increased in future patches.
Allied troops should suffer higher jungle penalties in 42-43 than the Japanese and then evening out and improving in 44-46.
- What I'm thinking about here is e.g. that a British inf division marching through jungle outside a base hex during in 42-43 will gain 1 disruption and 1 fatigue point for each turn. This can then be doubled during the monsoon. For Japan these values can e.g. be less sever (50% less?) in 42-43.
- Air operations during the monsoon should also be penalized with increased op losses and decreased coordination and strike efficiency.
...
No doubt I can attrit Andy severly in Burma, but it still doesn't feel right because this is not how I think this theatre should be modelled.
Admittedly, this dilemma is particularly bad for Japan, since they started the war as a surprise action, relying heavily on the unpreparedness, and secrecy regarding troop movements, strengths, and technical capabilities that of course "today's history students" playing AE can't be fooled with anymore -- everyone knows pretty much what Japan can do where and when. Under such circumstances, the war probably would never have been attempted by the Japanese. The uncertainty comes back partially for both player with time, and with deviation from history, but only to a limited degree.
I think your suggestions would unfortunately be jimmy-rigging a fix for the symptoms, rather than for the problem. If you increase any of "jungle fever, malaria and general troop disruption and fatigue", then the Burma theater will be off for Allied players that decide not to make use of hindsight and play fairly historically, i.e. loosing lots if Indian and British LCU in Singapore and Rangoon early on. Those players would be at a significant disadvantage then.
I am afraid, the only way to avoid the allied player to save so many units and prevent him from building up the India-Burma theater with those units to massive strength in 1942/43 would be disallowing him to withdraw forces so early, or at all. I.e. find a way to force allied players to keep up the fight for Singapore and Rangoon with the historical forces, perhaps by PP cost for their evacuation, or PP losses for not "garrisoning" these cities until the Jap player takes them.
Sort of mimicking the political level of consequences, if he doesn't help his colonies withstand the Jap onslaught. And mimicking the Allied believe, that Japanese aren't actually so strong and can be stopped, i.e. "reinfuse" "uncertainty" into the allied decisions. However, if you would drive that idea to the limit (and apply it to the whole game), of course you would end up forcing the allied players and Japanese players to play exactly historically, depriving "the game component" of the possibility of doing exactly what players try today: play with hindsight and the accumulated historical and technical knowledge we have today, and test what could have happened if....
One crucial ingredient gets lost when you use a historical force setup, and historical strengths/technical capabilities, and that is uncertainty, and the possibility to be surprised and make many mistakes. One could think about randomizing the initial force setups and positions for both players air/naval platforms and LCUs, that would probably already add a lot more "tension" to the first year war of the virtual war. One could even think about randomizing technical parameters of weapons, ships, tanks, planes within a small interval, say +/-5 or 10% for all armor values, speed, climbrate, max alt etc. That would lead to -- of course -- less historical, but more dynamical scenarios.
Maybe both could be done with an external editor, if one would find the time to write it. But then you'd run again into the problem that the AI for the scenarios gets messed up, because it requires definite force setups rather on relying on dynamic functions that could determine which forces are actually available and ready at a base/in a theater and fire scripts with that (or not, if not enough). I don't know, maybe scenarios for PBEM don't require any scripts -- in that case one could really build such an editor to export "randomized" scenario start files?
I think the only way to fix such "problems" (if those are true problems?) would be finding a way to bring back uncertainty and the related human failures. Else, this is just a feature that both sides have to deal with.
RE: Monsoon
I would pay good money to have a "set up phase" where units could be placed as desired before turn one (provided that restricted units must be placed in their assigned theaters unless PPs are paid). Half of my confusion is figuring out where everything is, if I set it up myself I know and can alter my objectives more substantially. Think of the set up of old Avalon Hill board games in the 80s.
I also think an essential house rule is that both sides must pay PPs for restricted command units to cross national borders.
I also think an essential house rule is that both sides must pay PPs for restricted command units to cross national borders.
RE: Monsoon
I think you are onto something here!
As I see it each game must be prepped according to players preferences.
Options are limited to some switches and house rules in this regard.
What I think reality fans often fails to realize is that it's impossible to simulate WWII in the Pacific.
- Without the uncertainty and knowledge about the opposing side and with the benefit of hindsight any game will be a rather dull recreation and colorless simulation.
Only by recreating the game setup with new and undefinable variables will the players get a feel for what the commanders experienced during the war.
Now we research airplanes based on know how that only became available after research and development of these models had been completed.
All games are thus greatly opportunistic and flawed if you consider them from a historical perspective.
Unfortunately this is outside of the scope of most games, so unless we play Civilization we have to rely on the options available to us.
Just the fact that I unwanting selected "Withdrawals OFF" included new and unfamiliar ground into this game. How many carriers don't you think the Japs thought they had
sunk by the end of 42? Their commanders reported more sinkings than the Americans actually had.
Because of the added strains caused by "Withdrawals OFF" I need to come up with a counter, something Andy does not expect and that will tax him as his early Burma offensive taxes me...! Will consider what this can be [8D]
As I see it each game must be prepped according to players preferences.
Options are limited to some switches and house rules in this regard.
What I think reality fans often fails to realize is that it's impossible to simulate WWII in the Pacific.
- Without the uncertainty and knowledge about the opposing side and with the benefit of hindsight any game will be a rather dull recreation and colorless simulation.
Only by recreating the game setup with new and undefinable variables will the players get a feel for what the commanders experienced during the war.
Now we research airplanes based on know how that only became available after research and development of these models had been completed.
All games are thus greatly opportunistic and flawed if you consider them from a historical perspective.
Unfortunately this is outside of the scope of most games, so unless we play Civilization we have to rely on the options available to us.
Just the fact that I unwanting selected "Withdrawals OFF" included new and unfamiliar ground into this game. How many carriers don't you think the Japs thought they had
sunk by the end of 42? Their commanders reported more sinkings than the Americans actually had.
Because of the added strains caused by "Withdrawals OFF" I need to come up with a counter, something Andy does not expect and that will tax him as his early Burma offensive taxes me...! Will consider what this can be [8D]
"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower
RE: Monsoon
Andy stands down all his ac in Oz and Burma today!
I've performed a time consuming review off engine - airframe production and adjusted.
Most production numbers were ok but I found one serious flaw. Engine production to Dinha II and several minor ac types like the Alf
was 10 units!! Not sure what has happened here but the solution is rather simple. An increase in engine production, but only a slight one.
- In 01/43 the Dinah III becomes available and this ac uses another engine than the Dinah II. I will therefore prepare for mass production of the Dinah III while
accepting a relative low replacement rate for the Dinah II over the next coupld of months.
Somehow I've already produced 750 engines for the new Judy dive bomber that becomes available from 01/43, so I switched production of this engine off completely.
Production of many ac types have also been switched off as we have enough reserves in the pools, while production of others like the Helen II has been further increased.
I noticed that I now produce more Emily's than Mavis flying boats and need to replace some of the Mavis units. The Emily got a horrible service rating and is rather unsuitable
for smaller bases, it should mostly be operated from size 5 and larger bases.
Production of the Topsy has also been stopped and we're switching to the Thalia. Should have done this earlier, but this review of engine production finally completed this process.
The next choice I have to make is whether I should the heavy research I'm doing on the Tony directly to the Jack or George fighter or try to accelerate production of the Judy and Jills first.
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Oct 27, 42
Andy sends out strong ASW units north of PH, but I-160 simply plays with them all
and tops it of by sending one of the hunters to Davy Jones locker! Well done I-160!! [8D]
- Those 8 tube launchers are great.
Sub - ASW Attacks
ASW attack near Niihau at 176,106
Japanese Ships
SS I-160
Allied Ships
DD Lansdowne, Torpedo hits 1, heavy damage
DD Laffey
DD Duncan
SS I-160 launches 8 torpedoes at DD Lansdowne
I-160 diving deep ....
DD Duncan fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Duncan fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Duncan fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Duncan fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Duncan fails to find sub, continues to search...
Escort abandons search for sub
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASW attack near Niihau at 176,106
Japanese Ships
SS I-160
Allied Ships
DD Buchanan
SS I-160 is sighted by escort
I-160 diving deep ....
DD Buchanan fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Buchanan fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Buchanan fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Buchanan fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Buchanan fails to find sub, continues to search...
Escort abandons search for sub
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Niihau at 176,106
Japanese Ships
SS I-160
Allied Ships
DD Lansdowne, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
DD Buchanan
SS I-160 launches 8 torpedoes at DD Lansdowne
I-160 diving deep ....
DD Buchanan fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Buchanan fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Buchanan attacking submerged sub ....
DD Buchanan attacking submerged sub ....
DD Buchanan fails to find sub, continues to search...
Escort abandons search for sub
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASW attack near Niihau at 175,103
Japanese Ships
SS I-160
Allied Ships
DD Ralph Talbot
DD Hughes
DD Arunta
SS I-160 is located by DD Ralph Talbot
DD Arunta fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Ralph Talbot fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Arunta fails to find sub and abandons search
DD Ralph Talbot fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Ralph Talbot fails to find sub, continues to search...
Escort abandons search for sub
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASW attack near Niihau at 175,103
Japanese Ships
SS I-160
Allied Ships
DD Hull
DD Monssen
DD Lang
SS I-160 is located by DD Hull
DD Hull fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Lang fails to find sub and abandons search
Escort abandons search for sub
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air Combat
Today we bomb Nanning as always and 50 bombers also hit the "stack" in Burma.
While in the jungle casualties are low though, so these are mostly nuisance attacks to
increase disruption (since they don't get any by walking through the jungle...)
Morning Air attack on 73rd Motorised Brigade, at 57,44
Weather in hex: Clear sky
Raid spotted at 26 NM, estimated altitude 16,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 7 minutes
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 9
Ki-48-IIa Lily x 23
Allied aircraft
Kittyhawk IA x 1
P-40E Warhawk x 1
Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-48-IIa Lily: 1 destroyed, 5 damaged
Aircraft Attacking:
22 x Ki-48-IIa Lily bombing from 11000 feet *
Ground Attack: 2 x 100 kg GP Bomb
CAP engaged:
AVG/3rd Sqn with P-40E Warhawk (1 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 29000
Raid is overhead
No.453 Sqn RAF with Kittyhawk IA (1 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 29000
Raid is overhead
Also attacking 23rd Indian Division ...
Also attacking 73rd Motorised Brigade ...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on 7th Australian Division, at 57,44
Weather in hex: Clear sky
Raid spotted at 36 NM, estimated altitude 11,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 10 minutes
Japanese aircraft
Ki-21-IIa Sally x 29
Allied aircraft
Kittyhawk IA x 1
No Japanese losses
No Allied losses
Allied ground losses:
22 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Aircraft Attacking:
29 x Ki-21-IIa Sally bombing from 11000 feet
Ground Attack: 4 x 250 kg GP Bomb
CAP engaged:
No.453 Sqn RAF with Kittyhawk IA (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 1 scrambling)
Group patrol altitude is 29000 , scrambling fighters to 29000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 57 minutes
Also attacking 2nd British Division ...
Also attacking 7th Australian Division ...
Also attacking 2nd British Division ...
Also attacking 7th Australian Division ...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Hunter is hunted by hunters and one of the hunters is sunk!
I've performed a time consuming review off engine - airframe production and adjusted.
Most production numbers were ok but I found one serious flaw. Engine production to Dinha II and several minor ac types like the Alf
was 10 units!! Not sure what has happened here but the solution is rather simple. An increase in engine production, but only a slight one.
- In 01/43 the Dinah III becomes available and this ac uses another engine than the Dinah II. I will therefore prepare for mass production of the Dinah III while
accepting a relative low replacement rate for the Dinah II over the next coupld of months.
Somehow I've already produced 750 engines for the new Judy dive bomber that becomes available from 01/43, so I switched production of this engine off completely.
Production of many ac types have also been switched off as we have enough reserves in the pools, while production of others like the Helen II has been further increased.
I noticed that I now produce more Emily's than Mavis flying boats and need to replace some of the Mavis units. The Emily got a horrible service rating and is rather unsuitable
for smaller bases, it should mostly be operated from size 5 and larger bases.
Production of the Topsy has also been stopped and we're switching to the Thalia. Should have done this earlier, but this review of engine production finally completed this process.
The next choice I have to make is whether I should the heavy research I'm doing on the Tony directly to the Jack or George fighter or try to accelerate production of the Judy and Jills first.
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Oct 27, 42
Andy sends out strong ASW units north of PH, but I-160 simply plays with them all
and tops it of by sending one of the hunters to Davy Jones locker! Well done I-160!! [8D]
- Those 8 tube launchers are great.
Sub - ASW Attacks
ASW attack near Niihau at 176,106
Japanese Ships
SS I-160
Allied Ships
DD Lansdowne, Torpedo hits 1, heavy damage
DD Laffey
DD Duncan
SS I-160 launches 8 torpedoes at DD Lansdowne
I-160 diving deep ....
DD Duncan fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Duncan fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Duncan fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Duncan fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Duncan fails to find sub, continues to search...
Escort abandons search for sub
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASW attack near Niihau at 176,106
Japanese Ships
SS I-160
Allied Ships
DD Buchanan
SS I-160 is sighted by escort
I-160 diving deep ....
DD Buchanan fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Buchanan fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Buchanan fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Buchanan fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Buchanan fails to find sub, continues to search...
Escort abandons search for sub
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Niihau at 176,106
Japanese Ships
SS I-160
Allied Ships
DD Lansdowne, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
DD Buchanan
SS I-160 launches 8 torpedoes at DD Lansdowne
I-160 diving deep ....
DD Buchanan fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Buchanan fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Buchanan attacking submerged sub ....
DD Buchanan attacking submerged sub ....
DD Buchanan fails to find sub, continues to search...
Escort abandons search for sub
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASW attack near Niihau at 175,103
Japanese Ships
SS I-160
Allied Ships
DD Ralph Talbot
DD Hughes
DD Arunta
SS I-160 is located by DD Ralph Talbot
DD Arunta fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Ralph Talbot fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Arunta fails to find sub and abandons search
DD Ralph Talbot fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Ralph Talbot fails to find sub, continues to search...
Escort abandons search for sub
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASW attack near Niihau at 175,103
Japanese Ships
SS I-160
Allied Ships
DD Hull
DD Monssen
DD Lang
SS I-160 is located by DD Hull
DD Hull fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Lang fails to find sub and abandons search
Escort abandons search for sub
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air Combat
Today we bomb Nanning as always and 50 bombers also hit the "stack" in Burma.
While in the jungle casualties are low though, so these are mostly nuisance attacks to
increase disruption (since they don't get any by walking through the jungle...)
Morning Air attack on 73rd Motorised Brigade, at 57,44
Weather in hex: Clear sky
Raid spotted at 26 NM, estimated altitude 16,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 7 minutes
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 9
Ki-48-IIa Lily x 23
Allied aircraft
Kittyhawk IA x 1
P-40E Warhawk x 1
Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-48-IIa Lily: 1 destroyed, 5 damaged
Aircraft Attacking:
22 x Ki-48-IIa Lily bombing from 11000 feet *
Ground Attack: 2 x 100 kg GP Bomb
CAP engaged:
AVG/3rd Sqn with P-40E Warhawk (1 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 29000
Raid is overhead
No.453 Sqn RAF with Kittyhawk IA (1 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 29000
Raid is overhead
Also attacking 23rd Indian Division ...
Also attacking 73rd Motorised Brigade ...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on 7th Australian Division, at 57,44
Weather in hex: Clear sky
Raid spotted at 36 NM, estimated altitude 11,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 10 minutes
Japanese aircraft
Ki-21-IIa Sally x 29
Allied aircraft
Kittyhawk IA x 1
No Japanese losses
No Allied losses
Allied ground losses:
22 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Aircraft Attacking:
29 x Ki-21-IIa Sally bombing from 11000 feet
Ground Attack: 4 x 250 kg GP Bomb
CAP engaged:
No.453 Sqn RAF with Kittyhawk IA (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 1 scrambling)
Group patrol altitude is 29000 , scrambling fighters to 29000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 57 minutes
Also attacking 2nd British Division ...
Also attacking 7th Australian Division ...
Also attacking 2nd British Division ...
Also attacking 7th Australian Division ...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Hunter is hunted by hunters and one of the hunters is sunk!
- Attachments
-
- SNAG-0771.jpg (105.72 KiB) Viewed 181 times
"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower
-
castor troy
- Posts: 14331
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:17 am
- Location: Austria
RE: Monsoon
lol, looks like I-160 is a war winner... [:D]
RE: Monsoon
A little nuisance attack tomorrow:
2 teams from 2 different Para units will drop on 2 dot bases to disrupt rail traffic.
- Not sure if this will have any effect on the supply flow in the area, but it's worth a try.
If Andy does not take out the raiders they will blow up more of his railway so it should be worth a minute effort.
Maybe this will force him to deploy more garrison units in the area as well.
2 teams from 2 different Para units will drop on 2 dot bases to disrupt rail traffic.
- Not sure if this will have any effect on the supply flow in the area, but it's worth a try.
If Andy does not take out the raiders they will blow up more of his railway so it should be worth a minute effort.
Maybe this will force him to deploy more garrison units in the area as well.
- Attachments
-
- SNAG0772.jpg (656.64 KiB) Viewed 182 times
"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower
RE: Monsoon
PS! It has been very difficult to draw supplies into Shwebo.
Even after unloading 150k supplies into Rangoon supplies fails to distribute.
- Supplies quickly spilled out of Rangoon to other unknown locations and purposes, cause only 38k supplies remain and pulling supplies into Rangoon
has the effect of reducing supplies to other bases in the basin [8|]
Even after unloading 150k supplies into Rangoon supplies fails to distribute.
- Supplies quickly spilled out of Rangoon to other unknown locations and purposes, cause only 38k supplies remain and pulling supplies into Rangoon
has the effect of reducing supplies to other bases in the basin [8|]
"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower
RE: Monsoon
Hmmh, interesting that Andy stands down in both theaters. I can understand AUS, although I would assume that if he already would get enough aircraft replacements and good new pilots, he would keep a campaign of attrition up against you from now on everywhere. But now he takes a break in Burma? What is his army doing? If it keeps advancing, then he must have problems with putting up a continuous air effort. If it is retreating, he might call the theater a day?
John, what are your present plans and locations of your carriers? Do you specific plans? What are your plans with dealing with the RN in the Indian ocean? I think those should be taken out to silence his efforts from this region in the future...
John, what are your present plans and locations of your carriers? Do you specific plans? What are your plans with dealing with the RN in the Indian ocean? I think those should be taken out to silence his efforts from this region in the future...
RE: Monsoon
ORIGINAL: PzB
A little nuisance attack tomorrow:
2 teams from 2 different Para units will drop on 2 dot bases to disrupt rail traffic.
- Not sure if this will have any effect on the supply flow in the area, but it's worth a try.
If Andy does not take out the raiders they will blow up more of his railway so it should be worth a minute effort.
Maybe this will force him to deploy more garrison units in the area as well.
I suspect that it will.
Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home
RE: Monsoon
ORIGINAL: PzB
PS! It has been very difficult to draw supplies into Shwebo.
Even after unloading 150k supplies into Rangoon supplies fails to distribute.
- Supplies quickly spilled out of Rangoon to other unknown locations and purposes, cause only 38k supplies remain and pulling supplies into Rangoon
has the effect of reducing supplies to other bases in the basin [8|]
Do you have the Southern Area Army HQ stationed across the border from Rangoon? It has been my experience that it will steal most excess supplies right out of Burma if it is reasonably close (i.e. Bangkok, Saigon or even Singapore).
RE: Monsoon
Most likely reason is that Andy is resting his men and machines before another major effort in both Oz and Burma [8|]
The army marching through the jungle has a pace of 2 miles per turn....and he's using Skytrains to supply them.
My plan to deal with the RN lies at the bottom of the Indian Ocean right now after their grandious sortie.
The carriers are resting while my tankers refill and bring in more fuel to bases that have been run almost dry.
Southern Area HQ is in Singapore. Think I need a major sized HQ to place in Rangoon, but none is forthcoming soon.
I can nick one from the Solomons if necessary.
The army marching through the jungle has a pace of 2 miles per turn....and he's using Skytrains to supply them.
My plan to deal with the RN lies at the bottom of the Indian Ocean right now after their grandious sortie.
The carriers are resting while my tankers refill and bring in more fuel to bases that have been run almost dry.
Southern Area HQ is in Singapore. Think I need a major sized HQ to place in Rangoon, but none is forthcoming soon.
I can nick one from the Solomons if necessary.
"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower
RE: Monsoon
ORIGINAL: castor troy
ORIGINAL: PzB
The Jap heavy cruisers are actually worth almost as much as their battleships (except the Furutaka, Aoba class) while being worth only 1/6 in VP.
What they lack in shell weight they make up for in torpedoes, what they lack in armor they make up for in speed.
I have to deny that because in AE with the different naval routines to WITP, the battleships became much more important. And what makes the BBs so much more important than the heavy cruisers (not saying the heavy cruisers would be bad)? The BBs are bomb prove, the CAs aren´t. And I can assure you, my PB4Y and B25C and B25D1 with their 70 lownav crews make short process with every Japanese surface combat ship in range - except the BBs because they are bomb prove. The BBs can only be sunk by torpedoes or other BBs gunfire (ok, you can sink them after hitting them with 300 5inch shells or 100 500lb bombs). I would rate every BB three times more important in AE than in WITP. While heavy cruisers can do a good job too, they´re in trouble if ending up in range of my bombers (17 hexes normal range for the PB4Y Liberator for example) or if they meet BBs of course. Needless to say what happens if they end up in 1000lb bomb range of my 70 skilled SBDs, but the 500lb bomb equipped level and attack bombers on 1000ft naval attack are nothing worse, in fact they seem to be even better when you think about their ability to fly through enemy Cap as if it wouldn´t exist when talking about the USN Liberators.
Yes but unlike WITP night conditions are critical and a cruiser DD TF can eat up a BB TF in low moonlight conditions. I am learning to pay attention to this. You send your BBs out at night with no radar and low moonlight and you can end up eating torpedoes and getting no hits in return. It is more complicated now, but BBs can be defeated. Even PT boats in low moonlight can be very deadly. This is the way it should be as the old BBs on both sides were unsuited for night action due to slow turrets, rate of fire and older fire control systems.
I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.
Sigismund of Luxemburg
Sigismund of Luxemburg
RE: Monsoon
That's true crsutton, battleships are for bombardment, escort duties and fighting other battleships and heavy cruisers now!
We're nearing the end of October and 2 seaplane tenders are almost in Tokyo to begin their conversion to light carriers.
Air units are transferred ashore and one Rufe seaplane fighter unit is increased in size to 24. Still waiting for the Musashi to be completed so I can accelerate
the Shinano (a Taiho class carrier in scen 2) and perhaps another late war carrier. The next fleet carrier to arrive is the Taiho around mid 43. 2 Katsuragi's will then follow on the next few months with the Shinano arriving around end 43 according to plans.
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Oct 28, 42
Night Air Attacks
A few night air attacks from both sides with little result to show for!
Night Air attack on Chittagong , at 55,41
Weather in hex: Thunderstorms
Japanese aircraft
Ki-21-IIa Sally x 17
Allied aircraft
no flights
Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-21-IIa Sally: 1 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
Runway hits 1
Aircraft Attacking:
17 x Ki-21-IIa Sally bombing from 11000 feet *
Airfield Attack: 2 x 250 kg GP Bomb
Raid spotted at 27 NM, estimated altitude 13,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 7 minutes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Air attack on Magwe , at 57,47
Weather in hex: Moderate rain
Allied aircraft
Wellington Ic x 10
Allied aircraft losses
Wellington Ic: 1 damaged
Runway hits 1
Aircraft Attacking:
6 x Wellington Ic bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
4 x Wellington Ic bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
Raid spotted at 47 NM, estimated altitude 12,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 18 minutes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Air attack on Magwe , at 57,47
Weather in hex: Moderate rain
Allied aircraft
Wellington Ic x 12
No Allied losses
Airbase supply hits 1
Aircraft Attacking:
12 x Wellington Ic bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
Raid spotted at 44 NM, estimated altitude 14,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 16 minutes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Air attack on Dacca , at 56,38
Weather in hex: Severe storms
Japanese aircraft
Ki-21-IIa Sally x 20
Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-21-IIa Sally: 1 destroyed, 9 damaged
Aircraft Attacking:
19 x Ki-21-IIa Sally bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 kg GP Bomb
Raid spotted at 24 NM, estimated altitude 14,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 6 minutes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air Combat
Some attacks and sweeps, but nothing major.
Morning Air attack on 46th Indian Brigade, at 60,44
Weather in hex: Clear sky
Raid spotted at 41 NM, estimated altitude 18,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 14 minutes
Japanese aircraft
Ki-43-Ic Oscar x 16
No Japanese losses
Aircraft Attacking:
16 x Ki-43-Ic Oscar sweeping at 15000 feet *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on 46th Indian Brigade, at 60,44
Weather in hex: Clear sky
Raid spotted at 47 NM, estimated altitude 15,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 13 minutes
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 6
Ki-48-IIa Lily x 25
Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-48-IIa Lily: 2 damaged
Allied ground losses:
58 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Aircraft Attacking:
25 x Ki-48-IIa Lily bombing from 11000 feet *
Ground Attack: 2 x 100 kg GP Bomb
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Shwebo , at 59,45
Weather in hex: Light cloud
Raid spotted at 29 NM, estimated altitude 16,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 9 minutes
Allied aircraft
Blenheim IV x 30
Hudson I x 27
Allied aircraft losses
Hudson I: 1 destroyed, 1 damaged
Japanese ground losses:
4 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Airbase hits 4
Airbase supply hits 5
Runway hits 35
Aircraft Attacking:
12 x Hudson I bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 lb GP Bomb
12 x Hudson I bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 lb GP Bomb
3 x Blenheim IV bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 lb GP Bomb
15 x Blenheim IV bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 lb GP Bomb
6 x Blenheim IV bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 lb GP Bomb
3 x Hudson I bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 lb GP Bomb
3 x Blenheim IV bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 lb GP Bomb
3 x Blenheim IV bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 lb GP Bomb
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Shwebo , at 59,45
Weather in hex: Light cloud
Raid spotted at 25 NM, estimated altitude 14,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 8 minutes
Allied aircraft
Blenheim IV x 29
No Allied losses
Airbase hits 1
Airbase supply hits 2
Runway hits 9
Aircraft Attacking:
8 x Blenheim IV bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 lb GP Bomb
9 x Blenheim IV bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 lb GP Bomb
12 x Blenheim IV bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 lb GP Bomb
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Shwebo , at 59,45
Weather in hex: Light cloud
Raid spotted at 15 NM, estimated altitude 21,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 4 minutes
Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 30
P-38G Lightning x 4
No Allied losses
Japanese ground losses:
6 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Airbase hits 2
Airbase supply hits 3
Runway hits 13
Aircraft Attacking:
12 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 15000 feet
Airfield Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
12 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 15000 feet
Airfield Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
6 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 15000 feet
Airfield Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground Combat
We capture only one of the dot bases in India as the other holds a weak construction unit.
I will not follow up to knock it out as all troops dropped here will be lost.
Ground combat at Rangpur (58,34)
Japanese Shock attack
Attacking force 53 troops, 1 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 4
Defending force 0 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 0
Japanese adjusted assault: 5
Allied adjusted defense: 1
Japanese assault odds: 5 to 1 (fort level 3)
Japanese forces CAPTURE Rangpur !!!
Combat modifiers
Attacker: shock(+), leaders(-)
Assaulting units:
3rd Raiding Rgt /1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Tezpur (60,36)
Japanese Shock attack
Attacking force 19 troops, 1 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 3
Defending force 472 troops, 0 guns, 6 vehicles, Assault Value = 1
Japanese adjusted assault: 2
Allied adjusted defense: 5
Japanese assault odds: 1 to 2 (fort level 1)
Combat modifiers
Defender: preparation(-), morale(-), experience(-)
Attacker: shock(+), leaders(-)
Assaulting units:
Yokosuka 1st SNLF /1
Defending units:
1st Bengal Construction Battalion
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We're nearing the end of October and 2 seaplane tenders are almost in Tokyo to begin their conversion to light carriers.
Air units are transferred ashore and one Rufe seaplane fighter unit is increased in size to 24. Still waiting for the Musashi to be completed so I can accelerate
the Shinano (a Taiho class carrier in scen 2) and perhaps another late war carrier. The next fleet carrier to arrive is the Taiho around mid 43. 2 Katsuragi's will then follow on the next few months with the Shinano arriving around end 43 according to plans.
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Oct 28, 42
Night Air Attacks
A few night air attacks from both sides with little result to show for!
Night Air attack on Chittagong , at 55,41
Weather in hex: Thunderstorms
Japanese aircraft
Ki-21-IIa Sally x 17
Allied aircraft
no flights
Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-21-IIa Sally: 1 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
Runway hits 1
Aircraft Attacking:
17 x Ki-21-IIa Sally bombing from 11000 feet *
Airfield Attack: 2 x 250 kg GP Bomb
Raid spotted at 27 NM, estimated altitude 13,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 7 minutes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Air attack on Magwe , at 57,47
Weather in hex: Moderate rain
Allied aircraft
Wellington Ic x 10
Allied aircraft losses
Wellington Ic: 1 damaged
Runway hits 1
Aircraft Attacking:
6 x Wellington Ic bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
4 x Wellington Ic bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
Raid spotted at 47 NM, estimated altitude 12,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 18 minutes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Air attack on Magwe , at 57,47
Weather in hex: Moderate rain
Allied aircraft
Wellington Ic x 12
No Allied losses
Airbase supply hits 1
Aircraft Attacking:
12 x Wellington Ic bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
Raid spotted at 44 NM, estimated altitude 14,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 16 minutes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Air attack on Dacca , at 56,38
Weather in hex: Severe storms
Japanese aircraft
Ki-21-IIa Sally x 20
Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-21-IIa Sally: 1 destroyed, 9 damaged
Aircraft Attacking:
19 x Ki-21-IIa Sally bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 kg GP Bomb
Raid spotted at 24 NM, estimated altitude 14,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 6 minutes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air Combat
Some attacks and sweeps, but nothing major.
Morning Air attack on 46th Indian Brigade, at 60,44
Weather in hex: Clear sky
Raid spotted at 41 NM, estimated altitude 18,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 14 minutes
Japanese aircraft
Ki-43-Ic Oscar x 16
No Japanese losses
Aircraft Attacking:
16 x Ki-43-Ic Oscar sweeping at 15000 feet *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on 46th Indian Brigade, at 60,44
Weather in hex: Clear sky
Raid spotted at 47 NM, estimated altitude 15,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 13 minutes
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 6
Ki-48-IIa Lily x 25
Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-48-IIa Lily: 2 damaged
Allied ground losses:
58 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Aircraft Attacking:
25 x Ki-48-IIa Lily bombing from 11000 feet *
Ground Attack: 2 x 100 kg GP Bomb
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Shwebo , at 59,45
Weather in hex: Light cloud
Raid spotted at 29 NM, estimated altitude 16,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 9 minutes
Allied aircraft
Blenheim IV x 30
Hudson I x 27
Allied aircraft losses
Hudson I: 1 destroyed, 1 damaged
Japanese ground losses:
4 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Airbase hits 4
Airbase supply hits 5
Runway hits 35
Aircraft Attacking:
12 x Hudson I bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 lb GP Bomb
12 x Hudson I bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 lb GP Bomb
3 x Blenheim IV bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 lb GP Bomb
15 x Blenheim IV bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 lb GP Bomb
6 x Blenheim IV bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 lb GP Bomb
3 x Hudson I bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 lb GP Bomb
3 x Blenheim IV bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 lb GP Bomb
3 x Blenheim IV bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 lb GP Bomb
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Shwebo , at 59,45
Weather in hex: Light cloud
Raid spotted at 25 NM, estimated altitude 14,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 8 minutes
Allied aircraft
Blenheim IV x 29
No Allied losses
Airbase hits 1
Airbase supply hits 2
Runway hits 9
Aircraft Attacking:
8 x Blenheim IV bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 lb GP Bomb
9 x Blenheim IV bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 lb GP Bomb
12 x Blenheim IV bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 lb GP Bomb
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Shwebo , at 59,45
Weather in hex: Light cloud
Raid spotted at 15 NM, estimated altitude 21,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 4 minutes
Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 30
P-38G Lightning x 4
No Allied losses
Japanese ground losses:
6 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Airbase hits 2
Airbase supply hits 3
Runway hits 13
Aircraft Attacking:
12 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 15000 feet
Airfield Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
12 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 15000 feet
Airfield Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
6 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 15000 feet
Airfield Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground Combat
We capture only one of the dot bases in India as the other holds a weak construction unit.
I will not follow up to knock it out as all troops dropped here will be lost.
Ground combat at Rangpur (58,34)
Japanese Shock attack
Attacking force 53 troops, 1 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 4
Defending force 0 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 0
Japanese adjusted assault: 5
Allied adjusted defense: 1
Japanese assault odds: 5 to 1 (fort level 3)
Japanese forces CAPTURE Rangpur !!!
Combat modifiers
Attacker: shock(+), leaders(-)
Assaulting units:
3rd Raiding Rgt /1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Tezpur (60,36)
Japanese Shock attack
Attacking force 19 troops, 1 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 3
Defending force 472 troops, 0 guns, 6 vehicles, Assault Value = 1
Japanese adjusted assault: 2
Allied adjusted defense: 5
Japanese assault odds: 1 to 2 (fort level 1)
Combat modifiers
Defender: preparation(-), morale(-), experience(-)
Attacker: shock(+), leaders(-)
Assaulting units:
Yokosuka 1st SNLF /1
Defending units:
1st Bengal Construction Battalion
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower
-
castor troy
- Posts: 14331
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:17 am
- Location: Austria
RE: Monsoon
ORIGINAL: crsutton
ORIGINAL: castor troy
ORIGINAL: PzB
The Jap heavy cruisers are actually worth almost as much as their battleships (except the Furutaka, Aoba class) while being worth only 1/6 in VP.
What they lack in shell weight they make up for in torpedoes, what they lack in armor they make up for in speed.
I have to deny that because in AE with the different naval routines to WITP, the battleships became much more important. And what makes the BBs so much more important than the heavy cruisers (not saying the heavy cruisers would be bad)? The BBs are bomb prove, the CAs aren´t. And I can assure you, my PB4Y and B25C and B25D1 with their 70 lownav crews make short process with every Japanese surface combat ship in range - except the BBs because they are bomb prove. The BBs can only be sunk by torpedoes or other BBs gunfire (ok, you can sink them after hitting them with 300 5inch shells or 100 500lb bombs). I would rate every BB three times more important in AE than in WITP. While heavy cruisers can do a good job too, they´re in trouble if ending up in range of my bombers (17 hexes normal range for the PB4Y Liberator for example) or if they meet BBs of course. Needless to say what happens if they end up in 1000lb bomb range of my 70 skilled SBDs, but the 500lb bomb equipped level and attack bombers on 1000ft naval attack are nothing worse, in fact they seem to be even better when you think about their ability to fly through enemy Cap as if it wouldn´t exist when talking about the USN Liberators.
Yes but unlike WITP night conditions are critical and a cruiser DD TF can eat up a BB TF in low moonlight conditions. I am learning to pay attention to this. You send your BBs out at night with no radar and low moonlight and you can end up eating torpedoes and getting no hits in return. It is more complicated now, but BBs can be defeated. Even PT boats in low moonlight can be very deadly. This is the way it should be as the old BBs on both sides were unsuited for night action due to slow turrets, rate of fire and older fire control systems.
of course BBs can be defeated but... a) none of my Allied BB TFs got no radar, in fact, I guess each of my TF that includes a BB got something like two dozen radar sets and in most times more, very unlikely to be surprised and b) my lownav attacks with medium USAAF and USN heavy bombers are so devastating (even against agile DDs) that I wouldn´t move my heavy cruisers in range of a couple dozen PB4Y if I can´t provide 250 fighters on Cap for them. The BBs at least would survive the bomb hits, the CAs won´t.
In WITP as the Allied player I had nothing comparable to the Betty, in AE, the devs gave me PB4Y Liberators for lownav attacks...
I´m fearing my enemy´s BBs but since I´ve got long range killer bombers I don´t fear his CAs or anything smaller anymore because the chances to move in and out unseen into an area I´m covering with my B-25D1 and PB4Y is like playing Russian roulette. Date is 4/43. And the PB4Y got a normal range of 17 so you can imagine that I´m able to cover quite an area with them, should be very rare to move forward without being in range of these babies. Of course, bad weather could ground them.-
castor troy
- Posts: 14331
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:17 am
- Location: Austria
RE: Monsoon
PzB, hope you don´t mind if I spam your AAR.
Just want to show and warn you about the lethality of Allied lownav attacks, move in range of the bombers and lose ships, that´s the way it is in my PBEM. Of course I´ve spent months for training the crews in lownav attacks (after spending months training navbomb to find out they couldn´t hit anything from 6000-10000ft). Now I´m employing medium USAAF bombers at 1000ft (attack bombers attack at 100ft and drop their FULL bomb load) and USN heavy bombers at 1000ft. The USN bomber numbers are still limited but three or four dozen in one area means muchos trouble for the IJN if the enemy decides to move in range. Fighters? My heavy bombers don´t care about fighters, at least not if they´re "only" facing up to 40-50.
Posting below what has happened just recently in my PBEM, an enemy CL with more than halve a dozen DDs ended up in range of my bombers. Say good bye... the CL and probably five or six DDs were sunk. The combat reports are all from the same day, had three PB4Y and one B-25C squadron in range. The same would have happened to CA because those would be even easier hit than a DD and most bombers would have focussed on the heavy cruisers.
Morning Air attack on TF, near Hollandia at 93,116
Weather in hex: Light cloud
Raid spotted at 49 NM, estimated altitude 4,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 16 minutes
Allied aircraft
B-17F Fortress x 4
PB4Y-1 Liberator x 17
Allied aircraft losses
PB4Y-1 Liberator: 1 destroyed, 11 damaged
Japanese Ships
DD Hatsukaze, Bomb hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
CL Kuma, Bomb hits 4, on fire
DD Takanami
DD Yugumo, Bomb hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
DD Natsushio
Aircraft Attacking:
3 x PB4Y-1 Liberator bombing from 1000 feet
Naval Attack: 5 x 500 lb SAP Bomb
7 x PB4Y-1 Liberator bombing from 1000 feet
Naval Attack: 5 x 500 lb SAP Bomb
7 x PB4Y-1 Liberator bombing from 1000 feet
Naval Attack: 5 x 500 lb SAP Bomb
4 x B-17F Fortress bombing from 10000 feet
Naval Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
----------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Hollandia at 93,116
Weather in hex: Light cloud
Raid spotted at 12 NM, estimated altitude 6,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 3 minutes
Allied aircraft
Mitchell II x 6
Allied aircraft losses
Mitchell II: 2 damaged
Japanese Ships
DD Natsushio, Bomb hits 1, on fire
CL Kuma, Bomb hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
Aircraft Attacking:
6 x Mitchell II bombing from 1000 feet
Naval Attack: 3 x 500 lb SAP Bomb
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Hollandia at 93,116
Weather in hex: Thunderstorms
Raid spotted at 43 NM, estimated altitude 4,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 14 minutes
Allied aircraft
Mitchell II x 11
PB4Y-1 Liberator x 20
Allied aircraft losses
Mitchell II: 3 damaged
PB4Y-1 Liberator: 7 damaged
Japanese Ships
DD Takanami, Bomb hits 1, on fire
DD Natsushio, Bomb hits 4, heavy fires, heavy damage
CL Kuma, Bomb hits 5, heavy fires, heavy damage
DD Tokitsukaze, Bomb hits 4, heavy fires, heavy damage
Aircraft Attacking:
7 x PB4Y-1 Liberator bombing from 1000 feet
Naval Attack: 5 x 500 lb SAP Bomb
7 x PB4Y-1 Liberator bombing from 1000 feet
Naval Attack: 5 x 500 lb SAP Bomb
6 x PB4Y-1 Liberator bombing from 1000 feet
Naval Attack: 5 x 500 lb SAP Bomb
11 x Mitchell II bombing from 1000 feet
Naval Attack: 3 x 500 lb SAP Bomb
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just want to show and warn you about the lethality of Allied lownav attacks, move in range of the bombers and lose ships, that´s the way it is in my PBEM. Of course I´ve spent months for training the crews in lownav attacks (after spending months training navbomb to find out they couldn´t hit anything from 6000-10000ft). Now I´m employing medium USAAF bombers at 1000ft (attack bombers attack at 100ft and drop their FULL bomb load) and USN heavy bombers at 1000ft. The USN bomber numbers are still limited but three or four dozen in one area means muchos trouble for the IJN if the enemy decides to move in range. Fighters? My heavy bombers don´t care about fighters, at least not if they´re "only" facing up to 40-50.
Posting below what has happened just recently in my PBEM, an enemy CL with more than halve a dozen DDs ended up in range of my bombers. Say good bye... the CL and probably five or six DDs were sunk. The combat reports are all from the same day, had three PB4Y and one B-25C squadron in range. The same would have happened to CA because those would be even easier hit than a DD and most bombers would have focussed on the heavy cruisers.
Morning Air attack on TF, near Hollandia at 93,116
Weather in hex: Light cloud
Raid spotted at 49 NM, estimated altitude 4,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 16 minutes
Allied aircraft
B-17F Fortress x 4
PB4Y-1 Liberator x 17
Allied aircraft losses
PB4Y-1 Liberator: 1 destroyed, 11 damaged
Japanese Ships
DD Hatsukaze, Bomb hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
CL Kuma, Bomb hits 4, on fire
DD Takanami
DD Yugumo, Bomb hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
DD Natsushio
Aircraft Attacking:
3 x PB4Y-1 Liberator bombing from 1000 feet
Naval Attack: 5 x 500 lb SAP Bomb
7 x PB4Y-1 Liberator bombing from 1000 feet
Naval Attack: 5 x 500 lb SAP Bomb
7 x PB4Y-1 Liberator bombing from 1000 feet
Naval Attack: 5 x 500 lb SAP Bomb
4 x B-17F Fortress bombing from 10000 feet
Naval Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
----------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Hollandia at 93,116
Weather in hex: Light cloud
Raid spotted at 12 NM, estimated altitude 6,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 3 minutes
Allied aircraft
Mitchell II x 6
Allied aircraft losses
Mitchell II: 2 damaged
Japanese Ships
DD Natsushio, Bomb hits 1, on fire
CL Kuma, Bomb hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
Aircraft Attacking:
6 x Mitchell II bombing from 1000 feet
Naval Attack: 3 x 500 lb SAP Bomb
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Hollandia at 93,116
Weather in hex: Thunderstorms
Raid spotted at 43 NM, estimated altitude 4,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 14 minutes
Allied aircraft
Mitchell II x 11
PB4Y-1 Liberator x 20
Allied aircraft losses
Mitchell II: 3 damaged
PB4Y-1 Liberator: 7 damaged
Japanese Ships
DD Takanami, Bomb hits 1, on fire
DD Natsushio, Bomb hits 4, heavy fires, heavy damage
CL Kuma, Bomb hits 5, heavy fires, heavy damage
DD Tokitsukaze, Bomb hits 4, heavy fires, heavy damage
Aircraft Attacking:
7 x PB4Y-1 Liberator bombing from 1000 feet
Naval Attack: 5 x 500 lb SAP Bomb
7 x PB4Y-1 Liberator bombing from 1000 feet
Naval Attack: 5 x 500 lb SAP Bomb
6 x PB4Y-1 Liberator bombing from 1000 feet
Naval Attack: 5 x 500 lb SAP Bomb
11 x Mitchell II bombing from 1000 feet
Naval Attack: 3 x 500 lb SAP Bomb
------------------------------------------------------------------------