Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
Mike Solli
Posts: 15943
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2000 8:00 am
Location: the flight deck of the Zuikaku

RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464

Post by Mike Solli »

Pax, make sure you run a test turn to see what mistakes you may have made. I ended up making about a dozen changes. Most were minor but my major invasion base in the Philippines is now changed from Lingayan to San Fernando.
Image
Created by the amazing Dixie
User avatar
PaxMondo
Posts: 10337
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:23 pm

RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464

Post by PaxMondo »

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Pax, make sure you run a test turn to see what mistakes you may have made. I ended up making about a dozen changes. Most were minor but my major invasion base in the Philippines is now changed from Lingayan to San Fernando.
That's where I am now, testing all of my sea moves and bombing. Made the same change. The AB starts more developed, a big deal, and still on the rail line.

Then I have to load my factories and set my training groups. I always do those last in case I need a unit to support an attack that comes out of my testing. I'm doing a number of different things in China this time ...
Pax
User avatar
Mike Solli
Posts: 15943
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2000 8:00 am
Location: the flight deck of the Zuikaku

RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464

Post by Mike Solli »

I'm doing quite a bit differently as well. I think the biggest change is sending Kaga into the SRA. It'll move to Cam Ranh Bay on 7 Dec. The Ryujo will move to Takao on 7 Dec and convert to 30 Zeros on 8 Dec. Eventually, "mini" KB will have 86 Zeros, 27 Vals and 72 Kates. Very nice. It should hasten my advances there. I'm also going for Mersing. If that goes well, Ted should have no more than 400 AV to defend Singapore. The rest will be trapped north of Singapore. I'll take more merchant casualties but in the long run, it'll allow the capture of Singapore much more quickly.
Image
Created by the amazing Dixie
User avatar
PaxMondo
Posts: 10337
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:23 pm

RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464

Post by PaxMondo »

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

... I'm also going for Mersing. If that goes well, Ted should have no more than 400 AV to defend Singapore. The rest will be trapped north of Singapore. I'll take more merchant casualties but in the long run, it'll allow the capture of Singapore much more quickly.
I'll be watching this with interest ... I run about 2:3 (67%) successful on this ... 1/3 of the time those dang stringers get to me as I can't get enough cover. But, if you have Kaga there .... maybe enough. So, I'm gonna be watching this with interest to see how it plays out.
Pax
User avatar
Mike Solli
Posts: 15943
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2000 8:00 am
Location: the flight deck of the Zuikaku

RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464

Post by Mike Solli »

I ended up using the Yamada det Zeros as LRCAP. They tear up the Brits. I expect Force Z to run. for Java. If they head NE, they die. Ted likes to keep it as a force in being to torment me (and I agree with that concept). I do the same with KB. Most of the time it's sitting in port somewhere out of sight. If I guess right, it can be in position to trash whatever comes after me. I rarely send it against the Brits. Then it's too far out of position.

I'm really curious to see what Kaga does. I'll keep her out of sight (if I can) until I can catch Force Z or the US cruisers.
Image
Created by the amazing Dixie
User avatar
Mike Solli
Posts: 15943
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2000 8:00 am
Location: the flight deck of the Zuikaku

RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464

Post by Mike Solli »

I was curious to see what the 5 CVs do against Pearl. I ran a test twice. Once it did basically nothing but lost only 1 Val. The second time it sank 2 BBs, heavily damaged 5 more and the last had moderate damage for the loss of 2 Kates. Both times it sank 2-3 DD/CLs. Curious that so few planes were lost.
Image
Created by the amazing Dixie
User avatar
PaxMondo
Posts: 10337
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:23 pm

RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464

Post by PaxMondo »

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

I was curious to see what the 5 CVs do against Pearl. I ran a test twice. Once it did basically nothing but lost only 1 Val. The second time it sank 2 BBs, heavily damaged 5 more and the last had moderate damage for the loss of 2 Kates. Both times it sank 2-3 DD/CLs. Curious that so few planes were lost.
I suspect this will not matter much. Face it, so much variablity in the results. Yeah, your top end is going to be lower, but I suspect the median isn't going to change much. Will you stay a 2nd/3rd day?
Pax
User avatar
Mike Solli
Posts: 15943
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2000 8:00 am
Location: the flight deck of the Zuikaku

RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464

Post by Mike Solli »

I'm moving this over to the "real" AAR. [:D]
Image
Created by the amazing Dixie
User avatar
PaxMondo
Posts: 10337
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:23 pm

RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464

Post by PaxMondo »

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

I'm moving this over to the "real" AAR. [:D]
Until our next "secret" planning session!
[:'(]
Pax
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”