Page 8 of 8
RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon
Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2018 4:58 am
by devoncop
ORIGINAL: ChuckBerger
Am I reading this right, have you lost 3 cruisers and something like 27 destroyers?? Axis air power was not capable of this kind of effectiveness at this point in the war. I wonder about naval power in this game, between this AAR and Warspite's AAR on the desert campaign, it seems naval/air and naval/ground interactions are substantially out of whack.
and
I would not be so sure about things being out of kilter. As Warspites opponent in the CFNA I can't see his AAR for obvious reasons so don't know what his views are but the damage my ground troops took from his naval bombardments were my own fault for not utilising the Luftwaffe properly early enough. This was my first campaign playing TOAW IV and I am making a lot of mistakes.
The eventual effectiveness of the JU87s seems to have negated the naval power v land forces issue in our game. A post mortem will no doubt discuss whether it would have been possible for Warspite to protect his fleet differently but I would not judge the game mechanics on the experience of 2 novice players.
As far as this scenario is concerned do the allies have all available fighters and fighter bombers on air superiority missions to maximise Luftwaffe losses? Also having ships away from mutually supporting stacks ...particularly smaller destroyers makes them much more vulnerable. When I tried a second hard strike against stacks containing battleships and heavy cruisers I had much less success.
RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon
Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2018 6:49 am
by warspite1
ORIGINAL: devoncop
ORIGINAL: ChuckBerger
Am I reading this right, have you lost 3 cruisers and something like 27 destroyers?? Axis air power was not capable of this kind of effectiveness at this point in the war. I wonder about naval power in this game, between this AAR and Warspite's AAR on the desert campaign, it seems naval/air and naval/ground interactions are substantially out of whack.
and
I would not be so sure about things being out of kilter. As Warspites opponent in the CFNA I can't see his AAR for obvious reasons so don't know what his views are but the damage my ground troops took from his naval bombardments were my own fault for not utilising the Luftwaffe properly early enough. This was my first campaign playing TOAW IV and I am making a lot of mistakes.
The eventual effectiveness of the JU87s seems to have negated the naval power v land forces issue in our game. A post mortem will no doubt discuss whether it would have been possible for Warspite to protect his fleet differently but I would not judge the game mechanics on the experience of 2 novice players.
As far as this scenario is concerned do the allies have all available fighters and fighter bombers on air superiority missions to maximise Luftwaffe losses? Also having ships away from mutually supporting stacks ...particularly smaller destroyers makes them much more vulnerable. When I tried a second hard strike against stacks containing battleships and heavy cruisers I had much less success.
warspite1
The way that the AI was attacking and then devoncop initially, seemed to suggest the RN were impervious and could roam the coastline at will. With the use of the right aircraft (I'm not sure what, if anything else has changed) the position of the RN is completely different. They simply can't afford to stay at sea or they will be liable to get sunk or damaged.
As my opponent says, we are a couple of novices at TOAW so I wouldn't draw too many definitive conclusions from our game - but the initial fear about the RN being too powerful is wrong [;)]
RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon
Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2018 7:38 am
by tverse
ORIGINAL: ChuckBerger
Am I reading this right, have you lost 3 cruisers and something like 27 destroyers?? Axis air power was not capable of this kind of effectiveness at this point in the war. I wonder about naval power in this game, between this AAR and Warspite's AAR on the desert campaign, it seems naval/air and naval/ground interactions are substantially out of whack.
I can’t really say if the naval power is out of whack or not. All I can say is that I have left the air assist on for the whole game in an effort to simulate the lack of coordination between land and air forces. However, in the naval losses several of those posted did have allied air support I just did not always show it. I know that does not address the effectiveness of axis air power.
RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon
Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2018 11:28 am
by tverse
AM – July 29, 1943 (T40)
Overview.
CCB/2nd Arm – Unfortunately these units have picked a poor time to reorganize
and they cannot be moved out of the way to bring in other troops.
Patton is irate to have his advance slowed down.

RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon
Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2018 12:40 pm
by devoncop
You are still ahead of schedule so Patton looking down (or up) wherever he is now ...would be happy.
The air assistant is lethally bad imo. Both myself and Warspite noticed it would routinely change aircraft assignments each turn with no logic. If nothing else it should be prioritising air superiority with your Navy active over and interdiction as the Axis are barely moving.
RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon
Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2018 12:52 pm
by tverse
ORIGINAL: devoncop
You are still ahead of schedule so Patton looking down (or up) wherever he is now ...would be happy.
The air assistant is lethally bad imo. Both myself and Warspite noticed it would routinely change aircraft assignments each turn with no logic. If nothing else it should be prioritising air superiority with your Navy active over and interdiction as the Axis are barely moving.
The Air assistant does have some questionable assignments...I've had it rest perfectly healthy units when I could have used them, but as I said early I choose not to use it as a simulation of history. It does however interdict as the Axis try to withdraw.
RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon
Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2018 12:55 pm
by tverse
PM – August 1, 1943 (T47)
US Army Takes Messina.
After several days of “knock down drag out” fighting all of Sicily is now Allied territory.
Note: I did hold the CW units back to allow Patton his minor victory

RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon
Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2018 12:56 pm
by tverse
Conclusion

RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon
Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2018 12:57 pm
by tverse
A Final Thought from the Author of the Book.
This ends the AAR . I hope you enjoyed the approach which was more about the story than about how well I played the scenario.
Thanks for viewing.

RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon
Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2018 12:25 pm
by Curtis Lemay
ORIGINAL: ChuckBerger
Am I reading this right, have you lost 3 cruisers and something like 27 destroyers?? Axis air power was not capable of this kind of effectiveness at this point in the war. I wonder about naval power in this game, between this AAR and Warspite's AAR on the desert campaign, it seems naval/air and naval/ground interactions are substantially out of whack.
This scenario probably has never had its Naval AD adjusted yet.
Nevertheless, it is a
wargame: Players can make completely different choices with their forces than the historical participants.
RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon
Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2018 2:45 pm
by tverse
ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
ORIGINAL: ChuckBerger
Am I reading this right, have you lost 3 cruisers and something like 27 destroyers?? Axis air power was not capable of this kind of effectiveness at this point in the war. I wonder about naval power in this game, between this AAR and Warspite's AAR on the desert campaign, it seems naval/air and naval/ground interactions are substantially out of whack.
This scenario probably has never had its Naval AD adjusted yet.
Nevertheless, it is a
wargame: Players can make completely different choices with their forces than the historical participants.
You might be right about the Naval not adjusted yet. Here is a picture of my total naval losses at the end.

RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon
Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2018 3:25 pm
by devoncop
Many thanks for this fascinating AAR/history lesson !
Really enjoyed following it.
Ian
RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon
Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2018 12:12 pm
by tverse
ORIGINAL: devoncop
Many thanks for this fascinating AAR/history lesson !
Really enjoyed following it.
Ian
Glad to hear it.
RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon
Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2018 6:36 pm
by Nicholas Bell
Thanks for the great AAR. Nice job integrating actual history. It's been my lunchtime reading as of late.
RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon
Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2018 6:15 am
by cpt flam
Thank a lot for your work!
RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon
Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2018 8:45 pm
by MikeJ19
Great job and thanks for the history lesson. What are you doing next?
RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon
Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2018 9:07 pm
by tverse
ORIGINAL: MikeJ19
Great job and thanks for the history lesson. What are you doing next?
Right now I’m just playing a few different scenarios for grins. Not sure what I’ll do next.
I’m just glad some folks enjoyed the review. This style is not for everyone....but that is what’s nice about forums. ...the variety.
RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon
Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2018 9:35 pm
by MikeJ19
Have fun. I agree it is very nice seeing the different approaches to the battles and the reports.
RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon
Posted: Wed Feb 14, 2018 12:56 am
by gwgardner
One of the most entertaining and informative AARs I've ever read. Thanks.