Cohen vs Enrico - AAR nr. 5

Post descriptions of your brilliant successes and unfortunate demises.

Moderator: Shannon V. OKeets

AlbertN
Posts: 4291
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2010 3:44 pm
Location: Italy

RE: Cohen vs Enrico - AAR nr. 5

Post by AlbertN »

Samarkand has no printed factory.
Tashkent - yes it is Axis already since the end of May / June 1943.
AlbertN
Posts: 4291
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2010 3:44 pm
Location: Italy

RE: Cohen vs Enrico - AAR nr. 5

Post by AlbertN »

Nov / Dec 1943 - Bismark Sea

The Japanese in the end opted to sail into Bismark Sea with the whole of their battle force - placed in the 3 Box where some land based planes can come to assist as well to not be in a totally unfair inferiority against the potential US reaction.

In the while the minor task force of the USN - composed by 4 CVL and 3 CA - got mauled severely at no loss for the Japanese.

1 CVL sunk, 1 CVL damage, 2 CA sunk, 1 CA damaged, and 4 CVP (albeit of the "1" size) got shot down (2 of them with pilot).

What the US will do next is another tale though.
Decisive naval battle or convoy interdiction? (And port strikes all around?)

Image
Attachments
Bismark.jpg
Bismark.jpg (437.63 KiB) Viewed 623 times
User avatar
Centuur
Posts: 9094
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 12:03 pm
Location: Hoorn (NED).

RE: Cohen vs Enrico - AAR nr. 5

Post by Centuur »

If the USSR is gone, Germany should start sending over as many resources to the Japanese as the Japanese need to get back to full production. Start sending the German NAV's, an HQ and long range FTR3 to Vladivostok to aid the Japanese convoy line from Vlad to Japan in the defense against the US. The units now around Novosibirsk should continue eastwards towards Manchuria and from there into China to free up Japanese units from garrison duties. If that is done, things won't be so easy for the US to defeat the Japanese anymore...
Peter
AlbertN
Posts: 4291
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2010 3:44 pm
Location: Italy

RE: Cohen vs Enrico - AAR nr. 5

Post by AlbertN »

Nov / Dec 1943 - Decisive Battle in the Pacific:

The US has done a potential mistake to move in for the kill in splitted groups meanwhile Japanese is packed.
In the US turn though no side has found each other.

In the Japanese turn 2 more FTR at 6 air factor fly in from their bases (they'd not have gotten to the 3 box in the reaction) and the 2 CPs and cruiser in the 0 box are relocated (to deny the CP bonus to the search for US).

The US have the Corsair which could get to the 2 Box - and the other NAV which can go in the 1 box with reaction (or wait and get to the 3 box in the next US impulse).

Now it will be all own to the luck of the dice - but if the Japanese finds and the USA do not, it will be trouble for them as I plan to pick on the smaller carrier TF in the 3 box - which also have only 1 CA as escort. Surface combat will be very tasty in that case.

Funnily enough the US forgot to bring in another Essex carrier that is sitting down in a port right now.


Image
Attachments
Pacific.jpg
Pacific.jpg (385.14 KiB) Viewed 623 times
AlbertN
Posts: 4291
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2010 3:44 pm
Location: Italy

RE: Cohen vs Enrico - AAR nr. 5

Post by AlbertN »

Nov / Dec 1943 - Decisive Naval Battle in the Pacific

The draw of luck favored the US.
With their Mariner having flown at the 1 box, the US found with everything except their AirCobra - rolling a 2.
Japan rolled 7.

That neated the US 4 Surprise Points - which got spent for a +1 / -1 in the Air Battle. That brought the odds to 0 to 0, whereas any plane with at least 4 of air to air rating got used as fighter.

The first two rounds got rather inconclusive, with fighters watching each other and bombers getting through.
That was starting poorly for the Japanese, because they have less AA and less armoured carriers.

But the Lady Luck kissed the Japanese that started to abort the Corsair first and the 7 strong US fighter.
From there onward it has been a slow downfall for the US - fighting in the air at -1, -3, -1 again, -2 and -3 til the bitter end when they touched -4.

Though enough US bombers went through - 5 of them. Japan lucked with their AA (Highest of 3) rolling a 9.
One old CVP got blasted away and 4 more bombing points got denied.
The US, despite having a nice AA only achieved a grandtotal of 3 points scored rolling 5 dices.

The final result was 3X on the Japanese. The first carrier to go was the one where the 7 Air factor fighter landed - Tahio. I gave that for dead, since it would have taken 2 X results at worst.
It failed the very first roll. Blub.
I pick a random light cruiser to be sank.
US picks Shinano, where possibly wrongly I landed with 2 6 strong FTRs. Shinano passes its save and is damaged.

Japan nailed in 4 X and 3 D, a good result to be, plus 2 A.
Similar to the US targetting, Japan elects an Essex class carrier with the 7 strong FTR - which passes its save.
US has a submarine - it passes the save.
Next is another Essex class carrier with a 6/3 strong fighter bomber; it passes the save.
The US elects to finish the submarine as 4th X.
Out of the 3 D, I get to pick 2 - which means for me to hit the 2 damaged carriers. One sinks, the other is just aborted.
US damages one of its Heavy Cruisers.

US elects to flee from the sea, having lost the Corsair - and among the aborted another carrier with a 6 strong fighter.

Ultimately a Japanese tactical victory (accounting the CVL and CAs destroyed as part of the bait) but in the strategical standpoint does not really alter the carrier balance as both sides lost 1 fleet carrier only.

Image
Attachments
Destroyed.jpg
Destroyed.jpg (48.16 KiB) Viewed 623 times
brian brian
Posts: 3191
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 6:39 pm

RE: Cohen vs Enrico - AAR nr. 5

Post by brian brian »

"Blub" is the best word to use playing World in Flames - probably in any language?
AlbertN
Posts: 4291
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2010 3:44 pm
Location: Italy

RE: Cohen vs Enrico - AAR nr. 5

Post by AlbertN »

And this game too came to its end.

We reached the 1st impulse of Jan / Feb 1944 - where little happened (Japan lost a TRS and a MAR as they were trying to evacuate Efate and other islands from the Coral Sea) - but as the game would progress ultimately we realized in Europe little would happen because of how strong the Axis defences turned out to be.

Japan could suffer but is still very strong navy wise and with German BPs poured in to an extent the "limiting" factor would be just the inferior pieces to the US ones.
The US got 4 brand new carriers (well one was a rebuilt old carrier with 4 quality, and 3 Essex carriers) - and got 3 * 7 air factor carrier air onboard too. Probably in this turn they'd have gone to restock their carriers with the planes they were missing after the major battle of the previous turn.

By March April '44 they'd have got their carriers back to an operational level around in the Pacific with even more punch than before - but the whole European zone was stale except some strategic bombing and submarine strikes (which the Germans performed the last impulse of '43 - sinking 6 CPs).



User avatar
jzardos
Posts: 677
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2011 1:05 pm

RE: Cohen vs Enrico - AAR nr. 5

Post by jzardos »

Well done Cohen and nice AAR. You really wrecked the Axis player all game. Do you think Enrico would want to play me? I'm looking for a novice allied player as I'm basically a noob at the game, axis or allies. Just impossible to find opponent to play online (hotseat and screen share as netplay still seems a work in progress).

thanks
Jason
AlbertN
Posts: 4291
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2010 3:44 pm
Location: Italy

RE: Cohen vs Enrico - AAR nr. 5

Post by AlbertN »

Enrico tends to be quite short of time - and we started a new game where he's trying new "strategies" to various degrees of success.

Given I can ask him if you can get on skype together and arrange something, who knows.
User avatar
abulbulian
Posts: 1107
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 5:42 pm

RE: Cohen vs Enrico - AAR nr. 5

Post by abulbulian »

nice AAR
- Beta Tester WitE and ATG
- Alpha/Beta Tester WitW and WitE2

"Invincibility lies in the defence; the possibility of victory in the attack." - Sun Tzu
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Report”