Page 2 of 3
RE: Red Thunder II 1988
Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2019 8:47 pm
by larryfulkerson
ORIGINAL: mdanz
WTF happened to the navy?
Yikes..
My R&D department succeeded in building a particle beam weapon that can kill whatever it can see ( straight line-of-sight ). There's a small tank of H2, hydrogen molecules, that feeds the reactor, where the molecules are accellerated by strong magnetic fields and released to the rifle barrel all at once where there's a loud boom as the slug of particles break the sonic barrier as they leave the barrel and about half a second later the target vaporises in a cloud of smoke. The machine is really heavy so we deployed it on a ship up high in the tower so it could see further out to the horizon and theoretically there's no range limitation and the only requirement is a direct line-of-sight to the target. The most expensive parts of the machine is the superconducting magnets. They are made of a propritary mix of metals and ceramics to pack as many atoms as close together as possible to better conduct the magnitic field. It's so powerful a magnet that none of the crew is allowed to wear anything metal, can't have any fillings in their teeth, and metal objects in the room are stowed away before it's turned on. We learned that by hard experience. Oh, and the crew of the ship wanted me to thank you for the target practice.
RE: Red Thunder II 1988
Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2019 9:46 pm
by mdanz
I see..
Didn't know about that
RE: Red Thunder II 1988
Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2019 6:45 am
by larryfulkerson
This is what the battlefield looks like at the end of Matt's turn. He gained a few hexes with his attacks but he was mostly contained.

RE: Red Thunder II 1988
Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2019 9:58 am
by larryfulkerson
Here's the middle of the action and I've been using three-dot attacks and most of my units are red and shouldn't be used in combat this turn. I'm moving the red ones to the rear for refit and trying to find some non-red units to man the front lines. My aircraft are worn down and most are yellow in health. I'm surprised to find my special forces guys are still alive and blocking a major bridge over the river. I'm wondering why my opponent is permitting that unit to stay there. I just opened this turn and haven't moved anybody yet so this is the situation I'm dealing with. I have no plans to try to punch a hole in his lines this turn. Mostly I'm going to rest the red units and see if I can't do something about the weak spots and hold what I have this turn.

RE: Red Thunder II 1988
Posted: Thu Feb 07, 2019 11:19 am
by larryfulkerson
Here's the positions of the units in T7. Matt has been moving his units to the east and he's gained a hex or two in his turn. He got a lot of reinforcements recently and they are starting to show up on the front lines. Resistance has increased a lot and my advance has stopped where it is.

RE: Red Thunder II 1988
Posted: Thu Feb 07, 2019 9:01 pm
by MikeJ19
Larry,
Well done. The WP did not get this far West in my battle. You need to be destroying NATO units. Have fun
RE: Red Thunder II 1988
Posted: Sun Feb 10, 2019 12:26 pm
by larryfulkerson
This is the supply levels and it's too low to conduct a war. I'm going to have to wait until the supply is better before I do my big push.

RE: Red Thunder II 1988
Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2019 11:59 am
by larryfulkerson
This is the front lines in T10. Both sides are shooting and pushing and shoving and neither side is making much progress.

RE: Red Thunder II 1988
Posted: Thu Mar 07, 2019 9:44 am
by larryfulkerson
This is the situation at the beginning of T11.I'm not sure what to do so lemme think about it some more. I need to do a map study and take a look around and see if I can find some weak spot somewhere.

RE: Red Thunder II 1988
Posted: Thu Mar 07, 2019 11:12 pm
by MikeJ19
Hi Guys,
Looks like an interesting battle. I like how Matt is attacking in the South. He has also done well in taking out bridges.
Larry, what is your supply situation like? It is a limited sample size, but I think that WP supply is often set too low... It is really difficult to conduct offensive operations in a limited time frame with poor supply.
Have fun!
RE: Red Thunder II 1988
Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2019 4:57 am
by larryfulkerson
Here's the front lines in T12 and Matt is doing a good job of holding back my troops. I've been making multiple attacks each turn and it's like I'm beating my head against the wall. My losses are mounting. There were no reinforcements this turn. I'm trying to use a "broadfront" approach and I'm wondering if I should try to use a probing finger approach instead. Concentrate in just one area and push hard just there. Strip the front lines in other areas for the manpower to use in the point of the spear.

RE: Red Thunder II 1988
Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2019 5:02 am
by larryfulkerson
ORIGINAL: MikeJ19
Hi Guys,
Looks like an interesting battle. I like how Matt is attacking in the South. He has also done well in taking out bridges.
Larry, what is your supply situation like? It is a limited sample size, but I think that WP supply is often set too low... It is really difficult to conduct offensive operations in a limited time frame with poor supply.
Have fun!
As you can see for yourself, I'm running into areas in the single digits for supply and that's not going to work. I'm going to have to stop all the pushing and shoving and I may have to back up even. The supply levels are just too low to get serious about trying to conduct operations.

RE: Red Thunder II 1988
Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2019 2:53 am
by larryfulkerson
Here's what it looks like just after the combat replay ends. A lot of the Allied units pulled back and there was a lot of rearrangement that happened so I'm assuming that Matt is rotating his units as is possible. I need to bring the engineers up to the front to fix the bridges so the supply can flow across the river because I plan on pushing to the west as long as the supply levels will support it.

RE: Red Thunder II 1988
Posted: Wed Mar 20, 2019 7:43 pm
by larryfulkerson
It's T14 and this is what it looks like just after the Allied combat replay. I've got to see if I can take advantage of this somehow.

RE: Red Thunder II 1988
Posted: Wed Mar 27, 2019 10:37 pm
by larryfulkerson
This is what the face of war looks like in the middle of the battlefield and I'm pushing and shoving to see if I can make some small progress somewhere. My guys are tired and low on supply and lots of them are red and need a refit. I think I'll give my guys a day off to get them in a little bit better shape. I repaired a briddge in my backfield so I expect the supply level to rise a tiny bit on the front lines.

RE: Red Thunder II 1988
Posted: Sun Mar 31, 2019 9:13 pm
by larryfulkerson
I've largely cleared out the southern route and that will allow me to push and shove down south to try a thrust to the west down there may threaten his units and cause them to pull back.

RE: Red Thunder II 1988
Posted: Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:08 pm
by iwolfhound
Strange question: Can I get the status of the F111s out of England?
RE: Red Thunder II 1988
Posted: Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:10 pm
by larryfulkerson
Hey there iwolfhound dude:
I'm the Soviet player and I don't have access to that info but you
could interrogate Matt about it.
RE: Red Thunder II 1988
Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2019 8:31 pm
by mdanz
Hi iwolf,
I haven't been looking at these lately so I just saw the post. Here's the info you wanted. The airfields are marked as 'NATO off map airfields', that's probably England which is not on the map.
so far they look like this,
12th USAF
27th TFW 17/54 (that's over half clearly. Mostly attacking bridges, Soviet river crossings and interdiction)
366th TFW 49/54 (same missions for the most part but are fairing much better for some reason. Don't know why)
Hope that answers your question,
Have a good day
RE: Red Thunder II 1988
Posted: Mon Apr 15, 2019 10:56 pm
by larryfulkerson
Open letter to Matt:
I'm sorry my friend, I hate to abandon games but I'm having real world health issues
and I need more bed rest. My Blood Pressure is 175 / 111 and I need to rest a lot.
If it doesn't go down today I'm thinking of presenting at an OR. Preferably the
VA OR. I'll keep you all in my loop.