A Competitive GW (Solo) Scenario by the Numbers.

Post descriptions of your brilliant successes and unfortunate demises.

Moderator: Shannon V. OKeets

User avatar
rkr1958
Posts: 31855
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 10:23 am

Re: A Competitive GW (Solo) Scenario by the Numbers.

Post by rkr1958 »

Turn 22. Mar/Apr 1943. Allied #1. Allied Command.

Weather & Actions Matrix.
01-AL-Weather-Action-Matrix.png
01-AL-Weather-Action-Matrix.png (24.72 KiB) Viewed 50 times
Current Allied CP Lines & Production.
01-AL-Active-CP-0.png
01-AL-Active-CP-0.png (99.94 KiB) Viewed 50 times
01-AL-Production-0.png
01-AL-Production-0.png (138.33 KiB) Viewed 50 times
U-boat/Sub Threats
01-AL-Sub-Threat.png
01-AL-Sub-Threat.png (37.26 KiB) Viewed 50 times
Ronnie
User avatar
rkr1958
Posts: 31855
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 10:23 am

Re: A Competitive GW (Solo) Scenario by the Numbers.

Post by rkr1958 »

Turn 22. Mar/Apr 1943. Allied #1. Allied Command.

Actions (Revision).

(1) Action revision for the CW who will take a combine & not a land.
(2) This revision comes after the Western Allies spot a 50/50 high risk/high gain opportunity to really shake things up against Germany.
(3) If successful, will be (should eventually be) a major blow against Germany.
(4) If it fails, then while painful (11 BPs, 1 mar corps, 2 mar divs lost) won't/shouldn't change the strategic situation vs Germany vs not trying this mission.
(5) Will the planned mission be this counterfactual's Dieppe?
(6) Or will it be possibly the end of the beginning for Germany & a major assist to the Soviets fighting on the Eastern Front?
01-AL-Weather-Action-Matrix-revision.png
01-AL-Weather-Action-Matrix-revision.png (21.6 KiB) Viewed 46 times
Ronnie
User avatar
rkr1958
Posts: 31855
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 10:23 am

Re: A Competitive GW (Solo) Scenario by the Numbers.

Post by rkr1958 »

u]Turn 22. Mar/Apr 1943. Allied #1. Eastern Front.[/u]

Baltic Sea.
(1) USSR use their 1 NM to move 2 BBs from Leningrad to Baltic Sea[3] hoping to find & sink/abort 4 unescorted German CPs.
(2) Soviet BB miss finding & once again unescorted/under protected German convoys in the Baltic escape detection.
01-AL-Eastern-Baltic-NC-1.png
01-AL-Eastern-Baltic-NC-1.png (1.29 MiB) Viewed 35 times
Ronnie
User avatar
rkr1958
Posts: 31855
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 10:23 am

Re: A Competitive GW (Solo) Scenario by the Numbers.

Post by rkr1958 »

u]Turn 22. Mar/Apr 1943. Allied #1. Asian/Pacific Theater.[/u]

USN Strategic Bombing Raids.
01-AL-Asian-Strat-CLi.png
01-AL-Asian-Strat-CLi.png (21.7 KiB) Viewed 33 times
01-AL-Asian-Strat-1-Shanghai.png
01-AL-Asian-Strat-1-Shanghai.png (413.53 KiB) Viewed 33 times
01-AL-Asian-Strat-2-Canton.png
01-AL-Asian-Strat-2-Canton.png (333.3 KiB) Viewed 33 times
Ronnie
User avatar
rkr1958
Posts: 31855
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 10:23 am

Re: A Competitive GW (Solo) Scenario by the Numbers.

Post by rkr1958 »

u]Turn 22. Mar/Apr 1943. Allied #1. Asian/Pacific Theater.[/u]

Ground Strikes.
01-AL-Asian-GSTK-CL.png
01-AL-Asian-GSTK-CL.png (17.89 KiB) Viewed 32 times
01-AL-Asian-GSTK-1-NW1-Pusan.png
01-AL-Asian-GSTK-1-NW1-Pusan.png (426.4 KiB) Viewed 32 times
01-AL-Asian-GSTK-2-Canton.png
01-AL-Asian-GSTK-2-Canton.png (344.95 KiB) Viewed 32 times
01-AL-Asian-GSTK-3-Haichow.png
01-AL-Asian-GSTK-3-Haichow.png (416.55 KiB) Viewed 32 times
Ronnie
User avatar
rkr1958
Posts: 31855
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 10:23 am

Re: A Competitive GW (Solo) Scenario by the Numbers.

Post by rkr1958 »

Turn 22. Mar/Apr 1943. Allied #1. Western Front.

Amphibious Invasion. Kiel, Germany.

(1) Germany has left northern Germany ungarrisoned.
(2) The Western Allies Joint Chiefs approve of a high risk/high reward amphibious invasion to seize the undefended port city of Kiel, Germany.
(3) If successful, this invasion would immediately open a path to the heart of Germany, take significant pressure off the Soviets on the Eastern Front and significantly shorten the war.
(4) The risk is the total loss of the invasion force (UK mar corps, div & US mot corps = 12 BPs); but more significantly, revealing this vulnerability to the Germans who could immediately address it.
(5) A major impediment is the lack of offensive shore bombardment support due to three primary issues:
(a) surprise invasion required CW to take a combine, use both naval moves to position troops in the [4] box for the invasion & leaving no naval moves from moving BBs for shore bombardment
(b) even with move(s) available, RN BBs would only be able to reach North Sea[2] which would reduce each BB's shore bombardment factors by 2,
(c) most USN BBs in the Pacific & not available.
(6) RN NM 1/2. TRS w/Royal Mar. Liverpool ->Hull (French Amph Gp. Southampton -> North Sea[4], embarks Royal Mar for invasion).
(7) RN NM 2/2. 2 RN CAs to North Sea[4], embarks UK & USN CBs Eng mar divs.
01-AL-Western-North-Sea-Inv-TF.png
01-AL-Western-North-Sea-Inv-TF.png (2.37 MiB) Viewed 7 times
Ronnie
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Report”