Page 14 of 15
RE: Historiker (J) vs. USS America (A) - no USS America
Posted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 9:22 am
by Historiker
ORIGINAL: obvert
For the Ha-5 engines, I like the Ki-27 Ic.
At Hami you can definitely get the base with two tanks rgts as long as the supply flows. For anything further you may need air support. Not that it's so important to go further, considering i don't think those supplies flow well out of Urumchi anyway.
Do you mean Ki-21 or Ki-57? [:)]
RE: Historiker (J) vs. USS America (A) - no USS America
Posted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 9:27 am
by obvert
ORIGINAL: Historiker
ORIGINAL: obvert
For the Ha-5 engines, I like the Ki-27 Ic.
At Hami you can definitely get the base with two tanks rgts as long as the supply flows. For anything further you may need air support. Not that it's so important to go further, considering i don't think those supplies flow well out of Urumchi anyway.
Do you mean Ki-21 or Ki-57? [:)]
Yes, the Sally!
Ki-21 Ic.
RE: Historiker (J) vs. USS America (A) - no USS America
Posted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 9:29 am
by Historiker
Right now, my pools are filled to the top, so I'll have to see what I build. But my naval construction uses so much HI, that despite most aircraft plants being turned off, I still only have 2.500 daily surplus, which is getting smaller by the day.
I will do an extensive economy report next rund, when the first month has passed.
RE: Historiker (J) vs. USS America (A) - no USS America
Posted: Sun Jul 01, 2012 6:40 pm
by Historiker
6/1/42
Subs:
This time, his subs stop dudding... 2 xAK sunk in one turn - while I fail to find anthing but ASW-groups [:@]
I will start to spread my SCs to counter that. Regarding how often my DDs got hit by duds, it seems an innaceptable risk to use DDs for ASW missions, while PBs are sunk regularly by subs as well. SC may go down in numbers as well, but their shot range makes them only somewhat usefull in any other use.
The first FP groups will also be moved into the infested areas, despite their still untrained crews. But I am forced to do something, regarding how much a pain in the ass his subs already are.
China:
Wenchow attacked with far superior forces, but his troops still hold the base. I will attack again, tomorrow.
Another day of Nate-strafing proves equally satifactory. It seems like this is a decent use for this planes. Interesting fact: I set them to ground attack at 100feet. This trains them both low ground as well as strafing.
Economy:
Let's get to the interesting part, the economy.
Air production:

RE: Historiker (J) vs. USS America (A) - no USS America
Posted: Sun Jul 01, 2012 6:52 pm
by Historiker
Aircraft Pool:
I intend to have about 200 of my main Army and my main Navy fighter each, as well as 100 bombers of each frontline type. As I have tons of army bombers left, I stopped most production. The differences between the variants is too small to justify the spent HI for additional planes so far.

RE: Historiker (J) vs. USS America (A) - no USS America
Posted: Sun Jul 01, 2012 6:57 pm
by Historiker
Industry Chart:
Not much surplus, but I plan to have about 50k armament points in the pool. When this number is reached, I will reduce the pdouction accordingly. My NSY is also very high, but I need even more to be able to accelerate all 6 Unryus without stopping everything else. The MSY is intended, as the demand will rise drastically soon and I don't plan to build additional civilan shipyards.

RE: Historiker (J) vs. USS America (A) - no USS America
Posted: Sun Jul 01, 2012 7:00 pm
by Historiker
Industry Pool:

RE: Historiker (J) vs. USS America (A) - no USS America
Posted: Sun Jul 01, 2012 7:04 pm
by Historiker
Ressource/Oil Situation:
Several Refineries are turned off to avoid fuel spoilage. Burma was never turned on to allow a flow of the oil without spoilage to where it is needed and where it can be transported with lesser risks.
Honshu's ressource situation is getting serious. I still didn't manage to get enough ressources on the island. I started several additional convoys, but I'll have to watch it. Trying to work only with Fusan didn't work so far, as it simply isn't able to load enough ressources onto the convyos per day.

RE: Historiker (J) vs. USS America (A) - no USS America
Posted: Sun Jul 01, 2012 7:06 pm
by Historiker
Fuel & Supply situation:
Honshu's supplies dropped significantly, but I don't have any major offensive operation outside Chine right now, so I see no problem.

RE: Historiker (J) vs. USS America (A) - no USS America
Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:32 pm
by Historiker
6/2/42
Subs:
SS KXV sinks one of my 1.250 capacity tankers off Palembang. I REALLY have to get my ASW going! [:@]
China:
more troop killing [8D] 281 Chinese combat squads killed today!
The last shock attack was an attempt to take out a nasty portion of the AVG. But not only was the group gone, the base also held the initial attack [:(]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at 92,36 (near Kweisui)
Japanese Deliberate attack
Attacking force 14184 troops, 78 guns, 315 vehicles, Assault Value = 544
Defending force 5884 troops, 76 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 82
Japanese adjusted assault: 309
Allied adjusted defense: 47
Japanese assault odds: 6 to 1
Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), op mode(-), morale(-), experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker:
Japanese ground losses:
92 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 10 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Allied ground losses:
2155 casualties reported
Squads: 163 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 97 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 4 destroyed, 7 disabled
Guns lost 26 (17 destroyed, 9 disabled)
Units retreated 3
Defeated Allied Units Retreating!
Assaulting units:
11th Indpt Infantry Regiment
23rd Tank Regiment
1st Recon Regiment
20th Recon Regiment
2nd Ind.Mixed Brigade
8th Recon Regiment
26th Recon Regiment
Defending units:
11th Chinese Corps
3rd Prov Chinese Corps
17th Group Army
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Wenchow (89,58)
Japanese Deliberate attack
Attacking force 20992 troops, 154 guns, 42 vehicles, Assault Value = 756
Defending force 3084 troops, 10 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 110
Japanese adjusted assault: 647
Allied adjusted defense: 94
Japanese assault odds: 6 to 1 (fort level 1)
Japanese forces CAPTURE Wenchow !!!
Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(-), experience(-)
Attacker:
Japanese ground losses:
328 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 15 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Allied ground losses:
1122 casualties reported
Squads: 36 destroyed, 6 disabled
Non Combat: 30 destroyed, 7 disabled
Engineers: 7 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 3 (1 destroyed, 2 disabled)
Units retreated 1
Defeated Allied Units Retreating!
Assaulting units:
52nd Infantry Brigade
58th Infantry Brigade
22nd Division
2nd Ind.Mixed Regiment
Defending units:
100th Chinese/C Corps
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at 88,41 (near Kaoping)
Japanese Deliberate attack
Attacking force 40006 troops, 317 guns, 32 vehicles, Assault Value = 1395
Defending force 4336 troops, 43 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 150
Japanese adjusted assault: 734
Allied adjusted defense: 28
Japanese assault odds: 26 to 1
Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(+), fatigue(-), experience(-)
supply(-)
Attacker:
Japanese ground losses:
544 casualties reported
Squads: 3 destroyed, 34 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 10 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Allied ground losses:
1972 casualties reported
Squads: 81 destroyed, 78 disabled
Non Combat: 75 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 4 destroyed, 6 disabled
Guns lost 24 (7 destroyed, 17 disabled)
Units retreated 1
Defeated Allied Units Retreating!
Assaulting units:
110th Division
6th Ind.Mixed Brigade
7th Ind.Mixed Brigade
41st Division
4th Ind.Mixed Brigade
Defending units:
34th Chinese Corps
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Kweilin (76,54)
Japanese Shock attack
Attacking force 647 troops, 7 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 42
Defending force 1600 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 41
Japanese adjusted assault: 20
Allied adjusted defense: 11
Japanese assault odds: 1 to 1 (fort level 2)
Japanese Assault reduces fortifications to 1
Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), disruption(-), experience(-)
Attacker: shock(+)
Japanese ground losses:
22 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Allied ground losses:
28 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 2 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Assaulting units:
Yokosuka 3rd SNLF /1
1st Raiding Rgt /1
Defending units:
2nd Chinese Base Force
Burma:
Magwe is attacked...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Magwe , at 57,47
Weather in hex: Thunderstorms
Raid spotted at 40 NM, estimated altitude 12,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 13 minutes
Japanese aircraft
Ki-43-Ic Oscar x 67
Ki-44 Tojo x 6
Allied aircraft
Blenheim IV x 30
Wellington Ic x 29
B-17E Fortress x 10
B-25C Mitchell x 12
No Japanese losses
Allied aircraft losses
Blenheim IV: 8 destroyed, 1 damaged
Wellington Ic: 9 destroyed, 8 damaged
B-17E Fortress: 4 damaged
B-25C Mitchell: 3 destroyed, 4 damaged
Oil hits 17
Aircraft Attacking:
13 x Blenheim IV bombing from 6000 feet *
City Attack: 2 x 250 lb GP Bomb
9 x Wellington Ic bombing from 6000 feet
City Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
10 x Blenheim IV bombing from 6000 feet *
City Attack: 2 x 250 lb GP Bomb
12 x Wellington Ic bombing from 6000 feet
City Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
4 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 6000 feet
City Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
9 x B-25C Mitchell bombing from 6000 feet
City Attack: 6 x 500 lb GP Bomb
6 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 6000 feet
City Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
CAP engaged:
64th Sentai/A with Ki-44 Tojo (2 airborne, 4 on standby, 0 scrambling)
2 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 20000 , scrambling fighters to 20000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 12 minutes
1st Sentai with Ki-43-Ic Oscar (11 airborne, 22 on standby, 0 scrambling)
11 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 20000 , scrambling fighters to 20000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 11 minutes
11th Sentai with Ki-43-Ic Oscar (11 airborne, 23 on standby, 0 scrambling)
11 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters to 15000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 9 minutes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Intel screen says:
Blenheim: 13 A2A, 4 Ops
Wellington: 8 A2A, 5 Ops
B-25: 6 A2A, 2 Ops
B-17: 2 A2A, 1 Ops
All shot down without any losses. Unfortunately, those 17 oil hits disabled 54 oilwells [:@]
I am seriously considering to invade India to push his bombers away. I can't push the bombers out of reach, but I may force them to fly without escorts. I could muster six to eight divisions for an operation to conquer the Calcutta region. I want that Oil to flow into Indochina, Siam and Malaya, as it did until now.
Another benefit is that the Indian/Burmese front is pushed back to the calcutta area, where at least some of his bomber forces will be dedicated to city attacks instead of ground attacks for some time...
Apart from China, where I am still in the cleaning and annihilation process, there are only a handfull of operations I am preparing and considering right now:
1. Northern Australia
He seems to have evacuated the coastal bases except Darwin. So I'm thinking about landing most forces not at Darwin after a fast transport has taken Wyndham. Paras could take Daly Waters, if not defended.
2. Western Australia:
This only has a small priority. It would further reduce his abilities to strike back, while it would help cut off Australia from Africa. It might, in theory, be augmented by an invasion at Port Augusta, but as the amphib bonus is gone, I'd have to prepare a division for that allowing him to fortify the city. Unprepared means my troops there are almost certainly doomed, so that's propably out of the question.
3. Eastern Australia
As mentioned before. Landing at Brisbane without crossing the LOD, killing all forces north of it while the southern part of Australia recieves a strategic bombing campaign to reduce the supply production close to the front. It would propably need at least five divisions, so it seems unrealistic to do it in the same time I go for Burma. As this campaing will take approx. half a year, it seems I have to decide wheterh Eastern Australia or Burma has to be attacked unless I weaken China. [:@]
4. Alaska:
I am tempted to do something similar to what PJH does in his game against Cannoe. I could take everything down to Annette Island or maybe even further down. Having that bases, I can start occasional raids into the sealanes between PH and the West Coast. The threat allone will act as a fleet in being. The forces needed after the inicial invasions would propably be small, but I will take out two to three divisions for half a year thanks to the unprepared invasions... [:(]
5. Midway:
I will likely take the base within two months using two unprepared divisions. After that, Fast transports will conquer the dot bases down to PH to create the threat of invasion. The bases will be used for recon on PH, and maybe even for occasional night raids with PA! This operation will defenitly happen.
6. India:
While I'd be tempted to try all of India, that seems impossible without the amphib bonus. So I'll propably take Ceylon first and then march some units from Akyab to Chittagong and take the base. My forces will then land there and try to advance to a line maybe from Cuttack to Nepal. This will take many ground units, but I'd need much of them in Burma anyways, which can be left lightly defend as long as I have naval supremacy (so until mid 43).
The downside is, that he'll be able to use his restriced indian units against me.
Well, we'll see.
For now, I am going to invade Northern Australia in about four weeks and take Midway in six to eight. After that, I'll decide.
RE: Historiker (J) vs. USS America (A) - no USS America
Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:33 pm
by Historiker
btw:
Anyone still reading here? I get the impression I'm alone, except for obvert who feels oblidged to comment as I comment on his AAR. But thanks to the nonexisting feedback, I'm thinking about dropping my AARs and safe the time.
RE: Historiker (J) vs. USS America (A) - no USS America
Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 1:12 pm
by JocMeister
Wow, You are certainly being agressive! [:D]
RE: Historiker (J) vs. USS America (A) - no USS America
Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 1:23 pm
by SqzMyLemon
I follow along, but haven't been posting as you have things well in hand. I'm envious of all the recent spankings to Allied CV's in various AAR's, but it tends to bum me out. So I tend to not post much. [:D]
RE: Historiker (J) vs. USS America (A) - no USS America
Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 2:24 pm
by obvert
I hear you. It was tough for me for a while in the beginning, but has gotten steadily better the longer I've been doing them.
You'd think the authors of the AARs you post in would feel like it might be good to reciprocate a bit. Without trying to seem to righteous, I have a philosophy that if I read I should post something periodically. It's a lot of effort to do these things and even if it's a bit of encouragement, it helps a lot and makes a better forum when people give something back. Just my two cents. Obviously everyone should use it as they see fit.
I for one hope you keep this going! How else will I learn your tricks? It's also great to have the dual AARs for our game. Makes a complete picture for players to see.
RE: Historiker (J) vs. USS America (A) - no USS America
Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:03 pm
by JocMeister
I read it too obviously! [:)]
RE: Historiker (J) vs. USS America (A) - no USS America
Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 6:59 pm
by Historiker
ORIGINAL: JocMeister
Wow, You are certainly being agressive! [:D]
Why that?
Thank you guys. At least someone is reading [&o]
Edit:
someone isn't appropriate.
I hereby knight thee "Knights of Historiker's AAR" - also known as "Knight of the Bavarian Beer bottle!"
You may rise and add this to your signature!

RE: Historiker (J) vs. USS America (A) - no USS America
Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 8:22 pm
by GreyJoy
I'm reading it mate. I know how much effort is needed for an AAR. Read it...don't post cause i really have few things to say for the Japs (at least for now[:D])....but i read greedly every AAR i can!
RE: Historiker (J) vs. USS America (A) - no USS America
Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2012 10:18 pm
by Historiker
6/3/42
Subs:
SS Seadragon is reported sunk near Palembang. I think it was hit a few turns ago, but I don't remember. Anyway, this must be false.
China:
Another 25 combat squads destroyed.
RE: Historiker (J) vs. USS America (A) - no USS America
Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2012 11:05 pm
by Chickenboy
ORIGINAL: Historiker
ORIGINAL: JocMeister
Wow, You are certainly being agressive! [:D]
Why that?
Thank you guys. At least someone is reading [&o]
Edit:
someone isn't appropriate.
I hereby knight thee "Knights of Historiker's AAR" - also known as "Knight of the Bavarian Beer bottle!"
You may rise and add this to your signature!
Oh-an honary knighthood to go along with it, eh? OK, I'll keep reading (and throw in the occasional banal comment too). [8D]
RE: Historiker (J) vs. USS America (A) - no USS America
Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2012 2:56 am
by JocMeister
ORIGINAL: Historiker
ORIGINAL: JocMeister
Wow, You are certainly being agressive! [:D]
Why that?
Just a reflection that your are playing very agressive! [:D]