Page 131 of 155
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 3:17 pm
by rkr1958
Turn 21. Jan/Feb 1943. Allied #3. The Marianas. Round 1. (con't)
I decide to save the 2 Japanese SP's to reduce the naval column by 1 of the allied planes that get through. It wasn't really necessary as Japanese AA reduce allied bombs from 4 to 1. Even before shifting the attack column down by 1, the 1-bomb has no effect on the lone Japanese cruiser.

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 3:18 pm
by rkr1958
Turn 21. Jan/Feb 1943. Allied #3. The Marianas. Round 2.
Searches, allied 10 and Japanese 7. Both sides miss, combat ends in the Marianas.
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 3:20 pm
by rkr1958
Turn 21. Jan/Feb 1943. Allied #3. South China Sea. Round 1.
1. IJN NAV reacts to the 0-box.
2. Search rolls, allies 10, Japanese 1. More than enough surprise points to send the RN sub to the bottom.

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 3:22 pm
by rkr1958
Turn 21. Jan/Feb 1943. Allied #3. Bay of Bengal. Round 1.
Japanese CP is sunk and RN sub is forced to abort.

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 3:24 pm
by rkr1958
Turn 21. Jan/Feb 1943. Allied #3. Bay of Bengal. Round 2.
1. Both sides stay.
2. Both search rolls fail to find. Combat ends in the Bay of Bengal.
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 3:26 pm
by rkr1958
Turn 21. Jan/Feb 1943. Allied #3. Western Med. Round 1.
1. RN sub attempts to initiate combat.
2. An Italian NAV (Sparviero) reacts to the 0-box.
3. Both search rolls fail to find. No combat.

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 3:27 pm
by rkr1958
Turn 21. Jan/Feb 1943. Allied #3. Eastern Med. Round 1.
1. The CW declines to attempt to initiate a naval combat.
2. The Germans, as the non-phasing player, do and use their Condor NAV for the attempt.
3. No additional axis air units react.
4. Both search rolls fail to find. No combat.

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 3:29 pm
by rkr1958
Turn 21. Jan/Feb 1943. Allied #3. Arabian Sea.
1. The CW declines to attempt to initiate a naval combat.
2. The Japaneses, as the non-phasing player, do and use their NAV for the attempt.
3. Both search rolls fail to find. No combat.

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 3:43 pm
by rkr1958
Turn 21. Jan/Feb 1943. Allied Ground Strikes.
1. The allies are attempting ground strikes against three axis stacks in Portugal.
2. Shown are the axis fighters than can intercept.
3. Also, shown are the allied fighters that can counter-intercept if axis fighters fly.
4. How do you wish to respond?

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 7:48 pm
by ashkpa
Turn 21. Jan/Feb 1943. Allied Ground Strikes.
1. The allies are attempting ground strikes against three axis stacks in Portugal.
2. Shown are the axis fighters than can intercept.
3. Also, shown are the allied fighters that can counter-intercept if axis fighters fly.
4. How do you wish to respond?
The Bf-109 in the hex the Beaufighter is attacking, will react to the hex the Wellington is bombing and return to his initial hex..
The Falco will intercept in his own hex (he will return to the hex next to the hex the Wellington is at not his own hex.
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 8:29 pm
by rkr1958
Turn 21. Jan/Feb 1943. Allied #3. Ground Strikes. 1 of 3.

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 8:30 pm
by rkr1958
Turn 21. Jan/Feb 1943. Allied #3. Ground Strikes. 2 of 3.

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 8:31 pm
by rkr1958
Turn 21. Jan/Feb 1943. Allied #3. Ground Strikes. 3 of 3.
The three allied ground strikes were a bust. That is, totally ineffective with the exception that a German fighter was downed (in ground strike #2).

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 8:31 pm
by rkr1958
Turn 21. Jan/Feb 1943. Allied #3. ETO.
Or what there is of it ...

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 8:33 pm
by rkr1958
Turn 21. Jan/Feb 1943. Allied #3. Naval Reorg.
The CW uses an empty Amph and TRS to reorganize one of their fighter.

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 8:33 pm
by rkr1958
Turn 21. Jan/Feb 1943. Allied #3. USSR.
Another blue factory railed Eastwards.

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 8:34 pm
by rkr1958
Turn 21. Jan/Feb 1943. Allied #3. The Soviet Eastern Front.

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 8:35 pm
by rkr1958
Turn 21. Jan/Feb 1943. Allied #3. The Soviet Asian Front.
Or what's left of it.

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 8:36 pm
by rkr1958
Turn 21. Jan/Feb 1943. Axis #5. Weather.
Naturally. I guess it's too much to ask for snow or even blizzard in the Arctic and North Temperate during the Jan/Feb turn!
This could be a back breaker for the allies.

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Tue Aug 29, 2017 1:16 am
by ashkpa
JF43 i5:
Axis actions: Italy and Japan take combined arm actions and Germany takes a land action.
Italy moves a NAV to the 4-box of the E. Med
Italy moves a fleet from La Spezia carry a Germany Mar-div to the 4-box of the E. Med
Japan moves two fleets into the Sea of Japan. Two transports from the Korean peninsula and a mixed battleship and carrier fleet from Fukuoka. They are carrying a MAR, MIL and inf-div.
For the naval combat, I do not initiate in three areas. The E. Med will await the outcome in the Arabian Sea.
Arabian Sea the axis find on rolls of 2/10. Decide to engage only the 0-box with 13 surprise points.
Choose Naval Air combat and use surprise to move up 5 columns and 3 to select the target for the 2nd effect on the CW.
Next post images show the result. Royal Sovereign and the CP were sunk. The York was aborted.
The axis stay for round 2, w
ill the Allies?
