Page 147 of 155
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 11:43 am
by rkr1958
Turn 23. Allied #4. USN. Bismarck Sea. Naval Battle. Round 1.
It's a disaster for the USN ... the second one this turn. With nothing really left to lose the USN and RN forces stay.

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 11:52 am
by rkr1958
Turn 23. May/June 1943. Allied #4. Bismarck Sea. Round 2. Searches.
Round 2 searches in the Bismarck Sea also go the Japanese way.
Instructions?

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 12:43 am
by ashkpa
Turn 23. May/June 1943. Allied #4. Bismarck Sea. Round 2. Searches.
Round 2 searches in the Bismarck Sea also go the Japanese way.
Instructions?
Debated avoiding, but in the end the transport is too tempting.
Engage the 1-box only. Use 2 SP to reduce AA to ne.
Use remaining SP to increase damage and target the transport.
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 11:51 pm
by rkr1958
Turn 23. May/June 1943. Allied #4. Bismarck Sea. Round 2.
Brutal for the USN, but could have been a lot worse. The USN TRS and BB both survived their damage rolls.

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 11:54 pm
by rkr1958
Turn 23. May/June 1943. Allied #4. Bismarck Sea. Round 3.
The USN stays for another potential round; however, both search rolls fail (allies 9, axis 8).
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Thu Nov 02, 2017 12:00 am
by rkr1958
Turn 23. May/June 1943. Allied #4. IJN Intercept Attempt. The Solomons.
An IJN sub unit attempts, but fails, to intercept the unescorted Yorktown on it's way back to Pearl Harbor.

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Thu Nov 02, 2017 12:04 am
by rkr1958
Turn 23. May/June 1943. Allied #4. USN/RN. Attempted Naval Combat. Bay of Biscay.
Search rolls, allies 8, axis 5. Neither side finds.

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Thu Nov 02, 2017 11:51 pm
by rkr1958
Turn 23. May/June 1943. Allied #4. USMC. Amphibious Invasion of Eniwetok.
Folks this is the USMC 1st marine division! The same division that was featured in the HBO mini-series, "The Pacific".

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Thu Nov 02, 2017 11:52 pm
by rkr1958
Turn 23. May/June 1943. Allied #4. USSR. Main Front.
Not good.

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Thu Nov 02, 2017 11:53 pm
by rkr1958
Turn 23. May/June 1943. Allied #4. USSR. The Caucuses.
I don't know the exact rule but my guess is is that Turkey is REAL close to coming in on the side of the axis. [&:]

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Thu Nov 02, 2017 11:54 pm
by rkr1958
Turn 23. May/June 1943. Axis #5. Weather.
Well, I must say that weather roll was a bit of a break for the allies.

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Fri Nov 03, 2017 8:13 pm
by Shannon V. OKeets
Germany needs to get 4 German corps units on the USSR-Turkey border. That means the 4-3 Rumanian MTN won't count.
There are 4 German corps that could do that fairly easily, ... if the Russian units would just get out of the way,
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Fri Nov 03, 2017 9:52 pm
by rkr1958
ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
Germany needs to get 4 German corps units on the USSR-Turkey border. That means the 4-3 Rumanian MTN won't count.
There are 4 German corps that could do that fairly easily, ... if the Russian units would just get out of the way,
I have a feeling that Pat will force the issue even if they don't "voluntary" move aside. [:)]
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Sat Nov 04, 2017 9:14 pm
by ashkpa
Commentary: Yes, I plan on forcing the issue. It would have been easier if the weather had not turned.
MJ 43 i5
Options: Germany and Italy take combined actions. Japan takes a land action.
Italy moves a transport out to the E. Med and picks up the 4-1 GAR (stops in the 2-box). The Germans moved the Romanian CP to the Black Sea.
Italy searched in the E. Med and the rolls were 7/9 so no contact.
Two ground strikes, one in Siberia with the lowest strength JP bomber and one on your southernmost stack on the Iberian Peninsula (image below). Do you wish to intercept?

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2017 1:57 pm
by rkr1958
Intercept with the USAF P-38F Lightening and the CVP with the highest air-to-air. Put theP-38F in the lead and stay until the status of the bomber is determined.
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2017 10:26 pm
by ashkpa
MJ43 i5 Ground Strikes.
The air combat was bloody. The US lost two plans, but no pilots. The Italians lost a fighter and the pilot. The bomber made it through and hit one target.

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2017 10:35 pm
by ashkpa
Note, during the movement phase the German XX Corp moved into Batum and then back to the swamp, forcing the RU fleet to rebase. I made the decision for you that the best of the two options for rebasing was Odessa (the other port will likely be overrun in my next impulse.
The corp was disorganized and I had hoped to reorg it with air transport, but I had forgotten that it cost two reorg points during a combined. So, it remains flipped at this moment.

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2017 12:37 am
by rkr1958
Turn 23. May/June 1943. Allied #7. Actions.

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2017 12:39 am
by rkr1958
Turn 23. May/June 1943. Allied #7. End of Turn Check.
Well, nothing from the allies to report this impulse. About all they did was to push a few units around on the map.
The turn continues.

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR
Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2017 12:40 am
by rkr1958
Turn 23. May/June 1943. Axis #9. Weather.
Fighting weather returns ... which isn't good news for the allies, especially the Soviets.
