Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!)

[RangerJoe]

What is more important is the amount of AAA plus radar/searchlights available. If they are flying low, then the amount of balloons available is dependent on the fortification level.

[rader]

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

What is more important is the amount of AAA plus radar/searchlights available. If they are flying low, then the amount of balloons available is dependent on the fortification level.

I've got pretty decent AA there - probably the second best defended place on the map after an airfield in Burma.

[rader]

June 6, 1943.

Raiding AV strikes again, with Jakes putting some more 60 kg bombs into a tanker near Palmyra.

These are fun, but hardly consequential to the war effort.

[rader]

Lost a lot more fighters to night raids by 4Es again, but flak did a decent job taking some down. Eight more 4Es wiped off the list.

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: rader

Lost a lot more fighters to night raids by 4Es again, but flak did a decent job taking some down. Eight more 4Es wiped off the list.

The only good news I can share with you is that the 4E losses are likely under-reported. FOW is likely in your favor here as he will have lost another 1 or 2 on the way back. Figure about 20% more ops losses in addition to the flak losses. Just based upon my experience in AI games ... I know you hate losing the fighters, but you shouldn't be losing too many pilots and you are attritting an asset with limited renewal at this point.

[RangerJoe]

Those tankers are scarce for the Allies. There aren't enough of them to move all of the fuel that is needed, at least it appears to me that way. Especially when those fuel thirsty BBs start moving.

[rader]

June 7, 943.

Brutal day in the air for Japan. I'd see an invasion force coming to the SE tip of NG and decided to meet them with dive bombers (they landed at Milne Bay). The Allied carriers were unreported, but were providing LRCAP. The mostly unescorted Japanese bombers got slaughtered. At least Vals and Oscars aren't much use anymore, so cleaning out the pool isn't a terrible thing.

The Port Moresby airfield was reported heavily damaged but some planes had moved in so we decided to strike the airfield... unfortunately our George sweeps and Helens encountered Thunderbolts for the first time. The Georges actually did so-so vs the Allied fighters, shooting down 13 Allied fighters while losing 25 (bad ratio considering it was over an Allied airfield, but any Thunderbolts down is a good thing).

For the first time, I was actually happy a strike didn't fly. Most of the bombers that were supposed to hit PM stayed on the runway, so relatively few were lost.

[RangerJoe]

LRCAP PM for more operational losses, even a 10% LRCAP by Oscars should do it.

[rader]

Does that really work?

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: rader

Does that really work?

Yes.

[rader]

June 9, 1943.

Another victim of the AV raider, but I get the sense that this LST might have been bait and he's using it to hone in and chase the AV.

[rader]

June 11, 1943.

An Allied attack in Burma along the coast where shells have rained down on Japanese positions for weeks.

The terrain is really rough, and despite a ton of Allied armor, Japanese forces are able to hold their ground.

[rader]

The Allied fleet seems to be mostly congregated around Port Moresby. A Japanese mine layer was torn apart by over 30 SBDs, but a few Georges on CAP extracted a small measure of vengeance against the escorting Wildcats and Martlets (Wildcats by another name). CM Itsukushima has a really bad day.

Hard to tell if these are the Allied fleet carriers, or just a British/CVE/CVL diversionary force. Seems there are at least a few of the large American flattops but I wouldn't discount him having others around somewhere.

[rader]

June 14, 1943.

Oof, a terrible naval battle result, albeit fairly small-scale. I sent 5x Shimakaze class destroyers vs 5 US destroyers. I expected the fight to be easy. These are the state of the art of Japanese destroyers with good commanders fighting at night with long lance torpedoes. Aren't we supposed to be good at this?

Nope, 4 Japanese destroyers sunk or crippled for not a single US destroyer significantly damaged. Losing destroyers, especially Shimakaze class destroyers, really hurts.

The only consolation is that in the morning, US B-25s attempted low-level bombing runs on the surviving Japanese destroyers and got badly chopped up by some Georges. But planes are a lot easier to replace than Japanese destroyers.

[RangerJoe]

By that time, those US DDs have radar so no surprise. Their training and operations have given the crews more experience as well. If you get close, all that AA on the DDs fire as well as the big guns. Since the 40mm out ranges the 25mm, the Allies have the advantage there.

[rader]

June 15, 1943.

This time we tried it again with 5 new destroyers from Rabaul. I figured the American DDs would be low on ammo and not really looking for a fight.

The Japanese destroyers arrived to find that the Americans had vacated the area. But the Japanese DD commander decided to wait around into daylight (this was not my intention; I had set them to retire but they did not).

However, it turned out to be a good thing as at least 10 waves of American carrier aircraft (plus some B-25s) bore down on the Japanese DDs. Luckily, the DDs had heavy air cover and Georges tore into the Allied aircraft with zeal. With the loss of a single George, the Georges managed to down more than a hundred Allied aircraft, mainly Avengers and SDBs. Three SBDs managed to get through to plant bombs on the Japanese destroyers, but none of the hits were fatal. A great day in the air, likely making up for the loss of DDs the day before.

[PaxMondo]

Those are a lot of pilots lost to the allies. Wow~~


[&o][&o][&o]

[rader]

Apparently we got a sync bug so Richard didn't see the same result. In his version "not much happened". That's only the second time we've gotten a sync bug this game. Sure is annoying.

[PaxMondo]

Yeah, quite ...

[RangerJoe]

What does the combat state? I do believe that is correct for both sides.