Page 153 of 325
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Posted: Sat Nov 06, 2021 5:29 pm
by RangerJoe
Thank you, Alfred.
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Posted: Sun Nov 07, 2021 1:00 pm
by Lowpe
July 21, 1942
Switching over to destroyers for the heavy lifting now on the Baker Island thrust...going to move North Carolina to nail something else I think or simply to perform shakedown cruises.
In other news, almost all of our slow battleships are fully upgraded for the date, and also have finished their shakedown cruises and have max experience so they might be employed. However, I really fear putting them to use now, knowing how powerful they can be in late 43 and 44 with so much more support.
For the naval invasion bombardment support, I haven't decided what my bombardment task forces will look like yet or even the timing. I feel good just building the dot bases and bypassing for now rather than pulling the trigger and putting at risk a lot assets.

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Posted: Sun Nov 07, 2021 1:05 pm
by Lowpe
Note the good combat value, the lack of a supply malus...got to be discouraging for Japan.
Ground combat at 81,41 (near Ankang)
Japanese Deliberate attack
Attacking force 17006 troops, 141 guns, 464 vehicles, Assault Value = 627
Defending force 30406 troops, 69 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 1012
Japanese adjusted assault: 501
Allied adjusted defense: 2539
Japanese assault odds: 1 to 5
Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(+), experience(-)
Attacker:
Japanese ground losses:
241 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 22 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 16 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Vehicles lost 75 (2 destroyed, 73 disabled)
Allied ground losses:
547 casualties reported
Squads: 6 destroyed, 38 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Assaulting units:
9th Tank Regiment
15th Tank Regiment
23rd Tank Regiment
3rd Tank Regiment
15th Division
13th Tank Regiment
11th Tank Regiment
51st Ind.Mtn.Gun Battalion
Defending units:
35th Chinese Corps
9th Chinese Corps
57th Chinese Corps

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Posted: Sun Nov 07, 2021 1:25 pm
by ny59giants
For the naval invasion bombardment support, I haven't decided what my bombardment task forces will look like yet or even the timing.
I tend to put those old, slow BBs in the Amphib TF to fire while unloading as it usually takes many phases to do so and they soak up any CD or FA gun hits in '42 and '43 before you get APA/AKAs. Since you will probably have to place those precious few APs to use, placing the old BBs nearby makes sense to me. Make sure you have a LCU with Naval Support for each invasion.
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Posted: Sun Nov 07, 2021 2:34 pm
by mind_messing
ORIGINAL: Lowpe
July 21, 1942
Switching over to destroyers for the heavy lifting now on the Baker Island thrust...going to move North Carolina to nail something else I think or simply to perform shakedown cruises.
In other news, almost all of our slow battleships are fully upgraded for the date, and also have finished their shakedown cruises and have max experience so they might be employed. However, I really fear putting them to use now, knowing how powerful they can be in late 43 and 44 with so much more support.
For the naval invasion bombardment support, I haven't decided what my bombardment task forces will look like yet or even the timing. I feel good just building the dot bases and bypassing for now rather than pulling the trigger and putting at risk a lot assets.
I would urge some caution, as the battleships are a challenging asset to manage at this point in the game given how they guzzle fuel, and even more so given the need to depend on tenders this far from a major port.
I think they need to be able to make a bombardment run and get back under friendly CAP before the air phase, elsewise it's a field day for the Betty/Nell.
That said, you should be alright for this corner of the map, at least for Canton and Baker, as it's probably far too far for any IJ land based air to fly.
Far better to stick with the destroyers and cruisers that you can use more regularly and more economically for the day-to-day work, from a practical standpoint.
I've had some success by simply plastering bases using a whole load of destroyers, which has the advantage of being a quick run in and out as well as fairly easy on the logistics train.
I've had issues with battleships soaking the supply and OPS points from AKE's/smaller ports and making rearming other ships a real bottleneck, which is exactly what you don't want when you're running a campaign from a small port and a load of tenders.
Leaning on the destroyers also gives you the option of leaning of the AD class ships a lot more - there's quite a few of them so you can take a few more risks with them than you would with other ships and inch forward your power projection that way...
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2021 6:45 pm
by Lowpe
July 22, 1942
A good fight on a road in China...

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2021 9:05 pm
by RangerJoe
You have good roadblocks, now if you can just keep the supplies flowing . . .
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2021 11:44 am
by Lowpe
July 24, 1942
China...we are leaking a bit...but holding. The big hit will be another armored push up from the Canton area with full armored divisions I bet.

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2021 12:07 pm
by Lowpe
Baker and Canton and Gilberts
Japan has unique units that can make bypassed bases dangerous...like Rufes, flying boats, type 88 mines and Iboats.
Our three launching bases have at least gotten to level 1 ports and now we can begin unloading bulldozers...Malden & Fanning. Christmas is almost fully built out.
Overall I am working at understanding the capabilities of Allied shipping to get the units to the front and working.
We are using all destroyers to keep up the bombardments, and yesterdays on Baker showed Nells so Japan is flying Nells for search out of a size 1 runway...something I wouldn't do but it does give him good search and is less expensive than flying boats.

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2021 12:20 pm
by Lowpe
We are getting enough supply up here for the troops, but not enough to get the bases past 20. I could fly some in to help with runway building, but haven't yet as all the good transports go to India. I could start using bombers, the Hudsons and probably will.
This is slow burner advance. I haven't really spent a lot of time optimizing here.

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2021 12:23 pm
by Lowpe
A long way to Kal...

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2021 12:25 pm
by Lowpe
Flood damage was over 60 yesterday...came down a bit today. Hard to see this ship making it all the way to Mombasa...but we will try.

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2021 12:49 pm
by Lowpe
Definite backwater area currently given Japan's lack of grabbing bases...will start our push here following my overall strategy of pushing along the entire Japanese perimeter but with the hammer blow coming at Marcus and Marianas.

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2021 3:23 pm
by BBfanboy
ORIGINAL: Lowpe
We are getting enough supply up here for the troops, but not enough to get the bases past 20. I could fly some in to help with runway building, but haven't yet as all the good transports go to India. I could start using bombers, the Hudsons and probably will.
This is slow burner advance. I haven't really spent a lot of time optimizing here.
Anecdotally, I found that when I brought in a convoy of supply to Port Augusta and set the supply spinners at Oodnadata or Alice Springs to max draw, at least part of the supply went on the direct rail line to those bases. The supply ships came via Cape Town.
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2021 3:25 pm
by BBfanboy
ORIGINAL: Lowpe
Flood damage was over 60 yesterday...came down a bit today. Hard to see this ship making it all the way to Mombasa...but we will try.
Allied damage control and an experienced crew - I give it at least 60% chance it will make it.
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Posted: Wed Nov 17, 2021 11:18 am
by Lowpe
July 25th, 1942
Naval clash near Baker Island in the Pacific...

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Posted: Wed Nov 17, 2021 11:23 am
by Lowpe
China...starting to crack.

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Posted: Wed Nov 17, 2021 11:42 am
by Lowpe
ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
Anecdotally, I found that when I brought in a convoy of supply to Port Augusta and set the supply spinners at Oodnadata or Alice Springs to max draw, at least part of the supply went on the direct rail line to those bases. The supply ships came via Cape Town.
No problem getting supply to Alice Springs just can't get enough north as priority is the troops in the field. I will start flying some up today.
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Posted: Sun Nov 21, 2021 10:47 am
by Lowpe
July 26th, 1942
The Chinese lines are buckling, no supply, but our troops can still move and in an absolutely shocking maneuver manage at the very last minute to reinforce our line against two IJA division and save the day...and for now prevent a breakout.
Not shown in this picture is all the small guerilla units moving all around the IJA frontal lines, infiltrating...therein lies the longer term possibility of holding this line.
Additionally, wearing down and disrupting the IJA divisions in this inhospitable terrain, means a long time before they are combat ready again...

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))
Posted: Sun Nov 21, 2021 11:02 am
by witpqs
Good job! Pnce they clear a road for supply onto the plain there it's much more difficult to slow them down.