Rise of the Sheep! JocMeister(A) vs. Obvert(J)

[JocMeister]

[font="Verdana"]2rd April 1945[/font]
______________________________________________________________________________

Not much happening

------------------------
Okinawa
------------------------
Ships are now in position to land on the last two islands. I don´t expect any interference. Masses of engineers are being dumped on each liberated island.

------------------------
China
------------------------
Erik finally reacts. But its too late. Don´t really understand what he is trying to do though. Makes no sense. [&:]

The crossing of the CMA didn´t trigger a shock attack which means the BTL that was guarding the crossing is completely wiped out by the bombings or doesn´t have any AV left.

Can anyone make any sense of this?

[JocMeister]

[font="Verdana"]Strategic Bombing[/font]
______________________________________________________________________________

I´ve decided to restart the HI campaign again. First strike will go in on the 5th. It will begin slowly with B29s staging from various bases on Luzon. I have to be very, very careful with losses and keep a better eye on that this time around.

I will add B24s as bases on Okinawa gets ready to receive them.

Right now I have 300 B29 of various models ready for action. I just checked the total losses of the same models. 400 have so far been lost. 190 to NFs, 75 to flak and the rest to OPS. If my math has´t failed me that 133% losses. [X(]

Keeping an eye on losses and stop the campaign if losses start to mount will be extremely important. These are the replacement rates.
B29-1 = 0
B29-25 = 40
B29-B = 40
B24J = 65

As mention before I the pilot quality will be a lot worse this time. So we will begin by striking inside the normal range. I won´t manpower bomb to start with. I hope that bombing from normal range will allow me to hit the HI/LI directly which wasn´t possible from extended range. I also hope that normal range will cut down a lot on the losses. The initial bombings will be mostly test runs to check losses and results.

It will also be an evaluation of the B29B version which I fear will be useless due to its lack of armaments and the extreme lethality of Japanese NFs.

A quick and dirty count still show about 5000 HI and 4500 LI on the Home Island. No aircraft factories have been damaged. Around 100 engine factories have been destroyed but it was a older model not used on the most modern air craft.

[JeffroK]

Maths bad, 400 lost out of 700 available is only 57% losses, just a scratch!

[JeffroK]

Maybe warm up the B29B on some Chinese ports/HK. Get their experience up and maybe force Erik to disperse his NF, how heavily defended is Shanghai by NF?

You dont have to send them into the Valley of Death, pick away at the edges.

Any rules about 4E attacking ground units??? Anytime you see a stack in open terrain bash it with B29's!!!

[ny59giants]

Besides going for his HI/LI, maybe hit his Oil and Refineries. He will still need them to get fuel for his HI and ships.

Kyushu:
Kurume - 10 Oil
Fukuoka - 12 Oil & 10 Refineries

Honshu:
Shimonoseki - 16 Oil & 160 Refineries
Tokuyama - 5 Oil & 5 Refineries

Port Arthur - 120 Refineries
Fushan - 55 Oil

The ones in Japan can be hit by B-24s from the size 6 AFs around Okinawa. The ones in Manchuria can be from the B-29s from the size 8 AF. Give him other bases to worry about. Spread his defenses out.

[JocMeister]

ORIGINAL: JeffK
Maths bad, 400 lost out of 700 available is only 57% losses, just a scratch!

Are you sure that is how you count combat losses? The operational strength of the B29 are around 300. So 300 planes have suffered 400 losses. Surely that must account for over 100% combat losses? I just figured that is how you calculate it. [:)]

ORIGINAL: JeffK

Maybe warm up the B29B on some Chinese ports/HK. Get their experience up and maybe force Erik to disperse his NF, how heavily defended is Shanghai by NF?

You dont have to send them into the Valley of Death, pick away at the edges.

Any rules about 4E attacking ground units??? Anytime you see a stack in open terrain bash it with B29's!!!

That is what I have been doing for the last 2 months. I cleaned up what was left after the year long Strat campaign flying from Burma. It has boosted the EXP somewhat but much less than anticipated. 70% of the pilots are still under 50 EXP which worries me quite a lot. But suffering 1-2 losses per mission instead of 30-50 has allowed the squadrons to fill out again which was the plan [:)]

4Es are free to attack ground targets but I´m reluctant to use the B29s for that. With a SR of 4 they take AGES to repair. Besides I have the B24s and 2Es I can use for that. [:)]

[JocMeister]

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Besides going for his HI/LI, maybe hit his Oil and Refineries. He will still need them to get fuel for his HI and ships.

Kyushu:
Kurume - 10 Oil
Fukuoka - 12 Oil & 10 Refineries

Honshu:
Shimonoseki - 16 Oil & 160 Refineries
Tokuyama - 5 Oil & 5 Refineries

Port Arthur - 120 Refineries
Fushan - 55 Oil

The ones in Japan can be hit by B-24s from the size 6 AFs around Okinawa. The ones in Manchuria can be from the B-29s from the size 8 AF. Give him other bases to worry about. Spread his defenses out.

Thanks Micheal. I´ll get to it! [:)]

Any point hitting the refineries this late btw? I figured there won´t be enough oil for them anyway?

[JeffroK]

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

ORIGINAL: JeffK
Maths bad, 400 lost out of 700 available is only 57% losses, just a scratch!

Are you sure that is how you count combat losses? The operational strength of the B29 are around 300. So 300 planes have suffered 400 losses. Surely that must account for over 100% combat losses? I just figured that is how you calculate it. [:)]

ORIGINAL: JeffK

Maybe warm up the B29B on some Chinese ports/HK. Get their experience up and maybe force Erik to disperse his NF, how heavily defended is Shanghai by NF?

You dont have to send them into the Valley of Death, pick away at the edges.

Any rules about 4E attacking ground units??? Anytime you see a stack in open terrain bash it with B29's!!!

That is what I have been doing for the last 2 months. I cleaned up what was left after the year long Strat campaign flying from Burma. It has boosted the EXP somewhat but much less than anticipated. 70% of the pilots are still under 50 EXP which worries me quite a lot. But suffering 1-2 losses per mission instead of 30-50 has allowed the squadrons to fill out again which was the plan [:)]

4Es are free to attack ground targets but I´m reluctant to use the B29s for that. With a SR of 4 they take AGES to repair. Besides I have the B24s and 2Es I can use for that. [:)]

No, your current 300 plus the lost 400 makes a total of 700, from these you have lost 400 or 57%. You can't lose more than 100%.

Otherwise I've been screwing up Accounting for the past 35 years.

[JocMeister]

I´m just thinking I´ve quite often read about military units suffering over 100% losses? So I wonder if they are calculated based on the strength of the unit rather than total availability?

[JocMeister]

[font="Verdana"]3rd April 1945[/font]
______________________________________________________________________________

Some interrupted landings.

------------------------
Okinawa
------------------------
As the allies land on Amami Oshima (the most eastern island in the Okinawas) two small Japanese DD forces interrupt. They are unable to effect the actual landing and all units are unloaded properly. But both sides suffer some losses.

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Apr 05, 45
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Amami Oshima at 98,64, Range 12,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
DD Tachibana, Shell hits 1
DD Tsuta, Shell hits 3, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
DD Kaki, Shell hits 3, on fire

Allied Ships
CA Chester
CA Chicago, Shell hits 2
DD Satterlee
DD Baldwin
DD Carmick
DD Shubrick
DD Sampson
DD Sims
DD Hammann
DD Russell
DD O'Brien
DD Henley
DMS Boggs
DMS Long
APA Wharton
APA Harris
APA Henry T. Allen
APA J. Franklin Bell
APA W.A. Holbrook
APA Leonard Wood
APA American Legion
APA Fuller
APA Harry Lee
APA U.S. Grant
APA Barnett
APA President Adams
APA President Polk
APA Thomas Jefferson
APA Charles Carroll
APA Arthur Middleton
APA Henrico
APA Lamar
AKA Hydrus
AKA Caswell
AKA Devosa
AKA Circe
AKA Andromeda
AKA Cepheus
AKA Procyon
AKA Lycoming
LCI(M)-803
LCI(M)-804
LCI(R)-72
LCI(R)-73
LCI(R)-74
LCI(R)-224
LCI(R)-225
LCI(R)-226
LCI(R)-230
LCI(R)-337
LCI(R)-338
LCI(R)-339

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Amami Oshima at 98,64, Range 12,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
DD Ikazuchi
DD Isonami, Shell hits 2
DD Ayanami, Shell hits 15, heavy fires, heavy damage

Allied Ships
CA Chester
CA Chicago, Shell hits 5, on fire
DD Satterlee
DD Baldwin
DD Carmick
DD Shubrick
DD Sampson
DD Sims
DD Hammann
DD Russell
DD O'Brien
DD Henley, Shell hits 13, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
DMS Boggs
DMS Long
APA Wharton
APA Harris
APA Henry T. Allen
APA J. Franklin Bell
APA W.A. Holbrook, Torpedo hits 1
APA Leonard Wood
APA American Legion
APA Fuller
APA Harry Lee, Shell hits 18, heavy fires, heavy damage
APA U.S. Grant
APA Barnett
APA President Adams
APA President Polk
APA Thomas Jefferson
APA Charles Carroll
APA Arthur Middleton
APA Henrico
APA Lamar, Shell hits 1, on fire
AKA Hydrus
AKA Caswell
AKA Devosa
AKA Circe
AKA Andromeda
AKA Cepheus
AKA Procyon
AKA Lycoming
LCI(M)-803
LCI(M)-804
LCI(R)-72
LCI(R)-73
LCI(R)-74
LCI(R)-224
LCI(R)-225
LCI(R)-226
LCI(R)-230
LCI(R)-337
LCI(R)-338
LCI(R)-339

The APA later sinks. I´m pretty sure DD Ayanami will sink too. So I traded 2 Jap DDs for a Bagley class DD and an APA. Can´t complain about that. If Erik had sent in BBs this could have turned out very nasty for us.

The troops are onshore safe and sound but will require a couple of days rest before attacking. They will secure the base pretty easily. If needed the Navy can lend a hand. Erik might try his usual trick of flying in troops to stiffen the defense but he might not have troops to spare.

Ground combat at Amami Oshima (98,64)

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 6995 troops, 102 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 253

Defending force 23105 troops, 434 guns, 803 vehicles, Assault Value = 958

Japanese ground losses:
37 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Allied ground losses:
Vehicles lost 1 (1 destroyed, 0 disabled)

Assaulting units:
Oshima Naval Guard Unit
70th Ind.Mixed Brigade
Amami Oshima Fortress
34th Const Co
189th JAAF AF Bn

Defending units:
754th Tank Battalion
3rd USMC Tank Battalion
6th Infantry Division
25th Infantry Division
5th USMC Tank Battalion

We also land and secure Okinoerabushima. Pretty lucky here because I failed to notice it was an island size 2 meaning a shock attack. Luckily I had some nifty LCIs with me... [:)]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pre-Invasion action off Okinoerabushima (96,65)

15 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.

Allied Ships
LCI(G)-442
LCI(G)-440
LCI(G)-438
LCI(G)-437
LCI(G)-408
LCI(G)-407
LCI(G)-406
LCI(G)-405
LCI(G)-404
LCI(G)-403
LCI(G)-401
LCI(G)-398
LSM(R)-199
LSM(R)-198
LSM(R)-197
LSM(R)-196
LSM(R)-195
LSM(R)-194
LSM(R)-193
LSM(R)-192
APA Winged Arrow
DE Tabberer

Japanese ground losses:
652 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 28 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 48 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 6 disabled

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground combat at Okinoerabushima (96,65)

Allied Shock attack

Attacking force 3112 troops, 60 guns, 43 vehicles, Assault Value = 109

Defending force 2043 troops, 34 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 46

Allied adjusted assault: 75

Japanese adjusted defense: 11

Allied assault odds: 6 to 1 (fort level 3)

Allied forces CAPTURE Okinoerabushima !!!

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), forts(+), disruption(-), fatigue(-)
experience(-)
Attacker: shock(+), leaders(+), leaders(-)

Japanese ground losses:
284 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 32 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 5 disabled
Engineers: 9 destroyed, 0 disabled

Allied ground losses:
190 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 18 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 7 disabled

Assaulting units:
30th Australian Brigade

Defending units:
14th Naval Guard Unit
52nd JNAF AF Unit

I also got some very interesting SIGINT this turn.

CVL Mizuho is moving to Nagasaki/Sasebo (102,58).

Its the second time I get a fix on this CVL. This means the KB will take station here next turn. By now Erik will have recovered fully from the last attempt. So its not impossible he will try again. This puts the KB within Fletcher range...hmm.

We also intercept some more ASW TFs around Formosa. Looks like Erik is still sending ships here. Don´t know why.

Day Time Surface Combat, near Taihoku at 88,63, Range 18,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
E No.60, Shell hits 31, and is sunk
E No.72, Shell hits 13, and is sunk

Allied Ships
DD Bennion
DD Callaghan
DD Cogswell
DD Erben
DD Foote
DD Gregory
DD John Hood
DD Hopewell
DD Johnston
DD Laws
DD Longshaw
DD McCord

[Barb]

ORIGINAL: JeffK

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

ORIGINAL: JeffK
Maths bad, 400 lost out of 700 available is only 57% losses, just a scratch!

Are you sure that is how you count combat losses? The operational strength of the B29 are around 300. So 300 planes have suffered 400 losses. Surely that must account for over 100% combat losses? I just figured that is how you calculate it. [:)]

ORIGINAL: JeffK

Maybe warm up the B29B on some Chinese ports/HK. Get their experience up and maybe force Erik to disperse his NF, how heavily defended is Shanghai by NF?

You dont have to send them into the Valley of Death, pick away at the edges.

Any rules about 4E attacking ground units??? Anytime you see a stack in open terrain bash it with B29's!!!

That is what I have been doing for the last 2 months. I cleaned up what was left after the year long Strat campaign flying from Burma. It has boosted the EXP somewhat but much less than anticipated. 70% of the pilots are still under 50 EXP which worries me quite a lot. But suffering 1-2 losses per mission instead of 30-50 has allowed the squadrons to fill out again which was the plan [:)]

4Es are free to attack ground targets but I´m reluctant to use the B29s for that. With a SR of 4 they take AGES to repair. Besides I have the B24s and 2Es I can use for that. [:)]

No, your current 300 plus the lost 400 makes a total of 700, from these you have lost 400 or 57%. You can't lose more than 100%.

Otherwise I've been screwing up Accounting for the past 35 years.

Military losses are usually calculated against a unit "paper" ToE - thus unit with ToE manpower of 3000 men that was in combat long enough an refilled several times could loose 4000 men - or about 133%...
Same goes for squadron - if its full ToE has 25 planes and had lost 50, its actually 200% losses.

The number you are calculating is total number of losses against total number of available planes in theater. Jock is calculating the number of losses against total unit capacity...
Both numbers are correct, but each in its own level... Oh I do love statistics

[JocMeister]

[font="Verdana"]China[/font]
______________________________________________________________________________

Turns out the lone unit sent out to meat the allied main army was a Tank RGT. Emphasis on "was"...

Morning Air attack on 8th Tank Regiment, at 73,57 , near Pakhoi

Weather in hex: Severe storms

Raid spotted at 40 NM, estimated altitude 8,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 11 minutes

Allied aircraft
Thunderbolt I x 37
B-24J Liberator x 12
B-24J Liberator x 149
B-25D1 Mitchell x 9
B-25G Mitchell x 15
B-25H Mitchell x 33
B-25J1 Mitchell x 70
B-25J11 Mitchell x 39
P-38J Lightning x 24
P-38L Lightning x 39
PB4Y-1 Liberator x 17
PBJ-1D Mitchell x 16
PBJ-1H Mitchell x 3
PBJ-1J Mitchell x 14
PV-1 Ventura x 12

No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
Vehicles lost 230 (82 destroyed, 148 disabled)

During the day the following bombers completely eliminate the RGT. Still no idea why Erik sent it there. While he doesn´t know the exact composition of the main army his recon should show him its 150.000 men. Not something a lone unit can do anything about. Strange thing is that I still see movement from Liuchow towards the army. But he only have 50.000 men there. Also see movement out of Nanning. I feel I´m missing some crucial piece of the puzzle here. Erik is a smart fellow. He won´t throw units in my way for nothing. So whatever he is doing here he is doing it for a reason. I just don´t see it yet.

The attack at Wuchow goes as plan. Only drawback with this is that Erik now knows the exact composition of the CMA.

Ground combat at Wuchow (76,57)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 33508 troops, 524 guns, 1851 vehicles, Assault Value = 1743

Defending force 540 troops, 5 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 5

Allied engineers reduce fortifications to 2

Allied adjusted assault: 1337 (Only computer neards get the joke) [:D]

Japanese adjusted defense: 1

Allied assault odds: 1337 to 1 (fort level 2)

Allied forces CAPTURE Wuchow !!!

Combat modifiers
Defender:
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
739 casualties reported
Squads: 19 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 46 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 41 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 5 (5 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Units destroyed 3

Assaulting units:
11th PAVO Regiment
18th Cavalry Regiment
Provisionl Tank Brigade
Guides Cavalry Regiment
3rd Cavalry Regiment
50th Tank Brigade
255th Indian Tank Brigade
19th Motorised Division
Gardner's Horse Regiment
254th Armoured Brigade
17th Motorised Division

Defending units:
68th Ind.Infantry Battalion
60th Construction Battalion
32nd JAAF AF Coy

Time to use the transport fleet...2500 AV will be flown into Wuchow while the CMA presses on. If I can secure Kukong the Superstack of 200.000 men in HK/Canton are in big, big doodoo. This also threatens the Changsha region.

I know I say this almost every post but I´m ecstatic with the advances here. I feel like Patton moving around all the German "Festungs". [:D] To add mobility I´ve started transferring US airborne units to China.

While this is not a complete Japanese collapse in China its certainly a complete collapse of the MLR. I still don´t think Erik has seen the danger. He should be racing in units to plug the gap but instead seem to stay put or send units North towards the Chinese? I wish I could see what his overall plan is. I´m missing something.

I want to add something about supply here also. Its just too easy to keep my units in supply. I bitched and moaned about how easy it was for Erik to keep massive armies in Burma in supply without Rangoon and his 350.000 unit stack that took China. Its not less silly when I can do it. I don´t even have to pump much supply in. I have 200k at Hanoi and thats it. It keeps flowing just fine 13 hexes east over yellow roads. This should be A LOT harder then what it is. I don´t know how much fuel two Motorized divisions and 800 heavy Tanks would use racing at full speed east. But I think keeping them in supply over bad roads 520 miles away from the nearest big supply dump would be VERY difficult. But I guess it goes both ways so no real harm done. Its just one of those things...

[JocMeister]

ORIGINAL: Barb

Military losses are usually calculated against a unit "paper" ToE - thus unit with ToE manpower of 3000 men that was in combat long enough an refilled several times could loose 4000 men - or about 133%...
Same goes for squadron - if its full ToE has 25 planes and had lost 50, its actually 200% losses.

The number you are calculating is total number of losses against total number of available planes in theater. Jock is calculating the number of losses against total unit capacity...
Both numbers are correct, but each in its own level... Oh I do love statistics

Ah, thanks for clearing that up! I was pretty certain I had seen combatlosses over 100%. [:)]

[JeffroK]

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

I´m just thinking I´ve quite often read about military units suffering over 100% losses? So I wonder if they are calculated based on the strength of the unit rather than total availability?

I know the US Army posted losses as a % of the TOE, so from ORDER OF BATTLE, US ARMY, ETO

The Per Cent of T/0' figure is merely a measure indicating the
relationship between the authorized strength and the total casualties
for each division. These casualty figures are based solely on data
available on 18 ,May 1945,

1st US Infantry Divison reports
Casualties (Tenttive) ..
Killed.....................3,973
Wounded.............. ... 11,448
Missing.". ..... ,..... . - 951
Captured........ .. ,. . .
Battle Casualties.. ....15003 '
Non-Battle Casualties - 14002
Total Casualties .'.''' 29,005
Percent of T/O Strength .. 205.9

[JocMeister]

ORIGINAL: JeffK
I know the US Army posted losses as a % of the TOE, so from ORDER OF BATTLE, US ARMY, ETO

The Per Cent of T/0' figure is merely a measure indicating the
relationship between the authorized strength and the total casualties
for each division. These casualty figures are based solely on data
available on 18 ,May 1945,

1st US Infantry Divison reports
Casualties (Tenttive) ..
Killed.....................3,973
Wounded.............. ... 11,448
Missing.". ..... ,..... . - 951
Captured........ .. ,. . .
Battle Casualties.. ....15003 '
Non-Battle Casualties - 14002
Total Casualties .'.''' 29,005
Percent of T/O Strength .. 205.9

Very interesting numbers! Whats "Non battle Casualties" and why does it have a minus sign in front? So does the "missing" column.

The 1st ID suffered over 200% losses during the war? [X(] But I guess you have to weigh in how long they have been in combat. And some wounded would of course return?

[koniu]

ORIGINAL: JocMeister


Very interesting numbers! Whats "Non battle Casualties" and why does it have a minus sign in front? So does the "missing" column.

"Non battle Casualties" = injuries, diseases (physical or mental), accidents, natural deaths, desertions, etc. But all those things dont involving enemy actions.

So if You shoot your self in leg when cleaning weapon You will be "Non battle Casualty"

I found something like that.
http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/ref ... ies-1.html

[paullus99]

US Infantry Divisions, over the course of the European Campaign, took upwards of 300% losses before the end of the war....some, like the 106th, for instance, were at the higher end of that scale (particularly after being blown apart by the initial German onslaught during BoB).

[Barb]

Jock - one one side you find ridiculous how supply can flow to your units far away, yet on the other side you do not seem to be bothered about the fact, that several hundred bombers (Marines included ...) had concentrated on single tank regiment and wiped it out completely in a day ... [8|]

Some say this game is broken ... well I see things much differently [:D]

[JocMeister]

I find it absolutely amazing that "non combat" losses are almost as high as the combat losses. [X(] I mean how much casualties can you have outside combat. I can certainly illness and accidents taking a toll. But almost 15.000 men lost in a single ID is crazy! [X(]

Would that number include people who got sick and temporarily sent to hospital and later be returned? If not what could cause so many "non casualties"?

Barb, I feel the same way about bombings as I do about supply. But its been debated to death. My comment on supply was just a reflection of how easy it is to draw supply even over long distance and crappy roads.

[JocMeister]

ORIGINAL: paullus99

US Infantry Divisions, over the course of the European Campaign, took upwards of 300% losses before the end of the war....some, like the 106th, for instance, were at the higher end of that scale (particularly after being blown apart by the initial German onslaught during BoB).

I wonder how it looked on the Russian and German sides!