Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!)

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 19147
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: Who knows?

RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!)

Post by RangerJoe »

What does the combat state? I do believe that is correct for both sides.
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing! :o

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
:twisted: ; Julia Child


Image
User avatar
rader
Posts: 1241
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 6:06 pm

RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!)

Post by rader »

The combat report matched the Japanese version. I think that's considered the "correct" version, and the other is a spuriously generated one.
User avatar
rader
Posts: 1241
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 6:06 pm

RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!)

Post by rader »

Didn't realize this was an actual ship. Ought to use it as bait for the USS Enterprise :)

Image
Attachments
Kobayashi.jpg
Kobayashi.jpg (83.13 KiB) Viewed 285 times
User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 19147
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: Who knows?

RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!)

Post by RangerJoe »

ORIGINAL: rader

Didn't realize this was an actual ship. Ought to use it as bait for the USS Enterprise :)

Image

Oh yes, they did put it in the game![:D]
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing! :o

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
:twisted: ; Julia Child


Image
User avatar
rader
Posts: 1241
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 6:06 pm

RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!)

Post by rader »

June 16, 1943.

Minor naval skirmish off the coast of Western Australia. The Allies lost 2 DDs to Japan's 1 DD and 1 AV. It should have gone a lot better for Japan - a Japanese TF of 1 CA, 4 DD found 4 Allied DDs in daylight but the CA (Atago) didn't engage and the Allied DDs got away with sinking a Japanese DD and then making a break for it (but not before two of them ate long lance torpedoes and promptly went to the bottom).



Image
Attachments
Kobayashi.jpg
Kobayashi.jpg (75.62 KiB) Viewed 285 times
User avatar
rader
Posts: 1241
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 6:06 pm

RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!)

Post by rader »

June 17, 1943.

Minor 3 DD vs 3 DD skirmish off the coast of Western Australia, trying to run down the remaining destroyers from the day before. One British destroyer ate a long lance and went down.

Also, near Milne Bay, a Dutch sub torpedoed I-22 and she sank fast.


Image
Attachments
image.jpg
image.jpg (262.61 KiB) Viewed 285 times
User avatar
rader
Posts: 1241
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 6:06 pm

RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!)

Post by rader »

Also some night bombing and managed to bring down 3x B-24s at a cost of 23 sacrificial bait fighters [8|]

Image
Attachments
image.jpg
image.jpg (97.55 KiB) Viewed 285 times
User avatar
rader
Posts: 1241
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 6:06 pm

RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!)

Post by rader »

Ugh... game on hold for 3 weeks as my esteemed opponent replaces his broken computer [:(]
User avatar
PaxMondo
Posts: 10835
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:23 pm

RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!)

Post by PaxMondo »

ouch!


[:(][X(][:(]
Pax
User avatar
rader
Posts: 1241
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 6:06 pm

RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!)

Post by rader »

We're back at it after the 2.5 week computer outage hiatus.

Quite a lot of air losses today over India as I tried to bomb some of his 4E bases and some Flak losses over Darwin as I tried to delay the return of the Allies in force.

He's got quite a lot of units and Flak at Darwin... not sure I'll be able to stop the buildup this time. He could be back in Darwin to stay.

Image
Attachments
image.jpg
image.jpg (283.12 KiB) Viewed 285 times
User avatar
rader
Posts: 1241
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 6:06 pm

RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!)

Post by rader »

Another day of major airframe losses as his 4Es prove unstoppable again, this time at Chungking.

Image
Attachments
image.jpg
image.jpg (96.36 KiB) Viewed 284 times
User avatar
rader
Posts: 1241
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 6:06 pm

RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!)

Post by rader »

July 4, 1943.

Our houserule on no strat bombing expired July 1, so now it's open season and the Allied 4Es have been torching every city in range since the start of the month. Today it was Rangoon's turn.

Image
Attachments
Rangoon.jpg
Rangoon.jpg (49.83 KiB) Viewed 284 times
DesertWolf101
Posts: 1722
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2016 1:06 pm

RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!)

Post by DesertWolf101 »

What is the CV balance like thus far?
User avatar
rader
Posts: 1241
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 6:06 pm

RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!)

Post by rader »

ORIGINAL: DesertWolf101

What is the CV balance like thus far?

Basically no one has lost any carriers yet because he has kept them hidden the whole war and I've been fairly cautious with them too.
User avatar
rader
Posts: 1241
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 6:06 pm

RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!)

Post by rader »

July 5, 1943

In Burma, a strong advancing Allied army compels Japanese forces to abandon Myitkiyna - no big loss because we were having trouble supplying it anyway.

4Es hit the Magwe oil hard at night but are met by both fighters who die in droves and massed flak guns that take down a large complement of Liberators. Porobably an exchange favoring the Japanese despite the loss of so many fighters.

Image
Attachments
image.jpg
image.jpg (278.54 KiB) Viewed 284 times
User avatar
rader
Posts: 1241
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 6:06 pm

RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!)

Post by rader »

In the East, Rabaul is feeling more and more under siege with each passing day as the Milne Bay and Port Morsesby airfields build and a large Allied army advances on Buna. Rabaul will likely either fall or be isolated within a matter of months.

Image
Attachments
image.jpg
image.jpg (191.29 KiB) Viewed 284 times
DesertWolf101
Posts: 1722
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2016 1:06 pm

RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!)

Post by DesertWolf101 »

I'm curious about your experience with the Tojo B. I was thinking of skipping directly from the A to the C version given the inaccuracy of the 40mm cannons. Would you suggest I reconsider this decision, do you find that they are effective against bombers?
User avatar
Bif1961
Posts: 2014
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 11:52 pm
Location: Phenix City, Alabama

RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!)

Post by Bif1961 »

The Ploesti raid of Burma?
User avatar
PaxMondo
Posts: 10835
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:23 pm

RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!)

Post by PaxMondo »

Tojo-b is a miss-step in the eyes of most players. The 40mm fire at such a slow rate that the hit rate is a rare event.
Pax
User avatar
rader
Posts: 1241
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 6:06 pm

RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!)

Post by rader »

ORIGINAL: DesertWolf101

I'm curious about your experience with the Tojo B. I was thinking of skipping directly from the A to the C version given the inaccuracy of the 40mm cannons. Would you suggest I reconsider this decision, do you find that they are effective against bombers?

We have a houserule that I can't "skip" models - so I need to research B (up to one month remaining) before I switch to C. I already have C but I'm using up my stockpiles of B first.

I'd say the B model is somewhere in between the A and C models. The centerline HMGs of the B version are good. The 40mms maybe occasionally do something, hard to tell, but they certainly aren't killers. The C version has probably better argument with 4x HMGs (still not stellar) and armor. None of them really compare to the Frank, except their service ratings are a lot better.
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”