Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

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

User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

October 20, 1942

China is an immensely fun war theater...I can't believe most AFBs write it off. The supply/TOE/respawning facets make for a great minigame. Throw in long distance aerial supply, the Burma Road, IJA air superiority, IJA Tanks, IJA Artillery deathstars....well, say no more! Sign me up!!!! :) I am fighting the gamiest tactics possible (nothing wrong with it with our HR ;)) in the Artillery Deathstar combined with the three IJA Tank Divisions! No infantry present. In a scenario one game, there would only be 2 Tank Divisions...those Guards are elite! :o

I am thinking Japan will break into the Central Chungking plains from the east/north axis before they break into the Tuyun/Kwiyang vector....I will keep the 11th LRP for use in Burma, but thinking about flying the African Brigade and letting them dig in across the river from Chungking to the SW.

Letting the 54th Corp take replacements around Paoshan, and the 8th Route Army (communists) take replacements from Chungking (as soon as they get within range). This despite there is only 15k supply in China... :roll:

Need to find a home for the 254th Armored...probably in the nasty terrain with the African Bde...let them dig in this time.
a.jpg
a.jpg (886.96 KiB) Viewed 810 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Lost my fragment of a unit of CD guns here...I think I lost 5 155mm CD guns...but they did their job sinking several small minesweepers. Got another today with an Sboat. :)

Bombardment by Japan have stopped two days after the sinking of the Shokaku...you can see our sub patrol spots...got a real chance to get forts up at Marcus, but I will need more engineers there.


a.jpg
a.jpg (431.22 KiB) Viewed 799 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

a.jpg
a.jpg (463.38 KiB) Viewed 794 times
Spotted... assemble the Copahee ASW team for these guys. ;) They might not stick around though...
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20318
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by BBfanboy »

I have always used the blimps on NavS from LA to cover the approaches to the port. Around Midway, I would have a concern that the Glen subs could put the Glen on Escort and attack the blimps if they get too far from Midway? I don't even know if a Glen has armament or can be on an escort mission but I would check that out. If the ZPKs are safe from air attack, then I think they are best on NavS - too slow to make an ASW attack before the sub gets away. Is night search an option for them?
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

I am very partial to the Blimps, and I want to get them forward to actually fight Iboats....because they are great! :D Plenty fast to nail Iboats, and you can see we got in an attack today from the graphic above.

Radar is 5/42 activation MAD actives 10/42

I wouldn't worry about a IJN floatplane shooting one down. :D

But whether to use them on ASW or Naval search is a very valid one....I used it here at Midway for ASW since these isolated islands tend to get the Iboats wandering into harbor...at least in this game and at this date. That is starting to change as my skill 70 pilots are getting quite adept at spotting the Iboats and the number of searching planes has increased. I suspect a move towards more naval search will be in order as the game progresses.

They are also amphibious which really leads to some flexibility. Here they are compared to a common float plane:

a.jpg
a.jpg (91.69 KiB) Viewed 715 times
User avatar
Encircled
Posts: 2097
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 3:50 pm
Location: Northern England

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Encircled »

My blimps do Nav Search out of SF, LA and SD

Its always fun to imagine them sub hunting of Guadacanal or worse, but it is just a bit of a waste!
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20318
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by BBfanboy »

Lowpe: Plenty fast to nail Iboats
I don't see how - they are armed with bombs and can only attack a surfaced sub. Such a sub would see the blimp a long way off and submerge before it ever got near. The radar and MAD would help with detection, but not attack.
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

October 21, 1942

Lots of Iboats spotted...these two here, two still at Midway...another perhaps between Pearl and LA closer to Pearl.

a.jpg
a.jpg (400.01 KiB) Viewed 645 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Midway...Task Force Jocko has almost 100 ASW points and 29 Avengers. If those Iboats don't move, they will be in for a hurting I think.
b.jpg
b.jpg (289.53 KiB) Viewed 640 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

China is locked into a bitter struggle....but I have some troops to pull out of reserve no pursuit mode today! ;)

admiral.jpg
admiral.jpg (1.06 MiB) Viewed 638 times
Sorry for all the crisscrossing lines! :oops:
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

The Iboat minigame. Lots of fun while our surface fleet upgrades.

b.jpg
b.jpg (377.58 KiB) Viewed 632 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Boy, those Tojos fly high! Interesting fight here, because just prior twin tailed devils shot down 2 Tojos over this hex...and then Hurricanes kept shooting down dribs and drabs (1 or 2) afterwards.

Morning Air attack on 16th Guards Regiment, at 60,44 , near Shwebo

Weather in hex: Partial cloud

Raid spotted at 16 NM, estimated altitude 1,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 4 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-44-IIa Tojo x 5

Allied aircraft
P-39D Airacobra x 20

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-44-IIa Tojo: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
P-39D Airacobra: 1 damaged
P-39D Airacobra: 1 destroyed by flak

Japanese ground losses:
30 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Aircraft Attacking:
16 x P-39D Airacobra bombing from 100 feet
Ground Attack: 1 x 500 lb GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
87th Sentai with Ki-44-IIa Tojo (5 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
(5 plane(s) diverted to support CAP in hex.)
5 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 36000 , scrambling fighters between 0 and 36000.
Raid is overhead
b.jpg
b.jpg (473.42 KiB) Viewed 628 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

BBfanboy wrote: Thu Mar 17, 2022 4:41 am
Lowpe: Plenty fast to nail Iboats
I don't see how - they are armed with bombs and can only attack a surfaced sub. Such a sub would see the blimp a long way off and submerge before it ever got near. The radar and MAD would help with detection, but not attack.
Stop being literal. I believe they are depth charges and not bombs...don't ruin this for me! :lol:

Hey, Encircled, plenty of restricted groups to fly search from the West Coast....those ZPKs are going to war!!! :twisted:
User avatar
Encircled
Posts: 2097
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 3:50 pm
Location: Northern England

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Encircled »

Lowpe wrote: Thu Mar 17, 2022 12:50 pm
BBfanboy wrote: Thu Mar 17, 2022 4:41 am
Lowpe: Plenty fast to nail Iboats
I don't see how - they are armed with bombs and can only attack a surfaced sub. Such a sub would see the blimp a long way off and submerge before it ever got near. The radar and MAD would help with detection, but not attack.
Stop being literal. I believe they are depth charges and not bombs...don't ruin this for me! :lol:

Hey, Encircled, plenty of restricted groups to fly search from the West Coast....those ZPKs are going to war!!! :twisted:
You are only doing it so you get one in air to air combat :D
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Encircled wrote: Thu Mar 17, 2022 12:55 pm
You are only doing it so you get one in air to air combat :D
Nonsense...they have a 50 caliber....going for a confirmed kill. :o
User avatar
MateDow
Posts: 224
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2002 12:00 am

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by MateDow »

I'll be curious to see how your hunter/killer groups do. I have never had good luck with them, so I have reverted to a passive defense of convoy escorts to kill subs. The only exception to that has been groups around Hawai'i keeping the approaches clear.
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Finished the turn, I have two groups out. A SC heavy group with 5 different task forces in between the Gilberts and Baker Island. They are supported by flying boats, float planes and two squadrons of Avengers flying naval search. I don't think I was able to assign any TF Commanders to that group.

TF Jocko, which is Copahee (2 squadrons of Avengers), about 14 destroyers and 4 SC, is moving to Midway and Kure, although only 2 SC and 4 Destroyers will make it to the Iboat location. They are supported by flying boats, SBDs, ZPKs...

The Nassau is hanging out in Tacoma's harbor getting some shakedown cruises done, while 4 SC are headed her way. In a few more days two more CVEs show up at Tacoma and that will make for a very heavy aerially hunter killer group.

What I am lacking right now is night search. Gilberts area has some, but not nearly enough till tomorrow. I am also out of Avenger squadrons.

Also, I am going to add some AMs to each group...preferably those great Australian ones.
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

MateDow wrote: Thu Mar 17, 2022 3:33 pm I'll be curious to see how your hunter/killer groups do. I have never had good luck with them, so I have reverted to a passive defense of convoy escorts to kill subs. The only exception to that has been groups around Hawai'i keeping the approaches clear.
As Japan, I started playing around with multiple 2 ship ASW killer groups. Initial results seemed positive when they hunted in groups of 3 or more supported by Jakes and Kates searching from bases. Didn't really get too far in testing this as I won in 1943.

3 is the optimal number of ASW ships, at least that is what a developer hinted at years back, but my theory is that having 3 size 2 task forces working together, is better than 2 size 3. It is all about the DL...and perhaps the op points.
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Oct 22, 1942

Japan breaks their air attack against four locations, rather than focused on one push....

It was getting a bit shaky but looking much better now...

The 3 Tank Divisions plus Artillery Super Stack attack:

Ground combat at 80,50 (near Changteh)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 19913 troops, 546 guns, 1527 vehicles, Assault Value = 740

Defending force 37963 troops, 187 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 571

Japanese adjusted assault: 424

Allied adjusted defense: 1276

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 3

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), experience(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
515 casualties reported
Squads: 12 destroyed, 10 disabled
Non Combat: 2 destroyed, 18 disabled
Engineers: 6 destroyed, 0 disabled
Vehicles lost 47 (3 destroyed, 44 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
897 casualties reported
Squads: 5 destroyed, 68 disabled
Non Combat: 2 destroyed, 16 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Guns lost 13 (1 destroyed, 12 disabled)
admiral.jpg
admiral.jpg (875.01 KiB) Viewed 524 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

The attack near Ankang, due west roughly, gets beat up pretty well:

Ground combat at 80,43 (near Ankang)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 26686 troops, 290 guns, 134 vehicles, Assault Value = 714

Defending force 31448 troops, 97 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 813

Japanese adjusted assault: 342

Allied adjusted defense: 1606

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 4

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
2562 casualties reported
Squads: 6 destroyed, 203 disabled
Non Combat: 2 destroyed, 27 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 12 disabled
Guns lost 15 (1 destroyed, 14 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
177 casualties reported
Squads: 8 destroyed, 23 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled

Assaulting units:
13th Division
39th Division
3rd Hvy.Artillery Regiment
1st Army
52nd Ind.Mtn.Gun Battalion
1st Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
4th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
11th Field Artillery Regiment

Defending units:
36th Chinese Corps
26th Chinese Corps
71st Chinese Corps
88th Chinese Corps
6th Group Army
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”