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 »

What a leaky perimeter....don't really understand it at all. Kind of feels like cheating. :oops:
b.jpg
b.jpg (675.12 KiB) Viewed 893 times
Probably send my first Corsairs here....not sure. I don't want them naval bombarded. We should be establishing bases from Kusaie to northern New Guinea to Meruake (eastern New Guinea) over the next month...bypassing the large bases and waiting for the battleships to demolish them. Plus we have the Marianas to plan for....3 more CVEs arrived giving me a total of six, seven or eight, something like that. Enterprise still in drydock... and the fast battleships getting another upgrade.

Will be knocking on Truk's doorstep before you know it!
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20337
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

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

Post by BBfanboy »

I'm OK with you using a no-knock entry for Truk! :)
Thanks for sharing your thoughts on how to 'ooze through the cracks' in the perimeter - something I haven't really tried to do. Looks like fun!
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
Encircled
Posts: 2097
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 3:50 pm
Location: Northern England

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

Post by Encircled »

Pretty much every Japanese player who goes for China then relies on garrisoning the perimeter when he's captured it with the troops it frees up

Every allied player has to push as much as he can everywhere else to make that perimeter as small as possible

He's going to have to pull troops out of somewhere as he can't leave it like that!
User avatar
Capt. Harlock
Posts: 5379
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

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

Post by Capt. Harlock »

Lowpe wrote: Mon May 30, 2022 1:54 pm This is the defense of Akyab....will turn off our bombardments because I am trying to tempt Japan into attacking here. Perhaps they will bombard with their warships and then attack!

Ground combat at Akyab (54,45)

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 5224 troops, 131 guns, 124 vehicles, Assault Value = 425

Defending force 37255 troops, 347 guns, 307 vehicles, Assault Value = 721

Allied ground losses:
Guns lost 4 (1 destroyed, 3 disabled)
And maybe you're also turning off the bombardments because the IJA is doing damage to you instead of vice versa? ;)
Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

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

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

Post by Lowpe »

Capt. Harlock wrote: Mon May 30, 2022 8:03 pm
Lowpe wrote: Mon May 30, 2022 1:54 pm This is the defense of Akyab....will turn off our bombardments because I am trying to tempt Japan into attacking here. Perhaps they will bombard with their warships and then attack!

Ground combat at Akyab (54,45)

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 5224 troops, 131 guns, 124 vehicles, Assault Value = 425

Defending force 37255 troops, 347 guns, 307 vehicles, Assault Value = 721

Allied ground losses:
Guns lost 4 (1 destroyed, 3 disabled)
And maybe you're also turning off the bombardments because the IJA is doing damage to you instead of vice versa? ;)
Oh, that is nothing...well within the fog of war. Every other day the bombardment is like that -- a minor loss and when I checked in Tracker it was no loss.
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: Mon May 30, 2022 4:24 pm I'm OK with you using a no-knock entry for Truk! :)
Thanks for sharing your thoughts on how to 'ooze through the cracks' in the perimeter - something I haven't really tried to do. Looks like fun!
I like to get my perimeter pretty well established by June of 42....easy to do with fast transport.

Getting more and more aggressive in the Solomons...and almost ready to pull the trigger on Kusaie.
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: Mon May 30, 2022 4:34 pm Pretty much every Japanese player who goes for China then relies on garrisoning the perimeter when he's captured it with the troops it frees up

Every allied player has to push as much as he can everywhere else to make that perimeter as small as possible

He's going to have to pull troops out of somewhere as he can't leave it like that!
Perimeter pressure is one of my goals as Japan simply can't respond everywhere. Keep looking at the Kuriles while they are relatively empty. A push there might screen the Marianas invasion....
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: Tue May 31, 2022 12:58 am

Perimeter pressure is one of my goals as Japan simply can't respond everywhere. Keep looking at the Kuriles while they are relatively empty. A push there might screen the Marianas invasion....
Yeah, my last game I really was far too cautious in 1942

Hey ho, lessons learnt and all that!
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 so silly....instead of replying to a message I accidentally reported it! :oops: :roll: :!:
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

Dec 23, 1942

Pushing forward...
a.jpg
a.jpg (817.7 KiB) Viewed 702 times
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20337
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

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

Post by BBfanboy »

Lowpe wrote: Tue May 31, 2022 10:17 am I am so silly....instead of replying to a message I accidentally reported it! :oops: :roll: :!:
:lol:
Merely proof that upgrading to a new model forum involves a loss of experience points! :ugeek:
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 »

BBfanboy wrote: Tue May 31, 2022 5:03 pm
Lowpe wrote: Tue May 31, 2022 10:17 am I am so silly....instead of replying to a message I accidentally reported it! :oops: :roll: :!:
:lol:
Merely proof that upgrading to a new model forum involves a loss of experience points! :ugeek:
Well, it was your message I reported! :mrgreen:
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

Dec 24th, 1942


Minor CAP trap over the Chungking plains:
Morning Air attack on 19th Chinese Corps, at 75,44 (Neikiang)

Weather in hex: Light cloud

Raid spotted at 31 NM, estimated altitude 5,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 10 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-51 Sonia x 23

Allied aircraft
P-66 Vanguard x 6

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-51 Sonia: 6 destroyed, 3 damaged

No Allied losses

Allied ground losses:
46 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 6 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Aircraft Attacking:
13 x Ki-51 Sonia bombing from 5000 feet
Ground Attack: 4 x 50 kg GP Bomb
1 x Ki-51 Sonia bombing from 5000 feet
Ground Attack: 4 x 50 kg GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
3rd FG/7th FS CAF with P-66 Vanguard (3 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
3 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 6000 , scrambling fighters between 0 and 6000.
Raid is overhead
3rd FG/8th FS CAF with P-66 Vanguard (3 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
3 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 6000 , scrambling fighters between 0 and 6000.
Raid is overhead

Also attacking 42nd Chinese Corps ...
Also attacking 19th Chinese Corps ...
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

Vengeance hitting the tank Divisions on the long mountain road....lots of flak against them:

Morning Air attack on 1st Tank Division, at 70,45 , near Tsuyung

Weather in hex: Heavy rain

Raid spotted at 34 NM, estimated altitude 14,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 13 minutes

Allied aircraft
P-66 Vanguard x 1
Vengeance I x 14

Allied aircraft losses
Vengeance I: 5 damaged
Vengeance I: 1 destroyed by flak

Japanese ground losses:
5 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Vehicles lost 2 (1 destroyed, 1 disabled)

Aircraft Attacking:
1 x Vengeance I releasing from 10000'
Ground Attack: 2 x 500 lb GP Bomb, 2 x 250 lb GP Bomb
7 x Vengeance I releasing from 2000'
Ground Attack: 2 x 500 lb GP Bomb, 2 x 250 lb GP Bomb
6 x Vengeance I releasing from 3000'
Ground Attack: 2 x 500 lb GP Bomb, 2 x 250 lb GP Bomb

Also attacking Guards Tank Division ...
Also attacking 1st Tank Division ...
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

Liberators doing the same thing:

Morning Air attack on Guards Tank Division, at 70,45 , near Tsuyung

Weather in hex: Heavy rain

Raid spotted at 32 NM, estimated altitude 9,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 10 minutes

Allied aircraft
B-24D Liberator x 24

Allied aircraft losses
B-24D Liberator: 5 damaged

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

Aircraft Attacking:
6 x B-24D Liberator bombing from 7000 feet
Ground Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb
3 x B-24D Liberator bombing from 7000 feet
Ground Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb
9 x B-24D Liberator bombing from 7000 feet
Ground Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb
6 x B-24D Liberator bombing from 7000 feet
Ground Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb

Also attacking 1st Tank Division ...
Also attacking Guards Tank Division ...
Also attacking 1st Tank Division ...
Also attacking Guards Tank Division ...
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

New planes, ships and devices for Jan 1943:

The alphabet destroyer conversion to DE looks intriguing.

Corsairs!

No Barracuda SST that I could find.
a.jpg
a.jpg (476.2 KiB) Viewed 660 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

Should be an interesting turn....invasions at Noumea, Koumac, Horn Island, and a para landing in Papua. Will also test Norfolk Islands garrison again and continue bombing of the IJA tank divisions in the mountains.

Hopefully it will be a Merry Christmas!
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

Dec 25th, 1942


Merry Christmas!


Flipped the turn rather quickly, made one oversight, hoping to get a turn back prior to lunch.



Took: Horn Island, Terapo in Dutch Papua

Invaded: Noumea, Koumac

Forces moving into the Solomons...


A month ago, Japan had just counter invaded Ndeni...now we are moving forward waiting for the KB to pounce.


Air attack on invasion force at Horn Island:

Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Horn Island at 91,128

Weather in hex: Partial cloud

Raid detected at 30 NM, estimated altitude 6,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 10 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M5 Zero x 19
G4M1 Betty x 11

Allied aircraft
P-40E Warhawk x 2
F4F-4 Wildcat x 4

Japanese aircraft losses
G4M1 Betty: 4 damaged
G4M1 Betty: 1 destroyed by flak

Allied aircraft losses
F4F-4 Wildcat: 1 destroyed

Allied Ships
CA Canberra
DD Hull
CA Pensacola
DD Stuart

Aircraft Attacking:
11 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 45cm Type 91 Torp

CAP engaged:
VF-3 with F4F-4 Wildcat (4 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
4 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 19000 , scrambling fighters between 0 and 19000.
Raid is overhead
347th FG/68th FS with P-40E Warhawk (2 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
2 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 29000 , scrambling fighters between 0 and 29000.
Raid is overhead
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

Dec 26, 1942

Moving on Perth! All systems go...not sure how much is left here. Squadron of Nells bombing my Humbers, escorted by Oscars. Kittyhawks on site, Spitfires railing in.
a.jpg
a.jpg (309.51 KiB) Viewed 548 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

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

Post by Lowpe »

Koumac is undamaged and a follow on force will start unloading tomorrow....makes a decent base, can hold lots of troops, sps 7 runway, 1 port. :D

Equal forces at Noumea....but our dogfaces aren't getting shelled daily....soon to be bombed via air force. No hurry to take it....will have 400 AV at Koumac in 2 days and they will leapfrog up into the Solomons. Push forward...
a.jpg
a.jpg (484.82 KiB) Viewed 542 times
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”