AAR: Istfemer (A) vs zeke99 (J)

Pacific War is a free update of the old classic, available in our Downloads section.
User avatar
Hattori Hanzo
Posts: 757
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 12:40 pm
Location: Okinawa
Contact:

RE: AAR: Istfemer (A) vs zeke99 (J)

Post by Hattori Hanzo »

Hattori Hanzo, Nice pic! Adds some warm colours to this thread, I think.

I really love the style of your AAR and the "Sex & War" pulp magazine picture is my "little contribution" to it [8D]
Istfemer
Posts: 190
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2014 9:45 am
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine

RE: AAR: Istfemer (A) vs zeke99 (J)

Post by Istfemer »

Situation on 8/02/42
---
CBI:
Airstrikes on Dacca and Mandalay. Japanese don't do much damage.
China. Japanese bombed Chungking and destroyed 1 howitzer. Allies responded with a night raid on Tientsin supply depots. Moderate damage was reported.

Australia:
Since Rockhampton has been secured and there are no signs of Japanese presence nearby, it is Townsville which will be enduring Allied airstrikes in the foreseeable future.

South Pacific:
Japanese bombarded Ellice I. and tried to land there but were thrown back into the sea. Good thing that I reinforced Ellice beforehand.
TF 30, led by Rear Admiral Kimura, was counterattacked by a mixed group of Wellingtons/B-17s from Fiji. Sixty-six tac bombers did significant damage to TF 30 and even sank 2 DDs (Fubuki- and Hatsuharu-class). This is how the amphibious assault went:

### Lt General Horii vs. Rear Admiral Turner
Losses: 19 squads, 2 arty, 2 afvs for Japanese; 1 squad for Allies. Odds 0.
### --
Losses: 48 squads, 3 arty, 3 afvs for Japanese; 36 squads, 1 arty for Allies. Odds 0.
### --
Losses: 41 squads, 4 arty, 1 afvs for Japanese; 51 squads for Allies. Odds 0.
### General Terauchi vs. Rear Admiral Turner
Losses: 34 squads, 7 arty, 1 afvs for Japanese; 19 squads, 1 arty for Allies. Odds 0. The Japanese 56th Inf Div left the atoll in disgrace.

TFs 51 & 52 wisely obeyed my orders and took the southern route (northeast of Fiji), not the northern one (just south of Ellice). Japanese carriers were parked at the spot two squares north of Ellice I. Since they couldn't bomb my recon floatplanes and didn't attack any land targets, I can only assume that the carriers were waiting for my ships to pass by.

Elsewhere:
Nauru depots, the poor Nauru depots... are burning again. No rain to put the fires out, no rain.

Weekly sub/antisub operations:
We sank 1 Japanese merchant.
Japanese sank 1 Allied merchant and 1 submarine.

Image
Attachments
BmbrdmntEllice.jpg
BmbrdmntEllice.jpg (65.81 KiB) Viewed 198 times
User avatar
Hattori Hanzo
Posts: 757
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 12:40 pm
Location: Okinawa
Contact:

RE: AAR: Istfemer (A) vs zeke99 (J)

Post by Hattori Hanzo »

August will be the month of the Allied revenge [:D]

can you provide an estimate of losses and victory points of both parts up to this point ?
Istfemer
Posts: 190
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2014 9:45 am
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine

RE: AAR: Istfemer (A) vs zeke99 (J)

Post by Istfemer »

ORIGINAL: Hattori Hanzo
August will be the month of the Allied revenge [:D]
Yes. August 1943. (also August 1944, and August 1945 too, and even possibly August 1946 as well [;)])

The not-quite-successful, the more-costly-than-expected.....
### Operation "Liberation of Espiritu Santo" has ended ###

Stats attached.

Image
Attachments
ScoreAndLossesAug42.jpg
ScoreAndLossesAug42.jpg (54.99 KiB) Viewed 199 times
Istfemer
Posts: 190
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2014 9:45 am
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine

RE: AAR: Istfemer (A) vs zeke99 (J)

Post by Istfemer »

Situation on 8/09/42
---
CBI:
A few small air clashes happened over Rangoon. Nothing important.

Australia:
Obsolete Japanese fighters tried to challenge my P-40s over Rockhampton, but my P-40s prevailed and shot them all down. Losses: 75 A5Ms/Ki-27s downed vs. 33 Warhawks lost.

South Pacific:
140 Zeroes and 15 Nells attacked Fiji. 56 P-40 Warhawks destroyed the bombers but took heavy losses themselves. Another enemy fighter sweep cleared the sky of Allied fighters. Two Japanese ACTFs circled Ellice and stopped at the spot 2 squares south of it. Allied tac bombers attacked the Japanese carriers multiple times. A few 500 lb. bombs fell on the carriers but didn't do any damage. I lost 136 tac bombers; gunners shot down 26 Zeroes -- it wasn't worth it. TFs 51 & 52 reached the safe waters of the eastern South Pacific. So at least something went right.

Elsewhere:
Finally! Japanese soldiers landed on Nauru and put out the raging fires themselves. It took them 8 full months to capture this tiny atoll -- can you believe that?

Allies reinforced Adak Island. Soldiers seem to like their new base of operations.

Weekly sub/antisub operations:
We sank 1 Japanese merchant.
Istfemer
Posts: 190
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2014 9:45 am
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine

RE: AAR: Istfemer (A) vs zeke99 (J)

Post by Istfemer »

Situation on 8/16/42
---
CBI:
Japanese planes tried to bomb the supply depots of Imphal&Kohima. Allied fighters intercepted.
Losses: 40 Japanese fighters, 8 bombers shot down vs. 58 Allied fighters lost.

Australia:
Townsville. A 'relaxed' air bombing campaign, initiated by me, has started here. Japanese beware!

South Pacific:
130 Zeroes and 12 Nells attacked Fiji. Warhawks and Wildcats intercepted.
Total losses: 27 Japanese fighters, 5 bombers shot down vs. 49 Allied fighters lost in the air. 17 planes were destroyed on the ground.
It's tough to put up a good defence against such overwhelming forces.

Weekly sub/antisub operations:
A Grimsby DE was nearly sunk on a route between Hawaii and Los Angeles.
Istfemer
Posts: 190
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2014 9:45 am
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine

RE: AAR: Istfemer (A) vs zeke99 (J)

Post by Istfemer »

Situation on 8/23/42
---
A very quiet week. Nothing really interesting happened.

CBI:
Japanese planes bombed the supply depots of Imphal&Kohima once again. This time Allied fighters did not intercept them. (too costly)

China as usual --- Japanese planes strike my depots & harass my LCUs here all the time.

Australia:
At Townsville, my relaxed air bombing campaign continued.

South Pacific:
Fiji's supply depots were bombed by 140 Japanese fighters and 15 bombers. My fighters were ordered to not engage them and they didn't.

Weekly sub/antisub operations:
We sank 7 Japanese merchants.
Japanese sank 1 Allied merchant.
Istfemer
Posts: 190
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2014 9:45 am
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine

RE: AAR: Istfemer (A) vs zeke99 (J)

Post by Istfemer »

Situation on 8/30/42
---
CBI:
Japanese planes chose Dacca as their target for this week's bombing. I do not approve of this.

China as usual.

Australia:
At Townsville, my relaxed air bombing campaign continued.

And the big news: my long-lost 1st Armoured Brigade has returned!
In late February 1942, a large Allied transport TF was attacked by Japanese bombers on its way from Cairns to Brisbane. Allies lost 7 APs that week. In the aftermath of these attacks the 1st Australian Armoured was completely depleted of men and materiel. (not that it had a lot to begin with) Transports carrying the empty brigade arrived in port on the 1st of March and my brigade subsequently disappeared. It's great to have it back. More strong (friendly) offensive units in Australia and everywhere, please.

South Pacific:
Fiji's supply depots were bombed again by Japanese fighters and bombers. Such raids are expected to continue.
New Zealand was reinforced with a few fighter & bomber groups and a full US division.

Weekly sub/antisub operations:
We sank 4 Japanese merchants.
Japanese sank 2 Allied submarines.
Istfemer
Posts: 190
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2014 9:45 am
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine

RE: AAR: Istfemer (A) vs zeke99 (J)

Post by Istfemer »

Situation on 9/06/42
---
CBI:
Mandalay & Imphal were the targets this week. Air battles over Imphal:
Japanese lost: 25 fighters, 4 bombers.
Allies lost: 46 P-40s in the air, 2 B-17s on the ground.

China as usual.

Australia:
At Townsville, my relaxed air bombing campaign continued.

South Pacific:
Fiji was bombed again by Zeroes & Bettys.
I require stronger, more maneuverable fighter aircraft. Aircraft like the P-38G Lightning (which has just entered production) and the F4U-1 Corsair (can't wait to get my hands on these).

Weekly sub/antisub operations:
We sank 6 Japanese merchants and 2 tankers.
Japanese sank 1 Allied submarine.
Istfemer
Posts: 190
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2014 9:45 am
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine

RE: AAR: Istfemer (A) vs zeke99 (J)

Post by Istfemer »

Situation on 9/13/42
---
It's quiet, too quiet.

CBI:
Kunming. Allied tac bombers raided Nanning airfield, destroyed 2 planes on the ground and lost 2 of their own. Incredible performance.

Australia:
At Townsville, my relaxed air bombing campaign continued.

South Pacific:
Fiji endured multiple airstrikes on supply depots. It's the new norm.

Weekly sub/antisub operations:
We sank 1 Japanese merchant and 1 tanker.
Istfemer
Posts: 190
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2014 9:45 am
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine

RE: AAR: Istfemer (A) vs zeke99 (J)

Post by Istfemer »

Situation on 9/20/42
---
CBI:
Chungking. Another Allied attack on those pesky Tientsin depots/oil facilities. Supply depot sustained light damage, oil industry sustained moderate damage. Good.

Australia:
At Townsville, my relaxed air bombing campaign continued.

South Pacific:
Fiji endured multiple airstrikes on supply depots, as per the new norm.

Weekly sub/antisub operations:
We sank 3 Japanese merchants and 1 tanker.
User avatar
Hattori Hanzo
Posts: 757
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 12:40 pm
Location: Okinawa
Contact:

RE: AAR: Istfemer (A) vs zeke99 (J)

Post by Hattori Hanzo »

do you have played the above 7 turns in a day... ??? [X(]
Istfemer
Posts: 190
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2014 9:45 am
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine

RE: AAR: Istfemer (A) vs zeke99 (J)

Post by Istfemer »

ORIGINAL: Hattori Hanzo
do you have played the above 7 turns in a day... ??? [X(]
Er.. no. I wish I could do that. [:D] These are the 'leftovers' from late 2015.
User avatar
Hattori Hanzo
Posts: 757
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 12:40 pm
Location: Okinawa
Contact:

RE: AAR: Istfemer (A) vs zeke99 (J)

Post by Hattori Hanzo »

so now, at which date of the campaign you two are ?
Istfemer
Posts: 190
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2014 9:45 am
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine

RE: AAR: Istfemer (A) vs zeke99 (J)

Post by Istfemer »

so now, at which date of the campaign you two are ?
9/20/42
It is quiet everywhere. We are building up our forces for... SOMETHING. I still have a lot of ships left in the repair queue.
Istfemer
Posts: 190
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2014 9:45 am
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine

RE: AAR: Istfemer (A) vs zeke99 (J)

Post by Istfemer »

Situation on 9/27/42
---
CBI:
Allied a/c bombed the supply depots of Rangoon (moderate damage) instead of going after Japanese shipping. Why, why, why?
In response to this uninspired act, 30 Jap fighters and 30 bombers from Rangoon bombed Mandalay. Unsuccessfully. Losses: 7 Ki-43 Hayabusas, 26 Ki-32s for Japanese vs. 3 Wildcats for Allies. No damage was done to the friendly supply depot. There were also lots of fighter sweeps. Ki-43 Hayabusas vs. Warhawks & Wildcats (losses not in our favour). Ki-27 Setsus vs. Warhawks & Wildcats. Hurricanes vs. Ki-43 Hayabusas.

The Japanese air force was very active on Chinese front this week: 174 bombers (from Hainan, Hong Kong, Nanning, Nanhsiung) bombed Kweilen twice. Kunming also got hammered.

Australia:
At Townsville, my relaxed air bombing campaign continued.

South Pacific:
Fiji endured multiple airstrikes on supply depots, as per the new norm.

Weekly sub/antisub operations:
We sank 7 Japanese merchants.
User avatar
Capt. Harlock
Posts: 5379
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

RE: AAR: Istfemer (A) vs zeke99 (J)

Post by Capt. Harlock »

Allied a/c bombed the supply depots of Rangoon (moderate damage) instead of going after Japanese shipping. Why, why, why?

That has been a problem in Pacific War for its entire existence. The program heavily favors industry and supply dumps when targeting bases. Setting the bombers to the Naval Inderdiction mission will solve this, but then they won't attack anything else but ships.

I've had a little luck using Beauforts and Beaufighters, the only Allied medium bombers that can carry torpedoes. This payload option seems to make them somewhat more likely to go after shipping.
Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo
Ian R
Posts: 3440
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Cammeraygal Country

RE: AAR: Istfemer (A) vs zeke99 (J)

Post by Ian R »

[;)]

Image
"I am Alfred"
User avatar
Capt. Harlock
Posts: 5379
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

RE: AAR: Istfemer (A) vs zeke99 (J)

Post by Capt. Harlock »

Beauforts and Beaufighters, the only Allied medium bombers that can carry torpedoes.

Mea culpa. Forgot about the USMC Mitchell squadrons.
Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo
User avatar
Hattori Hanzo
Posts: 757
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 12:40 pm
Location: Okinawa
Contact:

RE: AAR: Istfemer (A) vs zeke99 (J)

Post by Hattori Hanzo »

the torpedoes trick seem to work [:D]
Post Reply

Return to “Pacific War: The Matrix Edition”