cap_and_gown(j) v witpqs(a) - no witpqs

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

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

User avatar
castor troy
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:17 am
Location: Austria

RE: The butcher's bill

Post by castor troy »

ORIGINAL: cap_and_gown

Sept. 30, 1943

Holy Cow! Another allied sub sunk by Japanese AC. This is the 3rd in 4 days and the 6th confirmed sinking overall. Time to reload the sonobouys!

Allies capture Enewetok with the 138 (sep) regiment.

KB is about one day sailing from northern Marianas.



Image


guess none of them are actually sunk, you would be lucky to see one of them hit (of those that are reported hit). I´m only one month late in my PBEM compared to your date and while the Japanese received probably hundreds of "hit" messages (and sinkings [:D]) the enemy managed to sink ONE sub so far. And that one went down due to having 69 sys rather than a high flt damage as it started out with 14 or so flt, but the sys was responsible for seeing the flt go dramatically up. But like I´ve said, the enemy sunk one so far and out of a dozen "hits" only perhaps one is a damaging one. [:D]

Normally my subs (those that are actually hit by air asw) end up with a dozen sys and perhaps 20 flt damage after taking a bomb "hit"...
Rainer79
Posts: 603
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 7:49 am
Location: Austria

RE: The butcher's bill

Post by Rainer79 »

Sigh...

Actually I get 3-4 "hit" messages every turn. I am amazed that the US boats actually take so few damage from 250 kg bombs. Combined with the super-charged repair routine there are back in their patrol zone in record time. Still, the ratio is better than against PT boats or LCTs. None of the hundreds of "hits" against those targets seems to have caused damage.
User avatar
Q-Ball
Posts: 7392
Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2002 4:43 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois

RE: The butcher's bill

Post by Q-Ball »

I get FOW and all, but it would be nice if the routine was changed to put the number of bomb hits closer to actual, instead of it being completely bogus.
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: The butcher's bill

Post by Canoerebel »

By late '43 in my game against Miller, Japanese ASW was hammering Allied subs. By 1944 the carnage inflicted on Allied subs was unbelievable. So, early in the game Japanese ASW is worthless, but late in the game it is potent far beyond what it should be from a historical standpoint.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
janh
Posts: 1215
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 12:06 pm

RE: The butcher's bill

Post by janh »

Probably because player put much more emphasis on preparing and training it than historically? Plus, they maybe make much more use of the convoy system, which the Japanese were notoriously slow in bringing to use.
User avatar
CapAndGown
Posts: 3078
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Virginia, USA

The Hunt for Red October

Post by CapAndGown »

Oct. 1, 1943

This is becoming insane. Another allied sub sunk by Japanese AC. Or at least I assume that is what caused a sub to sink. I heard the sinking sound, but I am not sure who sank and who did the sinking. Tracker reports that the Skipjack bought the farm. OK. That may be FOW, but someone sank.

That makes 4 allied subs sunk by AC in 5 days. I know that RNG's generate streaks, but boy, this is weird. Maybe it has to do with the sheer number of subs the allies have out there. There must be dozens and dozens lurking around Truk and still more lurking in the Banda Sea. They are as likely to run into each other as a Japanese ship.

At least the allies got some payback today: the SS Bluefish torpedoed and sank the I-23.

So in the air we have Japanese Orions hunting down and killing allied subs, and at sea we have allied Dallas class SSN's sinking Japanese diesel-electric boats. We seem to be caught in a Tom Clancy novel.
User avatar
CapAndGown
Posts: 3078
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Virginia, USA

I hate subs

Post by CapAndGown »

Oct. 6, 1943

I hate subs. Even my own. Sub warfare is not fun. I want to see surface fights and/or carrier fights. Those are interesting. Subs are just plain boring.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Johnston Island at 159,107

Japanese Ships
SS I-15

Allied Ships
CVL Princeton, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
DD Lansdowne

I have no idea why Princeton was out there. It was on a route that ships returning from the Marshalls to Pearl Harbor would use. I wonder if it was returning to the shipyards to repair damage from a collision? It is listed as sunk, but that is highly improbable. No carrier planes are listed as ground casualties, and one torpedo generally is not enough short of an ammo explosion.

Right now the allies are delivering base forces and engineers to Kusaie Island. This delivery is being covered by the US carriers (minus Princeton, of course). I saw them getting set up for this delivery and was sorely tempted to attack with the KB. Unfortunately, the KB was just far enough away that it did not look like I would be able to guarantee they would be in position at the optimal moment and time. So we bide our time waiting for another opportunity.

I am not sure what the allies are going to do next. They could reinforce Enewetok, since there are no base forces there yet. Or they could go straight for Ponape. That is what I am hoping for. Or they could go south to Naru. For some reason they have been giving Naru a lot of attention with their 4E bomber force. Not sure why. They may be aiming for the supplies. Or they could be worried about its use as an airbase, though why I am not sure.

Image
Attachments
Ihatesubs.jpg
Ihatesubs.jpg (57.91 KiB) Viewed 127 times
User avatar
Chickenboy
Posts: 24642
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 11:30 pm
Location: San Antonio, TX

RE: I hate subs

Post by Chickenboy »

ORIGINAL: cap_and_gown

Oct. 6, 1943

I hate subs. Even my own. Sub warfare is not fun. I want to see surface fights and/or carrier fights. Those are interesting. Subs are just plain boring.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Johnston Island at 159,107

Japanese Ships
SS I-15

Allied Ships
CVL Princeton, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
DD Lansdowne

I have no idea why Princeton was out there. It was on a route that ships returning from the Marshalls to Pearl Harbor would use. I wonder if it was returning to the shipyards to repair damage from a collision? It is listed as sunk, but that is highly improbable. No carrier planes are listed as ground casualties, and one torpedo generally is not enough short of an ammo explosion.

Right now the allies are delivering base forces and engineers to Kusaie Island. This delivery is being covered by the US carriers (minus Princeton, of course). I saw them getting set up for this delivery and was sorely tempted to attack with the KB. Unfortunately, the KB was just far enough away that it did not look like I would be able to guarantee they would be in position at the optimal moment and time. So we bide our time waiting for another opportunity.

I am not sure what the allies are going to do next. They could reinforce Enewetok, since there are no base forces there yet. Or they could go straight for Ponape. That is what I am hoping for. Or they could go south to Naru. For some reason they have been giving Naru a lot of attention with their 4E bomber force. Not sure why. They may be aiming for the supplies. Or they could be worried about its use as an airbase, though why I am not sure.

Image
Perhaps they're picking on Nauru because its size permits sizeable numbers of defenders? Alternatively, its value as a resource source may be overestimated by an Allied opponent too-he may be picking on its defenders on the mistaken assumption of its resource value to you.
Image
User avatar
CapAndGown
Posts: 3078
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Virginia, USA

RE: I hate subs

Post by CapAndGown »

Oct. 9, 1943

I still hate subs. Good thing I am wounding and killing lots of them!

Another allied sub was sunk this turn. Not sure by whom or where, just heard the sinking sound. Over the last few turns we have had several subs listed as being sunk by 250kg bombs. Most of that is no doubt BS. But it probably does mean we are getting hits. I had an ASW TF severely damage the Halibut. Interestingly, Halibut was also attacked by Helens and is listed as being sunk by a 250kg bomb, not a depth charge. I guess bombs are bigger. OTOH, no sinking sound and the icon was still there during the orders phase. So who knows?

Right now this is just a numbers game. I can see 21 subs this turn between Guam and the Admiralty Islands. if this is just 1/4 of the subs in that region, then there may be 100 of them out there. Add in the subs in the Banda Sea, those around the Solomons, and those up near Japan and yeah, we are going to be getting a lot of hits. When there are that many subs out there my pilots could drop rocks at random intervals and probably hit something once and a while.

Well, this makes 7 subs most likely sunk by AC, and 5 in the last 2 weeks.
User avatar
CapAndGown
Posts: 3078
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Virginia, USA

RE: I hate subs

Post by CapAndGown »

Oct. 13, 1943

Another allied sub sunk by AC. Good thing my AC can sink them, because nothing else can, apparently. Just lost an APD to a British sub. Mostly my ASW ships fail to prosecute attacks against subs they find. Currently I am trying to smother the Seawolf, which is just off Singapore, with something like 8-9 ASW TFs. Even though it is shallow water, I have not had any luck.

Allies have been invading some dot bases around the Marshalls, such as Bikini. Not sure why. They also continue to bomb Nauru. Again, I don't know why. The allied carriers are currently just west of Kwajalein. I am hoping that an invasion of Ponape is about to kick off. I am getting impatient. I have worked out a counter attack plan that I very much would like to implement as soon as possible.
User avatar
CapAndGown
Posts: 3078
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Virginia, USA

RE: I hate subs

Post by CapAndGown »

Oct. 14, 1943

I guess one way to turn my subs into unstoppable killing machines is to force them to surface:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submarine attack near Maloelap at 148,116

Japanese Ships
SS I-164, hits 9, heavy damage

Allied Ships
DD Nicholson
xAK Zoella Lykes, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
xAK Cape Fear, Shell hits 1, Torpedo hits 1


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


SS I-164 launches 4 torpedoes at DD Nicholson
I-164 diving deep ....
DD Nicholson attacking submerged sub ....
SS I-164 forced to surface!
. . . .
Sub slips beneath the waves

Amazingly, after all that, the I-164 still has not sunk. It will probably sink next turn. It has 98 float damage. But I decided not to scuttle her just out of curiosity. It would be very ironic if the I-164 makes it since during the turn I heard the sound of a sub sinking, and it wasn't my sub! Instead, it looks like the S-31 got hit just south of Rabaul. The hex it was in during the combat replay was empty during the orders phase.

I am now up to 9 subs sunk by AC and 7 in the last month. (Well, there is a little FOW there since I am not sure if the Halibut was one of those subs. If so, it was a combined AC/ASW TF effort.)

The Allies have based 24-J's in the Marshalls and bombed Ponape today. They also swept the place from Kusaie with Corsairs. I was not flying CAP, but lost 3 pilots KIA anyway from planes destroyed on the ground. This bugs the hell out of me. I don't care about the planes, but the point of not flying was to keep the pilots healthy. But that doesn't work.

Not sure if the allies are going to move on Ponape yet. I hope so. I am ready.
User avatar
CapAndGown
Posts: 3078
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Virginia, USA

RE: I hate subs

Post by CapAndGown »

My opponent let slip in his latest email that 3 subs have been sunk in the last three days, not just the two I was sure about. That is 10 subs by AC overall, 8 in the last month.

A note on my ASW AC:

I am using Helens at maximum range.
No search arc set.
Trained on ASW to >60
I am not sure, but I think LowN is important too, in this case LowN > 60.
Altitude is set at 1000 feet.
60% ASW 40% Rest

FatR
Posts: 2522
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 10:04 am
Location: St.Petersburg, Russia

RE: I hate subs

Post by FatR »

Wow. I need to start training more squadrons for ASW purposes.
The Reluctant Admiral mod team.

Take a look at the latest released version of the Reluctant Admiral mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/
User avatar
KenchiSulla
Posts: 2956
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 3:19 pm
Location: the Netherlands

RE: I hate subs

Post by KenchiSulla »

I have used several types of aircraft for ASW purposes. As long as they carry 250 kg bombs you should be able to sink subs. It is my experience that lownav does not matter. Just ASW skill 60+ (I have some pilots up to 74-75 skill)and low altitude (100 ft). I estimate I sank 10+ subs in the last few months (confirmation by sound) by mostly ASW air and I am in oktober 1942.

Helens would be well suited because I have started to notice increased losses to my sally bombers by submarine flak hits..
AKA Cannonfodder

"It happened, therefore it can happen again: this is the core of what we have to say. It can happen, and it can happen everywhere.”
¯ Primo Levi, writer, holocaust survivor
User avatar
CapAndGown
Posts: 3078
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Virginia, USA

Battle Stations!

Post by CapAndGown »

Oct. 15, 1943

All Hands Battle Stations!

An allied fleet is entering the Timor Sea. I find it very difficult to believe this is an invasion since the allied fleet carriers are still over in the Marshall's. Nevertheless, this needs to be treated as a serious threat. It could be supported by the British CVs which are not accounted for, even though they are not very big. It could be that witpqs will be using LBA, though that seems very iffy, especially since there has not been any air activity in this sector. Maybe this is a diversion to draw off my carrier strength. I will not, however, allow my carriers to be diverted, not when their main prey is still lurking in the central Pacific.

This turn took forever to execute. I took numerous actions to prepare for a possible invasion in the lower DEI. Fighter and bomber squadrons were moved into the Timor region in large numbers. Nells are teamed up with Zero's and set to use torpedoes. Helen's are teamed up with Tojo's are are set to naval attack at 1000 feet. (They are all trained on LowN > 60.) Almost every transport AC in my air fleet was moved to the Celebes in preparation to fly in reinforcements to whatever base is threatened. A reserve division at Singapore was switched out of Strat mode to combat mode so it could board an amphibious invasion fleet. Another division on Java is being moved to Sorebaja in preparation for being loaded on an amphibious invasion fleet. AKs and LSDs at Rabaul will move to team up with escorts tomorrow and then set sail for the DEI. A cruiser TF at Tobali is heading for Sorebaja and then to Kendari, while my Kongo class BBs, along with another cruiser TF are setting sail from Wolei for Kendari. More cruisers and BBs are currently at Singapore and will be formed up in to TFs tomorrow after I check that the allied subs in the area have not laid mines there. Additional AC that were not able to make it to Timor in one jump will have to be rebased again next turn. I am afraid, however, that I have been caught a little off guard, since I do not have surface assets immediately available. The Wolei forces are 4 days away, while the Tobali TF is 2-3 days away.

I see several possibilities here. The allies may be looking to establish a beach head at Roti. They reconed it quite heavily earlier and it does not have a very strong garrison: just an naval guard unit. This target, however, would put the allies into the middle of a hornet's nest of interlocking Japanese bases. Another alternative is that they are going for Samlauki and the bases around it. This would allow them to have multiple bases making it harder for me to keep them suppressed. The allies have been reconning Samlauki every day for at least a month. Another possibility is that this is just a reinforcement convoy for Darwin. That seems unlikely. It is too big and too exposed for that, it seems to me. Finally, this is merely a diversion to draw off my CVs in preparation for an invasion of either Nauru or Ponape. Of course, it could be both a diversion and an invasion as well. Only time will tell.

I have done what I can for now, short of sending the KB. I hope that it is enough, although I am rather concerned.

Image
Attachments
Timor.jpg
Timor.jpg (124.28 KiB) Viewed 127 times
User avatar
CapAndGown
Posts: 3078
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Virginia, USA

RE: Battle Stations!

Post by CapAndGown »

Oct. 16, 1943

From all indications, the allied task forces spotted entering the Timor Sea yesterday were meant to deliver a large amount of supply and fuel to Darwin. They will probably still be able to deliver a significant amount, but a lot less than what they started with. They have also lost a good deal of their surface escorts:

Morning
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 8
Ki-49-IIa Helen x 31
Ki-49-IIb Helen x 13

Afternoon
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Japanese aircraft
A6M3a Zero x 30
G3M3 Nell x 18
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Japanese aircraft
Ki-49-IIa Helen x 9
Ki-49-IIb Helen x 12
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 8
Ki-49-IIa Helen x 22
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Japanese aircraft
Ki-49-IIa Helen x 13

Ships [ships listed more than once were attacked in multiple raids]
CL Java, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
CL Java, Bomb hits 3, and is sunk
CL Sumatra, Bomb hits 3, heavy fires, heavy damage
DD Stuart, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires
DD La Triomphant
DD Rotherham
PG Herald, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage

xAK Bhima, Bomb hits 3, heavy fires
xAK Bhima, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires, heavy damage
xAK Catrine, Bomb hits 1
xAK Catrine, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires, heavy damage
xAK Vera, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires
xAK Vera, Bomb hits 3, heavy fires, heavy damage

xAK La Cordillera, Bomb hits 1
xAK African Prince, Bomb hits 1, on fire
xAK Ettrickbank, Bomb hits 3, heavy fires, heavy damage
xAK Indira, Bomb hits 6, heavy fires, heavy damage
xAK Stanmore, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
xAK Bengalen, Torpedo hits 3, and is sunk
xAK Risaldar, Bomb hits 2, on fire
xAK Cornish City, Bomb hits 3, heavy fires, heavy damage
xAK Salween, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires, heavy damage

So, it does not appear as if an invasion is immanent. Nevertheless, I plan on getting some surface forces into position so as to try to finish off this convoy.


Image
Attachments
TimorSeaMassacre.jpg
TimorSeaMassacre.jpg (107.02 KiB) Viewed 127 times
User avatar
Q-Ball
Posts: 7392
Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2002 4:43 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois

RE: Battle Stations!

Post by Q-Ball »

Interesting results with the HELENS. You must have trained them all on LOW-N instead of NAV-B.

Are you concerned about the extreme flak at that altitude?
User avatar
krupp_88mm
Posts: 406
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 10:01 am

RE: Battle Stations!

Post by krupp_88mm »

Are you concerned about the extreme flak at that altitude?

i think the results speak for themselves.. haha
Decisive Campaigns Case Pony
Image

RRRH-Sr Mod Graphix ed V2: http://www.mediafire.com/?dt2wf7fc273zq5k
User avatar
CapAndGown
Posts: 3078
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Virginia, USA

RE: Battle Stations!

Post by CapAndGown »

ORIGINAL: krupp_88mm
Are you concerned about the extreme flak at that altitude?

i think the results speak for themselves.. haha

I am going to agree with krupp. Besides, the Netties have it even worse: they have no armor and are flying in at 200 feet! That wouldn't stop me from using them, so why would it stop me from using armored Helen's at 1000 feet? A big part of my anti-invasion planning has been centered on using army bombers in large numbers to attack the invasion fleets. I have trained them on NavB, but I am not sure how much they can hit from 6000 feet. Watching the Dutch earlier in the game made it seem like bombing from 6000 feet might be kind of futile. So everyone gets trained in LowN. Basically, my training program for army bombers runs like this: Ground -> NavB -> LowN -> ASW. For each skill I aim for 60+ for the great majority of the pilots before moving on to training for the next skill.
FatR
Posts: 2522
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 10:04 am
Location: St.Petersburg, Russia

RE: Battle Stations!

Post by FatR »

Naval bombing from 6k feet and above (unless your planes are torpedo bombers) is basically praying to the random numbers gods to let you hit something. Which is often denied. Just recently I had 40 Netties with NavB in 60s-70s launch bomb attacks against an Allied invasion convoy in decent weather. They scored only a single hit. NavB is acceptable when you are using American bombers, that roll more attacks and are vastly more survivable against enemy fighters. Unless his opponent screws up, in 1943 and later, a Japanese player should expect to take huge losses when attacking enemy TFs. So it is important to make every plane that gets to see the enemy count.
The Reluctant Admiral mod team.

Take a look at the latest released version of the Reluctant Admiral mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”