Page 5 of 5

Re: Back and Better Than Ever Vettim 89(A) vs Greasylake(J)

Posted: Mon Aug 03, 2026 12:11 pm
by vettim89
CaptBeefheart wrote: Mon Aug 03, 2026 1:49 am Ouch regarding New Caledonia. I feel your pain.

I like to put an AV or AVD or whatever at one of the Channel Islands (off LA) to host a Kingfisher squadron on ASW. With a three hex radius, that covers the LA approaches pretty well.

Regarding the deployment of your AUS and UK divisions, is your opponent known for doing end arounds? You'd hate for them to be hanging in Burma while he lands somewhere in India.

Good luck.

Cheers,
CB
I have a lot of ASW patrol AC near the WCUSA including a LB-30 squadron and Larry has not ventured there. Larry is a what I call a sneaky conservative player. By that I mean he plays pretty close to the vest but will pull a surprise move every now and then. That said, I still own all of the DEI except Miri which I have pounded to irrelevance; so I think any shocking moves in the near term are out of the question I am sending the 7th Aussie DIV to Oz. I am keep the 6th in India for now.

24 February 1942

Posted: Mon Aug 03, 2026 10:38 pm
by vettim89
The IJN SCTF has strayed further south an is in the Macassar Strait. I have a small convoy at Balikpapan which is departing. Two SCTF based around CLs (one Dutch, One British) are rushing to cover the convoy. We shall see what happens here. I am sure the Coral Sea romp is satisfying to Larry, but those CVs would probably be of better use here. I have three SCTF in the area: the above mentioned two plus one built around USS Houston south of Ambon

Bombardment attack at Bataan brought a comment from my opponent brought snide comment about future war crimes.
Ground combat at Bataan (78,77)

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 26254 troops, 380 guns, 135 vehicles, Assault Value = 1643

Defending force 54099 troops, 851 guns, 773 vehicles, Assault Value = 1673

Japanese ground losses:
1859 casualties reported
Squads: 49 destroyed, 75 disabled
Non Combat: 8 destroyed, 6 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 22 (11 destroyed, 11 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
74 casualties reported
Squads: 5 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Vehicles lost 1 (1 destroyed, 0 disabled)
AMPH TF arrives at Pago Pago to pick up teleported units and deliver them to Not-Pago Pago.

IJN remains in force in the Coral Sea. I debated this one. I have some merchies holed up at Brisbane and Sydney. I also have some surface units at Sydney including Canberra in the yard. I thought about forming a SCTF and have them run towards Melbourne at top speed. My fear with that is if Larry pursued I would have a TF out of fuel being chased by 10+ carriers. So I opted to keep them in port and formed some sacrificial TF with xAKL and AMc at each base. There are 50 P-40E with atrocious training at each base. My hope is that Larry will set his bombers on Naval strike as primary and either Port of Airfield attack as secondary. The sacrificial lambs will hopefully keep the nasties away from the bases themselves

Re: Back and Better Than Ever Vettim 89(A) vs Greasylake(J)

Posted: Tue Aug 04, 2026 12:33 am
by CaptBeefheart
Those KB cruises around SE Oz can really increase the pucker factor. At least you have some fighters there. Even with lousy EXP and AIR ratings they should be able to make it a bit painful for the IJN.

Cheers,
CB

Re: Back and Better Than Ever Vettim 89(A) vs Greasylake(J)

Posted: Tue Aug 04, 2026 3:00 pm
by BBfanboy
Those sacrificial TFs could also burn up KB sorties so it has to RTB. Good move.

Re: Back and Better Than Ever Vettim 89(A) vs Greasylake(J)

Posted: Tue Aug 04, 2026 4:17 pm
by Sardaukar
I had bad experiences with using Suva as stockpile base for fuel from WC/Panama even against AI.

Lost quite a few TK when KB gave a visit (yea, even AI can do that).

Auckland in NZ is way safer bet.