Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Poll

Bay 12 fighter unit should be...

IJNAF elite A6M2 Zero unit Chitose Ku S-1 or its detachments or division(s)
- 3 (42.9%)
a IJAAF Ki-43 unit in Indochina, to be used in China/East Indies(mostly)
- 1 (14.3%)
a IJAAF Ki-43 unit in Burma(at least initially)
- 3 (42.9%)

Total Members Voted: 7

Voting closed: May 04, 2014, 08:49:03 am


Pages: 1 ... 22 23 [24] 25 26

Author Topic: War in the Pacific: PBEM, apparently closed, see last posts  (Read 39342 times)

Sheb

  • Bay Watcher
  • You Are An Avatar
    • View Profile
Re: War in the Pacific: yet another PBEM, here we go?
« Reply #345 on: July 20, 2014, 11:45:08 am »

Banzai! By my count, this is the first seriously damaged carrier since the beginning of the war, right? Also, I can't find a trace of an IRL CVL Charlotte. Was she renamed?
« Last Edit: July 20, 2014, 11:47:23 am by Sheb »
Logged

Quote from: Paul-Henry Spaak
Europe consists only of small countries, some of which know it and some of which don’t yet.

Erkki

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: War in the Pacific: yet another PBEM, here we go?
« Reply #346 on: July 20, 2014, 12:53:13 pm »

Nope - CVL Charlotte is one of the US stop-gap measures after finding out that Japanese are as powerful as they are in this game mod, ie. one of the reinforcements the US would have put into use(there were already plans for converting her into a carrier). The additional Allied units are almost all already in use at the start of the war and are mostly planes, some airgroups, a handful of ships of which Charlotte is the most powerful and that are mostly Free French, and many naval and air units in better initial positions, simulating slightly better preparedness.

Charlotte can carry 24 planes, is very fast and has long endurance.

Success in hitting and what seems to be the sinking a major Allied warship by deliberate effort using subs only I think was bound to happen sooner or later. I pay a lot of attention to my submarines. Sinking of the USN sub by mines at Luganville and how the Allied CVBG popped up just like I thought it would to attack shipping near Luganville and Efate I think mean I'm slowly getting within the OODA loop of my opponent... I hope he will stay predictable!

Notice that this was another day when KB would have been able to force a carrier battle and almost surely win it, easily, had it only sailed in the approximate direction of Luganville, which would have made sense in many ways, and not towards Guadalcanal because I want to refuel it.



Red X marks the location of I-10's successful attack:
Logged

Sheb

  • Bay Watcher
  • You Are An Avatar
    • View Profile
Re: War in the Pacific: yet another PBEM, here we go?
« Reply #347 on: July 20, 2014, 01:37:41 pm »

4 CVL? That's a misindentification? Also, what's OODA?
Logged

Quote from: Paul-Henry Spaak
Europe consists only of small countries, some of which know it and some of which don’t yet.

Erkki

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: War in the Pacific: yet another PBEM, here we go?
« Reply #348 on: July 20, 2014, 02:09:55 pm »

4 CVL? That's a misindentification? Also, what's OODA?

Yeah its a mis-ID. That TF has CA Pensacola, CLs Java and De Ryuter and lots of DDs.

OODA stands for observe-orient-decide-act.  ;)
Logged

Erkki

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: War in the Pacific: yet another PBEM, here we go?
« Reply #349 on: July 25, 2014, 09:19:57 am »

My opponent is on a job trip... I expected the game to continue on Wednesday but no luck. I haven't heard of him since Sunday. Sorry about the delays, I hope we'll be back in business soon!

and only seconds after I posted this he emailed me. We'll be back tonight!
« Last Edit: July 25, 2014, 09:21:50 am by Erkki »
Logged

Anvilfolk

  • Bay Watcher
  • Love! <3
    • View Profile
    • Portuguese blacksmithing forum!
Re: War in the Pacific: yet another PBEM, here we go?
« Reply #350 on: July 25, 2014, 09:21:19 am »

Me too! I feel like we're edging closer and closer to a big aerial naval engagement... at least the tension is definitely mounting!

Erkki

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Logged

Anvilfolk

  • Bay Watcher
  • Love! <3
    • View Profile
    • Portuguese blacksmithing forum!
Re: War in the Pacific: yet another PBEM, here we go?
« Reply #352 on: July 25, 2014, 10:24:57 am »

Aaaaaaand that's how you lose 20m of your workday.

Erkki

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: War in the Pacific: yet another PBEM, here we go?
« Reply #353 on: July 26, 2014, 11:21:07 am »

March 15, 1942
Turn 100



Submarines: IJN submarines are back to their usual which is failing. Numerous attacks against enemy ASW TFs(!) of course fail, as does attack on CL Tromp near Sydney. 1 sub received minor damage in a depth charge attack by Dutch DDs.

CVL Charlotte: still afloat, made only 1 hex from where she was yesterday, towards Brisbane(NW). Sending the subs now that way.

China: IJA attack on Ankang road achieves only 1:2 odds but casualties slightly favor the Japanese(in destroyed squads). The lone KMT Corps in the North is nearly destroyed on the road to Lanchow. 2 IJA Cavalry units flank and today cut off what is probably 2 KMT Corps on the Mongolian border while a 3rd unit ties the Chinese that probably have no idea how little force they are actually facing.

Ground combat at 82,43 (near Ankang)
 
Japanese Deliberate attack
 
Attacking force 28911 troops, 242 guns, 265 vehicles, Assault Value = 980
 
Defending force 23794 troops, 174 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 584
 
Japanese adjusted assault: 385
 
Allied adjusted defense: 625
 
Japanese assault odds: 1 to 2
 
Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), experience(-)
Attacker:
 
Japanese ground losses:
      1560 casualties reported
         Squads: 2 destroyed, 143 disabled
         Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 13 disabled
         Engineers: 2 destroyed, 23 disabled
      Guns lost 20 (1 destroyed, 19 disabled)
      Vehicles lost 32 (1 destroyed, 31 disabled)
 
Allied ground losses:
      891 casualties reported
         Squads: 15 destroyed, 27 disabled
         Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 27 disabled
         Engineers: 1 destroyed, 7 disabled
      Guns lost 13 (10 destroyed, 3 disabled)
 
Assaulting units:
    15th Ind.Mixed Brigade
    36th Division
    116th Division
    15th Tank Regiment
    12th Tank Regiment
    58th Infantry Regiment
 
Defending units:
    55th Chinese Corps
    41st Chinese Corps
    75th Chinese Corps
    59th Chinese Corps
    45th Chinese Corps
    77th Chinese Corps
    1st Artillery Regiment
    7th Artillery Regiment

Ground combat at 85,33 (near Ningsia)
 
Japanese Deliberate attack
 
Attacking force 3480 troops, 26 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 127
 
Defending force 657 troops, 22 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 7
 
Japanese adjusted assault: 59
 
Allied adjusted defense: 5
 
Japanese assault odds: 11 to 1
 
Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), morale(-), experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker: leaders(-)
 
Allied ground losses:
      269 casualties reported
         Squads: 5 destroyed, 1 disabled
         Non Combat: 11 destroyed, 1 disabled
         Engineers: 1 destroyed, 3 disabled
      Guns lost 13 (5 destroyed, 8 disabled)
 
Assaulting units:
    11th Indpt Infantry Regiment
 
Defending units:
    81st Chinese Corps



Burma: IJAAF keeps bombing 1st Burma Div. while Imperial Guards is in pursuit. The chase will take a while.

Andaman Sea: Imperial forces organizing for an attack.

DEI: IJN battleships cross Java Sea without an interruption: the Dutch are contempt to only tracking the fleet with search aircraft. IJNAF hits Soerabaja and scores a 60 kg bomb hit on a submarine! A small mine ship is sunk.

PI: Iba on Luzon falls!

Ground combat at Iba (78,75)
 
Japanese Deliberate attack
 
Attacking force 10845 troops, 74 guns, 279 vehicles, Assault Value = 440
 
Defending force 4825 troops, 82 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 124
 
Japanese adjusted assault: 186
 
Allied adjusted defense: 82
 
Japanese assault odds: 2 to 1 (fort level 0)
 
Japanese forces CAPTURE Iba !!!
 
Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(-), preparation(-), fatigue(-)
 morale(-), experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker:
 
Japanese ground losses:
      288 casualties reported
         Squads: 1 destroyed, 23 disabled
         Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
         Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
 
Allied ground losses:
      3137 casualties reported
         Squads: 333 destroyed, 0 disabled
         Non Combat: 361 destroyed, 0 disabled
         Engineers: 10 destroyed, 0 disabled
      Guns lost 100 (100 destroyed, 0 disabled)
      Units destroyed 3
 
Assaulting units:
    1st Formosa Inf. Regiment
    16th Recon Regiment
    48th Recon Regiment
    4th Tank Regiment
    9th Infantry Regiment
    2nd Tank Regiment
 
Defending units:
    31st PA Infantry Division
    Subic Bay Defenses
    1st PI Base Force


This force is now freed to advance to Bataan peninsula.


South Pacific: 8 B-17s strike Port Moresby and score a runway hit. Enemy carriers in the New Hebrides disappear. Santa Maria(island near Espiritu Santo) occupied by the Japanese.

« Last Edit: July 26, 2014, 11:24:17 am by Erkki »
Logged

Anvilfolk

  • Bay Watcher
  • Love! <3
    • View Profile
    • Portuguese blacksmithing forum!
Re: War in the Pacific: yet another PBEM, here we go?
« Reply #354 on: July 26, 2014, 11:26:00 am »

I meant to ask how important the China land war is? Do you actually need to fight it? What do you get out of it? Resources?

Erkki

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: War in the Pacific: yet another PBEM, here we go?
« Reply #355 on: July 26, 2014, 12:32:18 pm »

China is important. The Chinese have a much larger army than the IJA if they are given the chance to feed all mouths and regroup. The further back they are pushed the easier they are to defend against(the front becomes smaller, opposite of East Front for Germany), the less supplies they have(resource and industry centers become captured by the Japanese) and the less potential B-24 or B-29 bases there will be in range of valuable targets.

In theory if Japan can win in China, that would free up over a million combat troops. If they can be kept in check, hundreds of thousands can be moved elsewhere.
Logged

Erkki

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: War in the Pacific: yet another PBEM, here we go?
« Reply #356 on: July 26, 2014, 12:56:31 pm »

Well, for tomorrow, I will move KB within strike range of Fiji. It can become interesting, or not. I will not go anywhere near Noumea again as they have about 100 fighters on the ground + more flying CAP. Amphibious TF will in the meanwhile move back to Efate and pick up the assault division under Zero-LRCAP. The whole area is swarming submarines.
Logged

Duuvian

  • Bay Watcher
  • Internet ≠ Real Life
    • View Profile
Re: War in the Pacific: yet another PBEM, here we go?
« Reply #357 on: July 26, 2014, 02:00:29 pm »

I was wondering why one of the Japanese infantry regiments is called 'Independent?'
Logged
FINISHED original composition:
https://app.box.com/s/jq526ppvri67astrc23bwvgrkxaicedj

Sort of finished and awaiting remix due to loss of most recent song file before addition of drums:
https://www.box.com/s/s3oba05kh8mfi3sorjm0 <-zguit

Erkki

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: War in the Pacific: yet another PBEM, here we go?
« Reply #358 on: July 26, 2014, 02:02:03 pm »

I was wondering why one of the Japanese infantry regiments is called 'Independent?'

Its an independent "mixed" brigade... So has all arms: infantry, AT, artillery and some light tanks.
Logged

Duuvian

  • Bay Watcher
  • Internet ≠ Real Life
    • View Profile
Re: War in the Pacific: yet another PBEM, here we go?
« Reply #359 on: July 26, 2014, 02:03:44 pm »

Neat.
Logged
FINISHED original composition:
https://app.box.com/s/jq526ppvri67astrc23bwvgrkxaicedj

Sort of finished and awaiting remix due to loss of most recent song file before addition of drums:
https://www.box.com/s/s3oba05kh8mfi3sorjm0 <-zguit
Pages: 1 ... 22 23 [24] 25 26