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 ... 16 17 [18] 19 20 ... 26

Author Topic: War in the Pacific: PBEM, apparently closed, see last posts  (Read 38953 times)

Erkki

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: War in the Pacific: yet another PBEM, here we go?
« Reply #255 on: June 30, 2014, 11:01:38 am »

What's CarDiv V again?

Also, things don't seem to be going that bad, except for those bomber and their stupid escorts never managing to get coordinated. Do the Allies have some sort of programmed bonus for the AVG like you do for amphibious landings? Because they seem to be doing really well.

What are you planning to do to those BBs off Timor? Are they a danger to all your stuff at Koepang?

And finally, huh, carriers around Line Islands? That's a bit out of the way of everything, isn't it? Or perhaps a round-about way of getting from Australia to the US?

I dont think theres a bonus... P-40 just happens to be a pretty good plane against what the Japanese have(contra what Luftwaffe had...) and AVG is basically the most skilled fighter unit the Allies have.

My BBs are just chilling there under Allied air search, luring Catalinas and Swordfishes in and having them shot down by Zeros.  ;) Though more seriously they're there mostly to show that theres a lot of power in the area. Besides, I hate burning fuel.

CarDiv V now has CVL Nisshin, CVE Hosho and CS Chitose! They'll bug out now and will refuel from a waiting replenishment force in 4 days on their way to Tokyo.

edit: that US carrier force near Line Island. I think they were based off Palmyra and sortied at flank speed when KB was first sighted. Palmyra I guess is a good place for a carrier base as it is behind a layer of air search. The port is not big enough to reload sorties or torpedoes, but carriers can be refueled by oilers or tankers and rearmed by AKEs. Basically just an achorage that can provide more air search and land-based fighters. As you can see I have a submarine placed towards the right direction, directly West... It didnt see anything when they left the place but sighted the enemy now when they were returning.
« Last Edit: June 30, 2014, 11:10:09 am by Erkki »
Logged

Erkki

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: War in the Pacific: yet another PBEM, here we go?
« Reply #256 on: June 30, 2014, 01:24:29 pm »

I'm considering trying an interception with the battleships and th cruiser squadron. I have BBs Yamashiro, Fuso, Kongo, Haruna, CA Ashigara and lots of DDs.

pros:
+enemy just lost its entire strike wing
+if a surface interception occurs, IJN will most probably have firepower and numbers
+any damaged enemy ships may remain within G4M strike range from Kendari even if they try to retreat
+Zeros can provide some LRCAP over 1 TF if the ships dont get too far

cons:
-it could be even odds and fighting at even odds is usually not a good idea for IJN
-Kongo and Haruna are both very low on ammunition and I dont want to risk them more than for covering the amphibious fleet at Koepang.
-Fuso and Yamashiro are slow. Against especially the British they can suffer in a night battle(torpedoes). On the other hand its nearly full moon and in a pure gun battle they can handle anything but other battlewagons. Enemy force may or may not have them.
-nearest repair yard is at Singapore, nearest refueling at Kendari, nearest rearm Bedeloap(AKE reloading ships still underway)

Anything I've missed? I think I'd rather just withdraw with everything towards Kendari and move the Zeros there too to fly LRCAP from a base that wont get bombarded.
Logged

Sheb

  • Bay Watcher
  • You Are An Avatar
    • View Profile
Re: War in the Pacific: yet another PBEM, here we go?
« Reply #257 on: June 30, 2014, 01:32:05 pm »

Well, I'd say go for it. As you said, your opponent is reckless, you need to exploit that recklessness, and this is a good opportunity.
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 #258 on: June 30, 2014, 01:49:39 pm »

I think you're right. It was supposed to be a surprise strike so there cant be much more power across the horizon. I'll attempt surface interception. Zeros will LRCAP Fuso and Yamashiro while Ki-43s(just flown in) will protect Kongo and Haruna. Ashigara will be left on her own.
Logged

Sheb

  • Bay Watcher
  • You Are An Avatar
    • View Profile
Re: War in the Pacific: yet another PBEM, here we go?
« Reply #259 on: June 30, 2014, 01:51:18 pm »

Banzai!
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 #260 on: June 30, 2014, 02:05:40 pm »

The distance is only 160 nm and Fuso & Yamashiro TF has plenty of fuel and full ammo storages, so I ordered flank speed dash to the West-South-West of enemy TF(where it will likely withdraw) with reaction allowed. Ashigara will try a more direct route will Kongo and Haruna trail.

We'll see tomorrow what the 4 old battlewagons are made of.
Logged

Erkki

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: War in the Pacific: yet another PBEM, here we go?
« Reply #261 on: July 02, 2014, 11:50:46 am »

February 28, 1942

China: -

Burma: 33rd division attacks for the 3rd day. A British AA unit and AVG ground echelon surrender! Near Prome, 1/3 of Imperial Guards Div. retreats the same British force that had been retreated from Rangoon and had then been bombed for 2 weeks:

Ground combat at 60,43 (near Katha)
 
Japanese Deliberate attack
 
Attacking force 13032 troops, 120 guns, 32 vehicles, Assault Value = 438
 
Defending force 216 troops, 5 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 2
 
Japanese adjusted assault: 175
 
Allied adjusted defense: 1
 
Japanese assault odds: 175 to 1
 
Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), disruption(-), fatigue(-), morale(-)
 experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker: leaders(-)
 
Allied ground losses:
      291 casualties reported
         Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
         Non Combat: 29 destroyed, 0 disabled
         Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
      Guns lost 5 (5 destroyed, 0 disabled)
      Units destroyed 2
 
Assaulting units:
    33rd Division
 
Defending units:
    1st Burma Auxiliary AA Regiment
    AVG Ground Echelon
 
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Ground combat at 54,49 (near Prome)
 
Japanese Deliberate attack
 
Attacking force 4525 troops, 40 guns, 16 vehicles, Assault Value = 162
 
Defending force 4258 troops, 46 guns, 25 vehicles, Assault Value = 59
 
Japanese adjusted assault: 124
 
Allied adjusted defense: 34
 
Japanese assault odds: 3 to 1
 
Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(-), fatigue(-), morale(-)
 experience(-)
Attacker: leaders(+)
 
Japanese ground losses:
      300 casualties reported
         Squads: 2 destroyed, 25 disabled
         Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
         Engineers: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled
 
Allied ground losses:
      978 casualties reported
         Squads: 49 destroyed, 0 disabled
         Non Combat: 84 destroyed, 1 disabled
         Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
      Guns lost 3 (3 destroyed, 0 disabled)
      Vehicles lost 4 (3 destroyed, 1 disabled)
      Units retreated 3
 
Defeated Allied Units Retreating!
 
Assaulting units:
    Imperial Guards/A Division
 
Defending units:
    1st Burma Division
    221 Group RAF
    77th Heavy AA Regiment


So after the fall of enemy defenses in Burma they have already lost circa 100 combat squads and 200-ish non-combat squads while retreating. Plus lots of vehicles and guns. Theres 2 Indian battalions and what is probably an engineer unit of some kind trapped near Toungoo. They'll be dealt away with shortly.

Timor Sea: Things dont go quite according to plan... Enemy withdraws to West as was expected. First, Fuso and Yamashiro fail to make contact and overshot the enemy. Then CA Ashigara meets the enemy and gets sunk by a battleship line:

Night Time Surface Combat, near Roti at 65,118, Range 3,000 Yards
 
Japanese aircraft
      no flights
 
Japanese aircraft losses
      E13A1 Jake: 1 destroyed
      F1M2 Pete: 1 destroyed
 
Japanese Ships
      CA Ashigara, Shell hits 11, and is sunk
      DD Kazegumo, Shell hits 2,  on fire
      DD Makigumo, Shell hits 1
      DD Kuroshio
      DD Oyashio, Shell hits 1,  on fire
 
Allied Ships
      BB Royal Sovereign, Shell hits 1, Torpedo hits 1
      BC Repulse, Shell hits 11
      CA Cornwall
      CA Exeter, Shell hits 1
      CL Enterprise
      CL Emerald
      DD Vampire
      DD Tenedos
 
Poor visibility due to Thunderstorms  with 96% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Thunderstorms and 96% moonlight: 3,000 yards
Range closes to 17,000 yards...
Range closes to 11,000 yards...
Range closes to 7,000 yards...
Range closes to 5,000 yards...
Range closes to 3,000 yards...


Night + Thunder --> max 3000 yard engagement where the enemy has massive firepower advantage. Japanese destroyers get to launch their torpedo attacks and score a hit on Royal Sovereign. CA Ashigara is lost. Notice the rather interesting composition of the enemy force... A fast BC, a BB, CAs and CLs mixed in with mere 2 escorts.

Then BBs Kongo and Haruna make contact with the enemy force slowed down by the torpedo hit. Their big guns are nearly out of ammo after the bombardment and amphibious missions, but they absorb fire and some hits. In a hit of some seriously bad luck, a small destroyer is lost to a torpedo launched by BC Repulse! Destroyers launch a highly successful torpedo attack!


Night Time Surface Combat, near Sawoe-eilanden at 62,120, Range 3,000 Yards
 
Japanese Ships
      BB Kongo
      BB Haruna, Shell hits 3,  on fire
      DD Yamagumo
      DD Yugure
      DD Ariake
      DD Ikazuchi, Shell hits 12, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
      DD Ayanami
      DD Asakaze
 
Allied Ships
      BB Royal Sovereign, Shell hits 25, Torpedo hits 5, and is sunk
      BC Repulse, Shell hits 18, Torpedo hits 3,  on fire,  heavy damage
      CA Cornwall
      CA Exeter
      CL Enterprise, Torpedo hits 1,  heavy damage
      CL Emerald
      DD Vampire
      DD Tenedos

Low visibility due to Thunderstorms  with 96% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Thunderstorms and 96% moonlight: 2,000 yards


Haruna receives 2 penetrating hits, one a heavy-caliber hit from the Royal Sovereign, but the long lances are dreadful! There was even a dud hit on one of the CAs!

The forces clash again shortly after. This time the wounded capital ships have been left behind:


Night Time Surface Combat, near Sawoe-eilanden at 62,120, Range 3,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
      BB Kongo
      BB Haruna, Shell hits 1,  on fire
      DD Yamagumo
      DD Yugure
      DD Ariake
      DD Ayanami, Shell hits 3,  on fire
      DD Asakaze
 
Allied Ships
      CA Cornwall, Shell hits 4
      CA Exeter, Shell hits 1
      CL Emerald, Shell hits 1
      DD Vampire, Shell hits 1
 
Poor visibility due to Thunderstorms  with 96% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Thunderstorms and 96% moonlight: 3,000 yards


The damaged Haruna leaves the task force, escorted by a destroyer. Kongo finds the hit enemy battlewagons and finishes them off:

Night Time Surface Combat, near Sawoe-eilanden at 63,120, Range 2,000 Yards
 
Allied aircraft
      no flights
 
Allied aircraft losses
      Walrus II: 1 destroyed
 
Japanese Ships
      BB Kongo, Shell hits 3
      DD Yamagumo
      DD Yugure
      DD Ariake
      DD Asakaze
 
Allied Ships
      BC Repulse, Shell hits 4, and is sunk
      CL Enterprise, Shell hits 27, and is sunk
      DD Tenedos, Shell hits 1


The last naval action of the day sees Ashigara's escort DDs finding the enemy carrier TF on their way home:

Day Time Surface Combat, near Sawoe-eilanden at 63,120, Range 5,000 Yards
 
Japanese Ships
      DD Kazegumo, Shell hits 4,  on fire
      DD Makigumo
      DD Kuroshio, Shell hits 1
      DD Oyashio, Shell hits 11,  heavy fires,  heavy damage
 
Allied Ships
      CVL Hermes
      BB Prince of Wales, Shell hits 7
      CL Hobart, Shell hits 7
      CL Mauritius, Shell hits 4
      DD Tjerk Hiddes, Shell hits 4,  heavy fires
      DD Kelvin, Shell hits 2,  on fire
 
Poor visibility due to Thunderstorms
Maximum visibility in Thunderstorms: 7,000 yards



Japanese losses:
CA Ashigara
DD Ikazuki
DD Oyashio about to sink

Allied losses:
BB Royal Sovereign
BC Repulse
CL Enterprise
2 badly mauled DDs that have a long way home


Torpedo bombers at Kendari sortie again as enemy carrier remains in range but they again fail to find the target.

What I think happened was that the enemy reacted away from Fuso and Yamashiro and ended meeting task forces they shouldnt have. That, or the carrier reacted away only after the first battles. Either way, didnt go as expected, but I still think Japan came up as the winner. In that weather it would have been, I think, best to have just 3-4 CLs leading double the number of DDs. Ashigara's loss hurts a lot and the DDs were good too, but the enemy losses here were NOT meaningless. BBs Fuso and Yamashiro remain in the area and are in position to attack again. They were not sighted by enemy air search. Fuel is now a problem for them as they used flank speed that, in hindsight, was completely unnecessary...


South Pacific 5 B-25s and 3 B-17s bombs Luganville, scoring 1 runway hit. Defending Zeros lose 3 of the number(!) shooting down 2 B-25s.


Screenshots will come later.
Logged

Erkki

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: War in the Pacific: yet another PBEM, here we go?
« Reply #262 on: July 02, 2014, 01:21:53 pm »

In Victory Points, today's naval battle losses were 410 Allied to 75 Japanese. Pretty good ratio at 5,47 to 1. Allied points don't include the destroyers of which I think 1 will go down or at least be out of action very long.

Spoiler: A large pic inside (click to show/hide)

Haruna's fires have been exhausted already and Kongo is safe at Koepang. Kongo's escorts will go back to escort Haruna. 2 DDs behind Haruna and her bodyguard escort a 3rd, damaged, destroyer.



BB Yamato became available today. I think she will stay in the home islands for at least a while now.
Logged

Anvilfolk

  • Bay Watcher
  • Love! <3
    • View Profile
    • Portuguese blacksmithing forum!
Re: War in the Pacific: yet another PBEM, here we go?
« Reply #263 on: July 02, 2014, 01:32:26 pm »

Whoa, lots of combat! All in all it does seem like came away the victor out of this. How long will it take your BBs to repair and be back in action?

And if they haven't stopped the Fuso and Yamashiro, could you try to use them to intercept the CVL Hermes? Its TF has already taken some damage, so might be moving a little slower.

Erkki

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: War in the Pacific: yet another PBEM, here we go?
« Reply #264 on: July 02, 2014, 01:50:18 pm »

I'm worried about those cruisers and BB Prince of Wales. They could be detached and sent after practically defenseless Haruna. Barring a series of accidents or an attack she will survive: 44 system damage, 24 float, 12 engine, no fires. OTOH all the enemy DDs have been hit multiple times now and their force is very, very vulnerable to submarine or air attack.

I'm still thinking about what to do with the remaining battle group. Send them to help Haruna or to an interception course? Hermes is slow, if only I can get the BBs into range... What is the enemy fuel and ammo situation? Those CAs must be out of torps and short on ammo, but how about the ones that are with Hermes?

Kongo is basically intact, needs just fuel and 36 cm caliber main gun ammo. Haruna's repairs will take a while, 2 moths maybe, and first she needs a drydock. Closest one that can fit her are Singapore and Hong Kong. She can still cruise at 12 knots and make 20 if needed.
Logged

Duuvian

  • Bay Watcher
  • Internet ≠ Real Life
    • View Profile
Re: War in the Pacific: yet another PBEM, here we go?
« Reply #265 on: July 02, 2014, 07:46:33 pm »

Prince of Wales and the cruisers were hit several times. How would that influence a BB fight if you intercept?
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 #266 on: July 02, 2014, 11:08:18 pm »

Prince of Wales and the cruisers were hit several times. How would that influence a BB fight if you intercept?

Those were mostly medium and small caliber hits that failed to penetrate armor. Prince of Wales did lose a secondary gun battery though. I dont think they suffered much damage, but could be short on ammo and fuel. Running out of main gun ammo for any one turret would have serious consequences in a battleship gun duel - as was seen with Haruna and Kongo, they achieved almost nothing. I'd have been better off with just DDs.  :(
Logged

Duuvian

  • Bay Watcher
  • Internet ≠ Real Life
    • View Profile
Re: War in the Pacific: yet another PBEM, here we go?
« Reply #267 on: July 03, 2014, 02:17:00 am »

Can you guess whether they are low on ammo or not? For example does it keep track of number of salvos or shots sighted versus ammunition known to be stored on board that class of ship?

I assume they weren't sighted firing their guns before that engagement, so they would be assumed to have started at full capacity.

Maybe you could send a destroyer ahead and order it to try to evade fire at long range for as long as it survives and see if they will waste ammo on it before your battlewagons cruise up into range. I have no idea if it's possible in the game.

Is there any chance those fleets are a feint you would be following into a trap? Perhaps a carrier tf or submarine wolfpack could be waiting out of sight? After all, you said you had left them stationary in one highly visible place as Swordfish bait. Were they there long enough for your opponent to move such a force into position?

I don't want to second guess you as you undoubtedly know more about it than I do; but wouldn't Yamato be most useful early in the war before the Allies have a lot more carriers? It probably uses a lot of fuel though.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2014, 02:37:47 am by Duuvian »
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 #268 on: July 03, 2014, 09:23:22 am »

Hi,

AFAIK there is no real way to track enemy ammo consumption. Its made even more difficult by the fact that ammo is tracked per mount, for example a battleship with bow, middle and aft turrets has 3 separate ammo storages. Not all guns fire all the time - the ones in the middle have the worst firing arcs and many, especially smaller anti-aircraft and dual purpose weapons, are limited to just either side.

Using small groups of DDs is good idea for night combat, especially in bad weather. They are very fast and maneuverable with torpedoes that are lethal against battleships, heavy cruisers and all civilian vessels. But making that work is tricky.

Its not a trap. There was no second carrier group or more surface action forces as was found out today. I also have a dozen-ish submarines down the coast between Timor Sea and Perth as well as an AMC raider to the West that has not seen aircraft or ships yet. Any way, if there had been more enemy force here I think it would have been attempted to put into use right away to use the surprise. I hope Fuso and Yamashiro will be able to bag more Brits!

On Yamato: she'll stay at Hiroshima for now as she indeed is VERY thirsty for fuel... As soon as I decide to send her either East or West, or even stay in the Home Islands together with BB Ise, she'll stay where ever she is. Sailing the large warships is very, very costly for Japan, and Yamato is the worst of them all. Now that shes ready though I'll be now continuing to build all of the halted, partially complete submarines and will add a couple of destroyers and a carrier to accelerated building.
Logged

Zrk2

  • Bay Watcher
  • Emperor of the Damned
    • View Profile
Re: War in the Pacific: yet another PBEM, here we go?
« Reply #269 on: July 03, 2014, 02:17:51 pm »

So we went one cruiser for a battleship and a battlecruiser? That sounds like a win to me.
Logged
He's just keeping up with the Cardassians.
Pages: 1 ... 16 17 [18] 19 20 ... 26