Carrier Battles for Guadalcanal Forum Index

Carrier Battles for Guadalcanal


 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Epic Battle

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Carrier Battles for Guadalcanal Forum Index -> Topics -> Miscellaneous
Previous topic :: Next topic  
Author Message
USS Archerfish
Beta-testing

Offline

Joined: 16 Mar 2017
Posts: 702

PostPosted: Tue 2 Jan - 06:28 (2018)    Post subject: Epic Battle Reply with quote

Howdy Gents


I’ve been playing the Midway 2P game with a player going by the name “Unasked”.  I’m playing the US and Unmasked the IJN.  The game has been truly EPIC!  We are still not finished but we are nearing the end of Day 3.  In this epic battle there have 27 air attacks and 12 surface battles!  One of my Task Forces TF-16.1, a 12 ship force comprised of Enterprise escorts after she sank and a couple of ships from TF 16.2 and TF 17.  TF, engaged in a record 8 surface battles against 4 different Japanese TFs with a record of 6 wins and 2 loss and sinking 1 BB (First heavily damaged by the Enterprise), 2 CAs, 8 DDs and heavily damaging 2 CAs! At the cost of 1 CA and 6 DDs.  As long as I’ve played this game I have never had such a hard fight Task Force like this one!

The game started with me quickly sinking 3 IJN CVs and damaging a 4th.  Unmasked claimed he didn’t see me until my aircraft until they were right on top of him. (There might have been a glitch with his search. Simply don’t know).  I offered to restart the game if he felt there was a bad search but like any true gamer he pressed on.


For the next (game) 4 hours I desperately pounded at his surface fleet with one airstrike after another in trying to prevent his transports behind them from landing.  So focused I was that I forgot about the other 2 CV that were still in the game.  I paid for this with an airstrike that sunk the Enterprise. Fortunately I was able to return the favor by destroying the flight deck of the Kaga and knocking her out of the game.  But Unasked was able to get one more shot in and damaged the deck of the Yorktown. Yorktown’s remaining planes were sent to the Hornet with the rest going to Midway. Unfortunately by late afternoon Midway had run out of fuel and 14 planes now sit there unable to fight.

By nightfall the fog of war had set in and Unasked TFs were now nipping at the heals of my 2 CVs and they were running for their lives.  He had me on the ropes.  During the night I maneuvers desperately to shake them off my tail.  I was sweating, my heart was pounding and I was biting my nails! I detached ships from the Hornet and Yorktown as well as split up my fighting TF-16.1. In hopes of distracting the hunters so my CVs could escape. In my wild maneuvers I made some mistakes and allowed the Japanese take two shot at my CVs with surface ships during the night. One TF was made up of 2 CAs which TF-17 with the Yorktown fought off. But the big scare was when one IJN TF with 2 BB, 2CAs and 3 DD caught the Hornet at night with only 2 CAs and 3 DDs defending her.  Miraculously the Hornet escaped without a scratch and I only lost one DD.  There were two other close calls where the Hornet managed to evade combat.  


In the early morning hours my frantic maneuverings paid off and the Hornet and Yorktown slipped away into darkness. This was in part due to the gallant efforts of TF-16.1 & 16.2.  Engaging in one fight after another, then splitting off to act as decoys.  At this point I used the remaining cover of darkness trying to regroup my TFs. But the wild manuvering split my carries far apart. During the night the Yorktown managed to level herself and was ready for flight operations but with no planes on deck and the remaining planes stranded on Midway with no fuel, she was out of the game.  So I sent her south east to disengage.  While the Hornet was forced to go North.


During this night time battle, I had sent the CA Pensacola and the DD Worden NW to search for my opponent’s last CV.  Luck once again landed in my lap when about 0340 my Small TF found the Akagi. She desperately tried to shake them but by day break they were still shadowing her and the Hornet went in for the kill.  I sent my last 7 SBDs. They struck with 4 direct hits but miraculously for Unasked, she did not sink but her deck was destroyed and she was now out of action. I had recovered my now 6 SBDs and rearmed and was ready to finish her off when the IJN TF with 2 BBs, 2 CAs and 2 DDs that the Hornet 🐝 tangle with during the night showed up. With this monster now blocking my path and on my tail I was forced to break off.  Any chances of intercepting the transports were now gone.  

By late morning all the ships that had split off from TF-16.1 during the night, including the Pensacola and Worden had regroup to 9 ships.  But their valiant actions during the night to help my carries escape has now drawn the wrath of my opponent and his remaining TFs.  By 1500, TF-16.1 was now surrounded on 4 sides.  With in one hour she engaged in 3 battles, emerging victorious in all 3 against a total of 1 BB, 4 CAs, 1 CL and 7 DDs, sinking 1BB, 1 CA, 3 DDs and crippling 1 CA at the cost of 3 DDs. At 1900 she engaged in yet another battle this time loosing 2 DDs while sinking 1DD.  After valiantly fighting all night and all day, successfully saving my CVs and with less than 1hr left in the game, the last 5 ships of TF-16.1 is attempting to evade 4 IJN TFs totaling 20 ships. In this game that gives glory to the carriers. This time the glory goes to the fighting ships of TF-16.1.


This has turned in to one Epic Game!  I gratefully thank my opponent for not giving up and putting up such a hard, hard fight.  The night fight is one that I won’t forget for a long time.  What a great game!


Last edited by USS Archerfish on Fri 5 Jan - 23:42 (2018); edited 10 times in total
Back to top
Publicité






PostPosted: Tue 2 Jan - 06:28 (2018)    Post subject: Publicité

PublicitéSupprimer les publicités ?
Back to top
Bladerunner
Administrateur

Offline

Joined: 25 Jan 2016
Posts: 1,085
Localisation: France

PostPosted: Tue 2 Jan - 10:44 (2018)    Post subject: Epic Battle Reply with quote

Great action report !
What is the final score ?


Back to top
USS Archerfish
Beta-testing

Offline

Joined: 16 Mar 2017
Posts: 702

PostPosted: Tue 2 Jan - 18:23 (2018)    Post subject: Epic Battle Reply with quote

The score is 127 to 91 but Unasked has successfully unloaded his entire transport cargo and troops on Midway.  


There is still about an hour left in the game and TF-16.1 is sandwiched between 2 TF. One is a battle scarred cruiser force of 4 ships and the other are 6 fresh DDs that has detached themselves from the transports after they finished their escort duties.  


I think this game is a great example of what could have happened if the Japanese had decided not to retreat. They had a big enough surface force to bulldoze their way to Midway.  The US carriers probably could have attacked for another day at best but most likely only a half a day before they started to run low on fuel and ordinance. 


Once the Japanese had captured Midway, they would have been capable of bombing Honolulu but only with a light payload as they would be at the edge of their fuel range.  Most likely though it would have turned into another Wake Island. No longer having a CV force to protect it and difficult to keep supplies, it would just withered away.  


Back to top
USS Archerfish
Beta-testing

Offline

Joined: 16 Mar 2017
Posts: 702

PostPosted: Wed 3 Jan - 06:01 (2018)    Post subject: Epic Battle Reply with quote

Just got hit by the fresh DDs.  I lost my second battle out of 8.  Lost 2 DDs and sank 1 DD.  Only 5 ships left. The only good thing was that that my ships retreated further away. 

Back to top
USS Archerfish
Beta-testing

Offline

Joined: 16 Mar 2017
Posts: 702

PostPosted: Wed 3 Jan - 06:12 (2018)    Post subject: Epic Battle Reply with quote

Also one thing I noticed was that there were no extreme battle damage results with surface engagements. I found that very refreshing. 

Back to top
larsenjp
Beta-testing

Offline

Joined: 19 Aug 2017
Posts: 364

PostPosted: Fri 5 Jan - 11:51 (2018)    Post subject: Epic Battle Reply with quote

Truly epic but very unhistorical... Laughing
Any admiral of the time would have run away, beginning with the Japanese...

Regarding the game, i think that supply (oil) concerns would have somewhat limit the action.
However i am a bit surprised because i thought that limited ammunition had been introduced into the game; so i find it a bit strange that your TF was able to support such a number of surface engagements without getting out of ammo.


Back to top
Bladerunner
Administrateur

Offline

Joined: 25 Jan 2016
Posts: 1,085
Localisation: France

PostPosted: Fri 5 Jan - 14:31 (2018)    Post subject: Epic Battle Reply with quote

Well the ammo pertains long to torpedoes

Back to top
larsenjp
Beta-testing

Offline

Joined: 19 Aug 2017
Posts: 364

PostPosted: Fri 5 Jan - 17:37 (2018)    Post subject: Epic Battle Reply with quote

Bladerunner wrote:
Well the ammo pertains long to torpedoes


You mean no limitation for gunnery?
If so, i think this should be introduced, at least as advanced rules or as an option similar to weather option (i mean limited ammo, both torpedoes and shells).


Back to top
USS Archerfish
Beta-testing

Offline

Joined: 16 Mar 2017
Posts: 702

PostPosted: Fri 5 Jan - 18:48 (2018)    Post subject: Epic Battle Reply with quote

larsenjp wrote:
Truly epic but very unhistorical... Laughing
Any admiral of the time would have run away, beginning with the Japanese...

Regarding the game, i think that supply (oil) concerns would have somewhat limit the action.
However i am a bit surprised because i thought that limited ammunition had been introduced into the game; so i find it a bit strange that your TF was able to support such a number of surface engagements without getting out of ammo.


True but it made for a very exciting game!


Yes historically both sides would generally break off after a major battle to refuel, resupply and assess damage. 


In my opinion I don’t think fuel restrictions need to be introduced.  A fleet going into battle with full tanks can run about A week. This includes 3 days at full speed.  One day to run in, one day for battle and one day to run back out. 

It is possible for ships to run low and in rarer cases actually run out of ammo in a battle but to implement something like this would require an incredible amount of research to find out what the ammo capacity of each class of ship carries.  This research would have to be done by us players. BR has his hands full as it is.  


Back to top
larsenjp
Beta-testing

Offline

Joined: 19 Aug 2017
Posts: 364

PostPosted: Fri 5 Jan - 23:00 (2018)    Post subject: Epic Battle Reply with quote

USS Archerfish wrote:
Yes historically both sides would generally break off after a major battle to refuel, resupply and assess damage. 


In my opinion I don’t think fuel restrictions need to be introduced.  A fleet going into battle with full tanks can run about A week. This includes 3 days at full speed.  One day to run in, one day for battle and one day to run back out.


More or less but historically the ships were already at sea since several days when the battles occurred. Oil resupply really played a major role during the battles because generally the admirals wanted to refuel before the battle in order to have full autonomy.
Furthermore, ships autonomy is not the same depending on their class; as you may know, DDs had shorter autonomy and were very often force to resupply to larger ships like BBs or CVs ... or force to leave the TF to resupply, which decreased the TF's anti-sub capabilities, among others. I do not think they had one week of autonomy.

Finally, as you know, the battle of Coral Sea spans over more than three days. It has been reduced to three days for the purpose of the game but i hope that one day we will have the full historical timeline, allowing to oppose the Japanese attacks both in Tulagi/Guadadalcanal and against Port-Moresby. Introducing supply problems may be then very interesting.

USS Archerfish wrote:
It is possible for ships to run low and in rarer cases actually run out of ammo in a battle but to implement something like this would require an incredible amount of research to find out what the ammo capacity of each class of ship carries.  This research would have to be done by us players. BR has his hands full as it is.  


I do not know but i don't think that any ship ever fought 4 major engagements within a few hours...
I agree this will require some research, to be done by ourselves...


Back to top
USS Archerfish
Beta-testing

Offline

Joined: 16 Mar 2017
Posts: 702

PostPosted: Fri 5 Jan - 23:36 (2018)    Post subject: Epic Battle Reply with quote

larsenjp wrote:
USS Archerfish wrote:
Yes historically both sides would generally break off after a major battle to refuel, resupply and assess damage. 


In my opinion I don’t think fuel restrictions need to be introduced.  A fleet going into battle with full tanks can run about A week. This includes 3 days at full speed.  One day to run in, one day for battle and one day to run back out.



More or less but historically the ships were already at sea since several days when the battles occurred. Oil resupply really played a major role during the battles because generally the admirals wanted to refuel before the battle in order to have full autonomy.
Furthermore, ships autonomy is not the same depending on their class; as you may know, DDs had shorter autonomy and were very often force to resupply to larger ships like BBs or CVs ... or force to leave the TF to resupply, which decreased the TF's anti-sub capabilities, among others. I do not think they had one week of autonomy.

Finally, as you know, the battle of Coral Sea spans over more than three days. It has been reduced to three days for the purpose of the game but i hope that one day we will have the full historical timeline, allowing to oppose the Japanese attacks both in Tulagi/Guadadalcanal and against Port-Moresby. Introducing supply problems may be then very interesting.

USS Archerfish wrote:
It is possible for ships to run low and in rarer cases actually run out of ammo in a battle but to implement something like this would require an incredible amount of research to find out what the ammo capacity of each class of ship carries.  This research would have to be done by us players. BR has his hands full as it is.  



I do not know but i don't think that any ship ever fought 4 major engagements within a few hours...
I agree this will require some research, to be done by ourselves...


Yes I’m aware that the Coral Sea spanned over a week but during the middle of it the CVs did break off to refuel. The Japanese’s ended up sinking the Yorktown’s oil tanker the Neosho in the fight.  


As for my engagements I was attacked by one TF at 1500, then attack by two TFs at 1600 and successfully won all engagements!  That was a miracle!  In a way I felt bad for Unasked.  It must have been frustrating as hell.  


The other thing I thought was very nice was that there wasn’t any extreme losses (like loosing half your forces) which I thought was more realistic.  Usually about 1-2 sometimes 3 ships per side was sunk.  


Back to top
Contenu Sponsorisé






PostPosted: Today at 16:50 (2018)    Post subject: Epic Battle

Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Carrier Battles for Guadalcanal Forum Index -> Topics -> Miscellaneous All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  

Index | Administration Panel | Create own nforum | Free support forum | Free forums directory | Report a violation | Conditions générales d'utilisation
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group