AAR\'s
#1
Posted 06 September 2008 - 08:12 AM
#2
Posted 10 September 2008 - 10:35 PM
#3
Posted 10 September 2008 - 11:30 PM
#4
Posted 11 September 2008 - 01:07 AM
#5
Posted 12 September 2008 - 03:55 PM
Actually the intent was that if they did not find the Bombardment group to launch a strike, they would have had an opportunity to attack the Supply mission. Perhaps that could be worded more clearly, but that is what we were trying to convey. So the IJN players were right to be fearful about an attack on one of his Supply missions, but the other could have gotten through, only suffering an attack afterwards from the unsuppressed Henderson Field. Note that Henderson is at its weakest strength, something the Kaigun also was probably unaware of. Ah, the fog of war!The US carrier group did attempt a strike against the IJN bombardment force and failed to locate it, so if I read the rules correctly it couldn't have attempted to intercept the supply runs. But the Rabaul commander did not realize this when cancelling his missions.
#6
Posted 07 May 2013 - 04:02 PM
We have also inserted a game mechanic to make Allied control in tactical engagements less likely. We make the Allied players roll their green morale before they can do anything but follow the ship ahead of them (IMHO station keeping was one of peace time measuring aids by which Admirals judged their captain's abilities) or to shoot at visually sighted (illuminated or not illuminated) ship (be it friend or foe).
The idea is that the sun is down. We, the leadership of the USN do not train to fight at night because we don't want to fight at night. No fights at night is our collective fantasy and we subscribe our fantasy to all navys (We really want to fight the Italians).
We will hug our collective fantasy tightly to our collective chests until the Japanese beat the daylight out of us at night. At which point, just like in the fairytale the little boy will say; "Why he has nothing on at all". We will then finally realize the nakedness of our fantasy. How many ships and crews this will cost us for our collective schooling in the class room of battle will depend solely on our making or not making our morale.
I really hate this because it costs me control but it seems the only way to keep the USN from taking advantage in every fight of what it has going for it and turning the IJN into a swim team.
#7
Posted 08 May 2013 - 06:14 PM
#8
Posted 09 May 2013 - 08:31 AM
#9
Posted 06 September 2013 - 03:19 PM
We ran the Solomons Campaign at the Call to Arms convention in Wellington, New Zealand on 3-4 August 2013. We played less than 3km (2 miles) from the quay where the US 1st Marine Division shipped out from in July 1942. Much to our surprise we got through 4 months of the campaign and came to a clear decision over the two days. Attached is a pdf after action report.
The campaign system worked really well and produced some interesting challanges for all the players.
Regards,
Paul
Attached Files
#10
Posted 06 September 2013 - 08:16 PM
Great read! Sounds like just about all the major elements were in play. Sounds like the IJN took a pounding but managed to stay somewhat in it to the end.Hi All,
We ran the Solomons Campaign at the Call to Arms convention in Wellington, New Zealand on 3-4 August 2013. We played less than 3km (2 miles) from the quay where the US 1st Marine Division shipped out from in July 1942. Much to our surprise we got through 4 months of the campaign and came to a clear decision over the two days. Attached is a pdf after action report.
The campaign system worked really well and produced some interesting challanges for all the players.
Regards,
Paul
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users