|
Ron Jeremy posted:Seems better than fighting to the last man in a cave before getting set on fire by a marine with a flame thrower You dont get set on fire if you surrender.
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 05:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 13:13 |
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:You dont get set on fire if you surrender. ...At least in theory.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 05:35
|
|
|
Let's just cut this off there. It's getting uncomfortably close to topics we're kind of supposed to be avoiding in this thread.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 07:31
|
|
|
So...... do you think Grey can hold out to 46?
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 16:19
|
|
|
If Grey were to hold out, with no further lost bases (somehow), what would be the most devestating nuke target the Allies could reach? Could they hit Kyoto or something, our would they have to settle for Rabaul?
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 16:29
|
|
|
Nuking Rabaul would be hella cathartic for the Allies at this point.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 16:50
|
|
|
Donkringel posted:What was the safest service to be in, Japanese wise? Army stationed in China? Being safely stationed in the Home Islands.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 18:30
|
|
|
Donkringel posted:What was the safest service to be in, Japanese wise? Army stationed in China? Obviously Tokyo Bay Fortress
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 18:41
|
|
|
sullat posted:Being safely stationed in the Home Islands. Stationed in Kyoto because that one US General or Admiral visited there before the war and saved it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 19:52
|
|
|
aphid_licker posted:Nuking Rabaul would be hella cathartic for the Allies at this point. Nukechat: that would be a hell of a timeline to be a historian in. (Besides battleship regularly beating on carriers, that is.) The nukes that were dropped on Japan were contentious enough, just imagine the debate that would have happened if the US had nuked an innocent city under military occupation at the time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 20:23
|
|
|
Mikl posted:Nukechat: that would be a hell of a timeline to be a historian in. (Besides battleship regularly beating on carriers, that is.) The nukes that were dropped on Japan were contentious enough, just imagine the debate that would have happened if the US had nuked an innocent city under military occupation at the time. Well I mean they're gonna be nuking something that looks like that scene from Being John Malkovich only with Tojos (the plane)
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 20:32
|
|
|
B29s can fly p loving far, but you still need a good chunk of runway. I think they need to take Guam. Nuking one of the atoll fortresses could be a statement of intent. Truk? e - Though you'd have no witnesses afterwards due to them all being dead.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 21:10
|
|
|
   Any good ships to sink here? No?  The Buna raid to the north find some prey.  Back to regulation.  Their thunderbolts do well today.  I lose some planes on a strike.  The second wave gets the hit.   While their help is appreciated, I'm going to put the Kido Butai planes onto training for a while – mainly so I can replace their losses without them frittering them away on minor strikes.  I would love to know how they are selling this back home.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 06:49
|
|
|
I think that by 1946 the USAAF was working on planes that could hit Germany launched from the east coast. Presumably if they were based out of Pearl Harbor they could get there. The YB-35 was in prototype at that era and the B-36 was in advanced stages of development, so with the war still going on by late 1945 they probably both could have been pushed into production. They could also have been based out of Australia rather than the US West Coast or Pearl.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 06:58
|
|
|
wedgekree posted:I think that by 1946 the USAAF was working on planes that could hit Germany launched from the east coast. Presumably if they were based out of Pearl Harbor they could get there. The YB-35 was in prototype at that era and the B-36 was in advanced stages of development, so with the war still going on by late 1945 they probably both could have been pushed into production. They could also have been based out of Australia rather than the US West Coast or Pearl. Evidence suggests a Convair B-36 would be able to make the trip from Pearl Harbour to Tokyo, and probably climb high enough to avoid most air defenses. Failing to make ground on the naval campaign I could plausibly see the US accelerating a small production run of long range bombers specifically to drop a nuke and being able to have something up and ready by 1946.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 09:53
|
|
|
Pinback posted:Evidence suggests a Convair B-36 would be able to make the trip from Pearl Harbour to Tokyo, and probably climb high enough to avoid most air defenses. Failing to make ground on the naval campaign I could plausibly see the US accelerating a small production run of long range bombers specifically to drop a nuke and being able to have something up and ready by 1946. Also they could start a strategic bombing campaign over from Australia, quite possibly. There were a number of airfields that could have been built up wtih almost no threat of airstrikes and even here doing well Grey hasn't been able to do much to remotely threaten the supply lanes to Australia, so it would be safe to ship them in. Presuming that as 1945 goes on the Allies haven't made a lot of headway on anchoring large strategic objectives and the USSR would historically intervene (which it may not in this timeline depending on how things are going in Europe) the US would probably be looking to mass deploy air assets with the range from wherever they could. Then also maintain 2-3 CVE raids on Rabaul and send the CVE's into harbor because they have to keep the pressure up.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 10:33
|
|
|
I think even a human player taking over the Allies would be hard pressed to eke out a win before time runs out. There's just no time to take over all the remaining bases - they haven't even started on a Philippine campaign yet, the ABDA front is still deep in Burma, and China is completely overrun. At best, you could take the Marianas, firebomb what you can, drop your two historical nukes, and hope for a win on points.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 14:03
|
|
|
The Convair B-36 has a 16,000km range. Hitting anywhere in the Home Islands and then cruising on back to Australia would have been no challenge at all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 14:49
|
|
|
The Allies took back, Wake, right? That's a 3180 nmi round trip to Tokyo, and the B-29 has a range of 2820 nmi. If they went with limited bomb loads, they'd definitely be able get there and back.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 16:16
|
|
|
habeasdorkus posted:The Allies took back, Wake, right? That's a 3180 nmi round trip to Tokyo, and the B-29 has a range of 2820 nmi. If they went with limited bomb loads, they'd definitely be able get there and back. The problem with this is that theres no islands between Tokyo and Wake. If you get a damaged B-29, which happened somewhat often enough, you'd most likely lose it and then have to try to rescue the crew.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 16:37
|
|
|
habeasdorkus posted:The Allies took back, Wake, right? That's a 3180 nmi round trip to Tokyo, and the B-29 has a range of 2820 nmi. If they went with limited bomb loads, they'd definitely be able get there and back. I don't think you could fit a runway big enough at Wake
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 16:43
|
|
|
Shipped in crates, assembled on site, RATO and ditch when you get back, obv.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 16:59
|
|
|
That's pretty expensive way of bombing stuff. Time to build an artificial iceberg and put an aiport there.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 17:33
|
|
|
they could theoretically launch B-36's from the aleutians, i guess. googling indicates that dutch harbor and tokyo are ~4600km apart while darwin, australia and tokyo are ~5400km apart. considering the weather conditions in the aleutians it's probably not worth it, though edit: also, The Doolittle Raid But With Nukes would be a great thing for this timeline. for any timeline, really
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 19:40
|
|
|
In this timeline Japan would put up a fighter screen if they detected Allied bombers because they still have planes and pilots to put up a screen. In OTL the US was already hitting the Home Islands with B-29s in November 1944 and Japan was having trouble fighting them. In the Greyverse Japan has been able to drop a few B-29s already, and has a much larger air force remaining. Also the AI Allies would screw up trying to send supplies to the forward air base that is providing the bombers. Yes, send those cargo ships into Rabaul harbor, the US Navy will have it cleared by then...
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 20:07
|
|
|
What would the opp loss report on Grey sinking the transports with the bombs on them even look like.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 20:10
|
|
|
oystertoadfish posted:they could theoretically launch B-36's from the aleutians, i guess. googling indicates that dutch harbor and tokyo are ~4600km apart while darwin, australia and tokyo are ~5400km apart. considering the weather conditions in the aleutians it's probably not worth it, though More than the weather conditions, it's extremely dubious the USAAF could have even put a runway capable of handling the B-36 there in the first place. It was an absolutely massive plane, requiring an incredibly long runway and requiring it to be extremely thick as well (due to the massive weight). Like, I don't think people are grasping the sheer size of a B-36 - the B-29 already had more specialized requirements than anything that had come before, and the B-36 is far larger in every dimension and literally over twice as heavy as a Superfort.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 21:54
|
|
|
I thought the B 36 only came online in 46-47 though? I mean I know at this point Grey is likely to stall out the war but home many B36s can the US possibly have by January 1947?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 23:32
|
|
|
A handful, if they hammer down and accelerate the programme by throwing GDP-impacting money at it like they did with the B-29.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 23:42
|
|
|
Theoretically Australia would probably be best. WEll within range, plenty of space to expand from, already has built up infrastructure and logistics to use. Altenratively they could try and beat the Germans to introducing the jet bomber because why not
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 04:28
|
|
|
  We trade planes over Rabaul.  The new engineers help crack the forts, but I need more supplies apparently.   The bombing on Chungking continues.  Right, I need to suicide a couple of ships to the enemy guns at Manus. Well, not need, but I want that bloody island! I'm going to use a fast transport from Rabaul – destroyers should be able to dodge their guns better!
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 05:09
|
|
|
Is this post-justification for a missclick you're going to make several days from now?
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 05:12
|
|
|
24 November 1944 HMCS Shawinigan, a corvette, is lost with all hands after suffering at homing-torpedo strike by U-1228 in the Cabot Strait.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 08:34
|
|
|
Am I remembering correctly that WITP only lets allies nuke with the historically-accurate squadron? If so is there a way to be un-nukeable if Grey still has the historic bases they were located at? Or will the AI re-base the right bombers somewhere in range? Unless Grey has control of all of those somehow? And if he shoots down the historical bombers, does the US get another shot? Is it possible to destroy all nuke-capable allied units?
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 09:57
|
|
|
Right, I need to suicide a couple of ships to the enemy guns at Manus. Well, not need, but I want that bloody island! I'm going to use a fast transport from Rabaul – destroyers should be able to dodge their guns better! [/quote] Fast destroyers are not very fast when they stop to unload ;-) Anyway, this is not 1941 anymore, you will need an armored division or 2 infantry divisions 100% PREPPED for Manus together with a HQ 100% prepped for Manus, attached to the region This ones requires planning.... complete with battleships to soak up the hits Look at the combat report, it lists the enemy units on Manus (10.000 is quite a force..) remember the raw AV is only the abilty to take ground ! and is not an indication of het defensive strength (coastal) artillery, AA, engineers do not have this abilty , but are counted as defense value
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 11:09
|
|
|
   Burma still exists guys, and it's doing fine.  If you ignore Rangoon taking 10-15 raids like this a day. Its a burned out husk of a city now.  I love that the superforts are being wasted on Rangoon and Hong Kong.  A nice dull day. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 19:37
|
|
|
Can't you unload everything on the other tile of the island? It might be slower, but no return fire.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 20:22
|
|
|
25 November 1944 USS Cavalla torpedoes the destroyer Shimotsuki between Singapore and Borneo. USS Hardhead torpedoes the escort No. 38 west of Manila. USS Atule torpedoes a patrol boat, confusingly also No. 38, off Cape Engano. A carrier sweep of Luzon claimed the heavy cruiser Kumano (damaged at Leyte Gulf), coast defense ship Yasoshima (ex-Chinese cruiser Ping Hai, fast transports T-6 and T-10, and minesweeper W-18, but suffered considerable damage from kamikaze strikes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 23:54
|
|
|
Dunno-Lars posted:Can't you unload everything on the other tile of the island? It might be slower, but no return fire. there is no "base" on the other hex of the island, which makes that a non-starter.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2018 01:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 13:13 |
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I don't think you could fit a runway big enough at Wake If you pile up all the corpses, wrecked ships and equipment in the water, you could probably expand the island enough.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2018 04:51
|
|