Panzer Grenadier Battles on February 25th:
Desert Rats #8 - Cavalleria
Errors? Omissions? Report them!
Kiska Evacuation
Alaska's War #11
(Attacker) United States vs Japan (Defender)
Formations Involved
Japan Kiska Occupation Force
Display
Balance:



Overall balance chart for AlWa011
Total
Side 1 0
Draw 1
Side 2 4
Overall Rating, 5 votes
5
4
3
2
1
3.8
Scenario Rank: 126 of 609
Parent Game Alaska's War
Historicity Alt-History
Date 1943-08-15
Start Time 08:00
Turn Count 24
Visibility Day
Counters 59
Net Morale 1
Net Initiative 2
Maps 1: AK2
Layout Dimensions 88 x 58 cm
35 x 23 in
Play Bounty 152
AAR Bounty 156
Total Plays 5
Total AARs 2
Battle Types
Kill Them All
Rear Guard
Conditions
Severe Weather
Terrain Mods
Scenario Requirements & Playability
Afrika Korps maps
Alaska's War book
Battle of the Bulge counters
Guadalcanal counters
Introduction

Had the American/Canadian forces been able to catch up to the retreating Japanese on Kiska, they might have had a shot at disrupting the Japanese evacuation. The encounter would likely have happened on the eastern side of the island near Vega Bay. As with all encounters in the Aleutians, the Americans would have had numerical superiority but would be fighting the terrain at least as much as the Japanese.

Conclusion

If the Japanese had chosen the stay and fight on Kiska as they did on Attu, the end results would have been the same but with more casualties as the actual force at Kiska was bigger at all most 5200 men. The only enemy tanks to land in North America were there.

Additional Notes

Scenario created by Jay Townsend, published by Avalanche Press, so PG-HQ considers it canonical. You can view the setup information at AP's site here: http://www.avalanchepress.com/Kiska_Evacuation.php or download a PDF of the same from us here: http://www.pg-hq.com/scenarios/Kiska-Evacuation.pdf


Display Relevant AFV Rules

AFV Rules Pertaining to this Scenario's Order of Battle
  • Vulnerable to results on the Assault Combat Chart (7.25, 7.63, ACC), and may be attacked by Anti-Tank fire (11.2, DFT). Anti-Tank fire only affects the individual unit fired upon (7.62, 11.0).
  • AFV's are activated by tank leaders (3.2, 3.3, 5.42, 6.8). They may also be activated as part of an initial activating stack, but if activated in this way would need a tank leader in order to carry out combat movement.
  • AFV's do not block Direct Fire (10.1).
  • Full-strength AFV's with "armor efficiency" may make two anti-tank (AT) fire attacks per turn (either in their action segment or during opportunity fire) if they have AT fire values of 0 or more (11.2).
  • Each unit with an AT fire value of 2 or more may fire at targets at a distance of between 100% and 150% of its printed AT range. It does so at half its AT fire value. (11.3)
  • Efficient and non-efficient AFV's may conduct two opportunity fires per turn if using direct fire (7.44, 7.64). Units with both Direct and AT Fire values may use either type of fire in the same turn as their opportunity fire, but not both (7.22, 13.0). Units which can take opportunity fire twice per turn do not have to target the same unit both times (13.0).
  • Demoralized AFV's are not required to flee from units that do not have AT fire values (14.3).
  • Place a Wreck marker when an AFV is eliminated in a bridge or town hex (16.3).
  • AFV's do not benefit from Entrenchments (16.42).
  • AFV's may Dig In (16.2).
  • Closed-top AFV's: Immune to M, M1 and M2 results on Direct and Bombardment Fire Tables. Do not take step losses from Direct or Bombardment Fire. If X or #X result on Fire Table, make M morale check instead (7.25, 7.41, 7.61, BT, DFT).
  • Closed-top AFV's: Provide the +1 modifier on the Assault Table when combined with infantry. (Modifier only applies to Germans in all scenarios; Soviet Guards in scenarios taking place after 1942; Polish, US and Commonwealth in scenarios taking place after 1943.) (ACC)
  • Tank: all are closed-top and provide the +1 Assault bonus, when applicable

Display Order of Battle

Japan Order of Battle
Imperial Japanese Army
  • Mechanized
  • Towed
United States Order of Battle
Army
  • Mechanized
Marine Corps
  • Foot
  • Misc

Display AARs (2)

Alaska’s War: Kiska Evacuation, Scenario #11
Author JayTownsend
Method Solo
Victor Draw
Play Date 2010-01-01
Language English
Scenario AlWa011

I played this one again last night and finished this morning. Funny thing is the Type 95 was the first unit lost to a M5 Stuart, followed by one of the Stuarts being lost a 37mm AT gun. I forgot to put the wreck counters on at first but latter remembered. The American strategy should be to blow by the Japanese Rear Guard Screening Force as fast as possibly, without getting tangle up too much, take care of them latter, as you must block the Elements of the Japanese Occupation Force from escaping in mass. The Japanese need to do the opposite and hold the American up with the Rear Guard and terrain and don’t get your Occupation Force stuck in too many assaults, even take the loses to escape.

I used a few home made assault counters I copied from one of the gamers on this folder. Helpful! In this situation, it pays off to have three combat units in a stack for assaults when ever you can, as there is not much artillery, other than one mortar unit. In the end I had to count both sides losses and the exited Japanese units and minus the totals. The Japanese lost 18 steps to combat but exited 13 steps, the Americans lost 7 steps. The end result was draw. Japanese 13 exit + 7 US step loses = 20, compared to Americans with 18 points of Japanese eliminated steps that didn’t exit. The difference is only two points, so it’s a DRAW, as a side must win by three points just to get a minor victory. Very close for the Japanese.

One more thing to remember, the American M5's have a movement of 11, the Scout INF unit has a movement of 4 and the LVT with an INF Passenger & Leader has a movement of 6, so get those units through fast but don't create too many wrecks in one hex, or it won't be fun.

The Terrain is a really killer, Muskeg hexes and visibility is only three hexes. The American have a stronger force but the Japanese have better morale.

0 Comments
You must be a registered member and logged-in to post a comment.
Alaska'a War #11 Kiska Evacuation or Just when I thought I was out they pull me back in!
Author PatC
Method Solo
Victor Japan
Play Date 2011-05-28
Language English
Scenario AlWa011

Imagine Lt. O'Bannon's chagrin when HQ informed him that he had to go back to the muskeg for one more scenario to intercept the Axis occupation force before they evacuated. This was bad karma to have to go back when you thought you were done. So reluctently he unpacked his duffle bag and fished out his dice and looked over the map. It figured to be a race to the road junction at 2010. Once deployed the Allies blew through the delaying force with amazing speed eliminating all but one HMG step and a Lt. Despite this the Axis occupation force managed to make good time toward the exit hexes and were just a little ahead of the advancing Allies when the two bodies made contact around the road junction. A wild melee ensued with assault and counter assault. The Allies lost a M5 step to assault and the lvt to the Axis ATG at the exit hex on the road. The Allies just could never get ahead of the Axis in strengh, and those that did got eaten alive in assault due to the axis morale level and the Assault bonus. Meanwhile though other axis units were taking a beating trying to withdraw under the Allied guns suffering step losses and disruptions and demoralizations in the process. Both sides had taken losses and the scenario was in the balance. At this poing the Axis decided for one turn to turn and meet their pursurers. This cost the Axis two steps and a demorlization but it disjointed the Allied pursuit by causing a step loss and several disruptions. This move, although expensive, allowed the bulk of the remaining Axis units to escape. The scenario ended at 1215 with the Axis scoring 22 points and the Allies 16 for a 6 point difference. Axis minor victory. Lt. O'Bannon survived with an additional 6 points and 2 steps destroyed. Kudos to "Super Fan" Jay Townsend for creating this scenario. It was a good one. Rating 4.

0 Comments
You must be a registered member and logged-in to post a comment.
Errors? Omissions? Report them!