Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is - 12/3/2006 10:24:44 AM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Hang on just a minute Jap DD's are NOT that powerfull.

Jap DD's are a huge danger to my CA's and BB's but those huge batteries of torpedoes which mke them the terror of the sea have no impact against PT Boats it isnt until late 43/44 that the Jap DD's have mostly got radar and enough auto weapons

Rightly of wrongly Jap DD's fall more into the category of Torpedo Boat and not Torpedo Boat Destroyer themselves.

2 or 3 Upgraded PT Boats are a real handfull for most Jap DD's and should win by playing the angles for the toprdo launches adn even one can ruin your day if it gets to close to 1000 feet

Only the best Jap DD's with radar, good AA and those good 5" DP guns are proper DD's the rest are themselved just glorified torpedo boats with no armour

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 31
RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is - 12/3/2006 10:31:53 AM   
pauk


Posts: 4162
Joined: 10/21/2001
From: Zagreb,Croatia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Feinder

I just get tired of 10% of the people using 1% of the game to make 90% of the noise.

Look at "the other" thread. Is he willing to post EVERY PT action, win or lose? Doubt it. It's just here's 3 actions from one game, where PTs won, and suddenly the whole blanket of PTs is a menace that that destroys Japan. That thread -is- blatently a "JFB thread".

Unlike the "other thread", this one is pure objective evidence. I'm just posting the EVERY PT ACTION OVER THE COURSE OF 8 MONTHS.

You draw your own conclusions. If you still think PTs are over-powered when they show 25 PTs lost thus far, vs. 1x DD and and transport, that's your perrogative. It begs the question of what you would consider balanced? 100 PTs lost to 1x DD? What sort of evidence of this in-game or gawd forbid, historical evidence, can you offer?

-F-


Ha, you got tired....Sorry to say but you are showing arrogancy. You are the one who ignoring the truth and arguments. But why i'm surpised, you clearly stated that you just dont care for other opinions and arguments:

quote:

"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me



quote:

Big picture Pauk.

You're guilty of focusing on what you don't like, and ignoring the simple truth.

What's over-all score card?

Something like 25 PTs sunk thus far, in exchange for a DD and an AP?



You and other persons ignoring the simple truth and questions. Posted question about PT radar efficiency and outcome of the Surigao strait battle - 39 PTs with radar, highly experienced crew vs japanese fleet. Twice - of course none of you responded to this question (in the other thread). Wouldn't that be ignoring the simple truth?

I'm willing to post all losses in my game:

date is 15th June 1943. Allied lost 104 PTs so far. 12 PTs (included in overall number) are sunk with figthers (i'm sure that quite a few PTs are first damaged with air cannons and then sunk by surface ships but i can not keep the track of it).

So, that leaves 92 PTs lost in the surface action.

They sunk 10 DD 2 PCs and two transports (according to intel screen - i'm sure that few more are first damaged with PTs and after that finished from the air - but can not keep the track of it.) So lets assume that i lost 2 more DDs due to PTs.

I like to imagine that i'm solid player so no crazy moves: all my DD (Torpedo boat destroyers) were in surface TF and i sending them in 3 flotillas at least (against 12 PTs)...

And this is what i've got - 10 of my 35 DDs are sunk by PTs in not many battles (don't have time to count naval enounters but if you dont trust me you can do it in my AAR). My navy losses arent big for that period - 9 CA and CLs + 35 DDs. Only 3 of CL/CAs were sunk in the naval battles - rest are sunk from the air. 6 DDs are lost due air attacks or mines. So, out of 29 DDs lost in naval action (surface, submarines) i lost more than one of 1/3 to PTs....

I'm not a lunatic and mostly i'm very careful with my ships - but perhaps i'm shizofrenic and that is not a true - we should ask Andy about it. So, i don't think i'm don't have right to complain about it....


quote:

If you look in the editor. Each PT has a unite slot, and unique arrival date in the editor. According to the manual, the only ships that respawn are Barges and MSWs. PTs do not (unless a dev would like to confirm or deny this). They are not unlimited.


Not an expert, really, so can you say how many PTs are available? 200, 300, 500?



_____________________________


(in reply to Feinder)
Post #: 32
RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is - 12/3/2006 11:03:41 AM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Mostly trasnports damaged and a few aux's around Manila and later on around kendari.

Some of those DD's sank were around Kendari when the PT Boats finished off crippples after brought Force Z in and killed or damaged 6 or 7 DD's - And I admit that particular Gp of PT Boats I remmeber with great pride they did very well and were VERY experienced when you finally got them

12 DD's for 92 PT Boats is a ratio I am unhappy with especially as some of the DD's were to some extent damaged by POW 1st.

My PT Boats should do better than that ESPECIALLY in the period before the Jap DD's get their AA upgrades and all those automatic weapons get added.

As I said before Jap DD's at start are NOT Destroyers they are mostly glorified Torpedo Boats themselves !!!!

I think the alllies get about 350 total in the war but losses drop off in late 43/44 as the Japanese tend to leave allied bases alone and the allies start to get enough DD's to take over the forward area security (PT Boats are ok but they are to limited so they tend to get relegated further and further back as the war goes on and the fighting leaves NG/Solomons and the allies get more and more proper Destroyers)

(in reply to pauk)
Post #: 33
RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is - 12/3/2006 11:07:48 AM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Pauk you are among the most carefull of my opponents with your ships which is why I find this so funny as I view the whole sequence of attacks we are discussing as out of character (which of course may be the point of these raids to knock me off balance and reconsider your preferred modus operandi)



<baits hook and waits to see if Pauk will provide some free intel>

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 34
RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is - 12/3/2006 11:26:00 AM   
Oliver Heindorf


Posts: 1911
Joined: 5/1/2002
From: Hamburg/Deutschland
Status: offline 		I never had luck with PTs I jst made a .50 cal hit on a DD before my PT was sunk.

_____________________________


(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 35
RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is - 12/3/2006 11:30:57 AM   
Charles2222


Posts: 3993
Joined: 3/12/2001
Status: offline 		From what I'm seeing here, the main issue seems to be that the DD's are far too easily hit by torps. In every engagement where you can see a DD is hit by a torp, is it assumed that all PT's fire all the torps? As the game works, don't ships always fire their first salvo of torps at it's maximum range (assuming some of the battles start at a range further than that)?

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 36
RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is - 12/3/2006 12:23:46 PM   
pauk


Posts: 4162
Joined: 10/21/2001
From: Zagreb,Croatia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Pauk you are among the most carefull of my opponents with your ships which is why I find this so funny as I view the whole sequence of attacks we are discussing as out of character (which of course may be the point of these raids to knock me off balance and reconsider your preferred modus operandi)



<baits hook and waits to see if Pauk will provide some free intel>




That is why i feels robbed - what would happend that i'm easy going with my Navy, just imagine!!! This was carefully planed operation, leaders and DD task composition were carefully choosed....

As for a free intel, no problem: my last air raid on PM was consisted of 3 Tojo sentai and one Chutai. Yes, almost 1-1 ratio kills, but didn't engaged crack Tojos - ony veterans with 70 exp. One group is crack - but this group lost only one pilot. It would be enough if i say that i have lots of crack groups in reserve waiting for your next move!



_____________________________


(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 37
RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is - 12/3/2006 12:29:30 PM   
pauk


Posts: 4162
Joined: 10/21/2001
From: Zagreb,Croatia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

12 DD's for 92 PT Boats is a ratio I am unhappy with especially as some of the DD's were to some extent damaged by POW 1st.


You must be joking, right? You should try Japanese side some day and would know that 12 DDs are enormous loss for the Japanese. Especially when they are lost for nothing in return (if you don't count some of the cheap 350 PTs)... the funny thing is that the whole Combined fleet now fears of couple PTs.... very realistic, right..

Once again, i do not have nothing against such results if these PTs were backed with surface capital ships (DDs, CAs) but this is not a case...Surigao strait!!!!

_____________________________


(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 38
RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is - 12/3/2006 1:09:05 PM   
Oliver Heindorf


Posts: 1911
Joined: 5/1/2002
From: Hamburg/Deutschland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Charles_22

From what I'm seeing here, the main issue seems to be that the DD's are far too easily hit by torps. In every engagement where you can see a DD is hit by a torp, is it assumed that all PT's fire all the torps? As the game works, don't ships always fire their first salvo of torps at it's maximum range (assuming some of the battles start at a range further than that)?


hmm, I never had a PT hitting anything with a torp in 2 years of game play. intresting.

_____________________________


(in reply to Charles2222)
Post #: 39
RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is - 12/3/2006 1:30:11 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Feinder

That they only put forth 2 or 3 examples that have frustrated them. They don't bother to post every action that PTs have been involved in, in their game.



lol, that´s funny! The examples I posted are all the encounters I had in the last two weeks (there weren´t many more before; one, two?). So the results are....

I´m not the player who begins to complain because I see something once!! For sure not. Seems that Pauk has lost a remarkable number of DDs to PTs too... So...


< Message edited by castor troy -- 12/3/2006 1:48:17 PM >

(in reply to Feinder)
Post #: 40
RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is - 12/3/2006 1:42:41 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Feinder

I just get tired of 10% of the people using 1% of the game to make 90% of the noise.

Look at "the other" thread. Is he willing to post EVERY PT action, win or lose? Doubt it. It's just here's 3 actions from one game, where PTs won, and suddenly the whole blanket of PTs is a menace that that destroys Japan. That thread -is- blatently a "JFB thread".

-F-



Are you joking??? You must be! When I read all this BS on this thread I get so upset the thing I´m thinking about is so .....

The difference between people that aren´t an English native speaker is that those people are reading what was written. The people that are native speaker are mostly only picking out two or three words out of five sentences.

If niceguy referres to "he didn´t even answer why he doesn´t strafe those PTs" then what should I say? People must be NUTS??

I answered long enough and detailed enough. I´M NOT THE JFB I´VE GOT JUST ONE PBEM MORE AS JAPANESE THAN AS ALLIED!! I´M NOT HAVING THE PROBLEM THAT I´M AMERICAN AND BECAUSE OF THAT, EVERYONE THAT SAYS SOMETHING ABOUT AMERICAN EQUIPMENT IS DUMB OR A FANBOY!

God damn the next who wants me to strafe Palmyra gets a medicament against Alzheimer´s disease sent from me. Just post your adress.

(in reply to Feinder)
Post #: 41
RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is - 12/3/2006 2:23:01 PM   
Charles2222


Posts: 3993
Joined: 3/12/2001
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Oliver Heindorf

quote:

ORIGINAL: Charles_22

From what I'm seeing here, the main issue seems to be that the DD's are far too easily hit by torps. In every engagement where you can see a DD is hit by a torp, is it assumed that all PT's fire all the torps? As the game works, don't ships always fire their first salvo of torps at it's maximum range (assuming some of the battles start at a range further than that)?


hmm, I never had a PT hitting anything with a torp in 2 years of game play. intresting.


A lot of ANY kind of results depends on WHO you are playing. Funny, I think I have told you this before on another subject. Anyway, if you are the Allies the torps won't probably hit. If you're the IJN they hit. If you're playing against a pbem'er I have no idea.

(in reply to Oliver Heindorf)
Post #: 42
RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is - 12/3/2006 2:30:29 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline 		PBEM against Przemcio! Losses are 18 US PTs against 3 Jap DDs with 5 or 6 damaged more than 30 sys (mostly because of .50 cal critical hits ).

Encounters were below 10. If people aren´t believing me then just ask Przemcio if the numbers are correct.

(in reply to Charles2222)
Post #: 43
RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is - 12/3/2006 3:09:23 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: pauk


quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

12 DD's for 92 PT Boats is a ratio I am unhappy with especially as some of the DD's were to some extent damaged by POW 1st.


You must be joking, right? You should try Japanese side some day and would know that 12 DDs are enormous loss for the Japanese. Especially when they are lost for nothing in return (if you don't count some of the cheap 350 PTs)... the funny thing is that the whole Combined fleet now fears of couple PTs.... very realistic, right..

Once again, i do not have nothing against such results if these PTs were backed with surface capital ships (DDs, CAs) but this is not a case...Surigao strait!!!!


No I am not joking you lost c 100 points against my 100 points seems about right to me if not against me.

If 12 DD's are a heavy loss then dont raid my bases where PT boats are present unless you mean it and are willing to losew ships - Jap DD's are not good enough to take on odds of 3:1 at night with a raidar disadvantage -

Re DD's v PT boats Surigaoa Strait had BB's and Cruisers - Mogami's searchlight illuminated the PT Boats and the PT Boats radar got confused by Nishimuras BB Group, the PT boats engaged at 3 miles range after being detected not 1,000 yards sorry I dont see how that one engagement relates to an unsupported 3 or 4 DD section taking on 12 PT Boats -
I say again early war Jap DD's are Torp heavy andf with few exceptions they are designed for the decisive battle at night against an enemy battle line not fighting off torpedo boats you are trying to use DD's for a role they are not suited for (they get better as they gain auto weapons and AA as time goes on) but in the early and mid phases of the war its only the disparity in night fighting exp that gives the Japs the edge.

Anyway I dont think we are adding anything new to the debate so i think I will go do some turns !!!

(in reply to pauk)
Post #: 44
RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is - 12/3/2006 3:10:54 PM   
Charles2222


Posts: 3993
Joined: 3/12/2001
Status: offline 		Oliver Heindorf: Oh. I'm sorry, I forgot to mention that the Allies get the raw end of PT torps if you're playing the Ai, while with playing as Japan against the allied AI you get ripped off.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 45
RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is - 12/3/2006 3:29:55 PM   
pauk


Posts: 4162
Joined: 10/21/2001
From: Zagreb,Croatia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac


quote:

ORIGINAL: pauk


quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

12 DD's for 92 PT Boats is a ratio I am unhappy with especially as some of the DD's were to some extent damaged by POW 1st.


You must be joking, right? You should try Japanese side some day and would know that 12 DDs are enormous loss for the Japanese. Especially when they are lost for nothing in return (if you don't count some of the cheap 350 PTs)... the funny thing is that the whole Combined fleet now fears of couple PTs.... very realistic, right..

Once again, i do not have nothing against such results if these PTs were backed with surface capital ships (DDs, CAs) but this is not a case...Surigao strait!!!!


No I am not joking you lost c 100 points against my 100 points seems about right to me if not against me.

If 12 DD's are a heavy loss then dont raid my bases where PT boats are present unless you mean it and are willing to losew ships - Jap DD's are not good enough to take on odds of 3:1 at night with a raidar disadvantage -

Re DD's v PT boats Surigaoa Strait had BB's and Cruisers - Mogami's searchlight illuminated the PT Boats and the PT Boats radar got confused by Nishimuras BB Group, the PT boats engaged at 3 miles range after being detected not 1,000 yards sorry I dont see how that one engagement relates to an unsupported 3 or 4 DD section taking on 12 PT Boats -
I say again early war Jap DD's are Torp heavy andf with few exceptions they are designed for the decisive battle at night against an enemy battle line not fighting off torpedo boats you are trying to use DD's for a role they are not suited for (they get better as they gain auto weapons and AA as time goes on) but in the early and mid phases of the war its only the disparity in night fighting exp that gives the Japs the edge.

Anyway I dont think we are adding anything new to the debate so i think I will go do some turns !!!


Yes, this debate becoming pointless. I have other view on the Battle of Surigao strait than you - we are not going to agree there. 100 points for 100 points seems like simple math, i do agree. But if Allies have 350 points avaliable only in PTs (didn't mentioned DDs!) while Japan have ummm... lets say 1000 points available with all DDs... well this is different story.

As i've said, i agree with you "do not raid bases where PTs are present". It is my only choice.

oh, well...

_____________________________


(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 46
RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is - 12/3/2006 3:34:13 PM   
pauk


Posts: 4162
Joined: 10/21/2001
From: Zagreb,Croatia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

... IS DUMB OR A FANBOY!


I'm dumbass!


_____________________________


(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 47
RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is - 12/3/2006 3:37:22 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: pauk


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

... IS DUMB OR A FANBOY!


I'm dumbass!




We better should refrain from posting our thoughts and become the "Yes Sir, you´re rigth Sir" people.

(in reply to pauk)
Post #: 48
RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is - 12/3/2006 3:41:47 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline 		Just stumbled over that one from Raverdaves and Luskans AAR: Seems to me he´s one of the guys here with bad luck too. All others besides Pauk and me must be the lucky ones. But of course, just another negative one.....

Night Time Surface Combat, near Kragen at 22,63

Japanese Ships
CA Chokai
CL Naka
DD Natsugumo
DD Asagumo
DD Harusame, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
DD Yudachi
DD Sagiri

Allied Ships
PT TM-4
PT TM-5
PT TM-6, Shell hits 4, and is sunk
PT TM-7, Shell hits 4, and is sunk
PT TM-8, Shell hits 1, and is sunk
PT TM-9, Shell hits 33, and is sunk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Kragen at 22,63

Japanese Ships
CA Chokai
CL Naka
DD Natsugumo
DD Asagumo, Shell hits 1
DD Harusame, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
DD Yudachi
DD Sagiri

Allied Ships
PT TM-10
PT TM-11
PT TM-13
PT TM-14, Shell hits 6, and is sunk
PT TM-15

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Kragen at 22,63

Japanese Ships
CA Chokai
CL Naka
DD Natsugumo
DD Asagumo
DD Yudachi
DD Sagiri

Allied Ships
PT TM-4
PT TM-5, Shell hits 4, and is sunk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Kragen at 22,63

Japanese Ships
CA Chokai
CL Naka
DD Natsugumo, Shell hits 2
DD Asagumo
DD Yudachi
DD Sagiri

Allied Ships
PT TM-10
PT TM-11
PT TM-13
PT TM-15


(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 49
RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is - 12/3/2006 3:45:05 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: pauk


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

... IS DUMB OR A FANBOY!


I'm dumbass!



You're a dumbass JFB...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to pauk)
Post #: 50
RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is - 12/3/2006 4:02:39 PM   
pauk


Posts: 4162
Joined: 10/21/2001
From: Zagreb,Croatia
Status: offline 		Nah, Castor stop it! It can't be... you must be dreaming

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

Just stumbled over that one from Raverdaves and Luskans AAR: Seems to me he´s one of the guys here with bad luck too. All others besides Pauk and me must be the lucky ones. But of course, just another negative one.....

Night Time Surface Combat, near Kragen at 22,63

Japanese Ships
CA Chokai
CL Naka
DD Natsugumo
DD Asagumo
DD Harusame, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
DD Yudachi
DD Sagiri

Allied Ships
PT TM-4
PT TM-5
PT TM-6, Shell hits 4, and is sunk
PT TM-7, Shell hits 4, and is sunk
PT TM-8, Shell hits 1, and is sunk
PT TM-9, Shell hits 33, and is sunk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Kragen at 22,63

Japanese Ships
CA Chokai
CL Naka
DD Natsugumo
DD Asagumo, Shell hits 1
DD Harusame, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
DD Yudachi
DD Sagiri

Allied Ships
PT TM-10
PT TM-11
PT TM-13
PT TM-14, Shell hits 6, and is sunk
PT TM-15

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Kragen at 22,63

Japanese Ships
CA Chokai
CL Naka
DD Natsugumo
DD Asagumo
DD Yudachi
DD Sagiri

Allied Ships
PT TM-4
PT TM-5, Shell hits 4, and is sunk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Kragen at 22,63

Japanese Ships
CA Chokai
CL Naka
DD Natsugumo, Shell hits 2
DD Asagumo
DD Yudachi
DD Sagiri

Allied Ships
PT TM-10
PT TM-11
PT TM-13
PT TM-15





_____________________________


(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 51
RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is - 12/3/2006 4:03:38 PM   
pauk


Posts: 4162
Joined: 10/21/2001
From: Zagreb,Croatia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus


quote:

ORIGINAL: pauk


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

... IS DUMB OR A FANBOY!


I'm dumbass!



You're a dumbass JFB...


Great D. T. has spoken!

_____________________________


(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 52
RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is - 12/3/2006 4:15:50 PM   
tsimmonds


Posts: 5498
Joined: 2/6/2004
From: astride Mason and Dixon's Line
Status: offline 		A total of 808 PT boats had been built or contracted for by 1/1/45.

Of these 85 had been transferred to the RN, and 181 to the USSR, and 136 had not yet been delivered.

That leaves 406 available to the USN by 1/1/45. At this time, 71 boats had been stricken, leaving 335 in commission. The vast majority of these boats were in the Pacific, mainly assigned to 7th fleet (MacArthur's Navy).

_____________________________

Fear the kitten!

(in reply to pauk)
Post #: 53
RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is - 12/3/2006 6:41:18 PM   
m10bob


Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus


quote:

ORIGINAL: pauk


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

... IS DUMB OR A FANBOY!


I'm dumbass!



You're a dumbass JFB...
[/quote


Terminus....ever the diplomat!


_____________________________




(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 54
RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is - 12/3/2006 6:46:47 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		You've heard of gunboat diplomacy... This is sledgehammer diplomacy; only kind Pauk understands...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to m10bob)
Post #: 55
RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is - 12/3/2006 6:49:10 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline 		Here´s the next engagement. This time the PTs were surprised and weren´t able to shoot back (range?). I´m NOT only realizing bad results.

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 11/17/42

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Baker Island at 94,92

Japanese Ships
CL Natori
DD Makigumo
DD Takanami
DD Yugure
DD Ariake
DD Asagiri

Allied Ships
PT PT-66
PT PT-68
PT PT-77, Shell hits 7, and is sunk
PT PT-81, Shell hits 20, and is sunk
PT PT-82
PT PT-84, Shell hits 14, and is sunk

< Message edited by castor troy -- 12/3/2006 6:52:32 PM >

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 56
RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is - 12/3/2006 7:38:26 PM   
m10bob


Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

Here´s the next engagement. This time the PTs were surprised and weren´t able to shoot back (range?). I´m NOT only realizing bad results.

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 11/17/42

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Baker Island at 94,92

Japanese Ships
CL Natori
DD Makigumo
DD Takanami
DD Yugure
DD Ariake
DD Asagiri

Allied Ships
PT PT-66
PT PT-68
PT PT-77, Shell hits 7, and is sunk
PT PT-81, Shell hits 20, and is sunk
PT PT-82
PT PT-84, Shell hits 14, and is sunk


Very valid example of "the other side of the coin"..
ONE shell equals ONE PT boat..
One might consider it impossible for the larger ships to have this advantage at night, but PT 109 never saw *nor heard* that DD in the Blackett Straits, (which like the entire "slot" has noisy surf.)

The PT boat itself is not the offensive weapon that kills Japanese DD's, merely the vehicle which carries the PT boat torpedo.
If the PT's can get close enough to launch, it's not a matter of how many "shells" hit th DD, but how many torpedoes hit the DD..
The DD might take a hundred shells from a PT, and those MG slugs might scratch the paint, but ANY ship taking a torpedo has limited flotation value from then on.
One might begin to curse the local CD guns as to complain about the torpedoes!
Why do people not send their DD's to engage in a bombardment?
Because they know the DD's will take the most damage,(because with shallower gun range, they must get closer to the shore..
No thanks, I'll use my CA's and BB's and lob shells in, thank you..
(Contrary to some opinion, this is NOT being gamey, it just makes sense!)..
O/K., if the Japanese know the Solomon "slot" is patrolled by PT boats, one would not expect him to SACRIFICE his vulnerable and VERY IMPORTANT DD's cleaning out the "slot".
If he does, he takes the risk..
BTW, somebody wanted to know how many PT's actually made it to the Pacific rather than Atlantic"
Suggest "Two Ocean Navy" by Samuel Elliott Morrison............Excellent read..........


_____________________________




(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 57
RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is - 12/3/2006 8:47:24 PM   
Demosthenes


Posts: 525
Joined: 12/8/2005
From: Los Angeles CA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

A total of 808 PT boats had been built or contracted for by 1/1/45.

Of these 85 had been transferred to the RN, and 181 to the USSR, and 136 had not yet been delivered.

That leaves 406 available to the USN by 1/1/45. At this time, 71 boats had been stricken, leaving 335 in commission. The vast majority of these boats were in the Pacific, mainly assigned to 7th fleet (MacArthur's Navy).


After reading both current PT Boat threads, it appears to me that a legitimate case for TOO MANY PT Boat losses can just as easily be made.

It looks to me that the emotion being vented lamenting PT Boats is nothing more than people just not liking ship losses.

Demo

_____________________________


(in reply to tsimmonds)
Post #: 58
RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is - 12/3/2006 9:04:04 PM   
Feinder


Posts: 6589
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline 		"Just the facts mam!" - Dragnet.

May brings another un-miraculous month for PTs. Poor little IJN PT got mixed up with the wrong invasion TF...




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Akyab at 30,29

Japanese Ships
CA Chokai, on fire
CA Mogami
CA Mikuma
CA Suzuya
CA Kumano
CA Aoba

Allied Ships
PT PT-36
PT PT-37
PT PT-38
PT PT-40



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF, near Suva at 86,114

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 20

No Japanese losses

Allied Ships
PT PT-30, Shell hits 12, Bomb hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
PT PT-29, Shell hits 8

Aircraft Attacking:
4 x A6M2 Zero attacking at 100 feet
4 x A6M2 Zero attacking at 100 feet
4 x A6M2 Zero attacking at 100 feet
4 x A6M2 Zero attacking at 100 feet
4 x A6M2 Zero attacking at 100 feet


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat at 94,95

Japanese Ships
PC Shimushu
PT Gyoraitei #1
MSW Choun Maru #21, Shell hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
MSW Hinode Maru #17
MSW Tasei Maru
PC Ch 3
PC Ch 7
PC Ch 8
AP Eihuku Maru, Shell hits 2
AP Koei Maru
AP Ryoyo Maru
AP Takuei Maru, Shell hits 6, on fire, heavy damage
AP Takunan Maru
AP Tsunushima Maru
AP Unkai Maru #6
AP Yoshinogawa Maru, Shell hits 2, on fire
AP Meikai Maru
AP Tamatsu Maru
AP Miyako Maru

Allied Ships
DD Electra, Shell hits 7, on fire (went down fighting!)

Japanese ground losses:
152 casualties reported
Guns lost 2



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat at 94,93

Japanese Ships
PC Shimushu
PT Gyoraitei #1, Shell hits 2, and is sunk
MSW Tasei Maru
PC Ch 3
PC Ch 7, Shell hits 8, and is sunk
PC Ch 8, Shell hits 4, on fire, heavy damage
AP Eihuku Maru, Shell hits 8, and is sunk
AP Koei Maru, Shell hits 1, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
AP Ryoyo Maru
AP Takuei Maru, on fire, heavy damage
AP Takunan Maru
AP Tsunushima Maru
AP Unkai Maru #6
AP Yoshinogawa Maru, Shell hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
AP Meikai Maru, Shell hits 4, on fire
AP Miyako Maru

Allied Ships
BC Repulse, Shell hits 1
CL Adelaide
DD Litchfield
DD Parrott

Japanese ground losses:
2699 casualties reported
Guns lost 10


_____________________________

"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me


(in reply to pauk)
Post #: 59
RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is - 12/3/2006 9:12:45 PM   
Feinder


Posts: 6589
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline 		Only one combat in June.

Poor widdle guy...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Lunga at 67,97

Japanese Ships
PT Gyoraitei #6, Shell hits 4, and is sunk

Allied Ships
BB Colorado
DD Waters
DD Talbot
DMS Lamberton
DMS Perry
DMS Chandler
DMS Wasmuth
PG Charleston



.
.
.

As a post-note to that battle for the JFBs, LtFightr did send down the Atago and some friends a few days later. They put 3x torps into Colorado, she rolled over and sank in 18 minutes with great loss of life.



Atago ate 3x 16" shells, but appearenly has made it back to Rabaul.

-F-

_____________________________

"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me


(in reply to Feinder)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.844