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: Need help!!!

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> RE: Need help!!! Page: <<   < prev  22 23 [24] 25 26   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Need help!!! - 2/18/2008 11:48:13 PM   
jesperpehrson


Posts: 1052
Joined: 7/29/2006
Status: offline
Status-report on Landunits (all countries):
705 out of 1062 units done (67%)

DONE:
Siberian Russia 4/4 (Adam) DONE!
Finland 8/8 (Adam) DONE!
Rumania 10/10 (Adam) DONE!
Mongolia 1/1 (Adam) DONE!
Switzerland 6/6 (Adam) DONE!
Phillipines 1/1 (Adam) DONE!
Afghanistan 2/2 (Adam) DONE!
Australia 8/8 (Michaelbaldur) DONE!
New Zeeland 3/3 (Michaelbaldur) DONE!
South Africa 5/5 (Michaelbaldur) DONE!
Denmark 1/1 (Michaelbaldur) DONE!
Norway 3/3 (Michaelbaldur) DONE!
Poland 14/14 (Michaelbaldur) DONE!
AOI 1/1 (Mziln) DONE!
Croatia 1/1 (Capitan) DONE!
Ecuador 1/1 (Capitan) DONE!
Peru 1/1 (Capitan) DONE!
French Somalia 1/1 (Capitan) DONE!
Ivory Coast 1/1 (Capitan) DONE!
French Sudan 1/1 (Capitan) DONE!
Senegal 1/1 (Capitan) DONE!
Middle Congo 1/1 (Capitan) DONE!
Niger 1/1 (Capitan) DONE!
Indo-China 1/1 (Capitan) DONE!
N. East Indies 2/2 (Capitan) DONE!
Belgian Congo 1/1 (Capitan) DONE!
Saudi Arabia 1/1 (Capitan) DONE!
Iraq 2/2 (Capitan) DONE!
Liberia 1/1 (Capitan) DONE!
Cameroon 1/1 (Capitan) DONE!
Gabon 1/1 (Capitan) DONE!
Madagascar 1/1 (Capitan) DONE!
Morroco 1/1 (Capitan) DONE!
Algeria 2/2 (Capitan) DONE!
Tunisia 1/1 (Capitan) DONE!
Syria 2/2 (Capitan) DONE!
Sudan 1/1 (Capitan) DONE!
Nigeria 2/2 (Capitan) DONE!
Sierra Leone 1/1 (Capitan) DONE!
British Somalialand 1/1 (Capitan) DONE!
Egypt 2/2 (Capitan) DONE!
Kenya 1/1 (Capitan) DONE!
Uganda 1/1 (Capitan) DONE!
Tanganyika 1/1 (Capitan) DONE!
Northern Rhodesia 1/1 (Capitan) DONE!
Southern Rhodesia 1/1 (Capitan)
Palestine 1/1 (Capitan) DONE!
Aden 1/1 (Capitan) DONE!
New Caledonia 1/1 (Capitan) DONE!
Sweden 13/13 (Toed) DONE!
Ireland 2/2 (bj_rodhe) DONE!
Hungary 6/6 (Grisouille) DONE!
Bulgaria 3/3 (Grisouille) DONE!
France 68/68(Grisouille)DONE
Greece 4/4 (Grisouille) DONE!
SS-Germany 19/19 (Grisouille) DONE!
Netherlands 2/2 (Grisouille) DONE!
Yugoslavia 9/9 (Dale) (DONE!)
Bolivia 1/1 (Jeff) (DONE!)
Paraguay 1/1 (Jeff) (DONE!)
Colombia 1/1 (Jeff) (DONE!)
Zoya and Tito 2/2 (MarcusWatney) (DONE!)

ASSIGNED but NOT DONE:
USA 50/99 (Adam)
Russia 125/146 (Adam)
Ukraine 0/8 (Adam)
Communist China 16/18 (Wosung)
Nat. China 34/38 (Wosung)
Korea 0/2 (Wosung)
Manchuko 0/4 (Wosung)
Formosa 0/1 (Wosung)
Italy 22/61 (Jimm)
Libya 0/3 (Jimm)
Eritrea 0/1 (Jimm)
Italian Somalialand 0/2 (Jimm)
Burma 1/2 (Capitan)
Germany 92/128 (Capitan)
Thailand 0/1 (Capitan)
Northern Ireland 0/1 (Capitan)
Belgium 0/4 (BredsjöMagnus)
UK 31/57 (Rob)
Canada 9/10 (Rob)
India 3/13 (Rob)
Brasil 0/5 (Jeff)
Argentina 0/3 (Jeff)
Mexico 0/6 (Jeff)
Panama 0/2 (Jeff)
Venezuela 0/1 (Jeff)
Uruguay 0/1 (Jeff)
Chile 0/2 (Jeff)
Japan 64/76 (Mziln)
Iran/Persia 0/2 (Herulf)
Portugal 0/2 (Doug)
Turkey 1/13 (Doug)
Austria 0/3 (SGT Rice)
Ethiopia 1/6 (SGT Rice)

UNASSIGNED:
Nat. Spain 2/14
Rep. Spain 1/14
Czeckoslovakia 1/15

-------------
"NEW UNITS" 13/61

Also the ART (including ART, AA and AT) for all nations is being done by STABILO

Anyone who like to pitch in with any of the unassigned countries is welcome to take part! Just send me a PM and I will help you get started!

- Capitan

< Message edited by capitan -- 3/15/2008 9:55:44 PM >

(in reply to jesperpehrson)
Post #: 691
RE: Need help!!! - 3/2/2008 3:50:24 PM   
jesperpehrson


Posts: 1052
Joined: 7/29/2006
Status: offline
Mziln is confirmed for doing the Japanese.

Anyone interested in taking up the reins for Turkey, Persia or Portugal?

(in reply to jesperpehrson)
Post #: 692
RE: Need help!!! - 3/2/2008 6:19:02 PM   
SGT Rice

 

Posts: 653
Joined: 5/22/2005
Status: offline
I'll volunteer. Do you have a list/instructions?

Guess I should read the instructions; PM enroute.

< Message edited by SGT Rice -- 3/2/2008 6:20:29 PM >

(in reply to jesperpehrson)
Post #: 693
RE: Need help!!! - 3/2/2008 6:33:09 PM   
jesperpehrson


Posts: 1052
Joined: 7/29/2006
Status: offline
PM recieved and answered!

(in reply to SGT Rice)
Post #: 694
RE: Need help!!! - 3/2/2008 7:36:50 PM   
jesperpehrson


Posts: 1052
Joined: 7/29/2006
Status: offline
MarcusWatney: You have not enabled PMs or somesuch so I cannot respond to your PM.

This is what I replied:

"You are more than welcome to Zoya and Tito!

As for the naval writeups I direct you to Steve as I have no idea about them.

- Jesper"

(in reply to jesperpehrson)
Post #: 695
RE: Need help!!! - 3/2/2008 10:55:22 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: capitan

MarcusWatney: You have not enabled PMs or somesuch so I cannot respond to your PM.

This is what I replied:

"You are more than welcome to Zoya and Tito!

As for the naval writeups I direct you to Steve as I have no idea about them.

- Jesper"


Marcus, just in case you didn't receive my PM:

I received your PM and replied to it. Could send me your email address? That is a better way to handle communications on unit writeups.
SHokanson@HawaiianTel.net

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to jesperpehrson)
Post #: 696
RE: Need help!!! - 3/3/2008 11:56:19 AM   
herulf

 

Posts: 19
Joined: 12/23/2005
From: Barcelona, Catalonia
Status: offline
Hi all!

As a long time lurker I'd like to collaborate a bit in this great project trying to do the writeups of Persia.

any suggestion on how to start?

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 697
RE: Need help!!! - 3/3/2008 6:28:02 PM   
Mziln


Posts: 1107
Joined: 2/9/2004
From: Tulsa Oklahoma
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: herulf

Hi all!

As a long time lurker I'd like to collaborate a bit in this great project trying to do the writeups of Persia.

any suggestion on how to start?


Go to your browser (Yahoo, Google, or what you use) search for: Persia armies ww2

Wikipedia will show that Persia had 9 Divisions during the Anglo-Soviet invasion of Iran (Persia) August 25, 1941 - September 17, 1941.

How you find out how these 9 Divisions were organized into corps or armies is now up to you.

When you do a writeup:

Keep it simple and accurate.

DO NOT just cut and paste you will need to rewrite it.

Rough Example:

2nd Army (Dai-ni gun) (Formed on August 23, 1937. Deactivated December 9, 1938 and reactivated July 4, 1942 as part of the Southern Expeditionary Army it was demoblized 1945)

Attached to the 2nd Army in western New Guinea (April-June 1944) were the 35th Infantry Division, 36th Infantry Division, and support units.


< Message edited by Mziln -- 3/3/2008 6:42:43 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to herulf)
Post #: 698
RE: Need help!!! - 3/3/2008 6:36:37 PM   
jesperpehrson


Posts: 1052
Joined: 7/29/2006
Status: offline
PM sent!

(in reply to herulf)
Post #: 699
RE: Need help!!! - 3/5/2008 1:03:22 AM   
jesperpehrson


Posts: 1052
Joined: 7/29/2006
Status: offline
List on top of this page updated. Both Spains are still not taken nor is Czeckoslovakia. 61% done and going fast forward.

The french are now 100% done (even the "new" units). Thank you very much Grisouille!

Rob is cracking at the UK, Canada and India. He is doing a very nice job as well!

Herulf, Doug, SGT Rice and Marcus are new writers that are most welcome aboard this great undertaking!

As the end is coming ever closer I have been starting to think about how to wrap this all up (it has yet to be discussed with Steve). I am thinking, time willing, that me and a group of the writers spend a month or so this summer going through ALL writeups for errors (factual and spelling) and eventual plagiarism (unintentional or otherwise) to cover all bases.

(in reply to jesperpehrson)
Post #: 700
RE: Need help!!! - 3/5/2008 1:31:05 AM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: capitan

List on top of this page updated. Both Spains are still not taken nor is Czeckoslovakia. 61% done and going fast forward.

The french are now 100% done (even the "new" units). Thank you very much Grisouille!

Rob is cracking at the UK, Canada and India. He is doing a very nice job as well!

Herulf, Doug, SGT Rice and Marcus are new writers that are most welcome aboard this great undertaking!

As the end is coming ever closer I have been starting to think about how to wrap this all up (it has yet to be discussed with Steve). I am thinking, time willing, that me and a group of the writers spend a month or so this summer going through ALL writeups for errors (factual and spelling) and eventual plagiarism (unintentional or otherwise) to cover all bases.


I intend to have a separate section in the 'About' for MWIF acknowledging the authors. if you can get the correct spelling for everyone's name that would be good. I think we should also have a bibliography, with each author contributing his sources. Lastly, I would like to embed in the actual data file, who did each writeup. Each writeup starts with a [] and only the first number inside those brackets is processed by the program. The rest can be used as a comment - author's name.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to jesperpehrson)
Post #: 701
RE: Need help!!! - 3/5/2008 7:34:46 AM   
panzers

 

Posts: 635
Joined: 5/19/2006
From: Detroit Mi, USA
Status: offline
I don't know how other wargames are created but I must say you guys really seem to have your **** together and seem to really care about all of us and all the anticipation we all have.
I have been following this since shortly after EiA came out knowing that it is one down, and one to go, and am very pleased to see how much you guys want to cooperate with each other and how much we all want this to get done.
I can't speak for everyone else, but I am very satisfied with what I am seeing here, and when Steve gets that "about" page done about all the authors, I will see to it personally that you all get recognized by me.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 702
RE: Need help!!! - 3/5/2008 7:39:10 AM   
jesperpehrson


Posts: 1052
Joined: 7/29/2006
Status: offline
The question of sources is an interesting one. Perhaps each author could compile a list of the most important sources if they wish and we can manage it. I do think it is a misstake to try and list sources together with specific writeups. In my mind the texts has not been written to withstand the scrutiny of academic standards, but rather to entertain with historical facts.

Each authors name in each writeup is a good idea.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 703
RE: Need help!!! - 3/5/2008 8:08:37 AM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
The only request I would make - and to echo Capitan - is that the bibliography should be general as opposed to each individual unit.  For example having done about 60+ I cannot remember a specific source for each, but I certainly know what books and sources I have used.  So could it be something like:

Author: Robert Jenkins
Write ups: Royal Navy, Canadian, Indian, and British land forces (I don`t know how its best to show this as I have not done the Generals or the Artillery and have only done a selection of Naval units for example) - any ideas?
Sources and References: Purnell`s History of the Second World War, Osprey Publishing Campaign Series, Salamander`sThe Encylopedia of the World`s Warships, Wikipedia etc etc 

(in reply to jesperpehrson)
Post #: 704
RE: Need help!!! - 3/5/2008 10:07:11 AM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

The only request I would make - and to echo Capitan - is that the bibliography should be general as opposed to each individual unit.  For example having done about 60+ I cannot remember a specific source for each, but I certainly know what books and sources I have used.  So could it be something like:

Author: Robert Jenkins
Write ups: Royal Navy, Canadian, Indian, and British land forces (I don`t know how its best to show this as I have not done the Generals or the Artillery and have only done a selection of Naval units for example) - any ideas?
Sources and References: Purnell`s History of the Second World War, Osprey Publishing Campaign Series, Salamander`sThe Encylopedia of the World`s Warships, Wikipedia etc etc 

Yes, I meant just one common bibliography. I think the players might find it of interest.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 705
RE: Need help!!! - 3/8/2008 9:20:39 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline
Here are 3 new naval unit writeups from Norman42.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 706
RE: Need help!!! - 3/8/2008 9:24:14 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline
Cory sent me writeups for all 12 French battleships. Each one had a very different experience after the fall of Paris.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 707
RE: Need help!!! - 3/8/2008 9:25:55 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline
3rd and last in series. The Bretagne story is an especially sad one.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 708
RE: Need help!!! - 3/8/2008 9:27:41 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline
Here are 3 naval unit writeups I received from Robert Jenkins this week.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 709
RE: Need help!!! - 3/8/2008 9:29:40 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline
Reading these makes you appreciate how dangerous it was at sea in WW II.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 710
RE: Need help!!! - 3/8/2008 9:31:25 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline
3rd and last in the series. Here is a ship that survived until the end of the war.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 711
RE: Need help!!! - 3/8/2008 10:52:08 PM   
Grell

 

Posts: 1064
Joined: 4/1/2004
From: Canada
Status: offline
Hi Shannon,

Very impressive, well done.

Regards,

Grell

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 712
RE: Need help!!! - 3/9/2008 12:49:12 AM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Grell

Hi Shannon,

Very impressive, well done.

Regards,

Grell

Thanks. The credit goes to Cory & Robert.

I am still looking for authors.

There are a lot of submarines in MWIF (duh!), but each unit represents more than 1 submarine (20-50?).

This leaves a lot of leeway in doing the writeups for the subs. For instance, there are separate counters for German subs built in each year from 1933-1945. Each year could have its own writeup describing the characteristics of U-boats built in that year. Then historical accounts (e.g., combat patrols) of some of the individual subs built that year could be given. You could choose the more interesting subs for the latter. Or the ones about which events are actually known, since many of them never got home to base to report what they actually did.

A similar treatment could be made for the amphibious units and naval transports.

And also for the merchant marine for each country that has convoys in MWIF. But for convoys I think just one writeup per country would be best.

The idea is to add a historical flavor to how these 'anonymous' units performed during the war. Hundreds of thousands of men and women were involved, doing crucial service for their countries.

< Message edited by Shannon V. OKeets -- 3/9/2008 12:50:28 AM >


_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Grell)
Post #: 713
RE: Need help!!! - 3/9/2008 12:28:49 PM   
michaelbaldur


Posts: 4774
Joined: 4/6/2007
From: denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets


quote:

ORIGINAL: capitan

List on top of this page updated. Both Spains are still not taken nor is Czeckoslovakia. 61% done and going fast forward.

The french are now 100% done (even the "new" units). Thank you very much Grisouille!

Rob is cracking at the UK, Canada and India. He is doing a very nice job as well!

Herulf, Doug, SGT Rice and Marcus are new writers that are most welcome aboard this great undertaking!

As the end is coming ever closer I have been starting to think about how to wrap this all up (it has yet to be discussed with Steve). I am thinking, time willing, that me and a group of the writers spend a month or so this summer going through ALL writeups for errors (factual and spelling) and eventual plagiarism (unintentional or otherwise) to cover all bases.


I intend to have a separate section in the 'About' for MWIF acknowledging the authors. if you can get the correct spelling for everyone's name that would be good. I think we should also have a bibliography, with each author contributing his sources. Lastly, I would like to embed in the actual data file, who did each writeup. Each writeup starts with a [] and only the first number inside those brackets is processed by the program. The rest can be used as a comment - author's name.


don´t want my name on the write ups ... i´m not a author ...

_____________________________

the wif rulebook is my bible

I work hard, not smart.

beta tester and Mwif expert

if you have questions or issues with the game, just contact me on Michaelbaldur1@gmail.com

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 714
RE: Need help!!! - 3/9/2008 12:52:03 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets


quote:

ORIGINAL: capitan

List on top of this page updated. Both Spains are still not taken nor is Czeckoslovakia. 61% done and going fast forward.

The french are now 100% done (even the "new" units). Thank you very much Grisouille!

Rob is cracking at the UK, Canada and India. He is doing a very nice job as well!

Herulf, Doug, SGT Rice and Marcus are new writers that are most welcome aboard this great undertaking!

As the end is coming ever closer I have been starting to think about how to wrap this all up (it has yet to be discussed with Steve). I am thinking, time willing, that me and a group of the writers spend a month or so this summer going through ALL writeups for errors (factual and spelling) and eventual plagiarism (unintentional or otherwise) to cover all bases.


I intend to have a separate section in the 'About' for MWIF acknowledging the authors. if you can get the correct spelling for everyone's name that would be good. I think we should also have a bibliography, with each author contributing his sources. Lastly, I would like to embed in the actual data file, who did each writeup. Each writeup starts with a [] and only the first number inside those brackets is processed by the program. The rest can be used as a comment - author's name.


don´t want my name on the write ups ... i´m not a author ...

Ok.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to michaelbaldur)
Post #: 715
RE: Need help!!! - 3/11/2008 9:58:52 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
As its been quiet in the forum for a few days I thought I would throw a hand grenade of my own in.

Having seen some of the write ups I am a little concerned about the huge range in what is being written. Just to be clear I am not talking about historical vs ahistorical units where naturally what can be written about the latter is limited. Nor indeed where you have two historical units for example - one lasting the whole war and another that was destroyed after the first 10 minutes - again in this case, write up length will necessarily be different. What I am talking about is deciding what is the correct level of detail.  

Looking specifically at the naval units, there are examples ranging from just a few lines of comment where the subject is one of the most famous carriers of WWII to minute detail concerning others - and many shades of grey in between the two extremes.  This problem in my view is exacerbated when different writers have contributed to sister ships or even different writers for the same powers units for example. It just makes for an uneven looking presentation.

The idea of this post is not to criticise anyone`s efforts (you may consider my own contributions too long or too short) but simply to a) find out if anyone else thinks this is a problem, and b) if so, how best to reach a consensus of what is the best way to standardise the write ups so that the finished product is as polished as possible.    

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 716
RE: Need help!!! - 3/11/2008 10:50:07 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

As its been quiet in the forum for a few days I thought I would throw a hand grenade of my own in.

Having seen some of the write ups I am a little concerned about the huge range in what is being written. Just to be clear I am not talking about historical vs ahistorical units where naturally what can be written about the latter is limited. Nor indeed where you have two historical units for example - one lasting the whole war and another that was destroyed after the first 10 minutes - again in this case, write up length will necessarily be different. What I am talking about is deciding what is the correct level of detail.  

Looking specifically at the naval units, there are examples ranging from just a few lines of comment where the subject is one of the most famous carriers of WWII to minute detail concerning others - and many shades of grey in between the two extremes.  This problem in my view is exacerbated when different writers have contributed to sister ships or even different writers for the same powers units for example. It just makes for an uneven looking presentation.

The idea of this post is not to criticise anyone`s efforts (you may consider my own contributions too long or too short) but simply to a) find out if anyone else thinks this is a problem, and b) if so, how best to reach a consensus of what is the best way to standardise the write ups so that the finished product is as polished as possible.    

You might post the suggestion you sent to me as a straw man to get the discussion started.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 717
RE: Need help!!! - 3/12/2008 12:06:06 AM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
Okay - here is the note I sent to Steve previously

Firstly - let me say that I think the write ups are secondary to the main issue - i.e. getting a working game on the market.
However, I think that if write ups are going to be included - and personally I believe that they are a superb addition to the game - then they need to be done "properly". 
Let me be clear, I am not saying that I believe my write ups are necessarily the way to go and am happy to listen to any criticism but I am generally happy with the approach I have sought to take i.e. a structure for the write ups so that for each ship I will get:

- Key Facts and Figures
- Brief background as to the reason the ships were required in the first place, class, no of ships etc
- WWII service history only - encompassing brief details of theatres operated in and only expanded slightly in the interests of brevity where there is a more famous or interesting episode e.g. River Plate, Hunt the Bismarck etc
- Fate

Reading the existing write ups of the three Australian County class sisters, I think they are simply too brief to give the reader any real insight.

.P  A County Class Cruiser, the HMAS Shropshire was commissioned by the Royal Navy in September 1929, but
was transferred to the Australian Navy after the HMAS Canberra was sunk in 1942. In the Royal Navy she
served in the South Atlantic as a merchant escort. In the Australian Navy she saw action in the battles of
Surigao Strait and Linyagen Gulf.
.P She was decommissioned in 1949. She was supposed to be renamed
Canberra after the HMAS Canberra was lost, but due to the fact that the US Navy had a ship with that name,
she kept her old name. This was the only ship ever to be named after Shropshire, England.

If the author would be agreeable, I would like to see these expanded in the way that her 10 sisters have been written up.
(I have added my Dorsetshire write up at the bottom of this post). 

Another example.

For the write up of HMNZS Gambia:
- Armour detail is missing
- There are references to Royal British Navy? and British Navy?
- The second paragraph simply repeats the facts section in more words - no value added.

HMNZS Gambia was originally commissioned into the Royal British Navy as a Fiji Class Cruiser, but
  was decommissioned into the New Zealand Navy in September 1943. Her battle honours include
  Sabang, Okinawa, and Japan. She was handed back to the British Navy in February 1946. Her first
  mission after rejoining the British Navy was to transport large quantities of gold bullion from Australia to
  England.
  .P She was finally decommissioned in December 1968. Her engines gave her a total of
  80,000 hp, and a top speed of 32 knots. Her main armament was a total of 12 152mm guns. At full load she
  had a displacement of 9,000 tons.

Last example - USS Enterprise

Commissioned in May 1938, the USS Enterprise was the sixth aircraft carrier to enter the lists of the US Navy.
   She would serve throughout the entire war, participating in almost every big battle in the Pacific. Although not
   in port during the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour, bombers of the Enterprise did participate in aerial
   battles over the port, and 6 of them were lost. The USS Enterprise was the flagship of Admiral Spruance’s
   fleet during the battle of Midway.
   .P She would go on to earn a total of 20 battle stars during her operations in
   WWII, the most of any ship in the US Navy. The Enterprise was finally decommissioned in February 1947.
   .P She was the only ship outside the Royal British Navy to earn the highest decoration of the British Admiralty,
   the British Admiralty Pennant.

You posted Norman42 write ups of three French ships on Saturday.  Personally I would have added a section on why they were built, class etc but in my view these were absolutely fine. They were brief - but only because the ships did not particularly warrant more and moreover they each had the same structure - which I think is very important.

I`m afraid what I know about computers is not worth knowing so I cannot help on the technical side but am keen to see the historical aspects done in a way that really give the reader - regardless of prior WWII knowledge, a real taster for what the unit he is commanding is all about, what she did and what happened to her.   

Dorsetshire write up

.P HMS Dorsetshire and her sisters were the first heavy cruisers built right
up to the 1922 Washington Treaty Naval limits (standard displacement 10,000
tons and 8-inch main armament). These limits had been set as the Royal Navy
already had cruisers this large (Hawkins Class).
.P Athough Britain needed more numerous smaller vessels, the building of large
cruisers between the wars by Japan had to be countered by the Royal Navy - the
County class were the result. There were 13 ships built including two for the
Royal Australian Navy. After the sinking of one of these - HMAS Canberra - the
British government agreed to the transfer of HMS Shropshire to the Royal
Australian Navy.
.P World War II gave the County class the opportunity to prove themselves as
excellent all-round vessels, noted for their combination of range, strength,
sea-worthiness and weight of fire.
.P HMS Dorsetshire was completed in 1930. In December 1939, a couple months
after war was declared, Dorsetshire was transferred from the China station to
Ceylon to link up with her sister ship Cornwall and the carrier Hermes - Force
I. Force I took part in the search for the pocket-battleship Graf Spee.
.P She operated in the South Atlantic for a short while before returning to
the UK in May. She quickly departed for West Africa and in June, set out to
follow the French battleship Richelieu which had left Dakar for Casablanca.
The Richelieu was eventually ordered to return to Dakar and Dorsetshire
continued to monitor French Naval Forces off Dakar throughout July.
.P In September 4 she had minor repairs in South Africa before returning to
Freetown. By November she was operating in the Indian Ocean and bombarding
Italian Somaliland. Thereafter a further spell in dock in South Africa was
followed by a patrol in the South Atlantic looking for the Admiral Scheer.
.P Dorsetshire`s most high profile engagement of WWII was the hunt for the
battleship Bismarck that had escaped into the North Atlantic in May 1941.
It was Dorsetshire that on 27 May was ordered to torpedo the crippled Bismarck
at the end of the battle. Dorsetshire recovered 110 of Bismarck's crew from
the sea, before being forced break off the rescue because of the presence of
a U-boat.
.P After this Dorsetshire undertook a further period of convoy escort and in
1942 she was assigned to the Eastern Fleet in the Indian Ocean. The Japanese
1st Air Fleet, fresh from 5 months of uninterrupted victory since Pearl Harbor
entered the Indian Ocean for what was known as the Indian Ocean raid.  During
this raid, Dorsetshire and her sister ship Cornwall were caught in the open
and without air cover. They were attacked by carrier based aircraft south-west
of Ceylon on 5 April 1942. Dorsetshire was hit by ten bombs and sank quickly.
234 crewmen died. Cornwall was hit eight times and sank about ten minutes
later.


(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 718
RE: Need help!!! - 3/12/2008 12:21:07 AM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
I'd add that the writeups miss the range, in nautical miles (with speed). It's an interesting figure.

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 719
RE: Need help!!! - 3/12/2008 12:23:15 AM   
marcuswatney

 

Posts: 279
Joined: 2/28/2006
Status: offline
I do agree that USS Enterprise does need a much more detailed write-up.

If the original authors are not offended, I could offer to rewrite any (or all) carriers of all nations, as that is a speciality area of mine.  The sort of areas that need to be stressed, for example, are speed, the US Navy's decision to sacrifice protection for aircraft capacity, the aircraft types carried at different stages of the war, and notable doctrines (e.g. damage control - the finest carrier the Japanese ever produced, Taiho, was destroyed when some moron thought it would be a good idea to clear the avgas fumes out of the hangar by switching on the electric fans).

I have sent Steve a write-up for Béarn, and you can decide if my style is acceptable.

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 720
Page:   <<   < prev  22 23 [24] 25 26   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> RE: Need help!!! Page: <<   < prev  22 23 [24] 25 26   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

2.922