RE: Tora, Tora, Tora!

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: Tora, Tora, Tora!

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] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Tora, Tora, Tora!

Page: << < prev 5 6 [7] 8 9 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Tora, Tora, Tora! - 5/17/2009 5:25:57 PM

IndyShark

Posts: 303
Joined: 7/7/2002
From: Indianapolis
Status: offline

My pleasure. You might want to read "Shattered Sword". I found it very interesting that the Japanese Carriers at Midway didn't carry every plane they could. The Japanese were short of many types of aircraft in 1942, but the Kates we a big problem since they were the best carrier based bomber they had.

(in reply to sven6345789)

Post #: 181

RE: Tora, Tora, Tora! - 5/17/2009 6:28:12 PM

spence

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline

Short of carrier aircraft and pilots in general. The airgroups of Junyo and Ryujo had quite a few planes and pilots "temporarily" assigned from 6th Kokutai. All the KB carriers carried some spare planes from the same unit although the planes were disassembled.

(in reply to IndyShark)

Post #: 182

RE: Tora, Tora, Tora! - 5/17/2009 6:38:35 PM

crsutton

Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

I don't know about the rest of you, but the first time I loaded up WITP to play a full first turn of the grand campaign, I was quite daunted and it took me _hours_ just to look over everything and form a mental picture of what I had. Then I had to start planning... it was easily two days before I had that first turn done, but once I did it I had a much better grasp of WITP. After that, first turns generally took more like 3-4 hours and once I got further into the game, turns were taking me 15-45 minutes depending on what was going on.

Now with AE you will have that same experience, because so much will be new and different in terms of the map and the detailed orders of battle. Expect that your first turn (especially for the Japanese) will take a long time just to wrap your head around things. Try the small scenarios first, try playing against the AI first, etc. Once you get past that first learning "cliff" it will become much easier as it did with WITP and it will take less time.

It is also important to emphasize that with AE, there is more to setup on the first turn also in terms of getting patrol routes set, setting up waypoints and such. But these things save you time in the long run and make it easier to manage certain things than it was in WITP.

Nevertheless, there's a reason why we made WITP a requirement to own AE. We don't want folks who haven't played WITP to jump into AE without any preparation. WITP vets will be fine, given some time to learn the ropes.

Regards,

- Erik

I have only two campaigns under my belt as the Allies in WITP-never tried the Japanese but want to in AE. One idea would be for four or five experienced Japanese players to set up their favorite first turns and then post them for dowloading. That is, a player could opt to use a set pre-determined day one turn and then go from there, tweaking only the things that he wants. It would save a lot of time and help those that are just overwhelmed by the demands of the first turn. Also, having a pre-set turn number one that was designed by a Japanese pro in front of my eyes for comparison sakes would provide a valuable learniing tool even if I just want to look it over.

Could it be done as the game now stands? That is, I could set up the game and options as the Japanese on turn one and then load up my Yamato Hugger's patented "Solomons Gambit-sub variant II" opening and be ready to go. Could be a few for the Allies as well.

Just a thought.

As a fair trade, I could give out my sure fire way to win at Black Jack in return..

< Message edited by crsutton -- 5/17/2009 6:41:44 PM >

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Erik Rutins)

Post #: 183

RE: Tora, Tora, Tora! - 5/17/2009 6:45:20 PM

BJStone

Posts: 135
Joined: 1/31/2009
Status: offline

The only problem I see with that is the need to set up a password on T0 prior to actually moving any of the units. In WiTP there is no way that I know of to reset the password.

Regards,

BJ

(in reply to crsutton)

Post #: 184

RE: Tora, Tora, Tora! - 5/17/2009 6:58:30 PM

Yamato hugger

Posts: 5475
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: IndyShark

Yh, this is really interesting! Thank you for sharing. I'd love to see the same details on the Allied side.

I didnt know you could play as the allies! Maybe I will look at that someday

quote:

ORIGINAL: Local Yokel

If I've followed correctly, having a TF 'docked' now has a significance in AE it doesn't have in the game 'as is', in that it reflects the use by the TF of the port's (limited) cargo handling facilities. In the game 'as is' being docked or undocked seems to make no difference to loading/unloading.

Sorry if I'm being very dense about this, but would appreciate clarification.

Undocked is same as it always was. Think of an undocked TF that is unloading/loading as being at an enemy base or a dot base (ie no port). Pretty much the same thing. Undocked TFs are NOT immune to sub attacks.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Grotius

I had been under the impression that aircraft would generally be organized into chutai, not larger groups. Is this not the case?

Termmy is right. I converted my Babs and Claude squadrons to form the group. I have an ample supply of Babs but woefully short (as you see) on Zeros. Most of the recon squadrons can be broken down into 2 or 3 flights, so these other squadrons that can convert to Zeros I do so. Should be noted that almost all recon squadrons can be converted to fighters in late 44.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

YH,

Are there any late war ('44 and beyond) R&D airframes that you would consider changing over to current planes??

Is that something that is even possible??

You can do it if you turn realistic R&D off in the initial game settings. We are playing with realistic on, so therefore I cant switch R&D factories to current production.

quote:

ORIGINAL: fabertong

With the first two.........I think it is because there are no airframes in productions.......so no factories to upgrade............

Not exactly. Just means its an end of the line aircraft. The factorys wont auto-upgrade to anything. If you want the factory to make something else, you have to switch it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: sven6345789

question regarding the Kate production numbers;
where do the 72 B5N1 +B5N2 come from, since there is only one in production; is there a historical explanation for that?

Indy is correct. The game USED to have the Kates as R&D and not available until Apr 42 but I see they changed that. Used to be you could only produce the Jean or Mable (the Mable was better then either Kate model anyways but they changed that also).

quote:

ORIGINAL: BJStone

The only problem I see with that is the need to set up a password on T0 prior to actually moving any of the units. In WiTP there is no way that I know of to reset the password.

Regards,

BJ

Well, there is a way, but it involves asking Matrix for a favor. They can reset it.

< Message edited by Yamato hugger -- 5/17/2009 7:02:53 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to IndyShark)

Post #: 185

RE: Tora, Tora, Tora! - 5/17/2009 7:32:44 PM

Yamato hugger

Posts: 5475
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline

Over 7000 hits? Joe, I want royalties!

_____________________________

(in reply to Yamato hugger)

Post #: 186

RE: Tora, Tora, Tora! - 5/17/2009 7:33:33 PM

Jim D Burns

Posts: 4013
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Salida, CA.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger
Everything else sits on trains (usually at the closest base to where the spearheads are at the time.

I do this for several reasons:
1) If I need to move them elsewhere to respond to a threat, they are already on trains and can just head on out.
2) Units in combat mode eat double supply, so these units wont.
3) They can perform their av support functions in any mode (engineering functions require a unit to be in combat mode however).
And 4) they dont become fatigued walking through the jungle, so when I get down south my units should be combat ready while his should be hurting from the long retreat south. I air attack all his units every day on the push south to keep him from railing out.

This sounds more like a new rule exploit to me than a design intent. Shouldn't units on trains unload from the train automatically if they don't have a destination hex other than their current hex set? I can think of no reasonable explanation for having units sitting on trains for days/weeks/months on end? Troops did not live on/in train cars.

I know it's way late in the process for changes, but could an auto-unload feature be added to the patch list, so units can't sit on trains without a move destination set?

Jim

_____________________________

(in reply to Yamato hugger)

Post #: 187

RE: Tora, Tora, Tora! - 5/17/2009 7:35:01 PM

jwilkerson

Posts: 10525
Joined: 9/15/2002
From: Kansas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

Over 7000 hits? Joe, I want royalties!

Alright we knight thee - Sir Yammy Baronette of Entomology!!

_____________________________

AE Project Lead
New Game Project Lead

(in reply to Yamato hugger)

Post #: 188

RE: Tora, Tora, Tora! - 5/17/2009 7:39:53 PM

Grotius

Posts: 5798
Joined: 10/18/2002
From: The Imperial Palace.
Status: offline

quote:

The only problem I see with that is the need to set up a password on T0 prior to actually moving any of the units. I

CRSutton might have been asking for a Japan-turn-one for AI games, perhaps? Even if not, I imagine many new players might benefit from a "pre-made" turn 1 as Japan, to help them get going in learning the game against the AI. Maybe Spooky could host such a thing.

quote:

Mixed. Some do, some don't. ... Plenty of air groups, like the above-mentioned Tainan Ku, start out pre-broken down,

Thanks, Termy. Sounds good.

quote:

Yes, some of it will be released early as part of the promotion, but not most of it. I expect we'll release the first bit in a week or two.

Woo, good news! That'll keep us occupied while we wait.

_____________________________

(in reply to jwilkerson)

Post #: 189

RE: Tora, Tora, Tora! - 5/17/2009 8:28:52 PM

rroberson

Posts: 2050
Joined: 5/25/2004
From: Arizona
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

I don't know about the rest of you, but the first time I loaded up WITP to play a full first turn of the grand campaign, I was quite daunted and it took me _hours_ just to look over everything and form a mental picture of what I had. Then I had to start planning... it was easily two days before I had that first turn done, but once I did it I had a much better grasp of WITP. After that, first turns generally took more like 3-4 hours and once I got further into the game, turns were taking me 15-45 minutes depending on what was going on.

Now with AE you will have that same experience, because so much will be new and different in terms of the map and the detailed orders of battle. Expect that your first turn (especially for the Japanese) will take a long time just to wrap your head around things. Try the small scenarios first, try playing against the AI first, etc. Once you get past that first learning "cliff" it will become much easier as it did with WITP and it will take less time.

It is also important to emphasize that with AE, there is more to setup on the first turn also in terms of getting patrol routes set, setting up waypoints and such. But these things save you time in the long run and make it easier to manage certain things than it was in WITP.

Nevertheless, there's a reason why we made WITP a requirement to own AE. We don't want folks who haven't played WITP to jump into AE without any preparation. WITP vets will be fine, given some time to learn the ropes.

Regards,

- Erik

I remember WITP the first day all too well, I was lucky though and my opp wanted to be the Japanese so I had plenty of time to learn the game before my first plunge as the empire. The new games I have started over the years probably took me less then 3 hours to plan now due to being so familiar with the system. I think the 24 hour statement just threw me because Yamato is a veteran AE player...so for him to need that long for his set up...yikes....the rest of us are screwed.

I personally hope my game partners are willing to jump off the cliff right away with AE. No sense in wasting time on the smaller scenarios...we can learn the new system together making mistakes along the way in the grand campaign....as it should be.

_____________________________

(in reply to Erik Rutins)

Post #: 190

RE: Tora, Tora, Tora! - 5/17/2009 8:31:09 PM

Terminus

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

Yammy and the rest of us may be AE veterans, but that doesn't mean we can snap our fingers and just make all the myriads of extra units go where we want them. There's lots to see, lots to do and it pays to take your time.

< Message edited by Terminus -- 5/17/2009 8:38:30 PM >

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to rroberson)

Post #: 191

RE: Tora, Tora, Tora! - 5/17/2009 8:35:47 PM

rroberson

Posts: 2050
Joined: 5/25/2004
From: Arizona
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Yammy and the rest of may be AE veterans, but that doesn't mean we can snap our fingers and just make all the myriads of extra units go where we want them. There's lots to see, lots to do and it pays to take your time.

I am both thrilled and terrified by this statement :P.

Will anyone actually be able to complete a game in our lifetimes

_____________________________

(in reply to Terminus)

Post #: 192

RE: Tora, Tora, Tora! - 5/17/2009 8:40:48 PM

Terminus

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

You know what stock is like... The first few turns are terrifying, but then the pace picks up. It's the same with AE, but more so.

Remember, for instance, that you can automate patrol task forces. Set up three way points for a submarine to travel between, one being a base where it can resupply, and leave it to do its thing.

Provided it's not attacked by ASW, you'll have to pull it in for overhaul eventually, but you won't have to check it every single turn.

< Message edited by Terminus -- 5/23/2009 9:09:22 PM >

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to rroberson)

Post #: 193

RE: Tora, Tora, Tora! - 5/18/2009 12:13:39 AM

Yamato hugger

Posts: 5475
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline

I got a PM from Tree, I guess he went out and bought a new modem instead of waiting for the repair guy tomorrow and was chomping at the bit, so its off to the allies. I didnt mess with R&D factories at all, I will do that next turn. I did go into the shipping stuff and shut down the Shinano and the Taiyo to give me some naval points (I only had 1 in the pool at the end of the turn). I also shut off a handful of xAKs (5 or 6) and an AS.

Dont know if hes going to do an allied point of view AAR or not.

< Message edited by Yamato hugger -- 5/18/2009 12:14:03 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to OldCoot)

Post #: 194

RE: Tora, Tora, Tora! - 5/18/2009 12:44:05 AM

IndyShark

Posts: 303
Joined: 7/7/2002
From: Indianapolis
Status: offline

I'd love a Allied AAR to see how the other side works and to get an idea of how much FOW changes the results.

(in reply to Yamato hugger)

Post #: 195

RE: Tora, Tora, Tora! - 5/18/2009 12:53:17 AM

Local Yokel

Posts: 1494
Joined: 2/4/2007
From: Somerset, U.K.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

quote:

ORIGINAL: Local Yokel

If I've followed correctly, having a TF 'docked' now has a significance in AE it doesn't have in the game 'as is', in that it reflects the use by the TF of the port's (limited) cargo handling facilities. In the game 'as is' being docked or undocked seems to make no difference to loading/unloading.

Sorry if I'm being very dense about this, but would appreciate clarification.

Undocked is same as it always was. Think of an undocked TF that is unloading/loading as being at an enemy base or a dot base (ie no port). Pretty much the same thing. Undocked TFs are NOT immune to sub attacks.

OK, thanks for that. Trouble is, it implies that no distinction is being drawn by AE between ships tied up at a dock to load/unload, and those that are not, but which are nonetheless within the 'defended area' of the port, i.e. sheltered from submarine attack by nets, indicator loops, etc.

_____________________________

(in reply to Yamato hugger)

Post #: 196

RE: Tora, Tora, Tora! - 5/18/2009 9:50:37 AM

Yamato hugger

Posts: 5475
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Local Yokel

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

quote:

ORIGINAL: Local Yokel

If I've followed correctly, having a TF 'docked' now has a significance in AE it doesn't have in the game 'as is', in that it reflects the use by the TF of the port's (limited) cargo handling facilities. In the game 'as is' being docked or undocked seems to make no difference to loading/unloading.

Sorry if I'm being very dense about this, but would appreciate clarification.

Undocked is same as it always was. Think of an undocked TF that is unloading/loading as being at an enemy base or a dot base (ie no port). Pretty much the same thing. Undocked TFs are NOT immune to sub attacks.

OK, thanks for that. Trouble is, it implies that no distinction is being drawn by AE between ships tied up at a dock to load/unload, and those that are not, but which are nonetheless within the 'defended area' of the port, i.e. sheltered from submarine attack by nets, indicator loops, etc.

Are you saying that ships unloading should be considered in the anchorage of a port? (Im sorry but your meaning isnt that clear to me, maybe because I just got off work and am fried). If thats it, I would suggest you put a question in the naval thread and let the naval guys handle that. Thats would be something outside the scope of this AAR and the powers that be dont always read these things diligently.

Edit: Oh man, I really am fried. I didnt even notice the other thread. Need caffine!!

< Message edited by Yamato hugger -- 5/18/2009 9:57:18 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Local Yokel)

Post #: 197

RE: Tora, Tora, Tora! - 5/18/2009 11:03:18 AM

Local Yokel

Posts: 1494
Joined: 2/4/2007
From: Somerset, U.K.
Status: offline

Sorry, don't want to sidetrack unnecessarily what should be your AAR thread, so I've also posted in the 'AE Port Size & Ship/TF tons' thread. Think this is probably the thread to which your are referring, and is probably the better place to address this topic.

_____________________________

(in reply to Yamato hugger)

Post #: 198

RE: Tora, Tora, Tora! - 5/18/2009 4:19:15 PM

Panther Bait

Posts: 654
Joined: 8/30/2006
Status: offline

I don't completely disagree with you, but it could be thought of as all the heavy equipment being loaded onto trains, and the men temporarily encamped nearby (or settled in existing housing). If the cargo was already loaded, it wouldn't take long to load the men and get the train moving.

The disconnect is that you probably don't have railyard space or enough rolling stock in a lot of WitP areas (like Malaysia) to keep whole divisions (or perhaps even regiments) loaded up and immobile all at one time. Especially not and keep the supply trains moving (assuming that rail lines are still prime supply pathways in the game).

So it might make sense to load and hold for a couple days, but not for weeks on end.

Mike

_____________________________

When you shoot at a destroyer and miss, it's like hit'in a wildcat in the ass with a banjo.

Nathan Dogan, USS Gurnard

(in reply to Jim D Burns)

Post #: 199

RE: Tora, Tora, Tora! - 5/18/2009 4:34:56 PM

Jim D Burns

Posts: 4013
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Salida, CA.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Panther Bait
So it might make sense to load and hold for a couple days, but not for weeks on end.

Were their regional limits to rolling stock that got used up every time you loaded a unit, I'd say fine, let the game assume heavy equipment is pre-loaded. But what I foresee happening is China or Japan loading 6/8/10 divisions or corps on rail cars and keeping them in the rear as a fast mobile reserve to react to moves made by the opponent.

Definitely gamey and an exploit of the new rule I think.

Also didn't I read somewhere once that you couldn't use rail move unless you owned both bases at either end of the rail section you were moving across? Has that been changed?

Jim

< Message edited by Jim D Burns -- 5/18/2009 4:35:29 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Panther Bait)

Post #: 200

RE: Tora, Tora, Tora! - 5/18/2009 4:53:29 PM

Chad Harrison

Posts: 1395
Joined: 4/2/2003
From: Boise, ID - USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

I have been meaning to ask this for some time, and finally have remembered to do so!

I noticed some time ago that you all have expanded the categories for bomber selection. So help me out here . . .

HB - Heavy Bomber - Example: B-24
MB - Medium Bomber - Example: B-25
LB - Light Bomber - Example: Hudson
AB - Attack Bomber - Example: A-20
BM - ????? - Example: ?????

Is this simply for additional organisation reasons, or is there going to be a fundamental difference between heavy, medium, light and attack bombers or their pilots?, outside of obvious plane characteristiscs defining what they are best at (such as the A-20's speed and manuverability, but lower payload and durability).

Thanks in advance.

Chad

(in reply to Yamato hugger)

Post #: 201

RE: Tora, Tora, Tora! - 5/18/2009 5:01:53 PM

Yamato hugger

Posts: 5475
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline

BM is "bomber" - will show all of the above categories.

And a bomber is a bomber really. Except DBs and TBs.

< Message edited by Yamato hugger -- 5/18/2009 5:15:11 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Chad Harrison)

Post #: 202

RE: Tora, Tora, Tora! - 5/18/2009 5:11:37 PM

Yamato hugger

Posts: 5475
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Panther Bait

I don't completely disagree with you, but it could be thought of as all the heavy equipment being loaded onto trains, and the men temporarily encamped nearby (or settled in existing housing). If the cargo was already loaded, it wouldn't take long to load the men and get the train moving.

The disconnect is that you probably don't have railyard space or enough rolling stock in a lot of WitP areas (like Malaysia) to keep whole divisions (or perhaps even regiments) loaded up and immobile all at one time. Especially not and keep the supply trains moving (assuming that rail lines are still prime supply pathways in the game).

So it might make sense to load and hold for a couple days, but not for weeks on end.

Mike

Not disagreeing with you. It depends on what you are doing, really. If you are playing a sim, then trains, engines, types of cars, ammo, aviation fuel, ect should all be represented. Personally, I play a game. Somewhere down the line they will probably add a fatigue factor for being in strat mode, but there are a lot of "unrealistic" things about rails in this game. For example: you want to base your aircraft on airfields that have a rail line running through them as much as possible. This way, if you have a lot of damaged aircraft at a base or the base is about to be over run, you just pop them on a train, and zoom you're off. Other things you can do is if you see your line is going to be cut in the next turn or 2 and rails are the only way you can move an air unit to a given point (like between Perth and eastern Oz), you can pop them on a train and send them out. As long as the rail line is open at the time, the air unit will appear at the base it was sent to as it is physically taken off the map and put on the reinforcement track to arrive at the target base in 1 to 4 days depending on distance and type of rail between start and end points.

< Message edited by Yamato hugger -- 5/18/2009 5:13:44 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Panther Bait)

Post #: 203

RE: Tora, Tora, Tora! - 5/18/2009 5:31:53 PM

Chad Harrison

Posts: 1395
Joined: 4/2/2003
From: Boise, ID - USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

BM is "bomber" - will show all of the above categories.

And a bomber is a bomber really. Except DBs and TBs.

Cool, thanks for the reply Yammy.

So like I said above, there is no special code written to make a B-29 behave differently than an A-20: their differences are in the actual plane characteristics, not some special code that makes a super heavy bomber different than an attack bomber.

Curious, are the main pilot skills different for say a fighter group vs a fighter bomber group? Or a super heavy bomber group vs an attack bomber group? Or are the main skills and skill levels the same.

Thanks again

Chad

(in reply to Yamato hugger)

Post #: 204

RE: Tora, Tora, Tora! - 5/18/2009 8:40:13 PM

Panther Bait

Posts: 654
Joined: 8/30/2006
Status: offline

I have been wondering how the train travel restriction would work. I suspect that it works up to the last hex under your sole control, not necessarily the closest base hex. In reality there could very well be additional rail stops, side rails, turnouts, etc. at each hex regardless of whether there is an official base at that hex or not.

Of course, that is complete speculation on my part.

_____________________________

When you shoot at a destroyer and miss, it's like hit'in a wildcat in the ass with a banjo.

Nathan Dogan, USS Gurnard

(in reply to Jim D Burns)

Post #: 205

RE: Tora, Tora, Tora! - 5/18/2009 8:45:41 PM

Panther Bait

Posts: 654
Joined: 8/30/2006
Status: offline

YH,

You're right of course. The game doesn't model rolling stock in any way other than very abstractly, so there is a limit to what can be done. Personally I have no problem with the abstraction.

A fatigue or disruption penalty would be good, but either way the switch back out of strategic move mode at the destination should still reduce the instant reinforcement effect quite a bit from stock.

Mike

_____________________________

When you shoot at a destroyer and miss, it's like hit'in a wildcat in the ass with a banjo.

Nathan Dogan, USS Gurnard

(in reply to Yamato hugger)

Post #: 206

RE: Tora, Tora, Tora! - 5/19/2009 6:38:15 AM

Yamato hugger

Posts: 5475
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: IndyShark

I'd love a Allied AAR to see how the other side works and to get an idea of how much FOW changes the results.

I sent a PM to Tree saying people wanted to see AFB stuff, and the repair routines. Dont know if he will have time for it this week though with something he referred to as "a life"

Whatever the hell that is.

_____________________________

(in reply to IndyShark)

Post #: 207

RE: Tora, Tora, Tora! - 5/19/2009 8:19:18 AM

Odin

Posts: 1052
Joined: 1/3/2001
From: Germany, Wanne-Eickel
Status: offline

Arg!!!

_____________________________

(in reply to Yamato hugger)

Post #: 208

RE: Tora, Tora, Tora! - 5/20/2009 3:31:25 AM

Kull

Posts: 2625
Joined: 7/3/2007
From: El Paso, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

I sent a PM to Tree saying people wanted to see AFB stuff, and the repair routines. Dont know if he will have time for it this week though with something he referred to as "a life"

Whatever the hell that is.

That thing nobody else on these boards will have after AE is released?

(in reply to Yamato hugger)

Post #: 209

RE: Tora, Tora, Tora! - 5/20/2009 4:27:58 AM

mojoman68

Posts: 6
Joined: 5/20/2009
Status: offline

A Life? Do you mean this period of time where I've built a new computer, stocked up on cheetos and Dr. Peeper and paid off the credit cards so when wifey says "are you playing that "Blue-Green" game again?" I can distract her with spakley's?

Yes We Can!

(in reply to Kull)

Post #: 210