Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

 
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] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific >> Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
- 6/24/2002 7:47:30 PM   
Mark W Carver

 

Posts: 83
Joined: 4/26/2002
From: South-central PA
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Michael Chan
My SC exp is upto 88 and I have sen many superor IJN subs that I have in my fleet , I have sent many inferior navel vessals to the watery grave of the ocean, so you can see the training has nothing to do with it, it is the superor JAPENESE vessals just like during all the conflicts of the world wars. [/QUOTE]

WOW! :eek: I shouldn't be doing this, but.... one word.

==== M I D W A Y ====

:p

(in reply to Paul Goodman)
Post #: 61
superior build and technology??? - 6/24/2002 10:22:33 PM   
rhohltjr


Posts: 536
Joined: 4/27/2000
From: When I play pacific wargames, I expect smarter AI.
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Michael Chan
[B]I .... jap subs are superor in build and technology [/B][/QUOTE]

Michael, for this UV game Japanese, British, US,
Jamaican... submarines all designed and build by Matrix and 2x3 team w/Grigsby san. :rolleyes: Welcome to the forum! :D

(in reply to Paul Goodman)
Post #: 62
- 6/25/2002 2:13:00 AM   
FAdmiral


Posts: 378
Joined: 12/20/2002
From: Atlanta,GA, USA
Status: offline 		The submarines in UV are not that very different from each other
in terms of individual construction. Now in SH2, I have commanded all types, German, Dutch, British, Japanese and
American. The U-Boats are far superior with the American
Fleet boats coming in second. The Brits are OK but the Dutch
and Japanese subs are large and very slow to react. And
against the Japanese Naval fleets, I can torp & evade them
with ease. But in UV, they seem to have the edge but I made
up for that with my last turn. It was early June 1942 and the
Japanese AI was mounting a major offensive against Port Moresby. My PBY's saw them coming and setting up in Gili-Gili
to invade PM. I had plenty of LBA there, mines surrounding the
harbour and subs covering the main routes. My carriers were
at Noumea refueling so they were out of the picture. The
bombardment force came at night BUT (shades of Midway)
2 BBs and 1 DD hit Mk. 16 mines. As they were retiring the
next day (never did bombard) my LBA gave them a horrific
pasting. And as they retired through the channel, my subs
nailed another DD and CA. I only lost 1 "S" class sub and a
few aircraft. Port Moresby WAS SAVED. With the back of the
Japanese fleet broken, they limped back to Rabaul. Now that
turn I will definately save and keep for prosperity. All of this
was made possible with the 1.11 patch which keeps the
battle more on an even keel. GREAT GOING guys from Matrix
and 2by3 !!!!!

JIM BERG, SR.

(in reply to Paul Goodman)
Post #: 63
Uh Ohhhh... - 6/25/2002 2:44:22 AM   
Ron Saueracker


Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline 		Well. Been doing lots of research for ship data base and guess what? Another mine warfare problem. For those of us who look upon the Argonaut as the only decent offesive mine capability platform for the allies, we should mourn it's demise as such. The Argonaut was converted from a minelayer into strictly a transport submarine in early 1942, losing it's mine ops capability. Oh well... :rolleyes:

_____________________________





Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to Paul Goodman)
Post #: 64
- 6/25/2002 5:12:06 AM   
Raverdave


Posts: 6520
Joined: 2/8/2002
From: Melb. Australia
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Michael Chan
[B]This is not my first post RAVERDAVE I have many posts.....

My SC exp is upto 88 and I have sen many superor IJN subs that I have in my fleet , I have sent many inferior navel vessals to the watery grave of the ocean, so you can see the training has nothing to do with it, it is the superor JAPENESE vessals just like during all the conflicts of the world wars. [/B][/QUOTE]

Un huh.......guess thats why Japan won the war :rolleyes:
Well there is only one way to shut you up...........how about we have a PBEM?

_____________________________




Never argue with an idiot, he will only drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

(in reply to Paul Goodman)
Post #: 65
- 6/25/2002 9:46:25 AM   
Michael Chan

 

Posts: 8
Joined: 6/24/2002
From: Japan
Status: offline 		Yes we do have a PBM , you need to accecpt tat even though Japan we unsuccessful during the war our MACHINES was far superor than AUSTRALIAN, BRITISH, AND YANKYS. Our engieers were far superor, because of there training and way of life and I think this is showing in the game and in your reply's. We (japenese) are always at the forfront of technology and are always striving for perfection.


What is learned in the cradle lasts to the grave. What you give is what you get. - Telagu (1821-1878)

(in reply to Paul Goodman)
Post #: 66
- 6/25/2002 10:19:12 AM   
Jagger2002

 

Posts: 674
Joined: 5/20/2002
Status: offline 		I think there are two good solutions to very strong subs.


One is to use the IJN sub realism rule. Prevents IJN subs from wiping out US invasions by massing on the location. Doesn't prevent the US subs from doing the same to IJN invasions. Nor does it prevent the US from parking in Rabaul or Truk.


A very good alternative which I have used with most of my PBEM partners was an agreement not to place subs directly on enemy bases or invasion sites. They can be directly adjacent-just not directly on the site. I really like this agreement because the IJN is allowed to use their subs a little more agressively by going after transports. And neither side can park at a harbor or invasion site and just start torpedoing everything in sight. Typically subs will get one shot at passing covoys. So they are still a factor but they are incapable of the turkey shoots by parking in locations where typically there are massive numbers of stationary targets.

(in reply to Paul Goodman)
Post #: 67
- 6/25/2002 10:55:14 AM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline 		In my games so far (all solo against the Japanese AI) I have used the Historical Japanese Sub Doctrine option and have mostly kept my subs on the convoy approaches. Well, except for the last game where they were invading Gili Gili. I just had to send a couple of subs into Milne Bay (I figured from what charts of the area I have seen that it isn't a completely suicidal attack - I'd love to see the admiralty charts of the area) to hit the supply ships.

I do like to send out 4 sub mining TFs to mine the passages between the islands. Typically a transport will hit one and then the Japanese minesweepers will come out to clear it away. A few weeks later, I send in a new batch...

(in reply to Paul Goodman)
Post #: 68
Go Team!!! - 6/25/2002 7:33:31 PM   
rhohltjr


Posts: 536
Joined: 4/27/2000
From: When I play pacific wargames, I expect smarter AI.
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Michael Chan

[B]Yes we do have a PBM ,...

[/B][/QUOTE]

One of you (or both!!!), please post an AAR. hee hee,.. running to get the pop corn.

(in reply to Paul Goodman)
Post #: 69
- 6/25/2002 11:09:39 PM   
FAdmiral


Posts: 378
Joined: 12/20/2002
From: Atlanta,GA, USA
Status: offline 		Maybe Michael doesn't really know what PBEM actually means,
Play-by-E-Mail game. Riverdale would like to play Michael by
this method. And no Michael, it is not the name of a ship or
aircraft !!!

JIM BERG, SR.

(in reply to Paul Goodman)
Post #: 70
Maybe off topic for UV subs but,... - 6/26/2002 1:17:17 AM   
rhohltjr


Posts: 536
Joined: 4/27/2000
From: When I play pacific wargames, I expect smarter AI.
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by FAdmiral
[B]... Now in SH2, I have commanded all types, German, Dutch, British, Japanese and
American. The U-Boats are far superior with the American
Fleet boats coming in second. The Brits are OK but the Dutch
and Japanese subs are large and very slow to react. ...

JIM BERG, SR. [/B][/QUOTE]

FAdmiral,

I was under the impression that SH2 was exclusively Atlantic / U-Boats. Are you really able to command all these different subs in SH2.
Can't imagine MOD guys have been that busy!

I guess the Brits, Dutch and Japanese had better sub torps->(Bureau Ord~BOHICA) than USA did early on.

thx, Robert Hohlt, Jr.

(in reply to Paul Goodman)
Post #: 71
- 6/26/2002 3:07:30 AM   
FAdmiral


Posts: 378
Joined: 12/20/2002
From: Atlanta,GA, USA
Status: offline 		Robert,

Actually both DC and SH2 shipped using the full map (long &
lat) of the planet so scenarios can be created anywhere on
the globe. Sub modding has been done by mainly one guy
and he has got some of them to work OK SH2 did not ship
with any Japanese models so you have to import them from
DC. Many a time I have seen a battle on UV that I thought
"what if I were in command of that sub" so I just recreated
the battle on SH2 in the same L & L position to see if I was
a better captain of the sub that the UV AL captain was.
I ALWAYS do much better, hitting ships mostly every time
and evading the DDs rather easily. Jap DDs always tended
to drop DCs very shallow. Of course, if I am in shallow water,
it's quite a bit tougher to evade.

JIM BERG, SR.

PS. Wouldn't it be SWEET if one game did this all for you.....WOW !
WITP, DC and SH2 as 1 complete game.....AWSUM !!!!!!!!!

(in reply to Paul Goodman)
Post #: 72
- 6/26/2002 5:07:45 AM   
1089

 

Posts: 210
Joined: 7/4/2001
From: Portland, OR
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by FAdmiral
[B]Maybe Michael doesn't really know what PBEM actually means,
Play-by-E-Mail game. Riverdale would like to play Michael by
this method. And no Michael, it is not the name of a ship or
aircraft !!!

JIM BERG, SR. [/B][/QUOTE]

The way I read it was that Michael was already playing a PBEM with Raverdave, and had posted many times before, under his real name. What person named Chan (a Chinese name) is going to rave about Japanese superiority?

kp

_____________________________

The Earth is but a hollow nougat, reverberating with the sounds of the big bands... :cool:

(in reply to Paul Goodman)
Post #: 73
- 6/26/2002 5:08:54 AM   
Raverdave


Posts: 6520
Joined: 2/8/2002
From: Melb. Australia
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Michael Chan
[B]Yes we do have a PBM , you need to accecpt tat even though Japan we unsuccessful during the war our MACHINES was far superor than AUSTRALIAN, BRITISH, AND YANKYS. Our engieers were far superor, because of there training and way of life and I think this is showing in the game and in your reply's. We (japenese) are always at the forfront of technology and are always striving for perfection.


What is learned in the cradle lasts to the grave. What you give is what you get. - Telagu (1821-1878) [/B][/QUOTE]


Yeah right, whatever, but just remember this....it was AUSSIE troops that FIRST stopped the Japanese, and it was in a small place called kokoda track......I also recall seeing a submarine on display at the Australian War Memorial........one of the three that attacked Sydney and sank a passenger ferry. Two were sunk and one decided to commit themselfs to what ever gods they prayed too. "Superor" training and technolgy huh?

_____________________________




Never argue with an idiot, he will only drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

(in reply to Paul Goodman)
Post #: 74
- 6/26/2002 9:01:05 AM   
Michael Chan

 

Posts: 8
Joined: 6/24/2002
From: Japan
Status: offline 		I seem to remember it was the kokoda TRAIL and you want to talk about technology ask your so called historians about the aircarft used during WW2 , my understanding they were built on early prototype japanese zeros. And yes I know my surname is Chinese but my father was Chinese and mother Japanese and they met during the war so please don't attack my nationality. I also know what PBEM means as I am in the middle of a email game with a British historian from Cambridge, I just wanted to be a smarting pants.



Dead men don't bite. - Plutarch (46-120)

(in reply to Paul Goodman)
Post #: 75
- 6/26/2002 9:19:46 AM   
Raverdave


Posts: 6520
Joined: 2/8/2002
From: Melb. Australia
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Michael Chan
[B]I seem to remember it was the kokoda TRAIL and you want to talk about technology ask your so called historians about the aircarft used during WW2 , my understanding they were built on early prototype japanese zeros. And yes I know my surname is Chinese but my father was Chinese and mother Japanese and they met during the war so please don't attack my nationality. I also know what PBEM means as I am in the middle of a email game with a British historian from Cambridge, I just wanted to be a smarting pants.



Dead men don't bite. - Plutarch (46-120) [/B][/QUOTE]

Yes it WAS called the Kokoda trail by an AMERICAN reporter, but the term "Trail" is an american one where as "Track" is an Aussie term, here in Australia it is called the Kokoda Track.

Interesting point that you raise about the Zeros.....could you please supply the details and which alllied aircraft were based on the design of the zero? Facts please.

Last point...I have not yet attacked your nationality......your arrogance however is anothere issue.

_____________________________




Never argue with an idiot, he will only drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

(in reply to Paul Goodman)
Post #: 76
- 6/26/2002 9:26:58 AM   
1089

 

Posts: 210
Joined: 7/4/2001
From: Portland, OR
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Michael Chan
[B]I seem to remember it was the kokoda TRAIL and you want to talk about technology ask your so called historians about the aircarft used during WW2 , my understanding they were built on early prototype japanese zeros. And yes I know my surname is Chinese but my father was Chinese and mother Japanese and they met during the war so please don't attack my nationality. I also know what PBEM means as I am in the middle of a email game with a British historian from Cambridge, I just wanted to be a smarting pants.



Dead men don't bite. - Plutarch (46-120) [/B][/QUOTE]

I wasn't attcking your nationality. I thought it illogical that a man with a Chinese name would be spouting Japanese propaganda, that's all.

kp

_____________________________

The Earth is but a hollow nougat, reverberating with the sounds of the big bands... :cool:

(in reply to Paul Goodman)
Post #: 77
Where have all the Submarines gone? Gone back to reloa... - 6/27/2002 1:02:48 AM   
rhohltjr


Posts: 536
Joined: 4/27/2000
From: When I play pacific wargames, I expect smarter AI.
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]... please don't attack my nationality.

[/B][/QUOTE]

Michael, that just dosen't go on, on these forums. We have all seen some rather intense arguments here but nationality bashing has never been an issue. I doubt it would be tolerated.

BTW I have heard Kokoda Track / Trail before. Seems the same to me. If not, I am certainly open to learn new things.

Finally, I too would like to find out your sources for stating allied aircraft were built from early prototype zeros.:)

(in reply to Paul Goodman)
Post #: 78
Kokoda Track/Trail - 6/27/2002 1:43:57 AM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline 		The Australian Official History of World War II uses the term “Kokoda Track”.

The U.S. Official History of World War II uses the term “Kokoda Trail”.

I do not have a Japanese history and I’d be language-impeded from reading it anyway.

Don

(in reply to Paul Goodman)
Post #: 79
- 6/27/2002 2:08:55 AM   
mdiehl

 

Posts: 5998
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline 		"I seem to remember it was the kokoda TRAIL and you want to talk about technology ask your so called historians about the aircarft used during WW2 , my understanding they were built on early prototype japanese zeros."

The A6M series fighters were based on Howard Hughes "Hughes Racer." The USN early war a/c were based on Grumman and Brewster designs with a developmental history that predated the Zeros by about 2 years. The RAAF Wirraway was based on a home-grown design that started out as a civilian a/c. The RAF/RIAF (in Malaysia and Burma in early 1942) primarily deployed F2A3 (Brewsters) obtained through Lend-Lease, much to their dismay, and Hawker Hurricanes, neither of which had any developmental association with the A6M series used by Japan. The US P40 was an in-line deriavtive of the Curtiss P36 Hawk (a radial engined beastie from 1939). The Bell P39 was a unique design. The Republic P47 "Tunderbolt" was a development from the Seversky P35-Republic P-43 Lancer line. The Lockheed P38 was a unique design.

It is often incorrectly supposed that an A6M captured in the Aleutians in early 1943 influenced late war US Navy aircraft design. That's incorrect. The major late war US a/c models F6F and F4U were in design prior to the start of the war and followed closely the principles set forth by their design teams. Igor Sikorski for the Vought F4U, favoring a radial engined demon-dawg and Grumman continuing with the sturdy radial-designs started with the Grumman Goblin series biplane fighter of 1938.

(in reply to Paul Goodman)
Post #: 80
- 6/27/2002 2:17:01 AM   
mdiehl

 

Posts: 5998
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline 		IJN submarines started the war with the advantage of a torpedo that worked well and had pretty decent speed. In all other ways they were inferior to the US subs that were fielded. Their primary disadvantages were: 1) Their size. They dove slower than any submarine manufactured by any major combatant. 2) Their shallow depth rating. Due in part in many cases to the inclusion of a floatplane hanger deck. An innovative but dangerous (and ultimately, failed) attempt to enhance the "scouting" function of IJN submarines as envisioned in the Decisive Battle Doctrine that was the basis for the IJN's warplan vs. the United States. (Subs were relegated to scouting roles and to attritional attacks on combat vessels. This was the doctrine primarily employed by the IJN throughout WW2.)

The US in exigis deployed a number of S-Boats or "Pigboats" (because they lacked a/c, in the tropics, their crews would "sweat like pigs"). These were an obsolete design from the 1920s whose one distinguishing characteristic was that, because they were very small, they could dive quite rapidly when the equipment was in good repair.

(in reply to Paul Goodman)
Post #: 81
Wirraway - 6/27/2002 2:57:22 AM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by mdiehl
[B]The RAAF Wirraway was based on a home-grown design that started out as a civilian a/c. [/B][/QUOTE]

The RAAF Wirraway was based on the North American NA-33 with improvements as specified by the Australian Government. There was some discontent in the Australian Parliament on the adoption of the U.S. aircraft.

The NA-33 was a basic, comparatively simple aircraft with excellent mechanical reliability. It is a member of the family of aircraft that included the famous NA-44, extensively used as a training aircraft by the U.S. Army as the AT-6, the U.S. Navy as the SNJ and by several allied air forces.

Another member of the family was the U.S. Army's A-27 light attack aircraft. This was a militarized variation of the NA-44 that was ordered by Siam but seized by the U.S. prior to delivery and issued to the U.S. Army Forces in the Far East.

As an Army Cooperation and light attack aircraft the Wirraway was excellent. When pressed into the role of a fighter in 1942 it was completely inadequate.

Don

(in reply to Paul Goodman)
Post #: 82
AUSSIE AIRCRAFT - 6/27/2002 12:41:39 PM   
stubby331


Posts: 268
Joined: 10/24/2001
From: Perth, Western Australia
Status: offline 		Talking of Aussie aircraft, (the only truly Aussie aircraft being the trusty Boomerang, yay!!!!.) (thats of course if you dont take into account the US designed engine).

Has anyone read of Boomerang air to air action? They were used in the war as ground support, so, despite searching I have never read of a air to air engagement.

On Michael Chan. Mate, your a riot. :)

Please come back to me on the Boomerang question.

ta

(in reply to Paul Goodman)
Post #: 83
- 6/27/2002 1:59:46 PM   
Duritz

 

Posts: 4
Joined: 6/20/2002
From: stepped out the front door like a ghost into a fog
Status: offline 		stubby331,

Australian Defence thinking at the time was very similar across a range of military hardware types.......

This thinking was; get a design from overseas and adapt or build as quick as possible. Must remember that Aust was in a situation where they bought all their equipment from the UK but that was impossible after 1940 and so they grabbed whatever they could while starting their own industries from scratch.

Brewster Buffaloes were bought, NA44's were built under licence while the Boomerang was designed locally as the long term solution to their fighter problem. A similar scenario can be seen with tanks with the A1 Sentinel being developed using M3 Stuart tank pieces as much as possible.

But aircraft....... by the time the Boomerang was fully tested and built the US was in the war and Australia had access to their (and indeed a resurgent Britain's) aircraft in huge numbers. The Boomerang was therefore pushed into the same roles as previously filled by the Wirraway, ground support, recon and other light duties.

As such it was never sent willingly into combat against enemy fighters but I remember reading somewhere that it wracked up massive kills for the war of 5 enemy aircraft, including 1 Zero of unknown type:eek: :rolleyes: :D !!! I believe this Zero was during the later stages of the NG campaign - Wewak perhaps or Hollandia.

Forgot where I read it now and it may have been 6 but.... that's it! Sorry my memory is fading.......:(

_____________________________

War does not decide who is right, it decides who is left.

"The price of a memory is the memory of the sorrow it brings." - Duritz.

(in reply to Paul Goodman)
Post #: 84
The Bob Semple... - 6/27/2002 10:21:02 PM   
Erik Rutins

 

Posts: 37503
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline 		The pinnacle of New Zealand military technology... ;)

http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/newzealand/newzealand.html

Regards,

- Erik

_____________________________

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC



For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to Paul Goodman)
Post #: 85
Wirraway - 6/27/2002 10:21:41 PM   
mdiehl

 

Posts: 5998
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline 		Right you are Don. I was thinking of the home-grown Boomerang, which turns out not to have been based on a civilian a/c but a whole new body, married to a P&W Twin Wasp engine, with a Wirraway wing section and tail, and later a Spitfire tail. Zounds!

With a top speed in level flight of low 300 mph it was good enough to hold its own against the Zeke but surpassed by later US and UK designs.

(in reply to Paul Goodman)
Post #: 86
- 7/1/2002 11:21:45 AM   
Michael Chan

 

Posts: 8
Joined: 6/24/2002
From: Japan
Status: offline 		Yes it WAS called the Kokoda trail by an AMERICAN reporter, but the term "Trail" is an american one where as "Track" is an Aussie term, here in Australia it is called the Kokoda Track.

Interesting point that you raise about the Zeros.....could you please supply the details and which alllied aircraft were based on the design of the zero? Facts please.

Last point...I have not yet attacked your nationality......your arrogance however is anothere issue.


__________________
"qui mare teneat, eum necesse rerum potiri" (that whoso can hold the sea has command of the situation) Themistocles 440 BC

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Raverdave I never stated you attacked my nationality, but I'm arrogant because you have the typical Aussia attitude (I am guessing your Australian because of your flag) that you are better than other Asian countrys. I have an Encylopeada of Aircraft, which has most of the worlds aircraft in it and it states that early Australian aircraft were based on Zeros.

(in reply to Paul Goodman)
Post #: 87
Settle down there big fella - 7/1/2002 12:05:52 PM   
stubby331


Posts: 268
Joined: 10/24/2001
From: Perth, Western Australia
Status: offline 		WHOAH. Hold on a minute Michael. Lets not get into my country is better than your country crap.

I’m Australian, and proud of it, just as you are Japanese (in part at least) and proud of that.

Yes, we have differences.

But, taking Pot shots with massive generalisations like your statement doesn’t get anyone anywhere except get their backs up.

So lets try to be nice and get along huh.

(in reply to Paul Goodman)
Post #: 88
- 7/1/2002 1:09:57 PM   
Duritz

 

Posts: 4
Joined: 6/20/2002
From: stepped out the front door like a ghost into a fog
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]I have an Encylopeada of Aircraft, which has most of the worlds aircraft in it and it states that early Australian aircraft were based on Zeros.[/QUOTE]

Hi Michael,

Your quote is of great interest to me.

Most early Australian designs were started before the Allies had a working model of the Zero (obtained in the Auletians in June '42 from memory). Allied theory on the Zero was that it was just an inferior Asian aeroplane - the same prejudice you accused Raverdave of - and nothing to worry about, that is of course until after the Pac War had started. By then the Wirraway was already in production and the Boomerang in design phase.

If the book states that it was based on the Zero then I would suggest you will have to disregard it - the dates just don't work.

At home I have a book that says that if it wasn't for poor quality British troops and commanders then the 8th Australian Division would have stopped the Japanese in the Malaya peninsular - what crap!

Point is that authors sometimes lie or guess facts they don't have on hand, a deadline is approaching and you have to get it done so you sort of guess that last detail and send the chapter off to the printer. Perhaps the bloke who wrote it believed it to be true, why wouldn't he - I wish we had copied the Zero design instead of flying breadboxes with wings. BUT we didn't!

You can trust me or the book, it doesn't really worry me either way but please don't use race as a reason for disagreement. You and Raverdave should just settle down. WW2 is over and enough people got hurt fighting it the first time round.

Duritz.

_____________________________

War does not decide who is right, it decides who is left.

"The price of a memory is the memory of the sorrow it brings." - Duritz.

(in reply to Paul Goodman)
Post #: 89
wow - 7/1/2002 2:48:13 PM   
Ron Saueracker


Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline 		This thread kinda lost it's direction.:p

_____________________________





Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to Paul Goodman)
Post #: 90
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific >> Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   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

1.266