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: 8Feb42 combat results:

 
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 >> After Action Reports >> RE: 8Feb42 combat results: Page: <<   < prev  50 51 [52] 53 54   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: 8Feb42 combat results: - 10/8/2012 3:46:17 PM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline 		Jim has one LCU in my Gasmata hex and he's got another one headed that way, obviously trying to take Gasmata away from me so I've
dispatched a DD on a bombardment mission using 2K as the range hoping that maybe some bombardment might dissuade our Allied
unit(s) somewhat. I'll see if I can rake up another LCU to send there as well.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 1531
RE: 8Feb42 combat results: - 10/8/2012 4:38:18 PM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline 		This is comparing the numbers ( fuel / oil levels ) from 6Feb42 with those from 8Feb42. You can see the differences.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 1532
RE: 8Feb42 combat results: - 10/8/2012 6:44:06 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		You've got a lot of oil and refineries to repair. That will cost a lot of supply. NOT good.


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 1533
RE: 8Feb42 combat results: - 10/8/2012 11:33:01 PM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline 		Palembang:
73 oil centers and 73 refineries

Miri:
122 oil centers and 122 refineries

Tarakan:
28 oil centers and 27 refineries

Surprisingly, Balikpapan seems to be just fine the way it is. I suppose I could boost production there to get more fuel output but I don't
think I need to do that at this stage of the game. I might need it later however.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1534
RE: 8Feb42 combat results: - 10/9/2012 5:33:01 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline 		So there I am, going though the list of TF's and I get to one, a picket sub on Christmas Island IO, and I find out that his signal said there
were, like, 6 ships, most of them AK's and maybe a TK in the mix. These picket subs have extraordinarily hands-down handy here
lately. I've detected three (3) Allied TF's with them and there's not a lot of monkey-ing around with them once you set them on target,
so I'm impressed with using the subs as pickets.

I'm going to have to see if I can scrape together a TF of at least DD's to see if I can't give this Allied TF some trouble. I'm remembering
wiping an Allied TF off the map in some game here, maybe a few turns ago, unless it was in Rob's game, which I doubt. I'm pretty sure
it was Jim's game and it occured around Palmyra as I recall, or one of the southernmost islands in the chain. I'll go through the sunk
ships list and see if I can't reconstruct the TF in question.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 1535
RE: 8Feb42 combat results: - 10/9/2012 5:51:10 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline 		Okie dokie......now I've run into a real problem with this AAR. I've got a picture of what I'm going to do about the Allied ships at Christmas
Island IO and I dare not just embed it in this post where Jim will run into it. Maybe I should just append it to this post and let people
BESIDES JIM click on it to see what it is and still maintain some OPSEC. And then when it's intelligence utility has past I'll embed it then.
That would be fair wouldn't it?




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 10/10/2012 8:23:31 PM >

_____________________________

If we're all created in the image of god then why aren't we all invisible?

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 1536
RE: 8Feb42 combat results: - 10/9/2012 6:01:49 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline 		Here's another one of those OPSEC problems that I have. I'll change the embeding on these pictures by 10Feb or so. By then this
little operation will have succeeded or failed and we will probably know which by then. Everybody besides JIM is welcome to click on
the attached picture.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 10/10/2012 8:23:55 PM >

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 1537
RE: 8Feb42 combat results: - 10/9/2012 6:12:40 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline 		Most of my escorts are just one PB or one DD or one SC etc. and that's not a lot of protection for a TF of ships especially when it's a big
TF with lots of ships. I'm wondering when I should go to two escorts, what's the size threshold. I'm thinking maybe if the TF is over 10
ships are so then maybe there should be two escorts instead of just one. Anybody have any experience with this sort of thing?

Also, I think Jim may have discovered my weakest link. My economy. If Jim can starve me out with a sub blockade I'll lose. I think. Well,
I mean lose earlier than I would have. I realize that the Japs are suppposed to lose. Anyway, I'm thinking that Jim is thinking he hasn't
yet sent enough subs to the Japanese Home Islands. I've circled those that are on the surface.....there are probably at least three more
that are submerged in this picture so you can imagine the number of Allied Subs Jim has invested in the blockade. I'm not at all sure that
my boys are up to the ASW challenge. I'll have to take another look at the aerial ASW assets I may have that aren't employed yet.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 10/9/2012 6:15:04 AM >

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 1538
RE: 8Feb42 combat results: - 10/9/2012 6:46:34 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline 		Here's the search patterns of the Japanese Home Islands. OPSEC problemo again. Sorry Jimbo.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 1539
RE: 8Feb42 combat results: - 10/9/2012 7:13:37 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline 		Another OPSEC problem Jim. Sorry about that.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 10/10/2012 8:24:31 PM >

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 1540
RE: 8Feb42 combat results: - 10/10/2012 1:24:35 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline 		I've run into a tiny little problem that my readers might want to avoid themselves. TF 408 is unloading 1st Hvy Arty /2 because, unless
I'm reading this wrong, 1st Hvy Arty /2 is empty. I'm finding in the TOE where it's authorized one tube but that there aren't any tubes
actually occupying that billet. So loading it would be a snap but there's nothing important to unload. Also, 1st Hvy Arty /6 in the hex is
in the same situation ( empty ). Also, the game engine won't let me load /6 and the error message when I try is something about the
rule one organization per ship ( and there's only one ship in this TF ). So I can't upload /6 and there's nothing to unload from /2 so I may
as well unload it and see if I can't disband it ..........or maybe I should wait and see if it ever gets it's tube. Yeah, use it as an indicator
as to whether or not there's sufficient armament getting out to the units in the field.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 1541
RE: 8Feb42 combat results: - 10/10/2012 1:48:12 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline 		Larry,

Notice that middle ship display above, that the picture of the ship is sort of doubled and split? That's because your PC/graphics card is not working well with the specific resolution settings that you've chosen for AE. It's the animation of moving water that is not working right.

Mine does the same thing. Because the specific resolution I chose is more important to me than the animations (explosions, guns firing, etc.) I just turned them off by adding this option to the shortcut:

-noFire

Note that the upper/lower case is critical. Just for reference, here is a complete example of a shortcut that I use:

"C:\Matrix Games\WITP AE - PBM #1\Beta2\War in the Pacific Admiral Edition.exe" -altFont -cpu4 -dd_sw -archive -wd -pxf1920 -pyf1018 -noFire

Forgive the wrap-around, obviously there is none in the shortcut. As mentioned, that -noFire turns off any graphics animations. You can still see the "combat animations", but you won't see guns firing, explosions and the like.

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 1542
RE: 8Feb42 combat results: - 10/10/2012 1:55:01 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs
-noFire

....As mentioned, that -noFire turns off any graphics animations. You can still see the "combat animations", but you won't see guns firing, explosions and the like.


Many thanks witpqs dude. I will use it. Got anymore tricks like that, that our readers would love to hear about? Or comments about the situation Jim and I are in, or something about the AAR itself, almost anything will do. I love to read posts from readers. Jim does too.

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 1543
RE: 8Feb42 combat results: - 10/10/2012 2:01:40 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs
-noFire

....As mentioned, that -noFire turns off any graphics animations. You can still see the "combat animations", but you won't see guns firing, explosions and the like.


Many thanks witpqs dude. I will use it. Got anymore tricks like that, that our readers would love to hear about? Or comments about the situation Jim and I are in, or something about the AAR itself, almost anything will do. I love to read posts from readers. Jim does too.

Have you heard the one about the farmer's daughter? Oh, wait, better not post that here!

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 1544
RE: 8Feb42 combat results: - 10/10/2012 2:05:28 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

I've run into a tiny little problem that my readers might want to avoid themselves. TF 408 is unloading 1st Hvy Arty /2 because, unless
I'm reading this wrong, 1st Hvy Arty /2 is empty. I'm finding in the TOE where it's authorized one tube but that there aren't any tubes
actually occupying that billet. So loading it would be a snap but there's nothing important to unload. Also, 1st Hvy Arty /6 in the hex is
in the same situation ( empty ). Also, the game engine won't let me load /6 and the error message when I try is something about the
rule one organization per ship ( and there's only one ship in this TF ). So I can't upload /6 and there's nothing to unload from /2 so I may
as well unload it and see if I can't disband it ..........or maybe I should wait and see if it ever gets it's tube. Yeah, use it as an indicator
as to whether or not there's sufficient armament getting out to the units in the field.




I think you are reading it wrong. The bottom picture you posted shows that the fragment on board the ship has "1" of the device in question in an enabled state, and "0" (the number in parentheses) in a disabled state. So, the ship (and by extension the TF) still has to unload that one device.

< Message edited by witpqs -- 10/10/2012 2:06:17 AM >

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 1545
RE: 8Feb42 combat results: - 10/10/2012 2:06:52 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline 		So um....Hey you guys.........I just had a thought. Maybe I should assign everybody who reads this AAR a specific unit from the game so
as to represent that unit. And chose them completely at Random. I've already chosen one for me at random and it turned out to be a
Jap transport pilot somewhere in China. D'oh. I'm going to pretend that he gets killed off sometime soon and in a week or so, game
time, chose some other unit to represent me. Anybody have a preference whether they want to be Ships, planes, or land? I think I'll just
go ahead and make the assignments and just announce them to the readers because that way we'll be on the program already and we
can always kill it off and make another assignment some days later.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 1546
RE: 8Feb42 combat results: - 10/10/2012 2:10:15 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs
I think you are reading it wrong. The bottom picture you posted shows that the fragment on board the ship has "1" of the device in question in an enabled state, and "0" (the number in parentheses) in a disabled state. So, the ship (and by extension the TF) still has to unload that one device.

Thank you very much for clearing that up for me. Now I understand what the various numbers mean more than I did before. That
information changes very little for the ship's situation however, since that one arty tube would probably just get lost overboard when
unloading at the beach. Or maybe I should just ship him / her to his / her parent organization and hope there is an eventual re-join.
Anyway, thanks.

< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 10/10/2012 2:11:18 AM >

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 1547
RE: 8Feb42 combat results: - 10/10/2012 2:17:01 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs
Have you heard the one about the farmer's daughter? Oh, wait, better not post that here!

Part of the reason that joke works so well is that originally farmers' daughters were thought to act just that way. Or it was hoped they
did anyway. That stereotype is an old one and many's the joke that includes it.

Then there are those that begin something like this one:

There once was a man from Norway
who hung upside down in a doorway

etc.

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 1548
RE: 8Feb42 combat results: - 10/10/2012 2:25:48 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline 		okie dokie witpqs dude.........I've decided to assign you to be the Task Force commander of TF 408. You're a captain dude. Maybe we
can wangle you a better command in the coming days.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 1549
RE: 8Feb42 combat results: - 10/10/2012 2:32:42 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline 		okie dokie Crackaces dude......your turn....now you're TF commander of TF 409.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 1550
RE: 8Feb42 combat results: - 10/10/2012 2:41:14 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline 		okie dokie Saros..........you're now the TF commander of TF 413. Good luck.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 1551
RE: 8Feb42 combat results: - 10/10/2012 2:46:34 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline 		okie dokie DOCUP you're now the 7th Tank Rgt Commander. Good hunting.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 1552
RE: 8Feb42 combat results: - 10/10/2012 2:50:26 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline 		okie dokie Justus2......it looks like you're the TF Commander of TF 418. Lemme know if that's okay with you. All of these assignments
are negoatiable.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 1553
RE: 8Feb42 combat results: - 10/10/2012 2:53:30 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline 		okie dokie el cid again we're making you the TF commander of TF 421: Stay safe out there.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 1554
RE: 8Feb42 combat results: - 10/10/2012 2:56:47 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline 		okie dokie MAurelius dude. You're going to be the TF commander of TF 423. Next stop Midway.






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 10/10/2012 2:57:27 AM >

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 1555
RE: 8Feb42 combat results: - 10/10/2012 2:59:49 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline 		So here's the assignments so far: 
------------------------------------------------------------------
witpqs          TF commander        TF 408
Crackaces       TF commander        TF 409
Saros           TF commander        TF 413
DOCUP           ARM unit commander  7th Tank Rgt 	 
Justus2         TF commander        TF 418
el cid again    TF commander        TF 421	
MAurelius       TF commander        TF 423


< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 10/10/2012 3:08:22 AM >

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 1556
RE: 8Feb42 combat results: - 10/10/2012 3:10:22 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline 		You should use the TF name field on the TF display.

You do realize that I am honor bound to banzai TF408 to Midway and capture the atoll with that single gun, don't you?

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 1557
RE: 8Feb42 combat results: - 10/10/2012 3:23:56 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs
You should use the TF name field on the TF display.


I use the name field to designate future ports to visit, cargo aboard, notes to myself ( "Tulagi needs fuel" ) etc. It's pretty handy to use
that way.....although I could really use a larger field to make longer notes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs
You do realize that I am honor bound to banzai TF408 to Midway and capture the atoll with that single gun, don't you?

If you really want to be included in the Midway adventure I'll see if I can figure out a way to include you somehow. I may have to make
a re-assignment but we'll get you in there somehow. Remind me if I I'm not acting soon enough to suit you. I've got a lot of things
going on right now.


okie dokie zuluhour dude you're now TF commander of TF 436. Good hunting.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 10/10/2012 3:27:27 AM >

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 1558
RE: 8Feb42 combat results: - 10/10/2012 3:39:31 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline 		okie dokie CV 2 you're now the TF commander of TF 456




Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 1559
RE: 8Feb42 combat results: - 10/10/2012 3:43:50 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline 		Falken, hello.......you're now the TF commander of TF 469. Anybody else want to be re-assigned? Just say so.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 10/10/2012 3:44:16 AM >

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 1560
Page:   <<   < prev  50 51 [52] 53 54   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: 8Feb42 combat results: Page: <<   < prev  50 51 [52] 53 54   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

2.142