Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

 
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: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent Page: <<   < prev  35 36 [37] 38 39   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 3/22/2013 2:49:00 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Paladin1dcs
I'm really looking forward to seeing how he does once he's got most of the fun toys in late '44 and '45.


Alas, I doubt we'll see those dates in this game. I could be wrong, but that's what I think. I'd lay odds were I a bettin' man. Which I am. So I'll give anyone interested 2:1 odds.



Is the bet whether this gets into 44? I might take you up on that one! John won't likely quit if the KB is still in operation.


I'll take 'the other side' of that bet. PM me if you're serious. I'll give you 2:1 odds.

_____________________________


(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 1081
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 3/22/2013 2:52:25 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline 		That's quite the vent, CR. I wonder what 'ownership' of his own problems he'll claim in this game? Perhaps his use of a stacking limit based on another mod was not fully calculated in his own mod. Good on you for using his own self-conceived limitations against him!

_____________________________


(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 1082
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 3/22/2013 2:54:59 PM   
Crackaces


Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline 		I have stated before .. Plan works .. brillant strategy .. plans do not work .. bad die rolls .. And your diabolical single ship TF! You scoundrel! The fact that John has loss sight of measured response has nothing to do with the results .

Hmmm.. There has been two other AAR's of recent beta's where as previous mixes of IJ OOB have failed to take Singapore in a reasonable time. But airpower allocation has been much different also. One thing that is different is flak effectiveness in terms of disrupting now poorly coordinated strike packages so ground attacks vs. places with flak are not as effective as in the past. John has not adaopted to this new world though he helped write this scenario.

Ramree and the results are going to unhinge him. I am wondering about your pwhexe file? Do you have an editor so you can check the hex at Ramree island?



_____________________________

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so"

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 1083
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 3/22/2013 3:04:28 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline 		Well, to be fair to John, dumping unsupported troops onto undefended rocks isn't a war-winning strategy, even for the Allies. Can CR supply, hold and leverage these footholds in the Gilberts at a reasonable cost? That's the question.

How would the Allies have felt if, IRL, they lost some 30 ships after such an endeavor? I'd wager they would have felt as if this were a defeat, even with the newly captured ground.

I let real life guide my thoughts at times like these as well. What would the Allied thoughts have been about dropping off a regiment (or smaller LCU) on a rock in the middle of the Pacific and then, BY DESIGN, cutting, splitting into singleton TFs and running like the wind? Do you think that a real life Admiral would make such a decision or implement it in this manner? Before we decry one player as a simpleton and hail another as a brilliant tactician and player, let's let real life have a say, shall we?

_____________________________


(in reply to Crackaces)
Post #: 1084
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 3/22/2013 3:14:32 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		Under the totality of the circumstances it's reasonable.  But the game forces us into strategies that don't perfectly align with real life.  A few examples:

1.  In real life, a small American CV TF suddenly learns that an overwhelmingly powerful enemy carrier force is 350 miles distant.  The American commander can immediately turn around and vamose.  In the game, the American commander continues to steam forward and cannot reverse course until the next day.  To avoid this nonhistoric situation, we send out flankers 90 or 180 miles or more whereas in the real war they might have only been five or ten miles out.

2.  In real life, Japan couldn't have within one day of an invasion sent patrol aircraft to basically ungarrisoned Baker, Tabituea and other islands and had immediate 360 degree saturated coverage of the entire ocean, getting solid sightings on the entire Allied fleet location.  Japan also couldn't have staged Betties forward hundreds of miles within 24 hours and then flown strikes the very next day a further 500 or 750 miles to the east.  The KB wouldn't have had perfect vectoring into the fleeing target TFs, which would have remained closer together for mutual support and protection.  So, of necessity, I scatter my ships and flee.

AE is replete with similar situations.  So do I feel the least bit remorseful in how I've handled the Gilberts Invasion?  Heck no!  Think of it this way - I knew the KB was 28 hexes SW of Tarawa.  Had John had a single patrol plane operating in the Gilberts, or a single patroling warship, he would've been alerted and I'd have had to stand down instanter.  He didn't so I rush in under circumstances quite similar to what the Allies did in Operation Watchtower. The Allies weren't sure they could hold that island, the supporting ships scattered, and for quite awhile it was a tossup - or the Americans thought it was.

< Message edited by Canoerebel -- 3/22/2013 3:17:37 PM >

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 1085
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 3/22/2013 3:25:17 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		Update re Ramree Island.  The "problem" was a figment of my imagination.  The base is still controlled by Japan (Ramree isn't an atoll, so my guys didn't auto shock attack).  When I take the base tomorrow, I'll be able to build the forts and airfield.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 1086
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 3/22/2013 3:33:32 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Under the totality of the circumstances it's reasonable. 


Oh, I agree. By all means. It's a reasonable event / outcome / approach when the game mechanics and vagaries are considered.

I'm just not conflating 'reasonable, non-gamey gameplay' with 'brilliant, balanced gameplay' is all.

_____________________________


(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 1087
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 3/22/2013 3:39:16 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy
Well, to be fair to John, dumping unsupported troops onto undefended rocks isn't a war-winning strategy, even for the Allies. Can CR supply, hold and leverage these footholds in the Gilberts at a reasonable cost? That's the question.


Does it matter? John is now reacting to what CR is doing and not the other way around. Isn´t that in itself worth a hefty price? Even if John takes it back it just means he is taking back something of no value instead of actually taking something with/of value?

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 1088
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 3/22/2013 3:41:52 PM   
Crackaces


Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Well, to be fair to John, dumping unsupported troops onto undefended rocks isn't a war-winning strategy, even for the Allies. Can CR supply, hold and leverage these footholds in the Gilberts at a reasonable cost? That's the question.

How would the Allies have felt if, IRL, they lost some 30 ships after such an endeavor? I'd wager they would have felt as if this were a defeat, even with the newly captured ground.

I let real life guide my thoughts at times like these as well. What would the Allied thoughts have been about dropping off a regiment (or smaller LCU) on a rock in the middle of the Pacific and then, BY DESIGN, cutting, splitting into singleton TFs and running like the wind? Do you think that a real life Admiral would make such a decision or implement it in this manner? Before we decry one player as a simpleton and hail another as a brilliant tactician and player, let's let real life have a say, shall we?



This game is as much as a similation of WWII as much as a "Civil War chess set" represents the War Between the States. Undoubtedly It is a great game, but when we start expecting a game to become a similation soon it breaks down. My personal rant centers on the detection hex always being the target hex, which is fudemental not only if I want to fantasize that this simulates WWII in someway, but game play is seriously affected. But I adapt .. The rules are the rules ...and thus I have done moves probably no commander would do but .. the game dictates that these moves are optimium. For example, sending all my LBA fighters in escort mode because of the penality of LRCAP over a TF ... the KB is one hex away from my LBA .. My CV's are 7 hexes away .. So .. my fighters do not intercept strike packages flying directly overhead .. no no . they would fly 400 miles away under severe penality ... so I send them in with some DB's and get a much better fight over the KB ...

BTW) Dumping unsupported troops on rocks and the opponent reacting like the home islands have been attacked is a war winning strategy in my book

In my first game it took me two months to relieve Tarawa at this very same moment in the game. My opponent reacted somewhat like this. The KB and BB's stayed out here which then allowed forces to operate rather freely elsewhere. I suspect CR's moves are likewise ..

BTW II) I might propose that John gets crap from a certain audience because he never recognizes the brilliance of the other guys strategy. It is always a die roll, the game, gamey play, but never John .. but if they other guy catches an unluckly break .. its John's most brillant move ever ..

_____________________________

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so"

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 1089
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 3/22/2013 3:48:32 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline 		Not necessarily. I've never been of the belief that goading the Japanese into a victory, losing LCUs and ships in the process is a universally profitable venture.

IMO, too many Allied players think that tweaking the Japanese timetable is worth paying an exorbitant price. We haven't seen enough AARs where early Allied forays are reversed with tremendous loss of Allied men and materiel to reinforce this, IMO.

Inspiring an opponent's action is one thing. Making the outcome of that reaction profitable to your position is another.

_____________________________


(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 1090
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 3/22/2013 3:49:32 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

BTW II) I might propose that John gets crap from a certain audience because he never recognizes the brilliance of the other guys strategy. It is always a die roll, the game, gamey play, but never John .. but if they other guy catches an unluckly break .. its John's most brillant move ever ..


I don't follow...

< Message edited by Chickenboy -- 3/22/2013 3:56:24 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to Crackaces)
Post #: 1091
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 3/22/2013 3:52:38 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

BTW) Dumping unsupported troops on rocks and the opponent reacting like the home islands have been attacked is a war winning strategy in my book



Ah! So, if the 2nd Marine Division had been overrun and liquidated on Guadalcanal IRL, this would have been viewed as an Allied success because of the attention the Japanese paid it? Bataan was a war winner, was it?

_____________________________


(in reply to Crackaces)
Post #: 1092
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 3/22/2013 4:05:07 PM   
Crackaces


Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

BTW II) I might propose that John gets crap from a certain audience because he never recognizes the brilliance of the other guys strategy. It is always a die roll, the game, gamey play, but never John .. but if they other guy catches an unluckly break .. its John's most brillant move ever ..


I don't follow...


Perth is an excellent example ... John uses the KB like a hammer .. CR moves some CV aircraft to Perth and lays a trap. John makes a tactical error in my view by striking the port ignoring the strategic error of not appricating the flak and effect on results in the target hex .. John losses a great deal of IJN CV based aircraft platforms with little to show for the losses ... Of course this has nothing to do with CR and everything to do with the borked die rolls ..

_____________________________

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so"

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 1093
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 3/22/2013 4:06:44 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Not necessarily. I've never been of the belief that goading the Japanese into a victory, losing LCUs and ships in the process is a universally profitable venture.

IMO, too many Allied players think that tweaking the Japanese timetable is worth paying an exorbitant price. We haven't seen enough AARs where early Allied forays are reversed with tremendous loss of Allied men and materiel to reinforce this, IMO.

Inspiring an opponent's action is one thing. Making the outcome of that reaction profitable to your position is another.


I´m only into my second PBEM so I have limited experience. But I played a very defensive first game and my pools were overflowing with materials and squads in late 42. I had hundreds of USA and USMC squads. Ships on the other hand...Loosing AP/AKs and CV are certainly bad. Everything else is expendable (in my very humble and limited experience).

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 1094
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 3/22/2013 4:14:08 PM   
Crackaces


Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

BTW) Dumping unsupported troops on rocks and the opponent reacting like the home islands have been attacked is a war winning strategy in my book



Ah! So, if the 2nd Marine Division had been overrun and liquidated on Guadalcanal IRL, this would have been viewed as an Allied success because of the attention the Japanese paid it? Bataan was a war winner, was it?


I think the fudemental difference in our arguements is that I see WitP AE as a game. I sense you view it as a similation. So I perceive that your arguements are based on some latient factors not represented in the game such as political factors, logistics, etc. Now, I understand there are two distinct opposite ends of the spectrum. On one end is the expectation that the opponent will manage the other persons view of reality and a series of "home rules" to somehow set up a situation that will turn this game into a similation. On the other end of the spectrum is the understanding that the game will never be a similation because basic assumptions are flawed. To wit the detection hex is the target hex not the first hex detected but many many more fundemental design problems. To wit the fundemetnal unit for a strike package is the squadron .. players cannot detach squadrons into smaller units to strike small scatering TF's a la PQ-17 .. so .... such moves are "Gamey"

Now believing this is a game and only a game .. I very much like CR's strategy of getting John to over committ resources i.e. platforms for what would be otherwise considered a small raid of sorts ... one that could be dealt with using measured force .. CR predicted and elicited the intended reaction and he will use this to push the big bowl of jelly in many places ...

< Message edited by Crackaces -- 3/22/2013 4:49:07 PM >

_____________________________

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so"

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 1095
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 3/22/2013 5:07:53 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline 		If you have not sent your return reply then I would not. We all need to vent when things don't go our way. Best to give John time to absorb his own vent. I have done it enough myself and a day or two of thought generally made me regret my vent or see it as a bit silly.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Crackaces)
Post #: 1096
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 3/22/2013 5:14:57 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		Okay, crustton, that sounds like good advice.  I won't send it.  I'll try to send something very short and "non adversarial."

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 1097
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 3/22/2013 5:28:11 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Well, to be fair to John, dumping unsupported troops onto undefended rocks isn't a war-winning strategy, even for the Allies. Can CR supply, hold and leverage these footholds in the Gilberts at a reasonable cost? That's the question.

How would the Allies have felt if, IRL, they lost some 30 ships after such an endeavor? I'd wager they would have felt as if this were a defeat, even with the newly captured ground.

I let real life guide my thoughts at times like these as well. What would the Allied thoughts have been about dropping off a regiment (or smaller LCU) on a rock in the middle of the Pacific and then, BY DESIGN, cutting, splitting into singleton TFs and running like the wind? Do you think that a real life Admiral would make such a decision or implement it in this manner? Before we decry one player as a simpleton and hail another as a brilliant tactician and player, let's let real life have a say, shall we?



While I don't want to wade into this debate, I do want to make the point that Guadalcanal was almost exactly what you are describing, except it was a whole division we dropped of and scattered like the wind to avoid retribution.

A temporary withdrawal to avoid the hammer is not the same as dropping them off and leaving them to their fate. Once the KB has to leave to refuel and rearm, there will be plenty of opportunity to sneak in support units and supply on the sly.

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 1098
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 3/22/2013 6:15:41 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

BTW II) I might propose that John gets crap from a certain audience because he never recognizes the brilliance of the other guys strategy. It is always a die roll, the game, gamey play, but never John .. but if they other guy catches an unluckly break .. its John's most brillant move ever ..


I don't follow...


Perth is an excellent example ... John uses the KB like a hammer .. CR moves some CV aircraft to Perth and lays a trap. John makes a tactical error in my view by striking the port ignoring the strategic error of not appricating the flak and effect on results in the target hex .. John losses a great deal of IJN CV based aircraft platforms with little to show for the losses ... Of course this has nothing to do with CR and everything to do with the borked die rolls ..


No, I'm not being clear. I understand your point about John's outlook on this game and mostly agree with it. My question was about 'proposing that John get crap from a certain audience'. Were you proposing that that audience was me / other readers of CR's AAR?

_____________________________


(in reply to Crackaces)
Post #: 1099
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 3/22/2013 6:16:59 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

BTW) Dumping unsupported troops on rocks and the opponent reacting like the home islands have been attacked is a war winning strategy in my book



Ah! So, if the 2nd Marine Division had been overrun and liquidated on Guadalcanal IRL, this would have been viewed as an Allied success because of the attention the Japanese paid it? Bataan was a war winner, was it?


I think the fudemental difference in our arguements is that I see WitP AE as a game. I sense you view it as a similation. So I perceive that your arguements are based on some latient factors not represented in the game such as political factors, logistics, etc. Now, I understand there are two distinct opposite ends of the spectrum. On one end is the expectation that the opponent will manage the other persons view of reality and a series of "home rules" to somehow set up a situation that will turn this game into a similation. On the other end of the spectrum is the understanding that the game will never be a similation because basic assumptions are flawed. To wit the detection hex is the target hex not the first hex detected but many many more fundemental design problems. To wit the fundemetnal unit for a strike package is the squadron .. players cannot detach squadrons into smaller units to strike small scatering TF's a la PQ-17 .. so .... such moves are "Gamey"

Now believing this is a game and only a game .. I very much like CR's strategy of getting John to over committ resources i.e. platforms for what would be otherwise considered a small raid of sorts ... one that could be dealt with using measured force .. CR predicted and elicited the intended reaction and he will use this to push the big bowl of jelly in many places ...


OK, Crackaces, that POV makes sense and describes my feelings on the matter well.

_____________________________


(in reply to Crackaces)
Post #: 1100
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 3/22/2013 6:44:56 PM   
Crackaces


Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

BTW II) I might propose that John gets crap from a certain audience because he never recognizes the brilliance of the other guys strategy. It is always a die roll, the game, gamey play, but never John .. but if they other guy catches an unluckly break .. its John's most brillant move ever ..


I don't follow...


Perth is an excellent example ... John uses the KB like a hammer .. CR moves some CV aircraft to Perth and lays a trap. John makes a tactical error in my view by striking the port ignoring the strategic error of not appricating the flak and effect on results in the target hex .. John losses a great deal of IJN CV based aircraft platforms with little to show for the losses ... Of course this has nothing to do with CR and everything to do with the borked die rolls ..


No, I'm not being clear. I understand your point about John's outlook on this game and mostly agree with it. My question was about 'proposing that John get crap from a certain audience'. Were you proposing that that audience was me / other readers of CR's AAR?


I think there are 4 others including myself that give John a "hard time" in this AAR that beyond simple critism. That hard time is a spectrum that goes from sanguine rooting for CR to give John a good whopping, to delving into DSM IV Dx's for John's behavior . I used the term'certain audiance' as the rest of the posters are pretty much focused in my opinion on the game, and are not as invested in John's ego being devastated . Speaking only from my standpoint as I am quite critical for the reasons stated. I am thinking that CR is taking advantage of John's personality in a very unfair way

< Message edited by Crackaces -- 3/22/2013 6:48:35 PM >

_____________________________

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so"

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 1101
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 3/22/2013 7:01:09 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		Since I'm not privy to John's AAR, alot of what's being said here is beyond the scope of my comprehension.  I can piece things together somewhat, and it's interesting information.  I think I've made this clear, but permit me to state again:  In real life, John and I are good friends going way back to UV days (2003).  In game life, John can irk the living stew out of me and does quite often.  It makes me want to thrash him badly - in the game.  But my game feelings don't transfer to real life.  And, in game terms, I'm having a blast playing a very aggressive and experienced opponent ---- even if his "Rolled Six!" and "Falaise Pocket" and "Banzaii!" comments drive me nuts. 

(in reply to Crackaces)
Post #: 1102
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 3/22/2013 7:11:16 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline 		Ah. I see.

I think Dan's posts on the matter of John's personality echo my own impressions quite well. Perhaps they're even a bit charitable. But they identify John's tendencies, frailties and foibles well. I'm probably a bit more critical than Dan is about John's strategic focus or lack thereof, but I've largely kept those rebukes to myself, as I don't think Dan would like to hear his friend berated in this AAR.

If you (Crackaces) have a history on the old WiTP site, you'll understand there's a personal connection between these two guys. John has been through a lot in his life and Dan was a loyal friend and connection. I know John is grateful for this loyalty. Some of this history gets in the way of me ripping John up one side and down the other in public.

Also, when I follow AARs, I will usually subscribe from the beginning based upon the player, his reputation, writing style, his opponent, the mod they're playing (yes, it matters), and-probably most importantly-the way the player plays the game. I followed very little of ChezDaJez / CR's AAR due to some of these factors. I've checked out of Bullwinkle's / OneEyedJacks for similar reasons.

Then there's the matter of a player not being able to take a hint. I made some suggestions early on in John's AAR that were bulldozed. I'll not so extend my neck again.

ETA: CR posted whilest I was drafting my note. This was originally targetted to Crackaces.

< Message edited by Chickenboy -- 3/22/2013 7:12:59 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to Crackaces)
Post #: 1103
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 3/22/2013 7:13:04 PM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Not sure I'll send this email.  Not sure the latter two points are worth making since they don't respond to his points, though hey do help illustrate that feelings of "hey, you're abusing the game" are (as always) mutual.


Try:

“You never know what worse luck your bad luck has saved you from.” – Cormac McCarthy, No Country for Old Men

“But, he thought, I keep them with precision. Only I have no luck anymore. But who knows? Maybe today. Every day is a new day. It is better to be lucky. But I would rather be exact. Then when luck comes you are ready.” – Ernest Hemingway, The Old Man and the Sea

“Shallow men believe in luck or in circumstance. Strong men believe in cause and effect.” — Ralph Waldo Emerson

“Luck is not chance-
It’s Toil-
Fortune’s expensive smile
Is earned-”
– Emily Dickinson

“Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.” – Seneca

“In short, they were gambling on their luck, and luck is not to be coerced.” – Albert Camus, The Plague

“You know, Hobbes, some days even my lucky rocketship underpants don’t help.” -– Bill Watterson, Calvin & Hobbes

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 1104
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 3/22/2013 7:14:09 PM   
Miller


Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline 		Dan you are getting too good at this game for your own good.........John will bail either when the KB is killed or by the end of 43, whichever is sooner.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 1105
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 3/22/2013 7:16:06 PM   
Crackaces


Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline
quote:

If you (Crackaces) have a history on the old WiTP site, you'll understand there's a personal connection between these two guys. John has been through a lot in his life and Dan was a loyal friend and connection. I know John is grateful for this loyalty. Some of this history gets in the way of me ripping John up one side and down the other in public.


Seems reasonable .. actually I am very new to this forum having 2 PBEM games under my belt and a game vs. the AI. I will take the hint, and not be so critical. Rather enjoy things and watch things unfold .. it is never good when the audiance gets involved with the play .. I know better

_____________________________

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so"

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 1106
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 3/22/2013 7:21:40 PM   
Encircled


Posts: 2024
Joined: 12/30/2010
From: Northern England
Status: offline
quote:

“You know, Hobbes, some days even my lucky rocketship underpants don’t help.” -– Bill Watterson, Calvin & Hobbes


This is a job for Stupendous man!

_____________________________


(in reply to Crackaces)
Post #: 1107
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 3/22/2013 7:27:09 PM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Encircled

quote:

“You know, Hobbes, some days even my lucky rocketship underpants don’t help.” -– Bill Watterson, Calvin & Hobbes


This is a job for Stupendous man!


I really miss C&H.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Encircled)
Post #: 1108
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 3/22/2013 7:40:33 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		How about Hee Haw:  Gloom, despair, and agony on me.  Deep dark depression, excessive misery.  If I had no bad luck, I'd have no luck at all.  Gloom, despair, and agony on me."

Hee Haw certainly was a fount of wisdom.....

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 1109
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 3/22/2013 8:49:26 PM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline 		And a font.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 1110
Page:   <<   < prev  35 36 [37] 38 39   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent Page: <<   < prev  35 36 [37] 38 39   next >   >>
Jump to:





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


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.798