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  94 95 [96] 97 98   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 2:00:42 AM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		No, this wasn't something intentional. I'm 100% sure of that. I think you'll find a post in John's AAR of the kind described.

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 2851
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 2:06:37 AM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy
Does this make you reconsider your extensive use of 'picket' xAKL and xAKs? I'd consider that the other pea in this pod, were I in John's position. Not identical, but comparable.


No, for reasons already explained. First, I've made limited use of xAKs and clear them out once they've served their purpose. I think it's historical, in keeping with what the Allied would have done had they needed to, and is necessary to avoid things that would be egregiously non historical (as stated in length earlier).

An example. I currently have six or eight ships on picket duty west of Sumatra. These include a mix of DDs and xAKs. John has used a three-DD patrol to sink several of the xAK and at least one of the DD. Then, last turn, a carrier force turned up and devoted a handful of Kates to dispose of an xAK. Knowing that the enemy was present, I dispersed the rest of my fleet. John probably used up 1% of his sortie capability. It has had absoltuley no deletorious affect on his ability to wage war, but it did help guard against the truly ridiculous ability of a Japanese carrier force to steam at flank speed (if desired), covering something like 750 miles in a single day, all the while the Allied ships just continue about their business without taking any evasive action.

I'm here to tell you. The reasonable use of picket ships is absolutely fair, historical, and called for. The failure to use them - at least for the Allies - would be the abuse.

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 2852
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 2:07:57 AM   
Cpt Sherwood

 

Posts: 837
Joined: 12/1/2005
From: A Very Nice Place in the USA
Status: offline 		I will only state that there was a post in Johns AAR about night bombing. No other details are necessary.

_____________________________

“Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.” ― Lucius Annaeus Seneca

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 2853
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 2:08:19 AM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline 		pws hasn't seen it. I'm sorry but if this post is there how could pws miss it? I don't see anyone else jumping in to say that post is there. Doesn't that make you just a bit suspicious?

CR,
You seem like a decent guy but, really, sometimes I worry that you're too nice for your own good.


Captain Sherwood,
Other details are necessary. The person who PMed CR said he made the post advocating it 4 hrs before it was raised here.
So, 3 items need to be checked.
1. Was there a post. You say there was.
2. Did it advocate night bombing to John - that's key.
3. Was it 4 hrs before a discussion began here- that's another key.

That a post was made is 1 thing but the other facts need to check out also.

Even if that's all kosher it doesn't change the fact that another person has, in alleging an OPSEC breach broken OPSEC themselves. This has happened before and like lambs the entire forum seems to just shrug and accept it and say "no foul". That's crazy, nonsensical behaviour..

< Message edited by Nemo121 -- 7/10/2013 2:57:00 AM >

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 2854
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 2:13:03 AM   
Cpt Sherwood

 

Posts: 837
Joined: 12/1/2005
From: A Very Nice Place in the USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy
Does this make you reconsider your extensive use of 'picket' xAKL and xAKs? I'd consider that the other pea in this pod, were I in John's position. Not identical, but comparable.


No, for reasons already explained. First, I've made limited use of xAKs and clear them out once they've served their purpose. I think it's historical, in keeping with what the Allied would have done had they needed to, and is necessary to avoid things that would be egregiously non historical (as stated in length earlier).

An example. I currently have six or eight ships on picket duty west of Sumatra. These include a mix of DDs and xAKs. John has used a three-DD patrol to sink several of the xAK and at least one of the DD. Then, last turn, a carrier force turned up and devoted a handful of Kates to dispose of an xAK. Knowing that the enemy was present, I dispersed the rest of my fleet. John probably used up 1% of his sortie capability. It has had absoltuley no deletorious affect on his ability to wage war, but it did help guard against the truly ridiculous ability of a Japanese carrier force to steam at flank speed (if desired), covering something like 750 miles in a single day, all the while the Allied ships just continue about their business without taking any evasive action.

I'm here to tell you. The reasonable use of picket ships is absolutely fair, historical, and called for. The failure to use them - at least for the Allies - would be the abuse.


I do agree with your reasoning and analysis on this subject.

_____________________________

“Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.” ― Lucius Annaeus Seneca

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 2855
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 2:17:59 AM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
quote:

I'm here to tell you. The reasonable use of picket ships is absolutely fair, historical, and called for. The failure to use them - at least for the Allies - would be the abuse.


Really? I don't use them, am I abusing the game?

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to Cpt Sherwood)
Post #: 2856
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 2:20:30 AM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		[Note to Self: Super-Secret strategy to insert controversy into AAR to heighten interest so that I can overtake GreyJoy is working! Remember to introduce sex into discussion tomorrow.]

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 2857
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 2:21:44 AM   
catwhoorg


Posts: 686
Joined: 9/27/2012
From: Uk expat lving near Atlanta
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Cpt Sherwood

I will only state that there was a post in Johns AAR about night bombing. No other details are necessary.


Yep. There was a post and I found the timing an odd coincidence.When I checked in on my phone earlier I was a little shocked in fact that the discussion was going on in both places. I couldn't PM from the phone easily, but was going to raise it when I had the chance tonight (only to find it had been raised).

I'll keep with my policy of not commenting on matters of substance but reading both. Its a amazing education for me to be reading both.

(in reply to Cpt Sherwood)
Post #: 2858
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 3:16:15 AM   
JuanG


Posts: 906
Joined: 12/28/2008
Status: offline 		I have been reading both AARs, but restrict comments to game mechanics questions (which makes two posts from me so far in Johns AAR). This is intentionally to avoid contamination, since its so great watching you guys go at it.

Nemo, if you'd like I can PM you the answers to those questions since you seem to be taking the role of neutral party in this. Would like you to ok it first though.

< Message edited by JuanG -- 7/10/2013 3:34:55 AM >

_____________________________


Coral Sea HDM
AltWNT Scenarios

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 2859
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 3:34:45 AM   
Cpt Sherwood

 

Posts: 837
Joined: 12/1/2005
From: A Very Nice Place in the USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

pws hasn't seen it. I'm sorry but if this post is there how could pws miss it? I don't see anyone else jumping in to say that post is there. Doesn't that make you just a bit suspicious?

CR,
You seem like a decent guy but, really, sometimes I worry that you're too nice for your own good.


Captain Sherwood,
Other details are necessary. The person who PMed CR said he made the post advocating it 4 hrs before it was raised here.
So, 3 items need to be checked.
1. Was there a post. You say there was.
2. Did it advocate night bombing to John - that's key.
3. Was it 4 hrs before a discussion began here- that's another key.

That a post was made is 1 thing but the other facts need to check out also.

Even if that's all kosher it doesn't change the fact that another person has, in alleging an OPSEC breach broken OPSEC themselves. This has happened before and like lambs the entire forum seems to just shrug and accept it and say "no foul". That's crazy, nonsensical behaviour..


So now you doubt my honesty? I refuse to provide any other details in this thread, it would be highly inappropriate. I do not take the breaking of opsec lightly, and do not accept it. But you were ranting about no post being made without verifying the facts.

_____________________________

“Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.” ― Lucius Annaeus Seneca

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 2860
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 3:48:56 AM   
Chickenboy


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

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy
Does this make you reconsider your extensive use of 'picket' xAKL and xAKs? I'd consider that the other pea in this pod, were I in John's position. Not identical, but comparable.


No, for reasons already explained. First, I've made limited use of xAKs and clear them out once they've served their purpose. I think it's historical, in keeping with what the Allied would have done had they needed to, and is necessary to avoid things that would be egregiously non historical (as stated in length earlier).

An example. I currently have six or eight ships on picket duty west of Sumatra. These include a mix of DDs and xAKs. John has used a three-DD patrol to sink several of the xAK and at least one of the DD. Then, last turn, a carrier force turned up and devoted a handful of Kates to dispose of an xAK. Knowing that the enemy was present, I dispersed the rest of my fleet. John probably used up 1% of his sortie capability. It has had absoltuley no deletorious affect on his ability to wage war, but it did help guard against the truly ridiculous ability of a Japanese carrier force to steam at flank speed (if desired), covering something like 750 miles in a single day, all the while the Allied ships just continue about their business without taking any evasive action.

I'm here to tell you. The reasonable use of picket ships is absolutely fair, historical, and called for. The failure to use them - at least for the Allies - would be the abuse.


Not to beat a dead horse, but I agree that the (limited) use of picket ships is fine. My preference is to ensure they're of a military class-a YP is fine, just so long as it's military crewed. It's a compromise between carpeting an area with 'filler' ships and no pickets. Others have expressed similar preferences, so I'll just leave it there.

_____________________________


(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 2861
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 3:54:15 AM   
JeffroK


Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline 		JIII & CR play their game the way they want.

Others play there own game there own way.

Both have reason to follow the tactics & strategies THEY choose.

I just want to hear what happened in the last turn!!!!!

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 2862
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 3:55:40 AM   
Cap Mandrake


Posts: 23184
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline
quote:

To fix this, I think what I'm going to do is "pretend like" I wasn't alerted to the night bombing problem


A very gentlemanly and proper solution, sir.

(in reply to JeffroK)
Post #: 2863
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 3:56:28 AM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline 		CptSherwood,
I'm a straight speaker Sherwood. If I doubted your honesty I'd have said so. I didn't so I don't. I'm just saying there's a difference between there being A post about night bombing and there being THE post about night bombing which fits the facts as we know them ( which include time and advocacy content). No allegations of lieing or anything like that just pointing out that your post was insufficient to show that the post referenced in the PM had actually been made.

Please don't go reading things which aren't there. It makes rational discussion much more difficult.


JuanG,
I appreciate the offer. I do think that it'd be really useful to get those answers though and I'd be happy for someone to be nominated by CR or by the posters to this AAR to receive those answers and post them here. I'd be happy to take that role if nominated but don't think I should self-nominate etc. I think this need to be done very transparently etc.

I'm also very conscious that I picked up on CRs comments about night-time raids being pinpricks and corrected him based on several game years worth of late-war experience and so, presumably, some mightn't think I'm impartial here.

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to Cpt Sherwood)
Post #: 2864
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 4:30:34 AM   
Cpt Sherwood

 

Posts: 837
Joined: 12/1/2005
From: A Very Nice Place in the USA
Status: offline
quote:

pws hasn't seen it. I'm sorry but if this post is there how could pws miss it? I don't see anyone else jumping in to say that post is there. Doesn't that make you just a bit suspicious?


That is a quote from one of your previous posts. To me, you are saying that because I am the only who posted that a post about night bombing existed, I am suspect, or maybe suspicious? Your statement that pws missed it and I saw it is suspicious?

I really don't care to continue this discussion, I want to see what happens in the next few turns. I also do not think that any of your questions should be answered in this thread or in John 3s. I feel that that would continue to provide opsec leaks and problems. Possibly it could be discussed/disclosed in a separate thread, with the understanding that neither Dan or John enter the third thread.



_____________________________

“Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.” ― Lucius Annaeus Seneca

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 2865
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 5:55:33 AM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline 		*sigh* I don't see why you're trying so hard to be offended. I posted that ten minutes before you posted so couldn't have been referring to you. Simple really.

You simply posted after me.

< Message edited by Nemo121 -- 7/10/2013 6:22:44 AM >

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to Cpt Sherwood)
Post #: 2866
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 6:04:06 AM   
corbon

 

Posts: 35
Joined: 11/11/2010
Status: offline 		I logged in, which I don't usually do, just to do this.
I don't even own this game (don't dare!) and don't usually even have an interest much in this theatre. I follow both AARs and a few others, just because they are awesome unwinding stories.

I can categorically state, having investigated thoroughly, there was no OPSEC violation in John 3rd's AAR, though it could look that way to an observer who missed some key details. Its also possible of course that there was a private OPSEC breach, but nothing in his AAR would lead to that conclusion. The timing is unfortunate, but follows naturally and independently.

I don't want to breach OPSEC myself, the way the initial reporter did, so I laid it all out carefully to Nemo121 so he could decide what should and should not be made public (it seems to me there's no breach by sending everything to him, and he's the best, or deepest, judge of what data can be shown), but unfortunately his mailbox is full and that reply disappeared.

What can I say without giving anything away... skirting the edges here, sorry, but I don't have the time to go through all those posts and get dates and details etc again.
The first (recent at least) mention of night bombing in John 3rd's AAR was just over a week before the discussion here.
The next mention was by John 3rd and predates CRs first hint, which Nemo later expanded, by around 15 hrs.
There was another post suggesting it again around the time of the discussion here, but a thorough read will show that it was quite clearly in response to John's mention, which was not long before. I imagine it was this post which set of the warning bells though.

(in reply to Cpt Sherwood)
Post #: 2867
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 6:25:42 AM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline 		Inbox is now cleared out a bit. I've been getting quite a few PMs recently as I'm sure you can all imagine.

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to corbon)
Post #: 2868
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 7:10:16 AM   
Encircled


Posts: 2024
Joined: 12/30/2010
From: Northern England
Status: offline 		I've logged on to see if there are any posts about sex yet.

A bit disappointed to be honest, unless OPsec is a euphemism I'm not aware of.

_____________________________


(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 2869
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 7:41:35 AM   
whippleofd

 

Posts: 617
Joined: 12/23/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Encircled

I've logged on to see if there are any posts about sex yet.

A bit disappointed to be honest, unless OPsec is a euphemism I'm not aware of.


If it is I sure hope they're using some form of protection, because there's OPsec going on all over the place. Once you've breached OPsec you're really breaching with all the other OPsec they've breached before.

Whipple


_____________________________

MMCS(SW/AW) 1981-2001
1981 RTC, SD
81-82 NPS, Orlando
82-85 NPTU, Idaho Falls
85-90 USS Truxtun (CGN-35)
90-93 USS George Washington (CVN-73)
93-96 NFAS Orlando
96-01 Navsea-08/Naval Reactors

(in reply to Encircled)
Post #: 2870
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 8:11:42 AM   
corbon

 

Posts: 35
Joined: 11/11/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Inbox is now cleared out a bit. I've been getting quite a few PMs recently as I'm sure you can all imagine.

Sorry, that PM has gone and I've no idea how to get it back.



Reviewing CR's original comment here, it appears that the original concern was about an OPSEC breach based on someone reading there, reporting here, rather than reading here, reporting there. That actually makes more sense based on the timing.

Thing is, it was CRs commentary to us in this thread (7/8/2013 10:49:29 PM 3. The air war has also gone well, though partly because John was delayed in getting his airforce set up and has since been only hitting at the margins (night Betty attacks vs. Sabang; ...) that are the first mention here, unfortunately just hours after the same subject turns up in John's thread, but clearly based on whats happening in game. Its not an OPSEC violation at all. Nemo then picks it up and gently pushes CR toward it, for reasons he has elaborated, without mentioning it by name.

The timing is unfortunate, but both players independently stimulated the discussion in their own threads. If there is any initial violation it has to be by CR! (Of course its not, and I'm not suggesting it is, just noting on who brought up what, when.)

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 2871
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 8:23:00 AM   
Walloc

 

Posts: 3141
Joined: 10/30/2006
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		I've been reading both sides too and purposely dont post in either. If/when I have posted in threads where i have read both AARs, i just like JuanG only goes to game mechanics or in a case where a 3rd person state stuff about OOBs which happens not to be accurately. I examined the time stamps on the posts and i pretty certain there was no breach of opsec pre u recieving that PM. As said by corbon actually the guy doing the PM has the chronology some what off, but this instead actually supports(IMO)in the way it was actually done, that there was no opsec breach prior to the PM.

Yes the PM was in effect breaching opsec. I dont either think it was done purposely/intentionally, but it happened.

When that is all said.
Reading both AARs i have noticed several ppl reading both AARs as i see them in both threads and commenting on current stuff in at leased one of them.
As said earlier i dont comment on operations, purposely. Reason is knowing when reading the 2 AARs u cant help getting ur views colored and even if subconciously this will affect ur comments. IMHO ppl dont realise this or admite it to them selfs.
If u dont want ppl commenting that reads both AARs u need to make that clear louder than prevously CR. Ofc this will remove some of the banter and advice given and im not the one to judge how u two want it CR/J3. Just saying this happens, and IMO a few cases has bordered problematic, again IMO. How u and John3rd wana deal with it if at all is ur business.


Kind regards,

Rasmus

< Message edited by Walloc -- 7/10/2013 8:33:39 AM >

(in reply to whippleofd)
Post #: 2872
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 10:05:03 AM   
pws1225

 

Posts: 1166
Joined: 8/9/2010
From: Tate's Hell, Florida
Status: offline
quote:

pws hasn't seen it. I'm sorry but if this post is there how could pws miss it? I don't see anyone else jumping in to say that post is there. Doesn't that make you just a bit suspicious?
- Nemo121

My humble apologies to the forum. It seems I did overlook a post in John's AAR that mentioned night attacks. My bad, so I shall now slink back to my corner and sit on my hands.

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 2873
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 10:05:04 AM   
kjnoel

 

Posts: 104
Joined: 3/10/2011
Status: offline 		I read both and ensure I only comment about inane things.... like this one... This post takes it level with Greyjoy's QBall AAR.

Congrats CR!

(in reply to Walloc)
Post #: 2874
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 11:15:02 AM   
JeffroK


Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline 		Only Level??

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to kjnoel)
Post #: 2875
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 2:22:13 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		I haven't had time to read through the posts last night and this morning, but will do so later today. I didn't want any of you who have asked questions to think I'm ignoring you. I have the new turn in from John, so I'm anxious to run it and see what's going on. All I've seen thus far is the combat report. I'll post two excerpts. Under the totality of the circumstances - IE, tactical, operational, strategic - who is the winner in the following battle:


TF 167 encounters mine field at Medan (46,76)

Japanese Ships
DD Arashio
CL Sendai, Mine hits 1
CA Mikuma, Mine hits 1

1 mine cleared

...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Medan at 46,76, Range 11,000 Yards

Allied aircraft
no flights

Allied aircraft losses
Walrus II: 1 destroyed

Japanese Ships
BB Yamato, Shell hits 1
BB Musashi, Shell hits 7, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
CA Haguro, Shell hits 1
CA Ashigara
CA Mogami
CA Mikuma
CL Sendai, on fire
DD Tanikaze
DD Asashio
DD Michishio, Shell hits 4, on fire
DD Arashio
DD Natsugumo, Shell hits 1, on fire
DD Yamagumo, Shell hits 1

Allied Ships
CA Devonshire, Shell hits 24, and is sunk
CL Achilles, Shell hits 9, heavy fires
CL Ceres
DD Meredith, Shell hits 1
DD Encounter, Shell hits 4, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
DD Fortune, Shell hits 1
DMS Boggs

P.S. The Royal Navy has done stout service throughout the game.

(in reply to JeffroK)
Post #: 2876
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 2:34:00 PM   
Cap Mandrake


Posts: 23184
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline 		Gentlemen;

You are more likely to read a story about General Longstreet secretly investing in Union gun foundries than sex-themed posts by the thread author. It is a gentle "rub. You will just have to go "down-market" for that.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 2877
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 2:36:36 PM   
jeffk3510


Posts: 4132
Joined: 12/3/2007
From: Kansas
Status: offline 		Not commenting is the safest action to take if you read both AARs. It is very difficult to have a neutral opinion. Maybe impossible..

_____________________________

Life is tough. The sooner you realize that, the easier it will be.

Currently chasing three kids around the Midwest.

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)
Post #: 2878
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 2:37:09 PM   
Cap Mandrake


Posts: 23184
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline 		Devonshire and Encounter sunk in exchange for Musashi out of commission for this battle. An operational victory if not a tactical one.

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)
Post #: 2879
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 2:41:26 PM   
Cap Mandrake


Posts: 23184
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline 		oops

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)
Post #: 2880
Page:   <<   < prev  94 95 [96] 97 98   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  94 95 [96] 97 98   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

2.172