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: Japanese land in OZ!!

 
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: Japanese land in OZ!! Page: <<   < prev  34 35 [36] 37 38   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/26/2014 12:56:48 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline 		Its just the bad luck of it. It could have been 2 Jap CVs down but instead I get slapped with loosing Sara out of nowhere. I think I deserve a break

(in reply to Cribtop)
Post #: 1051
RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/26/2014 1:28:50 PM   
Mike McCreery


Posts: 4232
Joined: 6/29/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

Its just the bad luck of it. It could have been 2 Jap CVs down but instead I get slapped with loosing Sara out of nowhere. I think I deserve a break


Dont you get it back in about a year? I think I read that somewhere... They rebuild them for ya after a stern talking to :P


_____________________________


(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 1052
RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/26/2014 1:45:52 PM   
JocMeister

 

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

ORIGINAL: Wargmr


quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

Its just the bad luck of it. It could have been 2 Jap CVs down but instead I get slapped with loosing Sara out of nowhere. I think I deserve a break


Dont you get it back in about a year? I think I read that somewhere... They rebuild them for ya after a stern talking to :P



Naah, thats a scenario switch in the editor. But I don´t know of any scenarios that actually have it enabled.

(in reply to Mike McCreery)
Post #: 1053
RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/26/2014 1:46:41 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline 		Got the turn off to Tom. Just ended the turn without doing anything. First time in this game but probably not the last...

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 1054
RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/26/2014 2:10:21 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister


quote:

ORIGINAL: Wargmr


quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

Its just the bad luck of it. It could have been 2 Jap CVs down but instead I get slapped with loosing Sara out of nowhere. I think I deserve a break


Dont you get it back in about a year? I think I read that somewhere... They rebuild them for ya after a stern talking to :P



Naah, thats a scenario switch in the editor. But I don´t know of any scenarios that actually have it enabled.


I seem to recall that you don't get Saratoga in her old configuration back, you get another Essex class CV that you can rename yourself,
That could have been changed in updates to the game or mods.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 1055
RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/26/2014 2:19:14 PM   
JocMeister

 

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

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
I seem to recall that you don't get Saratoga in her old configuration back, you get another Essex class CV that you can rename yourself,
That could have been changed in updates to the game or mods.


Not Sara but Yorktown. And I will get Yorktown II regardless if the original one is sunk or not.

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 1056
RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/26/2014 2:47:11 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
I seem to recall that you don't get Saratoga in her old configuration back, you get another Essex class CV that you can rename yourself,
That could have been changed in updates to the game or mods.


Not Sara but Yorktown. And I will get Yorktown II regardless if the original one is sunk or not.

From the manual:

16.1.1 AUTOMATIC SHIP REPLACEMENTS
There are several instances in which replacement ships may be provided as reinforcements
if a ship is sunk during the game. Replacement ships are generated if the option is selected
for the scenario and:
An American CV is sunk prior to 1944 will be replaced by an Essex-class CV.
An American or Australian CA that is sunk prior to 1944 will be replaced by a Baltimore-class
CA or a Cleveland-class CL. The replacement class is chosen at random.
Japanese Midget Submarines will be replaced with a Type “D” Midget Submarine
Whenever a replacement ship is created, it will be placed in the reinforcement list and given an
arrival time of at least 450 days from the date the original ship was sunk.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 1057
RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/26/2014 2:54:22 PM   
Bullwinkle58


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

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
I seem to recall that you don't get Saratoga in her old configuration back, you get another Essex class CV that you can rename yourself,
That could have been changed in updates to the game or mods.


Not Sara but Yorktown. And I will get Yorktown II regardless if the original one is sunk or not.

From the manual:

16.1.1 AUTOMATIC SHIP REPLACEMENTS
There are several instances in which replacement ships may be provided as reinforcements
if a ship is sunk during the game. Replacement ships are generated if the option is selected
for the scenario and:An American CV is sunk prior to 1944 will be replaced by an Essex-class CV.
An American or Australian CA that is sunk prior to 1944 will be replaced by a Baltimore-class
CA or a Cleveland-class CL. The replacement class is chosen at random.
Japanese Midget Submarines will be replaced with a Type “D” Midget Submarine
Whenever a replacement ship is created, it will be placed in the reinforcement list and given an
arrival time of at least 450 days from the date the original ship was sunk.


As Jocke said, it says right there in your quote that the editor switch has to be ON. It's not on in any stock scenarios; I doubt it is in DBB.

I played one AI GC with it ON just to see. Way too many CVs, but the extra CAs were nice.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 1058
RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/26/2014 3:08:38 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		Watching your American subs until 1/43 can put a big stress on your heart. You never know if they are actually going to do their job. I guess the best thing to do is have a frame of mind that anything they actually damage or sink is a bonus until '43.

Lost Enterprise and 4 or 5 modern BBs to I-boats through mid-43. Nothing to carrier air until some some CVEs got sunk in late '43. Since you get about 90 of them they don't hurt as much.

< Message edited by ny59giants -- 8/26/2014 4:09:06 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 1059
RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/26/2014 3:59:26 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline 		Now it begins...
______________________________________________________________________________

Looks like its already time to start pulling subs outside Japanese air search...or KB reach.

This makes it 11 I think subs lost in 2 weeks.


1

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by JocMeister -- 8/26/2014 5:00:55 PM >

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 1060
RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/26/2014 4:05:04 PM   
Bullwinkle58


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

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Watching your American subs until 1/43 can put a big stress on your heart. You never know if they are actually going to do their job. I guess the best thing to do is have a frame of mind that anything they actually damage or sink is a bonus until '43.



Even the reduction in the dud rate on 1/1/43 is too low. And 1942 is simply fantasy. JFBs have no, none, zero fear of USN subs in 1942. In reality, in JANAC records (post-war assessment using Japanese records; far lower than in-war CO claims), USN (no Dutch or RN) subs sank 133.5 Japanese ships in 1942 for 552, 472 tons. Of that total, 14 of those ships were sunk by S-class subs. The rest were fleet boats. Can anybody come close to matching that in the game?

How many times has a Japan economic primer said "Immediately turn off all merchant construction. You already have plenty."?

By the time subs actually work, in late 1943, JFBs have huge HI stocks, big Arms and Vehicle stocks, and are using the Magic Highway across Asia to avoid having to drive tankers all the way home.

Nerfing subs makes the game skew hard to an air war game, and not a naval game as it should be. I doubt the devs, or GG, had any idea JFBs would be as inventive as they have become. But leaving the dud rate at 12/7/41 levels for thirteen months is wrong, and it has big effects. Same as the very high escort-targeting rate versus targeting the merchants primarily, which was also the case in RL. And the sub war, except for the initial dud rate, is buried in the EXE, including the dates of dud rate reduction.

It's sad that so many people play this game and come away with the idea it was all about airplanes.

< Message edited by Bullwinkle58 -- 8/26/2014 5:05:53 PM >

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 1061
RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/26/2014 4:32:49 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		When Mr Kane invaded India vs me, he kept the Zeros on CAP while the Vals and Kates were places on ASW patrol almost totally. Lost lots of good Dutch subs that way.

_____________________________


(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 1062
RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/26/2014 4:40:01 PM   
Bullwinkle58


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

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

When Mr Kane invaded India vs me, he kept the Zeros on CAP while the Vals and Kates were places on ASW patrol almost totally. Lost lots of good Dutch subs that way.


Well, the DL system for subs is borked too, but it's not in the top-3. A detection gives a datum for a half hour or so, not a day. And USN subs had air search radar very early; they dived long before most air ASW got a hit.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 1063
RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/26/2014 5:43:57 PM   
Sangeli


Posts: 1132
Joined: 3/29/2012
From: San Francisco
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
Well, the DL system for subs is borked too, but it's not in the top-3. A detection gives a datum for a half hour or so, not a day. And USN subs had air search radar very early; they dived long before most air ASW got a hit.

Well Japanese planes did drop depth charges on subs and sunk them that way. Since I don't think planes actually have depth charges, dropping bombs during the search phase is more or less equivalent in my eyes.
quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
Even the reduction in the dud rate on 1/1/43 is too low. And 1942 is simply fantasy. JFBs have no, none, zero fear of USN subs in 1942. In reality, in JANAC records (post-war assessment using Japanese records; far lower than in-war CO claims), USN (no Dutch or RN) subs sank 133.5 Japanese ships in 1942 for 552, 472 tons. Of that total, 14 of those ships were sunk by S-class subs. The rest were fleet boats. Can anybody come close to matching that in the game?

I'm not sure if I've done quite this well but I've gotten in this range before. A sub sinking every 3 days is not so far fetched and I've certainly had streaks of doing better than that (though I'm counting Dutch sinkings too). And with some luck the US subs can sink capital ships. Certainly if you asked my current Japanese opponent he would have some fear of US subs even if it's not overwhelming. On the other hand, I'm not at all afraid of ASW in spring 1942 :P

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 1064
RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/26/2014 6:19:38 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
JFBs have no, none, zero fear of USN subs in 1942.


I was plenty scared in 1942. I am even more scared in 1st qtr 43!

Another part of the problem is the Japan's bomber force simply isn't effective where Allies have flak....thus making it a choice to send the IJA bombers to ASW duty. Escpecially once China craters.

Ask any JFB how many IJA air units are flying ASW/nav search...

So, since we are griping, how bout them 4Es! <added that for balance>


(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 1065
RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/26/2014 6:21:18 PM   
Bullwinkle58


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

ORIGINAL: Sangeli


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
Well, the DL system for subs is borked too, but it's not in the top-3. A detection gives a datum for a half hour or so, not a day. And USN subs had air search radar very early; they dived long before most air ASW got a hit.

Well Japanese planes did drop depth charges on subs and sunk them that way. Since I don't think planes actually have depth charges, dropping bombs during the search phase is more or less equivalent in my eyes.

That's not what I'm talking about. Of course planes sometimes dropped on diving subs. Sometimes strafed. But again, I invite anyone wanting to debate this topic to READ ACTUAL PATROL REPORTS. Most of the time the sub dove undetected. Inside strong air-ASW zones they patrolled at PD in daylight; only the scope up. The game assumes they are surfaced all day, everywhere. And a 40-mile hex can be transited in two hours on the surface. Why does a 10/10 DL remain for a full day? Better question given the phase nature of turns, why does one hit get a 10/10?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
Even the reduction in the dud rate on 1/1/43 is too low. And 1942 is simply fantasy. JFBs have no, none, zero fear of USN subs in 1942. In reality, in JANAC records (post-war assessment using Japanese records; far lower than in-war CO claims), USN (no Dutch or RN) subs sank 133.5 Japanese ships in 1942 for 552, 472 tons. Of that total, 14 of those ships were sunk by S-class subs. The rest were fleet boats. Can anybody come close to matching that in the game?


I'm not sure if I've done quite this well but I've gotten in this range before.

I'd like to see screen shots please.

A sub sinking every 3 days is not so far fetched and I've certainly had streaks of doing better than that (though I'm counting Dutch sinkings too).

Again, the figures I posted are USN SUBS, and not S-BOATS.

And with some luck the US subs can sink capital ships. Certainly if you asked my current Japanese opponent he would have some fear of US subs even if it's not overwhelming. On the other hand, I'm not at all afraid of ASW in spring 1942 :P

Look at Jocke's screen shots around Suva. If subs behaved historically no Japanese commander would have driven the IJN into that nest. Insanity.



_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Sangeli)
Post #: 1066
RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/26/2014 6:27:28 PM   
offenseman


Posts: 768
Joined: 2/24/2007
From: Sheridan Wyoming, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

Look at Jocke's screen shots around Suva. If subs behaved historically no Japanese commander would have driven the IJN into that nest. Insanity.



That insanity would only be insane if those subs were detected by the Japanese. I'd wager that MrKane never saw 90% of those boats.


_____________________________

Sometimes things said in Nitwit sound very different in English.

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 1067
RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/26/2014 6:28:18 PM   
Bullwinkle58


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

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
JFBs have no, none, zero fear of USN subs in 1942.


I was plenty scared in 1942. I am even more scared in 1st qtr 43!

Again, look at Jocke's screens. In my game with Lokasenna I have had circa 15 modern, radar-upgraded fleet boats off western Oz supported by air search from Perth. Overlapping patrol zones right on top of the KB and numerous other TFs. For weeks. Nothing.

Another part of the problem is the Japan's bomber force simply isn't effective where Allies have flak....thus making it a choice to send the IJA bombers to ASW duty. Escpecially once China craters.

I'm not only talking about places there is air-ASW. I'm talking choke points with no major air bases, the subs with radar, highly-trained crews, great COs, no damage. And no attacks, or one desultory fling at a PB when 3-4 fat xAKS are in company. Over and over and over.

Ask any JFB how many IJA air units are flying ASW/nav search...

So, since we are griping, how bout them 4Es! <added that for balance>

No balance at all. The number of 4Es in the game is historical, and they are not determinative until the late game, same as history. I beat this drum to remind everyone here that SUBS WERE DETERMINATIVE of the outcome in the PTO. The statistics are stunning. They brought the Japanese economy to its knees, by themselves. It's just a fact. And no matter how well the Allies play in the game this cannot be accomplished, or anything like it.



< Message edited by Bullwinkle58 -- 8/26/2014 7:29:42 PM >

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 1068
RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/26/2014 6:28:44 PM   
Bullwinkle58


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

ORIGINAL: offenseman


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

Look at Jocke's screen shots around Suva. If subs behaved historically no Japanese commander would have driven the IJN into that nest. Insanity.



That insanity would only be insane if those subs were detected by the Japanese. I'd wager that MrKane never saw 90% of those boats.



The DLs he reports say otherwise.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to offenseman)
Post #: 1069
RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/26/2014 6:32:22 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: offenseman
That insanity would only be insane if those subs were detected by the Japanese. I'd wager that MrKane never saw 90% of those boats.


If you go back a page in the AAR all subs were detected according to Jocke.


(in reply to offenseman)
Post #: 1070
RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/26/2014 6:34:42 PM   
offenseman


Posts: 768
Joined: 2/24/2007
From: Sheridan Wyoming, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58


quote:

ORIGINAL: offenseman


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

Look at Jocke's screen shots around Suva. If subs behaved historically no Japanese commander would have driven the IJN into that nest. Insanity.



That insanity would only be insane if those subs were detected by the Japanese. I'd wager that MrKane never saw 90% of those boats.



The DLs he reports say otherwise.

Ugh, missed that. sorry guys

< Message edited by offenseman -- 8/26/2014 7:35:11 PM >

_____________________________

Sometimes things said in Nitwit sound very different in English.

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 1071
RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/26/2014 6:35:45 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline 		No turn tonight as I´m on the bus back to the hospital. Brought the pad but won´t have access to the game. Looking at some numbers to keep me occupied and things are not looking good.

When Changsha and the rest of China falls there will be a massive shift in VPs. These are the base VP numbers (roughly)

Base VP shift:
Japan + 2060 (2340 if the mountain bases falls)
Allied - 830

Estimate of Allied LCU losses:
Low count 3000
High count 6000

This is based on numbers from my last game where I lost almost the entire Chinese army. That was 16k VPs lost. I´m now sitting at 9300.

Adjusted VP score:
Low estimate: 5,6:1
High estimate: 6,05:1

Allied VPs needed to avoid AV:
Low estimate: 8625 (+2450 or 412/month)
High estimate: 9375 (+3175 or 530/month)

This would be if no other allied losses occurred. And these figures have not taking into account the increasing Japanese strat points. Currently 5070 and rising. The current Allied VP increase lies steady at around 220 per months. This mostly to base building but this will drop off significantly now as most bases have expanded.

For fun I punched the numbers on how it would look without the Japanese STRAT points:

Low estimate: 7375 (+1175 or 196/month)
High estimate: 8125 (+1925 or 320 per month)

So while it may not look like the 5000 VPs are much in the big scheme of things (only about 14% of total Japanese VPs) they have a massive impact on the VPs. And these are permanent VPs that he will carry with him through the rest of the game.

Here is a short list of stuff I would have to accomplish EACH month up until 43 if I´m to avoid AV (if no other Allied losses occur)

- Capture 7 Marshalls + Gilberts. Or
- Sink 7 CAs. Or
- Sink 1 CV + 1 CA. Or
- Sink 2 Kongos + 1 CA Or
- Sink 15 big tankers. Or
- Shoot down 412 Japanese planes for no own losses...

... you get the picture.

Even if I managed to recapture Noumea (extremely unlikely) I would have to capture no less then 4 of them to gain the VPs needed.

Punching the numbers were a bit of a reality check. Considering the only avenues of approach for me is NOPAC (already in allied possession) and CENTPAC (only 2 bases with a x2 multiplier the rest x1. Current VP gain for the entire Marshalls + Gilberts is only 60 VPs) I can´t see where to find roughly 500 VPs per month (taking into account small allied losses outside China).

Anyone seeing any realistic way for me to avoid AV? There is no point doing a "hail Mary" and land in the Marianas just to get kicked off it 3 months later and THEN have AV kick in. I´m currently out of ideas!


(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 1072
RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/26/2014 6:41:46 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
JFBs have no, none, zero fear of USN subs in 1942.


I was plenty scared in 1942. I am even more scared in 1st qtr 43!

Again, look at Jocke's screens. In my game with Lokasenna I have had circa 15 modern, radar-upgraded fleet boats off western Oz supported by air search from Perth. Overlapping patrol zones right on top of the KB and numerous other TFs. For weeks. Nothing.

Subs still scare me. Your argue they should scare me more. Agreed.

Another part of the problem is the Japan's bomber force simply isn't effective where Allies have flak....thus making it a choice to send the IJA bombers to ASW duty. Escpecially once China craters.

I'm not only talking about places there is air-ASW. I'm talking choke points with no major air bases, the subs with radar, highly-trained crews, great COs, no damage. And no attacks, or one desultory fling at a PB when 3-4 fat xAKS are in company. Over and over and over.

That is a shame. Doesn't seem to work that way for IJN subs.

Ask any JFB how many IJA air units are flying ASW/nav search...

So, since we are griping, how bout them 4Es! <added that for balance>

No balance at all. The number of 4Es in the game is historical, and they are not determinative until the late game, same as history. I beat this drum to remind everyone here that SUBS WERE DETERMINATIVE of the outcome in the PTO. The statistics are stunning. They brought the Japanese economy to its knees, by themselves. It's just a fact. And no matter how well the Allies play in the game this cannot be accomplished, or anything like it.

That was supposed to be a rhetorical joke.








(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 1073
RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/26/2014 6:45:20 PM   
Sangeli


Posts: 1132
Joined: 3/29/2012
From: San Francisco
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister
Anyone seeing any realistic way for me to avoid AV? There is no point doing a "hail Mary" and land in the Marianas just to get kicked off it 3 months later and THEN have AV kick in. I´m currently out of ideas!

I wouldn't even worry about it if it's bothering you that much. I mean if you're willing to continue it's hard to imagine your opponent opting out when he's ahead; I'm sure he'd welcome the challenge.

Just go about your business as you would normally but I guess try to go for some easy VPs when you can and it's relatively safe. What you shouldn't do, however, is risk major fleet assets just because you want the VPs to avoid the 1943 AV.

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 1074
RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/26/2014 6:48:52 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Can you put some theater pictures up?

Without that, I would start recon of the Kuriles, make threatening moves in Burma, but focus on the supply line to Oz and Oz. Kicking the IJA out of Oz would be job number 1.

The VP will come, or they won't.



< Message edited by Lowpe -- 8/26/2014 7:53:43 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 1075
RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/26/2014 6:57:19 PM   
JocMeister

 

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

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Can you put some theater pictures up?


Hopefully tomorrow. Just arrived at the hospital.

The SOPAC/OZ area I think you are all pretty familiar with as I posted lots of screens.
I own all bases in NOPAC but only have troops on a couple of bases
Tom has only token forces in CENTPAC. Rowboats corps has taken most of the bases for him. He has Wake.
He has all of Burma including the Adamans.
China is toast. I might be able to hang on to the three mountain bases. But its unlikely if he really wants them.
I have the line islands.
I have all of India including the island in the IO and Ceylon.





(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 1076
RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/26/2014 7:01:16 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline 		Yes, and I don't think the game ends automatically. You can play on. Congratulate your opponent and them continue playing. See what it looks like in 1945.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 1077
RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/26/2014 7:07:12 PM   
Bullwinkle58


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

ORIGINAL: offenseman

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58


quote:

ORIGINAL: offenseman


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

Look at Jocke's screen shots around Suva. If subs behaved historically no Japanese commander would have driven the IJN into that nest. Insanity.



That insanity would only be insane if those subs were detected by the Japanese. I'd wager that MrKane never saw 90% of those boats.



The DLs he reports say otherwise.

Ugh, missed that. sorry guys


No problem for me. I lose stuff all the time.

I also realize I sound like a broken record on the sub topic (you young guys, look it up ), but it's personal to me. And the game could be so much better if it were more true to reality. To where the player's skill was the determining factor and not pitfalls loaded in the EXE.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to offenseman)
Post #: 1078
RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/26/2014 7:11:18 PM   
Bullwinkle58


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

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

That was supposed to be a rhetorical joke.




Ah. Sorry.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 1079
RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/26/2014 7:14:18 PM   
Bullwinkle58


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

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Yes, and I don't think the game ends automatically. You can play on. Congratulate your opponent and them continue playing. See what it looks like in 1945.


Opinions vary, but I think it would look a lot like a 1/1/44 map ought to look. At the cost of hundreds of hours of lifespan and a lot of being kicked in the groin. End it, and start a new game IMO.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 1080
Page:   <<   < prev  34 35 [36] 37 38   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Japanese land in OZ!! Page: <<   < prev  34 35 [36] 37 38   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

0.984