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: Strange Occurence with CVB Midway Corsairs

 
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 >> RE: Strange Occurence with CVB Midway Corsairs Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Strange Occurence with CVB Midway Corsairs - 5/26/2019 2:48:35 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: offline 		Yes, it does work. If you can load air units with 0 active planes, you can resize more than one at the same time.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to btd64)
Post #: 31
RE: Strange Occurence with CVB Midway Corsairs - 5/27/2019 2:13:12 AM   
CaptBeefheart


Posts: 2301
Joined: 7/4/2003
From: Seoul, Korea
Status: offline 		That is a beast of a carrier. I usually resize to get two 50-aircraft fighter squadrons. It's a good one to put F7F Tigercats on.

Cheers,
CB

_____________________________

Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.

(in reply to btd64)
Post #: 32
RE: Strange Occurence with CVB Midway Corsairs - 5/27/2019 2:49:17 AM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: offline 		Put A-4s and F-4s on it.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to CaptBeefheart)
Post #: 33
RE: Strange Occurence with CVB Midway Corsairs - 5/27/2019 11:58:24 AM   
HansBolter


Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline 		Been too busy with RL the past few days to complete another turn and confirm if the resize will happen at sea.
Spent Saturday night taking in the heavens on the 2 acre country property my brother and I acquired under the darkest skies in all of Florida. Astronomy is my third hobby and gets juggled along with wargaming and model building.

Am working today to make up some lost time from being sick and hope to get a turn in when I get home this evening.

Have been unable to find a single squadron that can upgrade to F7F Tigercats.

I have been able to convert squadrons to use Tigercat Recon and Night fighter air frames, but nary a one that can use the straight fighter version.

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 34
RE: Strange Occurence with CVB Midway Corsairs - 5/28/2019 12:23:01 AM   
HansBolter


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

Screenshot confirms no resize implemented while ship is on station with Death Star.

Midway has been ordered to Nagasaki to get its air wing sorted out.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 35
RE: Strange Occurence with CVB Midway Corsairs - 5/28/2019 2:25:20 AM   
BillBrown


Posts: 2335
Joined: 6/15/2002
Status: offline 		I would have sworn that I had done that before, but I am old and my memory is not what it used to be.

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 36
RE: Strange Occurence with CVB Midway Corsairs - 5/28/2019 2:31:15 AM   
geofflambert


Posts: 14863
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BillBrown

I would have sworn that I had done that before, but I am old and my memory is not what it used to be.

My curmudgeonlyness is much improved over what it used to be.

(in reply to BillBrown)
Post #: 37
RE: Strange Occurence with CVB Midway Corsairs - 5/28/2019 2:54:12 PM   
BBfanboy


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

ORIGINAL: geofflambert


quote:

ORIGINAL: BillBrown

I would have sworn that I had done that before, but I am old and my memory is not what it used to be.

My curmudgeonlyness is much improved over what it used to be.

So you are getting better at it? Bravo! We have a tradition to keep up!




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

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 geofflambert)
Post #: 38
RE: Strange Occurence with CVB Midway Corsairs - 5/28/2019 8:28:38 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 14863
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline 		MichaelM is working on my beta version of curmudgeonlyness.

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 39
RE: Strange Occurence with CVB Midway Corsairs - 5/31/2019 12:19:42 AM   
HansBolter


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

After arrival at Nagasaki the squadron resized, but I also took notice that it was capable of upgrading to Tigercats.
This is the first squadron I have found capable of doing so.
It may be that only squadrons allocated to CVBs will be capable.
I get two of the CVBs in this scenario.
BillBrown should take note of this for the Focus Pacific scenario, where four CVBs are available.

I immediately implemented the upgrade:

Damn, I better replace that commander as well.






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by HansBolter -- 5/31/2019 12:20:30 AM >

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 40
RE: Strange Occurence with CVB Midway Corsairs - 5/31/2019 1:09:24 AM   
BillBrown


Posts: 2335
Joined: 6/15/2002
Status: offline 		Note taken, thank you

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 41
RE: Strange Occurence with CVB Midway Corsairs - 5/31/2019 2:32:22 AM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Hans, of greater interest is how did you manage to nurse the game so long?


(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 42
RE: Strange Occurence with CVB Midway Corsairs - 5/31/2019 11:39:31 AM   
HansBolter


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

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Hans, of greater interest is how did you manage to nurse the game so long?




Well, as you and others have pointed out in other threads where I mentioned this scenario, the AI gets TONS of stuff to lose, which has allowed it to remain at least halfway viable for far longer.

In addition, I took a very methodical and historic approach in moving on Japan. I purposely slow paced my advance in late '43 and early '44. All the while, I was taking a decidedly a-historical approach in China and the DEI. I overran all of China, liberating all but two bases by 11/45. The entire DEI has been liberated except a few bases here and there the Aussies and Kiwis are currently clearing.

I was also very conservative with my carriers, using them solely to cover invasions, never to raid. Once, in mid '43 the AI sortied a combined carrier force into the central Pacific while I had operations underway in the Marshal's. It was the first time I had EVER seen the AI sortie carriers after the Pearl attack in a combined manner with more than 2-3 carriers. My carriers were scattered and not in position to react. The TF hung around the same area long enough for me to vector subs in and I finally scored a hit. This caused the TF to turn back for Japan and I didn't another carrier sortie until mid '44.

The AI still had a viable carrier force when I arrived in the Mariana's in the late summer of '44, but unfortunately sent them down from Japan piecemeal in 2s and 3s, sometimes sending two TFs of 2-3 at a time. With a fully fleshed out DS by mid '44, no sortie of 3-6 carriers was going to put a dent in it. I sunk about half of what came at me and let the other half limp back to Japan without pursuing. My hopes of another combined carrier sortie were dashed.

I haven't seen a single carrier since. They are either all laid up in dry dock or sunk trying to make it home. As the assault on the Home Islands have gotten underway, the AIs resilience is flagging. There are empty minor bases in Honshu that are autoflipping while Tokyo has 600+ LCUs stacked in it. The AI still has a large air force that is putting up a fight, but the ground game is down to whatever is currently stationed at a given base. The major bases all have large stacks. While Nagasaki fell easily to the Marines, the Army is having a devil of a time with Kagoshima. My first attack lowering forts to 8 destroyed over 400 combat squads.

The last remaining sieges in Korea/Manchukuo at Mukden and Keijo are also brutal with losses in the 300-500 combat squad range per attack. And these are being executed with 8k AV Russian hordes.

Overall, even given the lack of challenging counter attacks the game has held my interest and I am determined to see just how much I can conquer before the March 31. 1946 end date.

< Message edited by HansBolter -- 5/31/2019 11:41:58 AM >

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 43
RE: Strange Occurence with CVB Midway Corsairs - 5/31/2019 12:10:39 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Thanks!

With some spare time from my game with Wargamr over, I started up a game as Allies. It is now Jan 3, 1943. I defended forward of Singers, and managed to reform the two divisions there and they just got shattered so it looks a bit bleak for Singers although I was able to reinforce Singers with some British troops.

Burma, with the bandits, is always tough, but I formed up the division there but Rangoon looks to be lost, and the troops will make a last stand at Lashio. I wanted to get the reinforcements to Burma but Betties have prevented that. The AI is ruthless in pounding runways.

In the SE Pacific early on my two carriers caught some IJN invasion fleets and savaged them. I was a bit surprised about this as my carriers were making for Tahiti. It has been so long since I played I didn't remember all the starting surprises.

China seems to be secure, the AI there seems hopeless.

So, I want to pull back the carriers and go slow. Fighting forward in the SRA/Singers/Burma and we shall see what happens.

I think Andy told me that there were 5-6 AI scripts for second wave of offensives after initial expansion (and I recall seeing those in the editor)...doesn't really sound like the AI pursued one in your game.

I also think the nasty nasty Japanese game is better. The Allied AI/reinforcements are so tough early on.

Anyhow, it is nice to play a game against the AI again, but I do have a really tempting pbem offer -- two pbems is just too much at present.


(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 44
RE: Strange Occurence with CVB Midway Corsairs - 5/31/2019 12:30:53 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline 		I'm pretty sure scenario #40, which I really feel AndyMac created just for me, is based on his Nasty, not Nasty Nasty stock scenario that he 'ported' to Babes.

I have never played his Nasty Nasty as it is stock, not Babes based. I believe it is scenario 60 IIRC.

I had been one of AndyMac's stalwart contributors of feedback when he was working on the Nasty and Nasty Nasty scenarios.

During that time I also started toying around with my first mods and fell in love with the much more detailed LCU countermix in Babes. I told Andy that I would have a hard time going back to playing stock games after tasting Babes and in order to keep me providing feedback he 'ported' Nasty to Babes creating scenario 40.

It has a very aggressive start with the AI invading Coal Harbor, Hilo and Johnston Island on the first turn and starting the game with infiltrators in Burma.

I highly recommend this scenario to anyone looking for an AI game.

< Message edited by HansBolter -- 5/31/2019 12:31:28 PM >

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 45
RE: Strange Occurence with CVB Midway Corsairs - 5/31/2019 1:57:41 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Yes, I remember your involvement with it.

Andy's scen 60 Nasty nasty whatever can also be scenario 10 as he gave instructions in one of his many posts on how to overwrite those files. Still, the Japanese version is much tougher than playing as Allies.

I used to send Andy my save files and he would correct Japan's position way back when in the original ironman and so he kept creating more and more nastier versions.

I hope he is doing ok, we all miss him I am sure!

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 46
RE: Strange Occurence with CVB Midway Corsairs - 6/6/2019 6:50:09 AM   
Heeward


Posts: 343
Joined: 1/27/2003
From: Lacey Washington
Status: offline 		But how do you set the correct air group size in the editor?

_____________________________

The Wake

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 47
RE: Strange Occurence with CVB Midway Corsairs - 6/6/2019 12:48:40 PM   
Ian R

 

Posts: 3420
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Cammeraygal Country
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CaptBeefheart

That is a beast of a carrier. I usually resize to get two 50-aircraft fighter squadrons. It's a good one to put F7F Tigercats on.

Cheers,
CB


Check with Hans, but I think the twin engine F7Fs count exponentially for carrier space.

That is, each Tigercat uses up 4 airframe slots on your carrier.

As a corollary, do not actually give fighter sized twin engine shipboard fighters two engines in your mods, unless you want them to take up lots of hanger space.

By the way, per Admiral Mitscher's late '44 report/recommendations, the Midways (or at least the Midway) were assigned an airgroup with about 73 Corsairs and 63 Helldivers. IIRC Clark Reynolds in The Fast Carriers mentions that Mitscher told them the airgroup was too big to launch and get formed up before the earlier launched planes burned too much gas. They couldn't launch a complete strike package much better than an Essex at longer ranges. On the other hand, they were great for CAP.

At the same time, he recommended the CVLs lose their 9 machine VT detachments, so that with the F8F having a smaller hanger footprint than with the F6F or F4U, they turned into CAP carriers. The Saipans could spot 48 Bearcats in the hanger.

All of his report was accepted and was to be implemented for Downfall. You don't really see it in the stock game, but at least you can self implement it. In my long war mod I at least put the Saipans in with 48 x F8Fs.Thinking back on it, on reflection, I should have put the Midways (all six ;-) ) in with one big 72 x VF able to to be split in three so you can layer the CAP.


< Message edited by Ian R -- 6/6/2019 12:51:11 PM >

_____________________________

"I am Alfred"

(in reply to CaptBeefheart)
Post #: 48
RE: Strange Occurence with CVB Midway Corsairs - 6/6/2019 2:13:21 PM   
Admiral DadMan


Posts: 3627
Joined: 2/22/2002
From: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R

quote:

ORIGINAL: CaptBeefheart

That is a beast of a carrier. I usually resize to get two 50-aircraft fighter squadrons. It's a good one to put F7F Tigercats on.

Cheers,
CB


Check with Hans, but I think the twin engine F7Fs count exponentially for carrier space.

That is, each Tigercat uses up 4 airframe slots on your carrier.



That feature only come into play if the aircraft is NOT Carrier capable.

_____________________________

Scenario 127: "Scraps of Paper"
(\../)
(O.o)
(> <)

CVB Langley:

(in reply to Ian R)
Post #: 49
RE: Strange Occurence with CVB Midway Corsairs - 6/6/2019 2:26:32 PM   
Macclan5


Posts: 1065
Joined: 3/24/2016
From: Toronto Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

.... There are empty minor bases in Honshu that are autoflipping while Tokyo has 600+ LCUs stacked in it. ....
The AI still has a large air force that is putting up a fight, but the ground game is down to whatever is currently stationed at a given base.
...The major bases all have large stacks. ...
...While Nagasaki fell easily to the Marines, the Army is having a devil of a time with Kagoshima. My first attack lowering forts to 8 destroyed over 400 combat squads.

The last remaining sieges in Korea/Manchukuo at Mukden and Keijo are also brutal with losses in the 300-500 combat squad range per attack. And these are being executed with 8k AV Russian hordes.

Overall, even given the lack of challenging counter attacks the game has held my interest and I am determined to see just how much I can conquer before the March 31. 1946 end date.


Great post Hans .. very inciteful ..

It is fantastic you have Identified a robust AI game for elite echelon caliber of players..

I am much less experienced but learning -

I would only make 2 comments

(i) Historically the F7F3 never actually qualified for Carrier duty ? IIRC only the Marines used it ? Could be wrong but I would wonder if leaving the best Corsairs on deck is frankly not a better idea ? I would assume the stats of the F7F3 reflect its teething issues ?

Your thoughts....?

(ii) LCU in Operation Downfall.

I entirely concur about the LCU slog.

It is coding.

Even myself in stock games (updated AI) face exactly the same challenges. Stacks of units behind Level "X forts" - massive stacks to bombard - bomb - soften up the hex and still lots of destroyed and disabled units... same cities you cite. I would add Peiping, Shanghai, Singapore even before operation Downfall.

The LCU script is heavy in entrenchment, fort building, leadership bonus even when supply is (-) and experience is (-)

The Airforce is still somewhat effective however I find the AI has mismanaged the pilot supply - squadrons only half full no replacement pilots.

As supplies dwindle - the IJ air units get eaten up in smaller and small cadres by my CAPs and sweeps. Where as a 100 planes might fly at the 'beginning of downfall'.... now squads of 5 or 6 fly.

My B29 are specifically assigned to Airfield and Port attacks being far more successful there than "City attacks" Even Tokyo with its 3000 air units... once you suppress the CAP you can destroy 100s per turn.

I light the fires with good old Liberators and they seem to do the job.

Your thoughts on your bombing deployments ?

Personally I use August 15 as my hard stop date (obviously an easier AI). VJ day seems to me the logical cut off.

Regards



< Message edited by Macclan5 -- 6/6/2019 2:27:56 PM >

_____________________________

A People that values its privileges above it's principles will soon loose both. Dwight D Eisenhower.

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 50
RE: Strange Occurence with CVB Midway Corsairs - 6/6/2019 3:04:49 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline 		Can't really speak yet to the performance of Tigercats in comparison to Late model Corsairs. They haven't been active long enough.

IIRC other than in the speed category, the Corsiar has better performance stats.

For me, its more the novelty of getting the Tigercats into action any way I can and the scenario doesn't allow Marine squadrons to upgrade to them.

To address the earlier comment I don't see any overloading issues with 36 Tigercats, 36 Bearcats, 36 TBMs and 36 Helldivers aboard. The standard configurations of the CVB air wings is to allow larger strike groups than the Essex class, not to load them up with Fighters. Not to say that a player can't choose to keep the strike squadrons small to allow for over sizing the fighter squadrons.


I have had abysmal luck hitting airfields with B29s. I can't even get them to hit individual strategic targets like airframe factories. This may be because I am loathe to use them any lowwer than 20k. Even night bombing at 20k results in considerable flak losses. I have used them almost exclusively to area bomb manpower, running up about 39K victory points by 11/45, making considerable inroads toward destruction of infrastructure in Nagasaki, Hiroshima and Osaka.

There are something like 900 ships holed up in Tokyo along with the 600 LCUs. At a point near the very end of the scenario I will likely send a B29 mission against the port to see what I can harvest.

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to Macclan5)
Post #: 51
RE: Strange Occurence with CVB Midway Corsairs - 6/6/2019 11:30:59 PM   
Ian R

 

Posts: 3420
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Cammeraygal Country
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Admiral DadMan


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R

quote:

ORIGINAL: CaptBeefheart

That is a beast of a carrier. I usually resize to get two 50-aircraft fighter squadrons. It's a good one to put F7F Tigercats on.

Cheers,
CB


Check with Hans, but I think the twin engine F7Fs count exponentially for carrier space.

That is, each Tigercat uses up 4 airframe slots on your carrier.



That feature only come into play if the aircraft is NOT Carrier capable.


Checks editor ... in stock Scenario 1 Vanilla F7F3 is carrier capable, but not the nightfighter or PR versions. I only ever tried putting the -N shipboard. Because the -N was the only model that eventually passed carrier trials.

Interesting that the air team imposed the historical delay on the F4U passing carrier qualification, but let the F7F have that accelerated.

_____________________________

"I am Alfred"

(in reply to Admiral DadMan)
Post #: 52
RE: Strange Occurence with CVB Midway Corsairs - 6/6/2019 11:57:02 PM   
Admiral DadMan


Posts: 3627
Joined: 2/22/2002
From: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R


quote:

ORIGINAL: Admiral DadMan


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R

quote:

ORIGINAL: CaptBeefheart

That is a beast of a carrier. I usually resize to get two 50-aircraft fighter squadrons. It's a good one to put F7F Tigercats on.

Cheers,
CB


Check with Hans, but I think the twin engine F7Fs count exponentially for carrier space.

That is, each Tigercat uses up 4 airframe slots on your carrier.



That feature only come into play if the aircraft is NOT Carrier capable.


Checks editor ... in stock Scenario 1 Vanilla F7F3 is carrier capable, but not the nightfighter or PR versions. I only ever tried putting the -N shipboard. Because the -N was the only model that eventually passed carrier trials.

Interesting that the air team imposed the historical delay on the F4U passing carrier qualification, but let the F7F have that accelerated.


Also if I remember correctly, if you put a non-carrier capable aircraft on a carrier, the non-carrier capable aircraft will not conduct operations, even if (accounting for the x4) it fits under the carrier's capacity.


< Message edited by Admiral DadMan -- 6/6/2019 11:58:10 PM >

_____________________________

Scenario 127: "Scraps of Paper"
(\../)
(O.o)
(> <)

CVB Langley:

(in reply to Ian R)
Post #: 53
RE: Strange Occurence with CVB Midway Corsairs - 6/7/2019 12:55:05 AM   
Ian R

 

Posts: 3420
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Cammeraygal Country
Status: offline 		I never got that far - I offloaded the F7F-N group the next day and put 96x F6F-5Ns onboard instead.

I also recall reading - possibly in the manual - that the only flying operation they can do is transfer off the ship.

Meaning you might be able to accomplish the historical delivery of a P47 group to Saipan, catapulted from a CVE.

But not the part were some flew CAP while the others were launched.

_____________________________

"I am Alfred"

(in reply to Admiral DadMan)
Post #: 54
RE: Strange Occurence with CVB Midway Corsairs - 6/7/2019 11:31:45 AM   
Macclan5


Posts: 1065
Joined: 3/24/2016
From: Toronto Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

I have had abysmal luck hitting airfields with B29s. I can't even get them to hit individual strategic targets like airframe factories. This may be because I am loathe to use them any lowwer than 20k. Even night bombing at 20k results in considerable flak losses. I have used them almost exclusively to area bomb manpower, running up about 39K victory points by 11/45, making considerable inroads toward destruction of infrastructure in Nagasaki, Hiroshima and Osaka.

There are something like 900 ships holed up in Tokyo along with the 600 LCUs. At a point near the very end of the scenario I will likely send a B29 mission against the port to see what I can harvest.


+1 - Challenges of Downfall.

Having said that - allowing for differences AI / Stock / random aggressiveness script chosen.

(i) I too am reluctant to use B29 except at 20K

(ii) My B29 success was somewhat accidental / through experimentation.

I was using Libs and Mitchels to hammer ports / airfields and the 29's for city attacks to harvest flames and strat points. Once firmly planted on home island soil with my fully developed airfields / ports / supply minimums I looked at Tokyo and "close environs."

The game seem to concentrate ships / airframes in Toyko (airframes especially) and had withdrawn any remaining ships there "for protection ? " or because it had no other choice?

Switching the 29s to Airfield and Port started to bag me huge wins of the war of attrition type.

Dozens of planes each turn - possibly under the principal there were so many there they could not miss. Ships esp some tankers and a CVE / 2 X Cruiser Floatplane carriers / 1 baby battleship carrier type that had eluded me. Got bomb hits on all of them over 3 turns.

The 29s at 20K with 3 squadrons of 51Ds flying LR CAP (not escort) and 38Ls flying escort with the Bombers.

The 47Ns at 15K are sweeping and escorting the Libs into "city attacks" "industry attacks" and perhaps because the 5th / 7th flyboys have "so much experience over the years" (relative to the 29 Flyboys) - the Libs are getting my hits on factories... so combination of the experience and the durability of the Libs.

(Yes I realize I might have managed Bomber pilot experience slightly differently / better)




_____________________________

A People that values its privileges above it's principles will soon loose both. Dwight D Eisenhower.

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 55
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Strange Occurence with CVB Midway Corsairs Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
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

2.922