RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> After Action Reports



Message

castor troy -> RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE (2/13/2008 9:22:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nomad

Look at how few Vals flew. Looks like he transfered off most of his Vals and replaced them with Zeros.



mhm, I´ve overseen the obvious... and I´m not surprised...



Nomad -> RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE (2/13/2008 9:42:21 PM)

It is not something I would do, but I have heard of it before. Since the big killers are Kates, having more Zeros for Cap and Escort is a bonus. He might have moved on an extra Kate unit or two also.



1275psi -> RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE (2/13/2008 10:09:14 PM)

Commiserations mate
Keep the chin up
Ive already lost 5 cvs against robert lee -and its only 5/42 -its going to be the long haul for you now in this game



mdiehl -> RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE (2/13/2008 10:34:50 PM)

quote:

It's quite typical for US CV's to behave like this in 42, think it's a curse


It's actually more an egregious flaw in the game design. One of several illustrated by the one single post.

1. USN naval aviation and strike coordination is still substantially underrated.

2. Long lance propensity to score hits is still substantially overrated.

3. Japan couldn't have put 200 Zeroes into any single airbase on the map, not even in Japan, because of the logistical tasks, and would not have, because of the risks of putting so many eggs in a single basket.

4. CV reacting with a reaction range of "0" is a hardcoded trap that encourages Allied players to avoid using CVs aggressively until an overwhelming numerical supremacy can be achieved.

I too, find the sudden appearance of several hundred Zeroes and counterstrike capability in a hex far removed from the main arena of contention, and where Hoepner had given no indication of preparation for attack, to be, well an interesting coincidence. Perhaps there is after all a special Japanese Intel function being exercised here.



1275psi -> RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE (2/13/2008 11:34:24 PM)

Mdiehl
In the past I've often expressed disa greement with you -but on this occasion you have expressed very, very well with your last comment certain similar thoughts going through my mind.

This message should be read by only one person in the negative way[8|]



TenChiMato -> RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE (2/13/2008 11:44:34 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

I too, find the sudden appearance of several hundred Zeroes and counterstrike capability in a hex far removed from the main arena of contention, and where Hoepner had given no indication of preparation for attack, to be, well an interesting coincidence. Perhaps there is after all a special Japanese Intel function being exercised here.


its indeed troublesome but at the same time GH certainly had given quite a few clues regarding his next possible target by starting a bombing campaign against Ponape. Now, even without that a mass concentration of the KB+IJN air reserves at Truk to counter any follow-up strike in Central Pacific after the assault on the Marshalls was a logical move and well in Trollelite style of play from what we have seen so far.





Jim D Burns -> RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE (2/13/2008 11:49:35 PM)

Deleted.

Jim



Andy Mac -> RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE (2/13/2008 11:56:11 PM)

IMO thats good play I think the bombing campaign gave it away



hades1001 -> RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE (2/14/2008 12:00:51 AM)

Shame on someone here in this thread.

I knew where troll's KB is because I'm following both sides movements. And I tried to warn G.H. by a indirect way.(I can't do more because it woulb unfair for troll). You guys can check the last several posts written by me.

And the attack of G.H. is going in such a noisy way and so obvious that any experienced IJ player will notice it. It is common sense that send in the KB to stop the Allies.

Anyone said this mission should be kept more sneaky, they are right.
Anyone doubt about troll's dishonesty, shame on you, your vicious voice will do nothing good but ruin this interesting AAR.

Again, shame on you know whom!








Jim D Burns -> RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE (2/14/2008 12:13:34 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: hades1001
And I tried to warn G.H. by a indirect way


Well if that's true, then shame on you. I personally refrain from reading the opposing thread because I want to discuss strategy here. If you're going to give advice whether directly or indirectly due to what you've read elsewhere then it's wrong pure and simple no matter how you phrase that advice.

But I agree with you on your main point and I for one am deleting my post. Me and others piling on does not help anything and only leads to bad feelings, so I take your point to heart. I think everyone should delete their posts concerning the question raised.

Jim



hades1001 -> RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE (2/14/2008 12:19:16 AM)

yeah,you are right, I'm going to stop following troll's side simple because he is too lazy to write anymore. [:D]

Actually I was not trying to warn G.H., I was trying to make G.H. thinking about the risk, and obviously G.H. know troll's KB is around somewhere and he choose to be risky. Though he choose to do the wrong thing but it is his choice.

Just don't ruin this AAR, G.H. and troll are both good players and this AAR should be fun all the way to the end.~

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns


quote:

ORIGINAL: hades1001
And I tried to warn G.H. by a indirect way


Well if that's true, then shame on you. I personally refrain from reading the opposing thread because I want to discuss strategy here. If you're going to give advice whether directly or indirectly due to what you've read elsewhere then it's wrong pure and simple no matter how you phrase that advice.

But I agree with you on your main point and I for one am deleting my post. Me and others piling on does not help anything and only leads to bad feelings, so I take your point to heart. I think everyone should delete their posts concerning the question raised.

Jim





Gen.Hoepner -> RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE (2/14/2008 12:26:42 AM)

Guys, please.

TenChiMato and Hades are right.
My attack was predictable. I knew that.
I've done it because of this. Because it was predictable.
I thought. No, better, i hoped that given the logistical and strategical situation an attrition battle between my CVs and his KB and my LBAs at Eniwetok was somewhat favourable....facts prooved i was wrong.
Trollelite has just done what everyone else here would have done.Ambush me where was sure i was coming. Plain and simple.
The CVs reaction was a mess...totally...if they didn't react i would have been under the umbrella of 100 more fighters and with the beauforts at Eniwetok....bad luck...bad planning...and Trollelite's skills.
He played as a master here.
I wanna stress this thing.
He managed to keep his KB in the shade, despite my strong and long range recon.
He calculated where and when to come out.
Was his victory this one. Not my defeat.
So please give to Caesar what is Caesar's.

At the last time i formed 3 CVTFs...2 single CV TFs and one double CV TF...was a bad choice,but i don't think this changed much the things...

Well...however...the war is not lost. Not yet.
He will surely get the autovictory, but we're not going for autovictory anyway.
We're gonna keep on fighting. everywhere.
We'll slow down in the pacific. That's for sure. But the match isn't over.

Com'on! I still have the spirit!![8D]



Gen.Hoepner -> RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE (2/14/2008 12:41:38 AM)

Ok, Ponape will be conquered however. We'll postpone the operation for at least one week.
Now the priority is to save what's left of our fleet. Many BBs, 2 CVs...these must be saved!!

Then we'll think about some other strategies.
It's time to build up PM i think and Darwin...

Pity...it could have gone in another way[;)]...but that's war anyway.You have to suffer to see the end of the tunnell!![8D]



hades1001 -> RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE (2/14/2008 12:43:58 AM)

good for you, G.H.!

keep beating those japanese bastards[:D]

just curious, how did you set up your auto reaction for the CV TF?



Nomad -> RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE (2/14/2008 12:45:11 AM)

My dear General, please try using a Surface Combat TF as the lead for your CV TFs. If the CV TFs are set to follow the SC TF, then most of the time they will not react. I say most of the time because others have said they have had some react. I have NEVER had a CVTF that was following as SCTF react towards the enemy. But, remember that you will have no reaction which can lead to problems also. But, at least the CV TFs should be together and where you order them to go.



Gen.Hoepner -> RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE (2/14/2008 12:46:45 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: hades1001

good for you, G.H.!

keep beating those japanese bastards[:D]

just curious, how did you set up your auto reaction for the CV TF?


I set them to "0"...so they shouldn't have reacted...but we all know that the code here isn't that good...the CVs always react anyway...so it's juts a matter of luck.

Anyway...the UberCAP is still there.....gotta try another approach.



Gen.Hoepner -> RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE (2/14/2008 12:49:37 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nomad

My dear General, please try using a Surface Combat TF as the lead for your CV TFs. If the CV TFs are set to follow the SC TF, then most of the time they will not react. I say most of the time because others have said they have had some react. I have NEVER had a CVTF that was following as SCTF react towards the enemy. But, remember that you will have no reactioni which can lead to problems also. But, at least the CV TFs should be together and where you order them to go.


I'll keep that in mind, thanks Nomad...didn't know that[:(]

However i've learnt something today...never, NEVER go overconfident.
In China i've lost because of that.
In the pacific now the same...

sooner or later i'll learn the lesson, i promise[:D]



anarchyintheuk -> RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE (2/14/2008 12:49:55 AM)

Somewhat weasily, but it also allows you to lrcap your sctf w/o the cvtf penalty. Reading that sentence back, it looks like gibberish or witpspeak.



Nomad -> RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE (2/14/2008 1:13:04 AM)

As far as I know, CAP is not affected by coordination penalities.



Jim D Burns -> RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE (2/14/2008 2:05:12 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gen.Hoepner
Anyway...the UberCAP is still there.....gotta try another approach.


Since there is no house rule preventing it, replace all your torpedo plane squadrons with a 16 plane F4F squadron. It’s not a perfect solution but it will help make up for the loss of the two 36 plane squadrons that just went down with their ships.

Four remaining CV’s times 16 planes means you’ll have another 64 F4F’s for CAP duties in late 42 or early 43 when you’ll need to go on the offensive again. Don’t use them on escort as they’re just CV capable, not trained, so they’ll take higher op losses on longer range missions. Just use them for CAP.

Jim



1275psi -> RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE (2/14/2008 2:46:36 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: hades1001

Shame on someone here in this thread.

I knew where troll's KB is because I'm following both sides movements. And I tried to warn G.H. by a indirect way.(I can't do more because it woulb unfair for troll). You guys can check the last several posts written by me.

And the attack of G.H. is going in such a noisy way and so obvious that any experienced IJ player will notice it. It is common sense that send in the KB to stop the Allies.

Anyone said this mission should be kept more sneaky, they are right.
Anyone doubt about troll's dishonesty, shame on you, your vicious voice will do nothing good but ruin this interesting AAR.

Again, shame on you know whom!









As the co creator of the duel AAR, and as someone who's played that way for nearly 5 years, I think I have more than a fair enough reason to make the call that I did.

The ability to write AARs has always depended on total trust.
Facts show some now break that trust.

I still say -some one breaks that trust -in any way -even by giving hints -let alone peeking -which some one has already been shown to do on another AAR - should get NO chances -they attack the very core of AARs.

Further to the above.
Troll may well have guessed where the general was going to attack - I can usually tell Where Tabpub is going to strike weeks in advance -but it wont change my view on where we stand with the AARs.
he got caught peeking twice - why should I be shamed to think that he might have this time -its not me with the reputation..

Looks like its plan B - write AArs only weeks after the turns involved if we don't watch out.



hades1001 -> RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE (2/14/2008 3:31:11 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: 1275psi

quote:

ORIGINAL: hades1001

Shame on someone here in this thread.

I knew where troll's KB is because I'm following both sides movements. And I tried to warn G.H. by a indirect way.(I can't do more because it woulb unfair for troll). You guys can check the last several posts written by me.

And the attack of G.H. is going in such a noisy way and so obvious that any experienced IJ player will notice it. It is common sense that send in the KB to stop the Allies.

Anyone said this mission should be kept more sneaky, they are right.
Anyone doubt about troll's dishonesty, shame on you, your vicious voice will do nothing good but ruin this interesting AAR.

Again, shame on you know whom!









As the co creator of the duel AAR, and as someone who's played that way for nearly 5 years, I think I have more than a fair enough reason to make the call that I did.

The ability to write AARs has always depended on total trust.
Facts show some now break that trust.

I still say -some one breaks that trust -in any way -even by giving hints -let alone peeking -which some one has already been shown to do on another AAR - should get NO chances -they attack the very core of AARs.

Further to the above.
Troll may well have guessed where the general was going to attack - I can usually tell Where Tabpub is going to strike weeks in advance -but it wont change my view on where we stand with the AARs.
he got caught peeking twice - why should I be shamed to think that he might have this time -its not me with the reputation..

Looks like its plan B - write AArs only weeks after the turns involved if we don't watch out.



I really hope you can talk to troll directly rather talk in other people's AAR and ruin a game. I hold my point, shame on you.



hades1001 -> RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE (2/14/2008 3:34:57 AM)

Let me make this clear, no matter what's troll's personality, this should NOT be an issue in THIS AAR.



Gen.Hoepner -> RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE (2/14/2008 8:47:59 AM)

Herbie, please, i ask you to restrain yourself from these kinds of comments.
I trust my opponent. And that's why i won't change the way this AAR is being made. It will be up to date.
If i fall into the malicious trap of non-confiding my very opponent, then i should stop playing at all.
I was really pissed when, few months ago, Trollelite pointed out that someone was reading his own aar and then suggesting me what to do... i defined those accusations "crap".
Now, wanting to be a "honest" person, i have to define as "crap" the same accusations that are made up against him.
So please, let's talk about what are the next objectives of the campaign.
Let's talk about how to save my fleet from the KB's threat.
No more of this...please.

PS: i don't want to be rude...just understand my policy about this aar... still thanks



cantona2 -> RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE (2/14/2008 10:00:46 AM)

Lets put an end to it as GH says. Dnt like Troll either but this is GH's AAR and not a Troll gripe therapy session :D
Just get your ships the hell out of there GH ;)



Gen.Hoepner -> RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE (2/14/2008 2:35:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: cantona2

Lets put an end to it as GH says. Dnt like Troll either but this is GH's AAR and not a Troll gripe therapy session :D
Just get your ships the hell out of there GH ;)



Thanks mate.

Turn hasn't arrived yet...Trollelite will have to study hard in the next days...so no updates before the Week End...[:(]






Feinder -> RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE (2/14/2008 3:58:37 PM)

Well, it couldda been worse Hop.  At least you haven't lost 5 out of 6 like me!

In the immortal words...

"Run away!  Run away!"

Scoot back towards your LBA by any means.  If he chases you, we'll you've maximized your defense (maybe your LBA get a lucky hit).  If he doesn't chase, you've "only" lost 2x CVs.

-F-



mlees -> RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE (2/14/2008 5:32:31 PM)

What is the experience levels of your LBA in the Marshalls?

I have found that LBA don't seem to get much hits until they are in their 70's... and they won't even launch against CAP-defended CVTF's if their exp is in the 50's...



hades1001 -> RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE (2/14/2008 5:41:30 PM)

when RADM Spruence meet this same situation with Mr. troll after the Midway, he said:"
this is enough, retreat.

I'm sure troll won't do the same thing, so, you might able set a trap for him with your LBA?[;)]



pauk -> RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE (2/14/2008 6:04:27 PM)



guys, please calm down. If you want to comment AAR i suggest reading only one part of the AAR (where you are posting your thoughts, advices and that stuff).

Both "sides" here risks with "killing the players fun and enjoyment". Trust me i know what i'm talking.

You really all should refrain posting stuff like this (he is cheating, he is gamey opponent etc). Sooner or latter you will found yourselves in similar situations you will change your minds (like our very special PzjHortlund - he is actually now considering gamey ground training - which was in his eyes very gamey[:'(], until it is not his game[:D])

If GH and Trollelite have issues they will solve them directly. I'm reading both sides of AAR and not commenting anything. Please, lets focus on the game[:)]




Page: <<   < prev  40 41 [42] 43 44   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.75