PT boat usage (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> The War Room



Message

pmt411@cox.net -> PT boat usage (5/8/2011 6:25:22 AM)

I am playing a more advanced player. It is early January 1943. I lauchned a surpise attack to take back Norfolk Island in the South Pacific and retook it. He holds New Zeland and Noumea and bombs any resupply or reinforcement ships I send. He has landed troops on the island in a counter invasion. I built a squadron of PT boats in Sydney and had them accompany a cargo fleet to resupply Lord Howe Island. I then after resupply at Lord Howe, moved them and stationed them at Norfolk Island to help repel his naval reinvasion attempt at Norfolk Island. He has informed me that this isnt done by players as PT boats cannot be used this way and may not put to open sea and must only be used in coastal hexes by general agreement of the players on this board. I dont think my actions are unreasonable, but want to be fair and have searched the board for some discussion in the threads of this but cant find any answers. Is this the general understanding of most players on a consenus limitation on the use of PT boats?? I would welcome any help in this matter.



thegreatwent -> RE: PT boat usage (5/8/2011 6:34:39 AM)

I don't see any issue with escorting PT Boats to where they are needed. Historically MacArthur wouldn't have gotten away if they couldn't go to sea[:)]. Unless there is a house rule in your game precluding their use outside coastal hexes or being escorted I don't see a problem. Actually as the Allied player I would protest any such rule.



findmeifyoucan -> RE: PT boat usage (5/8/2011 8:49:12 AM)

This is war. You can do what ever your ships allow you to do! lol :-)
If you don't like what your enemy is doing then it is your job to figure out how to stop it with the resources you have available to you.



pmath -> RE: PT boat usage (5/8/2011 10:07:13 AM)

If the game mechanics allow for it then it is up to the opponent to offer a compelling argument. I see no reason the Allies couldn't have done what you did with your PTs. A lot of Jap Fan Boys don't want the Allied player doing anything that wasn't actually done in the war. On the other hand they have no problem starting the game parked over Pearl for a week.



gwozdziu12 -> RE: PT boat usage (5/8/2011 10:26:46 AM)

Bollocks. Right now I'm playing downfall, and trust me - IJN's MTB (and shinyo's) are one of the most deadliest weapon in this scenario (so far I've lost 2 CVE in night battles against them). I don't see any reason why lunching pt boats missions over open sea hexes should be forbidden. Unless it was one of your HR.



EUBanana -> RE: PT boat usage (5/8/2011 1:43:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: pmt411@cox.net
He has informed me that this isnt done by players as PT boats cannot be used this way and may not put to open sea and must only be used in coastal hexes by general agreement of the players on this board.


[&:]

quote:


I dont think my actions are unreasonable, but want to be fair and have searched the board for some discussion in the threads of this but cant find any answers. Is this the general understanding of most players on a consenus limitation on the use of PT boats?? I would welcome any help in this matter.


Heh, thats why, news to me.

Its also nonsense. You can make PT boats in remote locations after all, all you need is enough supply. How do you think the PTs got to Lunga in the first place? Over the Pacific, right? [;)] How will PTs get to Lord Howe Island?

...over the Pacific, right?

In an AKs hold, or towed along by an AK, makes little difference it seems to me.



Smeulders -> RE: PT boat usage (5/8/2011 2:20:08 PM)

It is very poor form of your opponent to appeal to a "general concensus" that doesn't exist.



crsutton -> RE: PT boat usage (5/8/2011 3:29:22 PM)

Yep, he is totally out of line and you can refer him to this thread.

PT boats were generally transported on the decks of larger merchant ships and were sent anywhere they were found useful. It is unlikely that they would have been sent to Norfolk Island as I don't think there is hardly any harbors around the Island and the ocean is deep blue water all around. PTs really were more suited to calmer waters. However, in game terms I use them at any base and would not hesitate to use them at Norfolk. I think most players here would say the same.

Diplomacy  is really nothing more than convincing others into doing things that are not in their best interest.....[;)]



Rob Brennan UK -> RE: PT boat usage (5/8/2011 4:58:00 PM)

Considering you created those PT Boats in a major harbour and then escorted them into the combat area , I salute you for playing fairly and very reasonably. Personally i don't ever just make magic PT boat squadrons out of coconut trees and sand.

As for using them in deep water , indeed bollocks is a good epithet to describe that. Using them to move when out of fuel and paddle across the pacific is out of line and now heavily penalized fortunately.

Maybe your opponent thought you created them in situ and that's what prompted his comments, if so then his assumption was wrong and you should let him know how you got them there.

Sounds like the Allies have a hard road ahead in your game , all the more fun imo. I wish both you and your opponent the very best for an enjoyable game.




Alfred -> RE: PT boat usage (5/8/2011 11:54:23 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: pmt411@cox.net

I am playing a more advanced player. It is early January 1943. I lauchned a surpise attack to take back Norfolk Island in the South Pacific and retook it. He holds New Zeland and Noumea and bombs any resupply or reinforcement ships I send. He has landed troops on the island in a counter invasion. I built a squadron of PT boats in Sydney and had them accompany a cargo fleet to resupply Lord Howe Island. I then after resupply at Lord Howe, moved them and stationed them at Norfolk Island to help repel his naval reinvasion attempt at Norfolk Island. He has informed me that this isnt done by players as PT boats cannot be used this way and may not put to open sea and must only be used in coastal hexes by general agreement of the players on this board. I dont think my actions are unreasonable, but want to be fair and have searched the board for some discussion in the threads of this but cant find any answers. Is this the general understanding of most players on a consenus limitation on the use of PT boats?? I would welcome any help in this matter.


This issue has often been discussed in the past. Have a look at this link which is fairly representative of the views held by many regular forumites.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2653233&mpage=1&key=boat%2Ccreation

Alfred



Disco Duck -> RE: PT boat usage (5/9/2011 1:26:07 AM)

An interesting video of the manufacture of the PT boat is on Utube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8tQP3s9DIQ

It states the boats ran into the tail end of hurricane in tests between Cuba and the Keys.



LoBaron -> RE: PT boat usage (5/9/2011 7:59:44 AM)

Good vid Disco Duck!

To me this looks like there had to be a lot of shipyard around to manufacture
the boats from scratch.

Any opinions what the base size should be to create PT boats at the base without
acting gamey?



Durbik -> RE: PT boat usage (5/9/2011 9:09:36 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: gwozdziu12

Bollocks. Right now I'm playing downfall, and trust me - IJN's MTB (and shinyo's) are one of the most deadliest weapon in this scenario (so far I've lost 2 CVE in night battles against them). I don't see any reason why lunching pt boats missions over open sea hexes should be forbidden. Unless it was one of your HR.



Hey, one of those CVE's succumbed due to courtesy of Sensuikan, not the PT boats. Don't take credit from my sub force (after all, it was their only hit in the scenario!) [:D]



USSAmerica -> RE: PT boat usage (5/9/2011 2:22:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

Good vid Disco Duck!

To me this looks like there had to be a lot of shipyard around to manufacture
the boats from scratch.

Any opinions what the base size should be to create PT boats at the base without
acting gamey?


I honestly think any port level is sufficient. They were manufactured IRL at shipyards, etc, and then loaded onto AK's for their trip to forward bases. The game simulates this by "creating" them from supply at the forward base. Think of it as the PT's being unloaded from the AK as part of the supply/cargo, and then they are put into operation.



LoBaron -> RE: PT boat usage (5/9/2011 4:46:33 PM)

Basically I see it the same way as you.

The only difference to reality is that with the assembling abstracted into supply consumption you can move the same hulls around the map
within 2 weeks (disassembling back to pool, recreate somewhere else). Not sure if should influence our point of view.

Some time ago I thought about a HR which prevents disassembling PTs except for major ports. Not sure whether this makes sense though.



Rob Brennan UK -> RE: PT boat usage (5/9/2011 6:53:01 PM)

just my opinion , but I'd say at any base that had a shipyard (of any size) , and working. Maybe a size 9 with ARD/AR and plenty of Naval support could do it but best to keep it simple and just use yards.



LoBaron -> RE: PT boat usage (5/9/2011 8:07:27 PM)

Good idea old friend. We could discuss this as a HR addon.



treespider -> RE: PT boat usage (5/9/2011 8:38:03 PM)

Not that I've tried, but is it not possible to lump the PT's into an escort TF with an xAK and schlep them from base to base thataway? I do not see any evil in that, assuming that your not setting up a PT base in the middle of the North Pacific using the aAK ...



LoBaron -> RE: PT boat usage (5/9/2011 8:50:16 PM)

Yes its possible and definitely not gamey. If we implement a HR like Rob proposed it would also be the only way to pull
PTs back to harbours with a repair yard for disbanding and relocation.



crsutton -> RE: PT boat usage (5/9/2011 10:33:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

Good vid Disco Duck!

To me this looks like there had to be a lot of shipyard around to manufacture
the boats from scratch.

Any opinions what the base size should be to create PT boats at the base without
acting gamey?


No size, building PTs use supply. This can represent that the boats were delivered to the base at an earlier date and then assembled later and fitted out for combat. You can make a HR but I find it is not really necessary and the more HR there are in a game the more arguments arrive later. Besides PT boats at a level 0 base cannot refuel or replenish so that would limit their use there.



PzB74 -> RE: PT boat usage (5/9/2011 11:16:18 PM)

I think 2 PT boat house rules should be considered for all PBEM games:

1. PT boats should not be created in an atoll base surrounded by enemy air and sea forces.
E.g. imagine the Japs launching a squadron of PT boats at Tarawa with a huge US invasion force overlooking the place with troops going ashore.
-> For islands it would be ok, e.g. Okinawa. Too big to keep an eye on what's happening and possible to "pull" PT boats of of caves and bays or launch them from shore.

2. PT boats should not intentionally be sent on missions that would leave them stranded in the middle of the ocean without fuel.
E.g. sending PT boats to strike at enemy from long distance without enough fuel to reach a friendly base after the battle.

Thumb rule: Use common sense

Note: Japan was more likely to send troops on suicide missions, this would not be acceptable in the West.




oldman45 -> RE: PT boat usage (5/9/2011 11:52:20 PM)

As long as you have a beach and some wood you can work on and for that matter assemble a PT boat. I wouldn't use a atoll to "build" them but just any island in the South and Southwest pacific could serve as a PT base so why not let them be assembled when the AK's get there?

Put some naval support squads and a couple an AG with some fuel and you have a fwd PT base. Send in an AE and I think you can reload the torps.



spence -> RE: PT boat usage (5/10/2011 12:09:06 AM)

Come on now. PT boats accomplished very little in RL against the mighty IJN. It needs to be hard coded that they contribute nothing whatsoever under any circumstances to any Allied plan at all. If you have found any conceivable use for them then you are obviously gaming the system to a completely unacceptable degree.





Rob Brennan UK -> RE: PT boat usage (5/10/2011 1:40:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

Come on now. PT boats accomplished very little in RL against the mighty IJN. It needs to be hard coded that they contribute nothing whatsoever under any circumstances to any Allied plan at all. If you have found any conceivable use for them then you are obviously gaming the system to a completely unacceptable degree.





[:D][:D][:D][:D][:D][:D]
quote:


Treespider

Not that I've tried, but is it not possible to lump the PT's into an escort TF with an xAK and schlep them from base to base thataway? I do not see any evil in that, assuming that your not setting up a PT base in the middle of the North Pacific using the aAK ...



Yup , IF you can get an AK to the destination unmolested then PT's are acceptable there. Fuel at location can be an issue however and no AG's = no more ammo ! so allies need to be able to base ships there to service the Pt's anyway. Do you need AE's for torps ? I thought the AG was enough for PT's ? AD's Wont rearm PT's from experience so AG conversions can be useful at times.


PzB . agree on point 2 completely , but point 1 presupposes that PT's are already there (and hidden) , apart from having them in port no way to really replicate that except for creating them out of thin air , interesting thought for Japan imo. Allies wouldn't use them hat way IRL IMO.


Common sense ! .. the most rare of commodities at times [;)]





Sardaukar -> RE: PT boat usage (5/10/2011 2:35:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rob Brennan UK


Yup , IF you can get an AK to the destination unmolested then PT's are acceptable there. Fuel at location can be an issue however and no AG's = no more ammo ! so allies need to be able to base ships there to service the Pt's anyway. Do you need AE's for torps ? I thought the AG was enough for PT's ? AD's Wont rearm PT's from experience so AG conversions can be useful at times.



AG will arm small vessel guns only (and maybe small escorts depth charges). To re-arm PT boats with torpedoes, you need AGP.



Disco Duck -> RE: PT boat usage (5/12/2011 3:53:33 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

Good vid Disco Duck!

To me this looks like there had to be a lot of shipyard around to manufacture
the boats from scratch.

Any opinions what the base size should be to create PT boats at the base without
acting gamey?

PT boats, like aircraft, would have been shipped on top of large freighters in a state of "damage". No fuel, no ammo and various things done to prevent damage while being shipped. So I would say any port with an AGP, regardless of size, any port with any size shipyard, or port size four. According to the manual (14.2.1.4) it takes a level four port to repair a PT boat.

If you ever make it to Battleship cove they have some nice models of Large Freighters with PT boats loaded on deck.[8D]



Rob Brennan UK -> RE: PT boat usage (5/12/2011 7:02:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rob Brennan UK


Yup , IF you can get an AK to the destination unmolested then PT's are acceptable there. Fuel at location can be an issue however and no AG's = no more ammo ! so allies need to be able to base ships there to service the Pt's anyway. Do you need AE's for torps ? I thought the AG was enough for PT's ? AD's Wont rearm PT's from experience so AG conversions can be useful at times.



AG will arm small vessel guns only (and maybe small escorts depth charges). To re-arm PT boats with torpedoes, you need AGP.



You would think by now I'd know all these support ship types , Thanks Sardukar. Seems like Malta hasn't affected your brain as much an alcohol fueled Mediterranean lifestyle should[;)]



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.640625