unlucky navy

unlucky navy (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames

Message

michaelbaldur -> unlucky navy (3/20/2012 10:21:01 AM)
it have really been a unlucky couple of impulses for the CW navy. all of its big ships sunk. it have 1 carrier and 1 CA left. and som CL and cvl .. but all battleships sunk [image]local://upfiles/24604/381E708DE08A45B497F3D086BE8C64D6.jpg[/image]

warspite1 -> RE: unlucky navy (3/20/2012 7:18:40 PM)
Wow...I thought I was rubbish at the game, but you really suck! [;)]

bo -> RE: unlucky navy (3/20/2012 7:27:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 Wow...I thought I was rubbish at the game, but you really suck! [;)] Suck, baloney, this would be a good day for me [:D] thank you for that pic Michael. Bo

michaelbaldur -> RE: unlucky navy (3/20/2012 8:13:19 PM)
to be fair I cheated a little .. but Italian navs are really [sm=00000036.gif]

trooper76 -> RE: unlucky navy (3/20/2012 9:03:59 PM)
"You sunk my battleship(s)!"

warspite1 -> RE: unlucky navy (3/20/2012 10:42:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur to be fair I cheated a little .. but Italian navs are really [sm=00000036.gif] Warspite1 The Regia Marina did that?? THE GAME IS BORKED!! [:D]

warspite1 -> RE: unlucky navy (3/20/2012 10:43:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bo quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 Wow...I thought I was rubbish at the game, but you really suck! [;)] .......this would be a good day for me..... Bo Warspite1 Bo - are you looking for an opponent when the game comes out [;)]

bo -> RE: unlucky navy (3/20/2012 11:35:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: bo quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 Wow...I thought I was rubbish at the game, but you really suck! [;)] .......this would be a good day for me..... Bo Warspite1 Bo - are you looking for an opponent when the game comes out [;)] Why yes I am Warspite, hopefully a dumb AI [:D] If I did not know Hoorn could not be invaded from the sea how the heck am I going to play you. [:-] Is there any kind of the fairness act here when playing PBEM against you Wif pros [&:] like hmmm let me think, I know I get an extra 30 Wehrmacht divisions right from the get go. [:)] Bo

Joseignacio -> RE: unlucky navy (3/21/2012 1:13:42 PM)
I guess you mean 30 corps. It's possible in MWIF (not in WIF, limited pool) to give you 30 divisions but the usual unit is the corps.

bo -> RE: unlucky navy (3/21/2012 4:33:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Joseignacio I guess you mean 30 corps. It's possible in MWIF (not in WIF, limited pool) to give you 30 divisions but the usual unit is the corps. Well lets see now Jose, beings I have never played Wif board game and have played Cwif which allows me divisions, I guess I mean divisions [:)] and if Warspite1 were a true Englishman he would give them to me. But if he were a English gentleman he would give me 30 corps which I would much prefer over divisions [:D] Jose I thought you were going to Hungary soon, while you are there read up on Cwif rules [;)] Bo

Joseignacio -> RE: unlucky navy (3/22/2012 8:44:50 AM)
Ok, divisions then. [:)] I was to Hungary by Christmas and don't intend to go back till summer holidays, which I am not sure when I will take in the period July-September...

Joseignacio -> RE: unlucky navy (3/25/2012 10:03:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur to be fair I cheated a little .. but Italian navs are really [sm=00000036.gif] Warspite1 The Regia Marina did that?? THE GAME IS BORKED!! [:D] I doubt italian navs were part of Regia Marina.

HansHafen -> RE: unlucky navy (3/25/2012 12:05:02 PM)
I expect the English Naval Commander to join his fleet at the bottom of the sea with all due haste! I was surprised to learn that the naval loses between the UK and Italy were basically even over the course of the war in the Med. Very surprising.

warspite1 -> RE: unlucky navy (3/25/2012 3:16:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HansHafen I expect the English Naval Commander to join his fleet at the bottom of the sea with all due haste! I was surprised to learn that the naval loses between the UK and Italy were basically even over the course of the war in the Med. Very surprising. Warspite1 I doubt they were even between Italy and the UK. Between Italy/Germany and the UK maybe, although the forces ranged were very different as were the objectives of each navy.

michaelbaldur -> RE: unlucky navy (3/30/2012 7:03:31 PM)
REVENGE [image]local://upfiles/24604/23D75E8DA9B54B73A1FD72BA289E9004.jpg[/image]

brian brian -> RE: unlucky navy (3/30/2012 10:17:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: HansHafen I expect the English Naval Commander to join his fleet at the bottom of the sea with all due haste! I was surprised to learn that the naval loses between the UK and Italy were basically even over the course of the war in the Med. Very surprising. Warspite1 I doubt they were even between Italy and the UK. Between Italy/Germany and the UK maybe, although the forces ranged were very different as were the objectives of each navy. lots of ways to count on that. Italy of course, ratcheted up the score a little using the Frogmen. And Warspite1 brings up an important point ... do losses to the Luftwaffe and the U-Boats count in that reckoning? What about the loss of the Roma? Probably best not count that on either side. A lot of WiF players don't play the Royal Navy that well....you have to play like the real Royal Navy did it.

warspite1 -> RE: unlucky navy (3/31/2012 8:08:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: brian brian quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: HansHafen I expect the English Naval Commander to join his fleet at the bottom of the sea with all due haste! I was surprised to learn that the naval loses between the UK and Italy were basically even over the course of the war in the Med. Very surprising. Warspite1 I doubt they were even between Italy and the UK. Between Italy/Germany and the UK maybe, although the forces ranged were very different as were the objectives of each navy. lots of ways to count on that. Italy of course, ratcheted up the score a little using the Frogmen. And Warspite1 brings up an important point ... do losses to the Luftwaffe and the U-Boats count in that reckoning? What about the loss of the Roma? Probably best not count that on either side. A lot of WiF players don't play the Royal Navy that well....you have to play like the real Royal Navy did it. Warspite1 I don't count Valiant and Queen Elizabeth as having been sunk as they were both repaired and returned to action. For the same reason Littorio and Caio Duilo are not counted. Conte di Cavour is however, because as a result of the Taranto raid she was never repaired before the Italians exited stage left. The three capital ships the RN lost were all to German subs. I like reading O'Hara's books but I fundamentally disagree with him on his appraisal of the Regia Marina in WWII. I think given the superiority they had, given the chances they had, they could and should have caused the Royal Navy very serious losses. In Littorio and Vittorio Veneto the RM had ships that completely outclassed anything Cunningham could offer, they had numerous 8-inch gunned heavy cruisers, they had air support, a larger submarine service - but they never really made it count. The Royal Navy's role in the Mediterranean was to put themselves in harm's way; trying to bring superior Italian ships to battle, saving the troops in Greece and Crete, supplying Malta, supporting forces in the Western Desert and later Torch and Italy. They did so superbly given the equipment they had to fight with (much of which was WWI vintage), and they suffered accordingly.

Terminus -> RE: unlucky navy (3/31/2012 2:05:35 PM)
Er, "superior" Italian ships? In some cases newer, certainly, but superior?

warspite1 -> RE: unlucky navy (3/31/2012 6:43:51 PM)
Delete - appears below

warspite1 -> RE: unlucky navy (3/31/2012 7:09:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: Terminus Er, "superior" Italian ships? In some cases newer, certainly, but superior? Warspite1 Yes. I mentioned specifically the two Littorios and the heavy cruisers. In terms of speed and range to dictate a battle, these were ships that Cunningham/Sommerville must have prayed for. Going into battle with Royal Sovereign, Ramillies, Barham and Malaya (sorry, I meant trying to get into a battle) was frustrating in the extreme - on more than one occasion. The County-class heavy cruisers were better suited elsewhere, York was sent to the Med but did not last long, while Exeter was otherwise engaged. The superiority also shows itself in overall numbers - and, given the fact that the RN was split in two, the local superiority they had on many occasions. The Second Battle of Sirte being perhaps the most extreme case. I believe that if you swapped the two British commanders for their Italian contemporaries, the Mediterranean naval war would have been very different.

Centuur -> RE: unlucky navy (3/31/2012 11:21:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Terminus Er, "superior" Italian ships? In some cases newer, certainly, but superior? Yes, technically superior. Also faster and with heavier guns, if you compare them with the CW naval forces in the Med. Personally I think the Italian High Command made a mess of the use of the Italian forces (including the navy). Also: there was a serious problem with... oil!

warspite1 -> RE: unlucky navy (4/1/2012 8:23:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Centuur quote: ORIGINAL: Terminus Er, "superior" Italian ships? In some cases newer, certainly, but superior? Yes, technically superior. Also faster and with heavier guns, if you compare them with the CW naval forces in the Med. Personally I think the Italian High Command made a mess of the use of the Italian forces (including the navy). Also: there was a serious problem with... oil! Warspite1 Had the Regia Marina been used properly the Royal Navy could have been forced to abandon the Mediterranean before the oil shortage became a problem.

HansHafen -> RE: unlucky navy (4/1/2012 8:50:33 PM)
I think I remember seeing in a Strategy & Tactics magazine the casualties list for the two navies during the war in the Med. and it was comparable. I can't locate it now, but will keep looking. Interesting issue.

warspite1 -> RE: unlucky navy (4/1/2012 9:45:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HansHafen I think I remember seeing in a Strategy & Tactics magazine the casualties list for the two navies during the war in the Med. and it was comparable. I can't locate it now, but will keep looking. Interesting issue. Warspite1 Yes, and as has been said above, the bulk of the larger RN casualties would be down to the Germans (u-boats and air strike): Ark Royal, Eagle, Barham, Galatea, Gloucester, Southampton, Fiji, Calcutta, Coventry, Naiad and Hermione from memory. The largest Italian success was the heavy cruiser York. Not sure why its interesting, but would be keen to see the article to understand what point is trying to be made here....

Gertrude73 -> RE: unlucky navy (4/2/2012 7:42:46 AM)
[image]http://www.infoocean.info/avatar2.jpg[/image]I thought I was rubbish at the game, but you really suck!

micheljq -> RE: unlucky navy (4/2/2012 4:13:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Centuur Yes, technically superior. Also faster and with heavier guns, if you compare them with the CW naval forces in the Med. Personally I think the Italian High Command made a mess of the use of the Italian forces (including the navy). Also: there was a serious problem with... oil! Technically superior, more modern, but without radars and without aircraft carriers, finally not so modern and superior than that.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cape_Matapan

Centuur -> RE: unlucky navy (4/2/2012 6:26:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: micheljq quote: ORIGINAL: Centuur Yes, technically superior. Also faster and with heavier guns, if you compare them with the CW naval forces in the Med. Personally I think the Italian High Command made a mess of the use of the Italian forces (including the navy). Also: there was a serious problem with... oil! Technically superior, more modern, but without radars and without aircraft carriers, finally not so modern and superior than that.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cape_Matapan Who needs aircraft carriers if one is fighting in the Med and able to get land based air cover almost everywhere? The main Italian problem was the Italian High Command. They didn't use their navy and airforce the way they should have done, from a military point of view. The use of radar came during the war itself and was in 1940 and 1941 not used extensively on Allied ships. Especially in late 1940, after the fall of France, the Italian navy was superior to the British in the Med. Fact was however that the Italians didn't realise this. If they had... It is the same in WiF. An Italian player should use his navy wisely with air cover over it. If he does, than the CW might get a nasty surprise, even with CW carrier planes covering the British fleet. The British carrier planes can't cope with the Italians, IMHO. No, if the Euroaxis play it right, the British fleet will be hovering in the Cape St. Vincent after France is conquered/Vichyfied and won't venture a lot into the Med, until they have enough LBA in the Western Med.

brian brian -> RE: unlucky navy (4/3/2012 1:37:29 AM)
Because World in Flames doesn't force the Italian player to play stupidly as Peter notes, the Italians can be quite dangerous. For equal opponents, the Med becomes a bloody place. The British can get a higher box with their land-based fighters ... but a lot of them are twin-engine. If the British make their priority to maximize the long-range fighters they can deploy there, control of the Med will depend in turn on the Italian build priorities of either bombers for Russia, or their own twin-engine fighters with the range for the 2 box to defend the Axis southern flank. A delicate balance. If the Axis choose to tip it in their favor using Fw 190s, it can get challenging for the Allies to be able to use their lift safely in the Med. But to do that in turn costs the Axis air missions in Russia....

Extraneous -> RE: unlucky navy (4/3/2012 1:56:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur it have really been a unlucky couple of impulses for the CW navy. all of its big ships sunk. it have 1 carrier and 1 CA left. and som CL and cvl .. but all battleships sunk Did you loose them all at once or piecemeal? All at once would be bad luck. Piecemeal would be your error. Remember: "There is no kill like overkill" ~ Schlock Mercenary, "The Seventy Maxims of Maximally Effective Mercenaries" [image]local://upfiles/29440/4545F7333885485F94DE646E45F1755F.jpg[/image]

micheljq -> RE: unlucky navy (4/3/2012 3:19:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Centuur Who needs aircraft carriers if one is fighting in the Med and able to get land based air cover almost everywhere? The main Italian problem was the Italian High Command. They didn't use their navy and airforce the way they should have done, from a military point of view. The use of radar came during the war itself and was in 1940 and 1941 not used extensively on Allied ships. Especially in late 1940, after the fall of France, the Italian navy was superior to the British in the Med. Fact was however that the Italians didn't realise this. If they had... It is the same in WiF. An Italian player should use his navy wisely with air cover over it. If he does, than the CW might get a nasty surprise, even with CW carrier planes covering the British fleet. The British carrier planes can't cope with the Italians, IMHO. No, if the Euroaxis play it right, the British fleet will be hovering in the Cape St. Vincent after France is conquered/Vichyfied and won't venture a lot into the Med, until they have enough LBA in the Western Med. Hi Centuur, I am not convinced about the fact that the ritals were able to cover all the Med. My understanding is that they had a good cover in the vicinity of Italy, Malta, Tunisia, Lybia coastlines. The british were already aware of the threat to their carriers from land based airplanes, they already had experienced it near Narvik where they lost a carrier to the Luftwaffe. They were already cautious about not approaching too much from certain bases where they knew italian airplanes could come. Another thing the italian navy did not have was the experience many crews of the Royal Navy had, it was one of the old british battleships, the Warspite who scored a record 26000 yards hit on the Guilio Cesare, not the contrary, despite the italian navy having "better guns" theorically. Maybe the italian fleet was not very eager to engage the older british battleships, who knows if they had done it in 1940, what could have had happened you maybe right, we will never know.

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.1875