(Full Version)

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

Message

siRkid -> (2/6/2003 4:52:49 AM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Weathersfield [B]Are you talking about the 6th Air Div having a load cost of 0? I saw that but I dont know all the particulars. [/B][/QUOTE] Good catch but that was not what I was referring to. This HQ does not have any units assigned yet (Alpha stage), therefore, zero load cost but of course you could not tell that. Rick

siRkid -> (2/6/2003 4:54:35 AM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by loader6 [B]I've got two guesses. 1. The 38th DIV has tankettes but at the top is shows vehicles as 0. [/B][/QUOTE] BINGO!

siRkid -> (2/6/2003 4:57:34 AM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Feinder [B]Kid, Do you know if aircraft production will be "country specific"? For example, in the old PacWar game, you could simply scrap the production of many of the Commonwealth aircraft, in favor of the better US ones. Will WitP compell you to build aircraft of the appropriate country? (I certainly think it should). Thanks for the info thus far guys! -F- [/B][/QUOTE] I don't know. They are still working on the production model.

iceboy -> Re: Re: Re: A few Bones (2/6/2003 1:25:59 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Kid [B]Right now ships are not captured; however, one of the testers has made that request. Rcik [/B][/QUOTE] One of the main fears in the real war was the fear of the enemy capturing the others ships. Because of this fear many ships were scuttled that might have been saved. Especially after a battle and you had to high tail it out of there. Some carriers for example. I think the option of capturing ships would bring a whole new use to the scuttle ship button because players, as each side in the real war did, would want to prevent the capture, repair, and use of their own ships against them and scuttle their own ships to prevent it. Would add another interesting flavor to the game I think!

byron13 -> (2/6/2003 9:31:54 PM)
We had a whole thread on ship capture. I'll see if I can't find and revive it. First, it would be hard to implement well, and the complaints about unrealistic captures would probably outweigh the benefit of having the option. Second, many players had a concern that players might game the system in an effort to capture ships. Yup, found it. It's the "How Are Captured Units Represented" thread. Upon review, it looks like I'm the only one that really had any concerns. Sigh. Trying to swim against the current as usual.

madflava13 -> (2/7/2003 3:21:51 AM)
Quick note to say that I think capturing ships should NOT be allowed... For the same reasons as mentioned - namely, the potential for crazy results (capturing BBs and CVs) and lack of real bearing on the game historically as the main reasons. I'd rather have some of the "nice to have, but low on the list" options ahead of this. Byron - A few of us are swimming with you...

Grotius -> (2/7/2003 10:31:08 PM)
Well, a few folks in the other thread suggested that capture be allowed, but limited to merchant vessels. That might be a reasonable compromise. Personally, I wouldn't mind if there were a small chance to capture enemy warships if you seize a base at which they are in port (as opposed to a TF).

madflava13 -> (2/8/2003 12:21:45 AM)
Grotius: Merchant ships perhaps... I just have a hard time seeing a scenario where any country would be taken by such surprise that warships are captured intact. Either scuttling charges would be set (in the case of ships too damaged to flee) or the ships would sail out of port...

Zakhal -> (2/10/2003 9:43:41 AM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by madflava13 [B]Grotius: I just have a hard time seeing a scenario where any country would be taken by such surprise that warships are captured intact.[/B][/QUOTE] Italy perhaps?:D I think the brits captured more than few vessels and same might have happened for the french capital ships if not for brits sinking them.

siRkid -> (2/10/2003 9:49:49 AM)
You guys aren’t hijacking this thread are you? ;)

Ron Saueracker -> (2/11/2003 12:28:58 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Snigbert [B][B]None of us want to use an entire division to garrison a small second-rate base.[/B] Like Canada.... waits for someone to throw a sharp object [/B][/QUOTE] Snigbert!!! Definitely time to turn off your water and hydro down there. And no, ya can't come up here and blow away all the animals and indians for sport like ya did down there either!;) Maybe we will even revoke your licence to play basketball, a game some bored Canuck invented. I know...Canadians will only be allowed to play on Canadian hockey teams. You'll be stuck with a few yanks from near the border and Don Cherry's favourites...Europeans. (insert utopian Star Trekesque society where money does not exist:rolleyes: ) Now we are never gonna show you guys how football should be played...4 downs, sheesh! I'm really gonna push Canada now in WITP! Should not be a blob of nothingness yet again. If Russia is in, why not Canada? Canada did more in Pacific war.

Bulldog61 -> (2/11/2003 1:32:59 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Ron Saueracker [B]Snigbert!!! Definitely time to turn off your water and hydro down there. And no, ya can't come up here and blow away all the animals and indians for sport like ya did down there either!;) Maybe we will even revoke your licence to play basketball, a game some bored Canuck invented. I know...Canadians will only be allowed to play on Canadian hockey teams. You'll be stuck with a few yanks from near the border and Don Cherry's favourites...Europeans. (insert utopian Star Trekesque society where money does not exist:rolleyes: ) Now we are never gonna show you guys how football should be played...4 downs, sheesh! I'm really gonna push Canada now in WITP! Should not be a blob of nothingness yet again. If Russia is in, why not Canada? Canada did more in Pacific war. [/B][/QUOTE] Sniggy! What did I tell you when Ron finds out you're going to be in deep du-du!

Snigbert -> (2/20/2003 11:25:20 AM)
[B]Maybe we will even revoke your licence to play basketball, a game some bored Canuck invented.[/B] Is this the crazy kind of stuff they teach you Canadians? Basketball was invented in Springfield Massachusetts, I've been to the Hall of Fame there. I dont remember them mentioning the inventor was Canadian...which they surely would have mentioned if it were true because it is so absurd to think of Canadians playing basketball. I thought that if there was no ice involved Canadians didnt consider it a sport.

bradfordkay -> (2/21/2003 3:02:51 AM)
Sniggie, I'm sorry, but Ron is right. Mr Naismith was a Canadian who happened to be living and working in Springfield. As often happens, our compatriots working there conveniently forgot to mention the Canadian connection...

Snigbert -> (2/21/2003 3:49:29 AM)
I'm covering my eyes and not reading anymore heresy. :)

Ron Saueracker -> (2/21/2003 8:35:53 AM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Snigbert [B][B]Maybe we will even revoke your licence to play basketball, a game some bored Canuck invented.[/B] Is this the crazy kind of stuff they teach you Canadians? Basketball was invented in Springfield Massachusetts, I've been to the Hall of Fame there. I dont remember them mentioning the inventor was Canadian...which they surely would have mentioned if it were true because it is so absurd to think of Canadians playing basketball. I thought that if there was no ice involved Canadians didnt consider it a sport. [/B][/QUOTE] Sniggy. Ever see a show called "Talking with Americans"? It used to be a spot on CBC's "This Hour Has 22 Minutes" but took off it was so funny. Rick Mercer, from 22 Minutes would go to the States and interview and question real Americans. He would get them to congratulate us on legalizing staplers, conduct polls like "Should the US bomb the snot out of Saskatchewanstan?" and get answers like "Hell, yes...after what those bastards did!", etc. Some of these Americans are US State Govenors and Congressmen, so don't feel bad about overlooking some rather trivial facts like the Bball thing.;)

Snigbert -> (2/21/2003 9:07:39 AM)
Sounds like a similar skit on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno where he interviews people on the street and they often sound incomprehensibly stupid. However, I think you can find extremely ignorant people on the street of any major city around the world, it's not just us Americans. It's just that we're more proud of it. :)

mogami -> A bone (2/27/2003 5:44:34 AM)
Greetings, Get out your maps of the Pacific and start plotting. Here is major units for Japan 7 Dec 41 14th Army 4th Tank Rgt Pescadore moves to Aparri PI 7th Tank Rgt Pescadore moves to Aparri PI 65th Bde Pescadores (loads and moves to Vigan PI) 4th Div Nagoya (Loads for movement to Vigan PI) 16th Div Amami 21st Div Osaka (loads for transport to Lagasipi PI) 48th Div (loaded on Transport turn 1 lands at Aparri PI)(Div is actually loaded in 2 TF's with differant targets. I combine into 1 TF and send to Aparri) 15th Army 33rd Div moving 55th Div Sienuem Reap (moving north towards Bangkok) 16th Army 8th Tank Rgt Kagoshima 56th Bde Palau moves to Davao (Mindanao PI) 2nd Div Kagoshima 38th Div Hong Kong 25th Army Imperial Guards Div Sienuem Reap (moving north towards Bangkok) 1st Tank Rgt Siemuem Reap (moving north toward Bangkok) 2nd Tank Rgt Taan 6th Tank Rgt Taan 14th Tank Rgt Taan 5th Div (loaded moves to Songkhia) will move down west coast of Malaysia 18th Div Taan moves to Khota Bharu 56th Div Osaka Southern Area Army 4th Mixed Rgt Saigon 21st Mixed Bde Saigon 23rd Mixed Bde Saigon (loads for transport to Brunei) Southern Fleet 35th Bde (used in support of 25th Army) And of course a host of SNLF units

TIMJOT -> (2/27/2003 8:49:51 AM)
Hello Mogami Not knit-picking, but I'm just curious. Are those pre-set army oob's or did you create them yourself? If they are pre-set, then 14th army should include the 16th Division. I believe the 21st Division was historically in the Southern Area Army's general reserve. Appreciate the insight, thanks:)

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.90625