RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commissioned ships (Full Version)

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



Message


Alpha77 -> RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commissioned ships (6/12/2021 4:02:23 PM)

Oh right, ban me for a (quite) funny internet meme ? [:D]

Even if it is not political at all, yeah go right ahead.

"MAKE MY DAY" [8D] (edit, the word "punk" deleted)

I guess some will also not know where this is from:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ishbTwXf1g

[image]https://i.imgflip.com/uhtcu.jpg[/image]





Yaab -> RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commissioned ships (6/12/2021 4:04:29 PM)

Getting back to the topic.

Empty xAKs/xAPs can take more damage from CD arty/bombs/mines than loaded ships of the same class. Cargo loaded in ships feeds fires when a ship is hit.

Compare this empty xAK

[image]https://i.postimg.cc/g07j81sT/Tura-3-single-250kg-GP-bomb-RESTART-XII.png[/image]

to this xAK which carried 3200 resources. Both ships were hit by single bombs.

[image]https://i.postimg.cc/HnzC4yHk/tura11-one-hit-by-50kg-bomb-so-much-damage.png[/image]

Seems to me, attaching empty xAK ships to amphibious landings in enemy hexes would be a valid tactics to fool enemy CD units.




Alpha77 -> RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commissioned ships (6/12/2021 4:22:34 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yaab
Getting back to the topic.


HOW DARE YOU? [:-]

The King of OT picture posts, who then complains when others post (even more funny) pics then himself (aka RJ) will not like you anymore [:(]

Lets listen to what climate Gretel has to say about this (people like metal here I hope)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kD1zubg3cA

But lets see if your actually useful post brings back seriousness to the thread [;)]




Shellshock -> RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commissioned ships (6/12/2021 4:38:39 PM)

Okay, forget the girls. We should have stuck to the beer at least.

[image]local://upfiles/37092/E086E6B7EDC74A429B257B68D15BE64C.jpg[/image]




Moltrey -> RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commissioned ships (6/12/2021 5:08:32 PM)

So I did some re-reading of Beans, Bullets and Black Oil the last two nights in reference to whether or not transport of WITP:AE "Fuel", aka Bunker C used in most ships (not boats) via Cargo Ships (in 55G drums) was unrealistic.

Thus far, I am not finding any evidence of the USN using Cargo Ships as an alternative when shipping Bunker C or Fuel in-game. In reality, almost all of Diesel, Aviation Gas, Gasoline and other lubricants and solvents were packaged in drums and utilized this way (the game uses Supply to simulate these).

The broader theme that W.R. Carter conveys is that the USN contracted private and merchant marine tankers to onload Bunker C at San Pedro, CA, Pearl Harbor, Australia, etc.; then they were ordered to the USN bases like Noumea, Suva, Efate, Luganville and Funafuti and paid to anchor/dock and then the Navy's own Oilers and Tankers would be ordered to these locations, pull along side and transfer the fuel to their own holds, then sprint off to prearranged meeting locations to replenish task forces.

The capital ships were directly refueled by the Oiler and many, if not all of the Destroyers were refueled from the largest of the TF capital ships. This saved time and lowered the risk from Japanese subs finding the TF while they were crawling at 10kts with lines attached. Oilers were typically assigned to Task Forces for days or weeks at a time, depending on what operations were underway and how many refuellings would be needed (and obviously how much Bunker C was in their holds).

To recap, so far the evidence sides with charter tankers from US to specific ports, where they refueled the USN Oilers until empty. I have found no mention of cargo ships being utilized for transporting Bunker C.

Of course that begs the question: Why did the WITP:AE Devs decide to allow a mechanic where Fuel could be transported (with reduced efficiency) in Cargo ships?
Right now the correct answer is "I don't know".
If I had to guess... perhaps the team felt that on top of all the myriad of things we as the player must keep track of in WITP:AE, NOT having the rule in tests may have shown a serious logistical nightmare in keeping fleets fueled. Which was a reality in WW2 as we all know. Maybe it just made the simulation a real grind without a good enough benefit?
We really need to hear one of the Devs answer.

Meanwhile, I will keep researching. [sm=character0085.gif]
P.S. I DO remember that shore-based Storage Tanks were built at strategic locations in the South Pacific, but I haven't come across those parts of the book yet to know what commodities were stored.




RangerJoe -> RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commissioned ships (6/12/2021 7:10:29 PM)

The DDs would use some diesel to thin the bunker fuel or to run only on diesel.




RangerJoe -> RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commissioned ships (6/12/2021 7:13:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yaab
Getting back to the topic.


HOW DARE YOU? [:-]

The King of OT picture posts, who then complains when others post (even more funny) pics then himself (aka RJ) will not like you anymore [:(]

Lets listen to what climate Gretel has to say about this (people like metal here I hope)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kD1zubg3cA

But lets see if your actually useful post brings back seriousness to the thread [;)]



I did not go to that link but that is a political thing that is using a mentally handicapped person with a mental health issue besides.

So, here we go:



[image]local://upfiles/52896/ED885446E8DB4DFDB92376B870AD565C.jpg[/image]




RangerJoe -> RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commissioned ships (6/12/2021 7:16:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shellshock

Okay, forget the girls. We should have stuck to the beer at least.

[image]local://upfiles/37092/E086E6B7EDC74A429B257B68D15BE64C.jpg[/image]


[sm=00000436.gif]

[image]local://upfiles/52896/E4270D3E6E354A948C06D3FDA8344F62.jpg[/image]




BBfanboy -> RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commissioned ships (6/12/2021 7:24:43 PM)

The happy grimace on the face of the center girl and the smirk on the guy's face makes one wonder ...[;)]




RangerJoe -> RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commissioned ships (6/12/2021 8:11:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

Oh right, ban me for a (quite) funny internet meme ? [:D]

Even if it is not political at all, yeah go right ahead.

"MAKE MY DAY, PUNK" [8D]

I guess some will also not know where this is from:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ishbTwXf1g

[image]https://i.imgflip.com/uhtcu.jpg[/image]


It does not matter if it is an internet meme or not, it is still wrong to post such things. So is name calling.




Alpha77 -> RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commissioned ships (6/12/2021 8:30:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe
It does not matter if it is an internet meme or not, it is still wrong to post such things. So is name calling.


Are you a humourless priester/pastor of some kind? Sounds at least so to me. And I am in fact one here not doing any "name calling". If you perhaps meant the "punk" thing this is a movie quote where I also posted the source for (Dirty Harry).

And that from a guy having a political charged message in his sig, thatīrich [X(] Not to mention posting useless huge pics making the forum a PITA to view for others.

But for the fun of it I played the pics game with you[;)]
Now that the fun ended I suggest we get back on track at least in this thread!




RangerJoe -> RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commissioned ships (6/12/2021 9:08:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe
It does not matter if it is an internet meme or not, it is still wrong to post such things. So is name calling.


Are you a humourless priester/pastor of some kind? Sounds at least so to me. And I am in fact one here not doing any "name calling". If you perhaps meant the "punk" thing this is a movie quote where I also posted the source for (Dirty Harry).

And that from a guy having a political charged message in his sig, thatīrich [X(] Not to mention posting useless huge pics making the forum a PITA to view for others.

But for the fun of it I played the pics game with you[;)]
Now that the fun ended I suggest we get back on track at least in this thread!


It does not matter if it is a movie quote or not.

[image]local://upfiles/52896/94895D8C060C49D0B8505FC9EDABD913.jpg[/image]




Alpha77 -> RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commissioned ships (6/12/2021 9:30:31 PM)

Ok, but even then "punk" can be positive or negative...Some 80/90ties punks were ok (esp. the music) I think, while today it seems to be more a trend or excuse for alcohol and drug use.

Edit, I did not know punk is a kind of insult in English.
Googled and it seems is can be seen as a personal attack? For sure I do not want to be thrown in with these folks,so I take it back.[:)]





CaptBeefheart -> RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commissioned ships (6/14/2021 5:44:12 AM)

Just caught up with this. I just came back from a four-day weekend on Saishu-to (Jeju-do today). I went near the abandoned Japanese airfield on the SW corner of the island, and as we took a ferry to a nearby island I could see the shinyo caves.

On topic: I see no problem with using xAKs for hauling fuel nor for amphibious use (with xAPs). It's risky as your invasion fleet will be sitting there a long time while everything unloads. Still, pre-1943, you pretty much need to sprinkle those ships in to pull off anything big, and that's in the first wave. As Hans says, you definitely need to put your follow-on troops on those kinds of ships through 1945.

FCooke: I've been to Ned Kelly's Last Stand on the Kowloon side a few times, the first time in 1992 when I was staying nearby at a nice luxury accommodation at the Chungking Mansions. Not a bad expat watering hole.

Cheers,
CB




Moltrey -> RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commissioned ships (6/14/2021 1:46:29 PM)

Guys... can we please stop with the thread-jacking and off-topic pics and replies with said pics and "nanny nanny, boo boo" attitudes?
Enough. If you persist just to be an ass I am going to report folks. Just stop already.




RangerJoe -> RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commissioned ships (6/14/2021 1:57:23 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Moltrey

Guys... can we please stop with the thread-jacking and off-topic pics and replies with said pics and "nanny nanny, boo boo" attitudes?
Enough. If you persist just to be an ass I am going to report folks. Just stop already.

[:-]




RangerJoe -> RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commissioned ships (6/14/2021 2:02:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

Yeah agreed the torp issue is not very serious anymore I can live with what we have now.

Does anyone know if torps can be somehow rescued from isolated islands ? I mean where normal cargo / transport missions are not possible anymore if the enemy has air superiority for example. Can they transported by air, cause I tried this already but it seems the support squads are lifted but not the torps. 50 torps left behind = 500 supply[:(]

Guess I am totally out here - so also an OT beer pic from me [;)] Am I now "Willkommen im Club"? Or does it need boobs etc. too?

[image]https://i.imgflip.com/3qt1ya.jpg[/image]


For the Corona party! [:D]

[image]local://upfiles/52896/16D192C755DB40BFB5C0AF0F4EA9579D.jpg[/image]




Ian R -> RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commissioned ships (6/14/2021 2:52:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: CaptBeefheart

Just caught up with this. I just came back from a four-day weekend on Saishu-to (Jeju-do today). I went near the abandoned Japanese airfield on the SW corner of the island, and as we took a ferry to a nearby island I could see the shinyo caves.

On topic: I see no problem with using xAKs for hauling fuel nor for amphibious use (with xAPs). It's risky as your invasion fleet will be sitting there a long time while everything unloads. Still, pre-1943, you pretty much need to sprinkle those ships in to pull off anything big, and that's in the first wave. As Hans says, you definitely need to put your follow-on troops on those kinds of ships through 1945.

FCooke: I've been to Ned Kelly's Last Stand on the Kowloon side a few times, the first time in 1992 when I was staying nearby at a nice luxury accommodation at the Chungking Mansions. Not a bad expat watering hole.

Cheers,
CB


Did they have the Bledisloe Cup on the TV?




Ian R -> RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commissioned ships (6/14/2021 2:54:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Moltrey

Guys... can we please stop with the thread-jacking and off-topic pics and replies with said pics and "nanny nanny, boo boo" attitudes?
Enough. If you persist just to be an ass I am going to report folks. Just stop already.



Are you a member of any sport discussion forums?




Ian R -> RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commissioned ships (6/14/2021 3:05:28 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Moltrey

Guys... can we please stop with the thread-jacking and off-topic pics and replies with said pics and "nanny nanny, boo boo" attitudes?
Enough. If you persist just to be an ass I am going to report folks. Just stop already.

[:-]


[image]https://kisselpaso.com/files/2016/01/Be-Like-bill.jpg[/image]




fcooke -> RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commissioned ships (6/14/2021 11:26:57 PM)

Capt BH - I think we spent almost every last penny we had that night, and we had a few hundred students in there that night - so it certainly was an expat bar that night. We were in HK less than 24 hours, so not enough time to befriend the locals and find more authentic spots. I made it up later when part of my team was in HK and I went there once a year - they found out I liked Peking duck so 4 out 6 dinners would be that. And they wouldn't even leave you alone on the weekend (I would normally choose to weekend in HK before heading off to Tokyo, China or Manila for the next leg of my trip). In Asia folks really looked after their visitors. When Europeans and Asians came to NY we were not such good hosts.




CaptBeefheart -> RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commissioned ships (6/16/2021 3:52:28 AM)

Ian R: No specific memory, but most expat bars in Asia will have League games on, followed by Union and footy. There are a couple of pubs here where I'll watch Bledisloe. The Aussie and Kiwi Chambers used to do an annual pissup at the local Hilton for one of the cup games--that was always a great outing.

fcooke: Back in the old days, before Seoul had a range of good expat joints, a trip to HK meant you hit up Ned Kelly's and a few other places. And to me, those pubs were inhabited by "locals," as in long-term expats. One time on business we went to a huge floating restaurant on the other side of Vitoria Peak--duck was the main attraction there.

Cheers,
CB




fcooke -> RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commissioned ships (6/16/2021 11:34:36 PM)

My first time to HK and the PRC was in 89 (1989 you wankers, not 1889). In the PRC we stayed at Beijing University about a month before Tiamen Sq. I still wonder how many of those students might have been involved. We also went to Shanghai. A couple of locals sidled up to us and brought us to their favorite watering hole a ferry floating in the river. They wanted hard currency, so we drank at yuan rates for hours and got shellacked. I think we ended up paying two USD for the pleasure - and everyone was happy with the deal. Didn't get back to HK/Beijing/Shanghai again until roughly 2017. Didn't recognize any of the places and certainly could not buy part of a drink for 2 USD, never mind an evening of 4 college students with still functional livers.....

My colleagues who didn't travel were often like 'what's the big deal of flying from Tokyo to HK?' I was like look at a map - what's the big deal about flying from NY to SF? People need to get out more....but as much as it sometimes sucked, I miss the travel a bit.




CaptBeefheart -> RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commissioned ships (6/18/2021 6:20:52 AM)

Asia is a great place to travel around. I've been to most of the countries (I should count how many WITP-AE bases I've been to sometime).

I was in Prague one time in '91 and spent a fun evening at U Fleku with some young eastern German guys. I ended up buying a few more than my share of rounds, which was fine as a round was $2 and they had yet to receive the full economic benefits of reunification. Luckily I could speak some rudimentary German in those days. It came in handy in that country as I met all of two people who spoke English.

I have a feeling a lot of chaps on this forum would be good to blow the froth off a few pints with. The only person I've done that with is Obvert, an all-around good guy, when I had a trip to London a few years back. It would be great to see him do another AAR.

Cheers,
CB




BBfanboy -> RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commissioned ships (6/18/2021 1:31:17 PM)

+1. Obvert vs. Lowpe would be legendary!




CV10 -> RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commissioned ships (6/18/2021 3:42:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

+1. Obvert vs. Lowpe would be legendary!


Their last game was legendary. Props to Lowpe for sticking with the game after the accidental soviet activation in 1942.




Yaab -> RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commissioned ships (11/26/2021 7:34:54 AM)

Thread resurrection.

Found out why your average xAKs/xAPs are so resilient against CD gun fire.

Basically, cargo is roughly three categories

-resources, fuel, oil,supplies
-LCUs (devices)
-empty (no cargo)


Basically, when a ship carries resources/fuel/oil/supplies, this cargo will feed fires whenever the ship is hit by a bomb/shell/torpedo. You don't even have to carry a full cargo, something like 1/3 cargo load is enough to give you considerably more system/fire damage. The most important thing is that supplies behave here the same way as fuel/oil, probably because they also represent ammo.

HOWEVER, a ship carrying LCU (devices) as its cargo behaves like an EMPTY ship for damage calculations. LCU devices do not feed fires when a ship is hit. All damage is soaked then by ship durability. It seems strange, because devices are created out of supply, so devices should be flammable too since tanks/arty devices travel with their ammo, however the code deducts(?) any flammable ammo from LCU devices.

Basically, if you have an xAK/xAP loaded with an LCU and no supplies or "three day" supplies, and the ship is unloading under a heavy CD gun fire, the ship is treated as EMPTY for damage calculations. Once you unload everyone and remain on station, firing at the CD gun unit, the ship is still treated as EMPTY for damage calculations. Since most CD gun shots are soaked by the ship's superstructures, they give no floatation damage and fire damage accumulates slowly because the ship has no cargo to feed the fires.

This means ships loaded solely with supplies are at a greater risk of sinking during amphibious invasions and suffer more damage when hit by GP bombs.







Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.9375