RE: When? (Full Version)

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



Message


Neilster -> RE: When? (8/1/2009 12:20:10 PM)

Onward and upward :)

Cheers, Neilster




Froonp -> RE: When? (8/1/2009 12:43:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
Rob Jenkins continues to do an enormous number of naval unit writeups every week.

Maybe !

But he hasn't answered the question : Why Gettysburg is not the name of a big ship [:D].




warspite1 -> RE: When? (8/1/2009 12:51:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
Rob Jenkins continues to do an enormous number of naval unit writeups every week.

Maybe !

But he hasn't answered the question : Why Gettysburg is not the name of a big ship [:D].

Warspite1

Sorry Patrice, I am officially rubbish [:D]

Seriously though, this does need answering quickly - its going to bug me - until I know the answer [&:]




Cheesehead -> RE: When? (8/1/2009 6:12:20 PM)

quote:

But he hasn't answered the question : Why Gettysburg is not the name of a big ship


Maybe so as not to offend a certain section of the country????




doctormm -> RE: When? (8/2/2009 1:56:44 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cheesehead

quote:

But he hasn't answered the question : Why Gettysburg is not the name of a big ship


Maybe so as not to offend a certain section of the country????


There's an Antietam and a Vicksburg during WWII, so there's no issue on Civil War battle names.




sajbalk -> RE: When? (8/2/2009 6:57:50 PM)

Vicksburg is for the city, I think. Antietam was efectively a tie, so neither side is upset.





Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: When? (8/3/2009 12:19:15 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sajbalk

Vicksburg is for the city, I think. Antietam was efectively a tie, so neither side is upset.



The South had a different name for the battle though (Sharpsburg).




paulderynck -> RE: When? (8/3/2009 12:32:26 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets


quote:

ORIGINAL: sajbalk

Vicksburg is for the city, I think. Antietam was efectively a tie, so neither side is upset.



The South had a different name for the battle though (Sharpsburg).

In the fabulous TV series The Civil War by Ken Burns, the author Shelby Foote is quoted saying the reason for this, IIRC, was something to do with the Southern forces being more rural oriented while the Northerners were more urban oriented...




Mad Russian -> RE: When? (8/4/2009 3:56:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sajbalk

Vicksburg is for the city, I think. Antietam was efectively a tie, so neither side is upset.





Antietam is also America's bloodiest day.

Good Hunting.

MR




Mad Russian -> RE: When? (8/4/2009 3:58:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets


quote:

ORIGINAL: sajbalk

Vicksburg is for the city, I think. Antietam was efectively a tie, so neither side is upset.



The South had a different name for the battle though (Sharpsburg).

In the fabulous TV series The Civil War by Ken Burns, the author Shelby Foote is quoted saying the reason for this, IIRC, was something to do with the Southern forces being more rural oriented while the Northerners were more urban oriented...



Which would then have them backwards. The Confederacy named their battles after the closest town and the Union named them after the closest river/creek/run.

Following your logic the Union would have named the battles after towns and the Confederacy after the closest moving water.

Good Hunting.

MR




Mad Russian -> RE: When? (8/4/2009 4:09:39 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sajbalk

Vicksburg is for the city, I think. Antietam was efectively a tie, so neither side is upset.




USS Antietam (CV/CVA/CVS-36) was one of 24 Essex-class aircraft carriers built during and shortly after World War II for the United States Navy. The ship was the second US Navy ship to bear the name, and was named for the Civil War Battle of Antietam (Maryland). Antietam was commissioned in January 1945, too late to actively serve in World War II. After serving a short time in the Far East, she was decommissioned in 1949. She was soon recommissioned for Korean War service, and in that conflict earned two battle stars. In the early 1950s, she was redesignated an attack carrier (CVA) and then an antisubmarine warfare carrier (CVS). After the Korean War she spent the rest of her career operating in the Atlantic, Caribbean, and Mediterranean. From 1957 until her deactivation, she was the Navy's training carrier, operating out of Florida.

Antietam was fitted with a port sponson in 1952 to make her the world's first true angled-deck aircraft carrier. But she received no major modernizations other than this, and thus throughout her career largely retained the classic appearance of a World War II Essex-class ship. She was decommissioned in 1963, and sold for scrap in 1974.



The first USS Gettysburg was a steamer in the United States Navy.

The ship was built in Glasgow, Scotland, in 1858, named Douglas, and operated for the Isle of Man Steam Packet Company between Liverpool, United Kingdom and Douglas on the Isle of Man, until November 1862. She was then sold to the Confederacy, renamed Margaret and Jessie, and operated as a blockade runner until her capture by the Union on 5 November 1863. The ship was renamed Gettysberg, and commissioned into the Union Navy on 2 May 1864.

During her military service, Gettysberg operated with the North Atlantic Blockading Squadron, was involved in both the first and second attacks on Fort Fisher, helped lay telegraph cables between Key West and Havana and undertook navigational surveys of the Caribbean and the Mediterranean.

Gettysburg was decommissioned on 6 May 1879 and sold two days later.

USS Gettysburg (CG-64) is a Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruiser in the United States Navy. She is named for the Battle of Gettysburg during the American Civil War. She was built at the Bath Iron Works in Maine.

With her guided missiles and rapid-fire cannons, she is capable of facing and defeating threats in the air, on the sea, or the ashore, and underneath the sea. She also carries two Seahawk LAMPS multi-purpose helicopters, but mainly for anti-submarine warfare, ASW.

On November 30, 1994, Gettysburg, along with USS Halyburton, was dispatched to assist the cruise ship Achille Lauro, which was on fire in the Indian Ocean off the coast of Somalia. Achille Lauro eventually sank but the passengers were rescued and transported to Mombasa, Kenya.[1][2][3]

On May 13, 2009 a team of sailors from the ship apprehended 17 pirates off the coast of Yemen as the pirates were attempting to hijack the Egyptian ship Motor Vessel Amira.

Nothing in between. No ship named Gettysburg in WWII.



The USS Vicksburg was a Cleveland-class light cruiser and the third to be named for the city in Mississippi. Construction began on October 26, 1942, though she was originally to be called the Cheyenne. A month later, her name was changed to the Vicksburg. She was launched on December 14, 1943 under the sponsorship of Miss Muriel Hamilton, and she was commissioned on June 12, 1944 under the command of Captain William C. Vose.

In January 1945, the Vicksburg joined Task Group 21.12 and headed for Hawaii. She arrived at Pearl Harbor on January 17 and conducted exercises through the end of the month. She then headed to Saipan before entering in her first major engagement of the war - the bombardment of Iwo Jima. She remained in the area into March before heading back to Ulithi for provisions. From there, she assisted with the air strikes in preparation for the invasion of Okinawa.

After the battle, the Vicksburg remained off of Okinawa in support duties, and then headed for the Philippine Islands in late June. She was still in the Philippines when the Japanese surrendered and headed for the Japanese home islands a few days later. On September 5, 1945, she entered Tokyo Bay.

The Vicksburg remained in Tokyo Bay for two weeks before joining the 3rd Fleet to head to Okinawa. There she received more than 2,000 passengers to carry home to the United States. She arrived in Pearl Harbor on October 4 and from there headed to San Francisco. She continued in duties along the West Coast for the rest of the year.

On January 17, 1946, the Vicksburg underwent an overhaul and modernization. She then operated out of San Diego until September. She was officially decommissioned on June 30, 1947 and was removed from the Navy list on October 1, 1962. She was sold for scrap two years later.


Good Hunting.

MR




brian brian -> RE: When? (8/6/2009 3:48:02 AM)

The US Military honored the south by naming Forts AP Hill, Lee, Jackson, and Bragg for the Confederate generals. Perhaps I'm forgetting some others. I think some southerners might even scratch their heads over the plaudit for Bragg though. Fort Bragg is a particularly large and important post still today, housing the 82nd Airborne and Special Operations Command. Fort Jackson is an important center for basic training. Don't know much about AP Hill or Lee these days. But that would be for discussion of a different war, just wanted to post for folks outside the USA who didn't know that.




foxtrot7 -> RE: When? (8/6/2009 3:58:52 PM)

Ft Lee is the Army's Supply and logistics training base. Advanced training is huge here for all your Quartermaster guys.

Ft AP Hill is a combat training center. Like a sandbox. Combat units come here to hone their skills for this kind of environment. Units from the 10th mountain go there a lot to to train when there not on deployment.




morgil -> RE: When? (8/6/2009 9:11:55 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

He also found a number of small errors in the data files, the only crucial one being that Bergen had been listed as an Objective city.

WHUTT !
Bergen is no longer a Objective City !?!
Thats a bleeping scandal, you know how much hard work it took to sneak it in there ? [;)]

Well, I can concede that by 1945 it was not such an important place, but from 1070 to atleast 1830s it was the most important Norwegian city. The Frigate HMS Tartar was almost sunk here 201 years ago by fire from rowing boats, and its a really nice place, though we claim to be a rainy city just too keep the people from Oslo away. (Only 3 meters of rain last year.)

That should count for something [:)]

Anyways, awesome job guys, I'm so looking forward to this game.

And on a side note..
USS Halyburton, how scary is that...Can you get electrocuted when you fire the main guns ?




foxtrot7 -> RE: When? (8/6/2009 10:36:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: morgil

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

He also found a number of small errors in the data files, the only crucial one being that Bergen had been listed as an Objective city.

WHUTT !
Bergen is no longer a Objective City !?!
Thats a bleeping scandal, you know how much hard work it took to sneak it in there ? [;)]

Well, I can concede that by 1945 it was not such an important place, but from 1070 to atleast 1830s it was the most important Norwegian city. The Frigate HMS Tartar was almost sunk here 201 years ago by fire from rowing boats, and its a really nice place, though we claim to be a rainy city just too keep the people from Oslo away. (Only 3 meters of rain last year.)

That should count for something [:)]

Anyways, awesome job guys, I'm so looking forward to this game.

And on a side note..
USS Halyburton, how scary is that...Can you get electrocuted when you fire the main guns ?


ONLY 3 METERS?!
Here in Arizona we consider 2 inches a wet year.
When Noah built the ark and the rains made the great flood. . . Arizona got 6 inches.




Tonqeen -> RE: When? (8/6/2009 10:44:26 PM)

A pudel in scandinavia weights at least 3 times the arizona ones due to wet fur :)




Orm -> RE: When? (8/6/2009 10:47:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: morgil

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

He also found a number of small errors in the data files, the only crucial one being that Bergen had been listed as an Objective city.

WHUTT !
Bergen is no longer a Objective City !?!
Thats a bleeping scandal, you know how much hard work it took to sneak it in there ? [;)]

Well, I can concede that by 1945 it was not such an important place, but from 1070 to atleast 1830s it was the most important Norwegian city. The Frigate HMS Tartar was almost sunk here 201 years ago by fire from rowing boats, and its a really nice place, though we claim to be a rainy city just too keep the people from Oslo away. (Only 3 meters of rain last year.)

That should count for something [:)]

Anyways, awesome job guys, I'm so looking forward to this game.

And on a side note..
USS Halyburton, how scary is that...Can you get electrocuted when you fire the main guns ?


I do not want to disrespect the importance of Bergen but are you not forgetting Trondheim?

I seem to recall that Trondheim was of great importance during late viking age and during the middle ages. It may just have been of religous importance because I do know that alot of Swedes travelled there for religous reasons.

And I am most likely wrong since I am from Sweden and therefore, by nature, totally ignorant of the relative importance of Norweigan cities. [;)]

Oh. And it never rains in Bergen. It pours. [8|]




Tonqeen -> RE: When? (8/6/2009 10:54:50 PM)

quote:

And I am most likely wrong since I am from Sweden and therefore, by nature, totally ignorant of the relative importance of Norweigan cities.


Oh, I thought Bergen was a mountain [:D]




*Lava* -> RE: When? (8/7/2009 11:44:29 AM)

How Kewl!

WiF will be published before Starcraft! [:D]




Shooterguy -> Long Time Coming! (8/7/2009 7:28:22 PM)

"I. Project Management
We are looking at the first week of November, 2009 for product release. " [&o]

Geez, I hope so! I've owned every paper copy of WIF ever released and have waited for a good computer version of this game forever. There is simply nothing like WIF out there, and if this game is done right no other grand strategic WWII game will come close to being as good as WIF.

I honestly don't have time to look through 4+ years of previous posts, but is this version going to take advantage of its translation to the computer to make the naval war better? Paper WIF did the best job of representing the naval war in a grand strategic fashion of any other game out there, but if the computer version can add limited intelligence and fog of war then I think finally we would see a game where the role the navies played on both sides of the conflict might finally be realized.

Only one weapon scared Winston Churchill to the point where he could envision his nation losing the war, the U-boats. This game could finally mirror that fear for a CW player. One weapon made the most contribution to defeating the empire of Japan, the submarine (from all allies involved), and hopefully this game can mirror that carnage that the submarines wrought. Paper WIF came close, but you could always see the pieces on the maps and had a general idea when your opponent was going to move them and their chance to sink enemy warships was never that good IMHO.

The surface fleets also suffered in paper WIF because you always knew where they were and could generally guess where they were going. This game could easily make the naval war just as much if not more fun and exciting as the land and air wars. To me, in paper WIF, the naval war was either over way too soon or was simply a side show to what happened on land. I'm looking forward to seeing the finished product!

Oh yeah, LT, USN, 6160, just in case you felt like flaming me for being a bubblehead lover [:D]




Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Long Time Coming! (8/7/2009 8:33:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shooterguy

"I. Project Management
We are looking at the first week of November, 2009 for product release. " [&o]

Geez, I hope so! I've owned every paper copy of WIF ever released and have waited for a good computer version of this game forever. There is simply nothing like WIF out there, and if this game is done right no other grand strategic WWII game will come close to being as good as WIF.

I honestly don't have time to look through 4+ years of previous posts, but is this version going to take advantage of its translation to the computer to make the naval war better? Paper WIF did the best job of representing the naval war in a grand strategic fashion of any other game out there, but if the computer version can add limited intelligence and fog of war then I think finally we would see a game where the role the navies played on both sides of the conflict might finally be realized.

Only one weapon scared Winston Churchill to the point where he could envision his nation losing the war, the U-boats. This game could finally mirror that fear for a CW player. One weapon made the most contribution to defeating the empire of Japan, the submarine (from all allies involved), and hopefully this game can mirror that carnage that the submarines wrought. Paper WIF came close, but you could always see the pieces on the maps and had a general idea when your opponent was going to move them and their chance to sink enemy warships was never that good IMHO.

The surface fleets also suffered in paper WIF because you always knew where they were and could generally guess where they were going. This game could easily make the naval war just as much if not more fun and exciting as the land and air wars. To me, in paper WIF, the naval war was either over way too soon or was simply a side show to what happened on land. I'm looking forward to seeing the finished product!

Oh yeah, LT, USN, 6160, just in case you felt like flaming me for being a bubblehead lover [:D]

Welcome to the forum.[:)]

Changing/revising the WIF rules is not part of my contract. In fact, it is specifically mentioned as something I am NOT doing. Plenty of other work is required to get this puppy out the door without adding new stuff.




Jagdtiger14 -> RE: Long Time Coming! (8/7/2009 9:22:01 PM)

Are you asking about the Hidden Task Forces Option?...or a change in the naval rules?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shooterguy

"I. Project Management
We are looking at the first week of November, 2009 for product release. " [&o]

Geez, I hope so! I've owned every paper copy of WIF ever released and have waited for a good computer version of this game forever. There is simply nothing like WIF out there, and if this game is done right no other grand strategic WWII game will come close to being as good as WIF.

I honestly don't have time to look through 4+ years of previous posts, but is this version going to take advantage of its translation to the computer to make the naval war better? Paper WIF did the best job of representing the naval war in a grand strategic fashion of any other game out there, but if the computer version can add limited intelligence and fog of war then I think finally we would see a game where the role the navies played on both sides of the conflict might finally be realized.

Only one weapon scared Winston Churchill to the point where he could envision his nation losing the war, the U-boats. This game could finally mirror that fear for a CW player. One weapon made the most contribution to defeating the empire of Japan, the submarine (from all allies involved), and hopefully this game can mirror that carnage that the submarines wrought. Paper WIF came close, but you could always see the pieces on the maps and had a general idea when your opponent was going to move them and their chance to sink enemy warships was never that good IMHO.

The surface fleets also suffered in paper WIF because you always knew where they were and could generally guess where they were going. This game could easily make the naval war just as much if not more fun and exciting as the land and air wars. To me, in paper WIF, the naval war was either over way too soon or was simply a side show to what happened on land. I'm looking forward to seeing the finished product!

Oh yeah, LT, USN, 6160, just in case you felt like flaming me for being a bubblehead lover [:D]





MajorDude -> RE: Long Time Coming! (8/7/2009 9:32:39 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shooterguy

...

Oh yeah, LT, USN, 6160, just in case you felt like flaming me for being a bubblehead lover [:D]



Does this mean you are an instructor at the USNA? [sm=character0085.gif]




Shooterguy -> RE: Long Time Coming! (8/7/2009 11:58:11 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14

Are you asking about the Hidden Task Forces Option?...or a change in the naval rules?

I don't remember a hidden task force option in paper WIF, but yes that sounds like an optional rule like that would fit the bill. At least if the contents of a task force were hidden it would add some fog of war. Having limited intelligence (ie. limiting what a player sees of the enemy's forces) would be better.

There's been quite a bit written about paper WIF's number one draw back being the ability to see every counter on the board. There was an optional rule (as I remember, don't own any paper WIF copies any more) where players couldn't unstack anything on the board to add at least a little fog of war. My problem with seeing everything on the board was that it made submarines much less effective. You could simply drive around them or when you had to drive past them ensure you had enough escort to kill any submarine that dared to attack you.

I understand Steve's reply that he's not supposed to change the rules. No problem. Put out the game as written and we'll all be happy (including me)! Something like what I'm talking about could be added as an optional rule or an update later if people ask for it. [:D]




Shooterguy -> RE: Long Time Coming! (8/8/2009 12:00:21 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MajorDude

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shooterguy

...

Oh yeah, LT, USN, 6160, just in case you felt like flaming me for being a bubblehead lover [:D]



Does this mean you are an instructor at the USNA? [sm=character0085.gif]


No, but I am an instructor at NSWC Dahlgren [:D]




Shooterguy -> RE: Long Time Coming! (8/8/2009 12:03:07 AM)

Welcome to the forum.

Changing/revising the WIF rules is not part of my contract. In fact, it is specifically mentioned as something I am NOT doing. Plenty of other work is required to get this puppy out the door without adding new stuff.

_____________________________

Steve

Understand, thanks. Like I said, get this game published as is and we'll all be happy [:D] Changes can always come later.




Extraneous -> RE: Long Time Coming! (8/8/2009 10:17:19 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shooterguy

No, but I am an instructor at NSWC Dahlgren [:D]


So at Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) – Dahlgren Division are you working at…

The New Railgun Electromagnetic Launch Facility Dedicated at NSWC Dahlgren?




Shooterguy -> RE: Long Time Coming! (8/8/2009 11:02:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shooterguy

No, but I am an instructor at NSWC Dahlgren [:D]


So at Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) – Dahlgren Division are you working at…

The New Railgun Electromagnetic Launch Facility Dedicated at NSWC Dahlgren?



No, I'm an instructor at ATRC, but the rail gun is definately very cool! [X(] I haven't seen it up close yet though. I'll weasel my way in there some time.




Extraneous -> RE: Long Time Coming! (8/9/2009 3:41:41 AM)

Cool, you work at The AEGIS Training & Readiness Center.

For those that don’t surf the net much…

The AEGIS Training and Readiness Center (ATRC) is staffed and maintained by a team of professional military and civilian instructors and technicians who provide training to both enlisted and officer personnel in the skills they will need to operate the United States Navy's most sophisticated warships, the Ticonderoga class cruiser and the Arleigh Burke class destroyer, both equipped with the AEGIS Combat System and the AEGIS Weapons System.


AEGIS (Advanced Electronic Guidance and Instrumentation System) is the US Navy's phased array radar-based combat system.  It is also the Greek word for Shield.


Welcome aboard.




christo -> RE: When? (8/10/2009 6:20:04 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets



Alain (Caquineur) sent me a partially edited version of the Land Unit writeups. I have put Adam and Christo in contact with him with the hope that they will author some of the missing writeups on land units.

BIG SNIP


IX. Glitz (historical video, sound effects, music, historical unit write-ups)
I have Robert on the naval unit writeups with Alain/Adam/Christo working on the same for land units. I am waiting on the sound effects from Jim and the music from Dave. There is no real hurry on the last two, though I would like to have them in hand before mid-August.



Not guilty
Would love to be in a position to help but methinks it was someone else

Christo




Page: <<   < prev  43 44 [45] 46 47   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.015625