Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: The rant goes on... Pzjg Hortlund vs Castor Troy

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> After Action Reports >> RE: The rant goes on... Pzjg Hortlund vs Castor Troy Page: <<   < prev  25 26 27 28 [29]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The rant goes on... Pzjg Hortlund vs Castor Troy - 7/3/2008 2:18:18 PM   
jumper

 

Posts: 489
Joined: 2/23/2006
Status: offline
PBEM QUIT????


_____________________________



(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 841
RE: The rant goes on... Pzjg Hortlund vs Castor Troy - 7/3/2008 3:31:20 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
quote:

The Oscar performed better than the Tojo which seems to be completely useless. Wonder if the reason for that is the low maneuver rating of 29 of the Tojo. Seems like the Tojo can only fly straight ahead


It helps to de-uber the plane. Problem with the Ki-44 in WitP, is that it's heavier firepower allows it to be much better dogfighter than it was in RL, hence the maneuver reduction in NM. The plane was originally designed as an Interceptor and was not an optimal choice for taking on fighters despite it's boom and zoom potential.

The Tojo in combat is a bit of an enigma. It had a very medicore record in the few times it was deployed to the front lines, despite it's positive attributes of which it had more than one. To be fair it was not all due to the airframe but improper tactics but even so, the plane just seemed to suffer "bad luck" at times. The deployment of the 87th Sentai in Burma ended up being a disaster with Murphy's Law hitting them just about everywhere.

Losses are looking very high here but not unexpected . NM 9.0 works better in latewar situations where lots of well armed fighters are buzzing around but less so in the early period which is why the main scenario uses 9.2 adjustments.

_____________________________


(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 842
RE: The rant goes on... Pzjg Hortlund vs Castor Troy - 7/3/2008 4:07:11 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jumper

PBEM QUIT????




yup, quit. I will post more about that tomorrow...

_____________________________


(in reply to jumper)
Post #: 843
RE: The rant goes on... Pzjg Hortlund vs Castor Troy - 7/3/2008 5:10:57 PM   
Yakface


Posts: 846
Joined: 8/5/2006
Status: offline
Here endeth the rant!

Sorry to see the end of the game.  Have enjoyed following it Castor.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 844
RE: The rant goes on... Pzjg Hortlund vs Castor Troy - 7/4/2008 7:52:38 AM   
F6frc


Posts: 112
Joined: 4/8/2008
From: The Arsenal of Ohio
Status: offline
Sorry to see it end too! 

(in reply to Yakface)
Post #: 845
RE: The rant goes on... Pzjg Hortlund vs Castor Troy - 7/4/2008 1:55:15 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
Thanks for reading and you comments!

Yes it has finally ended. With the disputs or better say different oppinions about gameplay in the past it was only semi surprising that now the game ended.

All started with a couple of messages via MSN before Iīve even seen the replay (hope Hortlund doesnīt mind posting our conversation):


Hortlund: so what do we do now, I had ordered a counterattack but half my aircraft did not take off, that caused me to lose roughly 200 aircraft for nothing
several attacks from different ranges to wear down your airdefences, for some reason the main strike did not take off

Castor: thatīs nothing new that something like that can happen, is it? same happened to me the first time I attacked your af in Wuhan

Hortlund: not really, not when over 200 aircraft just fail to takeoff

Castor: donīt know what you want me to say or to do now. this happens ALL the time

Hortlund: not really, and especially not during such crucial turns

Castor: ahh... you donīt want to seriously ask for a redo of the turn because one base didnīt launch a strike. This is something that has happened since witp came out. sorry, but thatīs not a glitch nor a bug. we would be still in dec 41 if we would have redone every turn where a base didnīt launch aircraft

Hortlund: this is different since it is a pretty crucial attack I have been setting up for several days and when only half of the aircraft launch because of a game bug it becomes a pointless slaughter


.
.
.
.
.
.

the conversation went on with both of us not changing oppinion and I suggested to just end the game as even if my opponent would agree NOT to redo the turn I thought it would still be like "castor only won because Hortlund was hit by a bug and Castor only wants to redo turns if he gets hit by a bug" and I didnīt want to have my opponent with such a feeling. As I havenīt seen the replay up to that point I always thought about one of the 1000 bomber strikes in China with a probable sweep not going in before the bombers, but when I received the replay I saw this:




AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 06/09/43

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Air attack on Lashio , at 35,30


Allied aircraft
Beaufighter VIF x 14


No Allied losses

Aircraft Attacking:
7 x Beaufighter VIF bombing at 2000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Yenen , at 50,26

Japanese aircraft
A6M3 Zero x 18
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 25
Ki-44-IIb Tojo x 13
Ki-46-II Dinah x 1
Ki-15 Babs x 1

No Japanese losses

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Sian , at 47,29

Japanese aircraft
J1N1-S Irving x 3
Ki-44-IIb Tojo x 5
Ki-45 KAIa Nick x 14
Ki-49 Helen x 76
Ki-46-II Dinah x 1

Japanese aircraft losses
J1N1-S Irving: 1 destroyed, 1 damaged
Ki-45 KAIa Nick: 5 damaged
Ki-49 Helen: 32 damaged


Allied ground losses:
28 casualties reported
Guns lost 2

Airbase hits 2
Runway hits 50

Aircraft Attacking:
9 x Ki-49 Helen bombing at 11000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 56th Division, at 28,77


Allied aircraft
P-40N Warhawk x 24
B-25C Mitchell x 66


Allied aircraft losses
B-25C Mitchell: 3 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
11 casualties reported

Aircraft Attacking:
4 x B-25C Mitchell bombing at 21200 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 51st Chinese Corps, at 48,30

Japanese aircraft
D3A Val x 13
J1N1-R Irving x 1
Ki-44-IIb Tojo x 9
Ki-45 KAIb Nick x 20
Ki-30 Ann x 122
Ki-51 Sonia x 54
Ki-46-II Dinah x 1

Japanese aircraft losses
D3A Val: 5 damaged
Ki-45 KAIb Nick: 1 damaged
Ki-30 Ann: 2 destroyed, 33 damaged
Ki-51 Sonia: 3 destroyed, 25 damaged


Allied ground losses:
114 casualties reported
Guns lost 4

Aircraft Attacking:
20 x Ki-51 Sonia bombing at 2000 feet

hmm... China launched the usual strikes, while not seeing that many aircraft...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BUT THEN:


Day Air attack on TF, near Tenimbar at 36,81

Japanese aircraft
G4M1 Betty x 19

Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 19

Japanese aircraft losses
G4M1 Betty: 5 destroyed, 5 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
F4U-1 Corsair: 1 damaged

Allied Ships
AK Robert H. Harrison
AK Lewis Cass

Aircraft Attacking:
4 x G4M1 Betty bombing at 11000 feet
4 x G4M1 Betty bombing at 11000 feet
4 x G4M1 Betty bombing at 11000 feet

long range strike against Tenimbar drawed my immidiate attention!!!!! Bombers on nav attack out of a sudden in the area North of Australia! This is where the mod works very very good, more occassions where it works perfectly in this turn... 5 Betties shot down, 12 drop bombs but all miss...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF, near Koepang at 28,77

Japanese aircraft
D3A Val x 3
B5N Kate x 4
Ki-44-IIb Tojo x 6

Japanese aircraft losses
B5N Kate: 1 damaged

Allied Ships
AK Belawan, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
AK Kwangtung, Bomb hits 3, on fire

Aircraft Attacking:
4 x B5N Kate launching torpedoes at 200 feet
3 x D3A Val bombing at 2000 feet

attack against my supply TF that is still unloading supplies for my troops at Koepang. My carriers are sitting one hex North of Koepang but no leaking Cap at all...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF, near Koepang at 28,77

Japanese aircraft
G4M1 Betty x 8

No Japanese losses

Allied Ships
AK Kiangsu, Torpedo hits 3, on fire, heavy damage

Aircraft Attacking:
4 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
4 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet

Another strike against my supply TF at Koepang, a small AK is sunk, again no leaking Cap. Damn, there will be surely strikes against my carriers I thought...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF at 29,76

Japanese aircraft
A6M3a Zero x 13
B5N Kate x 13
Ki-44-IIb Tojo x 20

Allied aircraft
Seafire x 30
F4F-4 Wildcat x 199

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M3a Zero: 12 destroyed
B5N Kate: 13 destroyed
Ki-44-IIb Tojo: 20 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
F4F-4 Wildcat: 5 destroyed, 33 damaged

And here it is, the first strike goes in against my carriers! Was very pleased about the number of fighters on Cap (in fact it didnīt matter anyway if I was pleased as the PBEM was quit at that point ) but damn a lot Wildcats got damaged already. No bomber made it through Cap.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF at 29,76

Japanese aircraft
A6M3a Zero x 71
Ki-49 Helen x 13

Allied aircraft
Seafire x 30
F4F-4 Wildcat x 194

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M3a Zero: 52 destroyed
Ki-49 Helen: 4 destroyed, 5 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
Seafire: 1 destroyed, 12 damaged
F4F-4 Wildcat: 41 destroyed, 89 damaged

Allied Ships
CLAA Caledon
BB Mississippi
BB Pennsylvania

Aircraft Attacking:
4 x Ki-49 Helen bombing at 6000 feet
3 x Ki-49 Helen bombing at 6000 feet
2 x Ki-49 Helen bombing at 6000 feet

another strike! The Zeroes managed to get through nearly all the bombers! 9 Helen dropped bombs, no CV was targeted and they all missed anyway. Again, I think the mod worked very well in this engagement. 41 Wildcats destroyed and 89!!! damaged is surely nothing amusing!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF at 29,76

Japanese aircraft
D3A Val x 5
A6M3a Zero x 4
Ki-44-IIb Tojo x 6

Allied aircraft
Seafire x 29
F4F-4 Wildcat x 152

Japanese aircraft losses
D3A Val: 5 destroyed
A6M3a Zero: 2 destroyed
Ki-44-IIb Tojo: 4 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
F4F-4 Wildcat: 7 destroyed, 10 damaged

Allied Ships
CV Lexington, Bomb hits 1, on fire

another strike!!! Still 181!!! fighters on Cap but they arenīt effective anymore! I clicked only escape all the time, I wasnīt interested in the exact replay as the game was quit. Amazing though that no Val shows up as bombing at 2000 ft but still Lexington takes a bomb and is on fire! This is the only thing I see as a bug in this turn...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We are still in the morning phase and ANOTHER strike goes in against the carriers!

Day Air attack on TF at 29,76

Japanese aircraft
Ki-51 Sonia x 25

Allied aircraft
Seafire x 29
F4F-4 Wildcat x 145

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-51 Sonia: 16 destroyed


Allied Ships
BB Maryland
BB West Virginia, Bomb hits 1

Aircraft Attacking:
2 x Ki-51 Sonia bombing at 2000 feet
3 x Ki-51 Sonia bombing at 2000 feet
4 x Ki-51 Sonia bombing at 2000 feet

unescorted dive bombers, 16 were shot down by the Cap of still 174 fighters but 9 drop bombs! Again, look how well the mod works!! And this is a good example that itīs not just Allied 4E bombers that canīt be stopped. Of course they are far more "unstoppable" than Japanese fragile dive bombers, but this turn alone shows that Nikmod works BY FAR BETTER than stock! Again, thx to Nik for the mod! 100 kg bomb hit on West Virginia wouldnīt do any damage...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF at 29,76

Japanese aircraft
G4M1 Betty x 6

Allied aircraft
Seafire x 29
F4F-4 Wildcat x 145

Japanese aircraft losses
G4M1 Betty: 5 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
F4F-4 Wildcat: 2 damaged

Allied Ships
BB Maryland

Aircraft Attacking:
1 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet

It isnīt over yet! Another strike! Another time when the Cap is no Cap shield at all, one out of six bombers still made it through to target BB Maryland! 6 bombers against 174 fighters and one still makes it through... not bad...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF, near Lae at 54,87


Allied aircraft
PB4Y Liberator x 4


No Allied losses

Japanese Ships
DD Urakaze

Aircraft Attacking:
4 x PB4Y Liberator bombing at 10000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Then the afternoon phase...

Day Air attack on TF at 29,76

Japanese aircraft
D3A Val x 16
Ki-44-IIb Tojo x 47
Ki-49 Helen x 10

Allied aircraft
Seafire x 19
F4F-4 Wildcat x 81

Japanese aircraft losses
D3A Val: 13 destroyed
Ki-44-IIb Tojo: 31 destroyed
Ki-49 Helen: 5 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
Seafire: 2 damaged
F4F-4 Wildcat: 4 destroyed, 30 damaged

Allied Ships
CVL Independence
BB Idaho
BB Mississippi

Aircraft Attacking:
3 x Ki-49 Helen bombing at 6000 feet
1 x D3A Val bombing at 2000 feet
2 x Ki-49 Helen bombing at 6000 feet
2 x D3A Val bombing at 2000 feet

With the heavy fighting in the morning, our Cap is reduced to not even 50% of what it was in the morning! The Tojos are dead meat as always but the bombers get through again, scoring no hit though.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF at 29,76

Japanese aircraft
A6M3a Zero x 14
Ki-49 Helen x 8

Allied aircraft
Seafire x 19
F4F-4 Wildcat x 77

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M3a Zero: 7 destroyed
Ki-49 Helen: 6 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
Seafire: 2 damaged
F4F-4 Wildcat: 3 destroyed, 12 damaged

Allied Ships
CV Lexington, on fire
BB Washington

Aircraft Attacking:
2 x Ki-49 Helen bombing at 6000 feet

The strikes donīt stop! A small one, but 2 bombers drop their bombs but miss. CV Lexington is still burning from a hit by a Val that didnīt even drop a bomb... as mentioned that is the real bug of this turn...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF at 29,76

Japanese aircraft
D3A Val x 5
Ki-44-IIb Tojo x 4
Ki-49 Helen x 6

Allied aircraft
Seafire x 19
F4F-4 Wildcat x 74

Japanese aircraft losses
D3A Val: 1 damaged
Ki-44-IIb Tojo: 2 destroyed
Ki-49 Helen: 6 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
F4F-4 Wildcat: 1 destroyed, 1 damaged

Allied Ships
BB Maryland, Bomb hits 1

Aircraft Attacking:
2 x Ki-49 Helen bombing at 6000 feet
4 x Ki-49 Helen bombing at 6000 feet

same again, 6 bombers drop bombs... 100% of the bombers made it through... bomb bounced off Marylands armor...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF at 29,76

Japanese aircraft
G4M1 Betty x 3
Ki-49 Helen x 3

Allied aircraft
Seafire x 19
F4F-4 Wildcat x 72

Japanese aircraft losses
G4M1 Betty: 3 damaged
Ki-49 Helen: 1 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
F4F-4 Wildcat: 6 damaged

Allied Ships
BB Maryland, Torpedo hits 1

Aircraft Attacking:
3 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet

small strike, not a single bomber shot down by 91 fighters, the Helens turned back but 3 Betties managed to put a torp into Maryland.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The rest of the day are ground attacks...
Ground combat at Homan

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 74010 troops, 974 guns, 13 vehicles, Assault Value = 1799

Defending force 79182 troops, 434 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 1977



Allied ground losses:
542 casualties reported
Guns lost 4


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Yenen

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 43957 troops, 468 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 798

Defending force 78661 troops, 455 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 2091



Allied ground losses:
47 casualties reported


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Sining

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 6924 troops, 47 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 214

Defending force 662 troops, 10 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 27

Allied max assault: 204 - adjusted assault: 81

Japanese max defense: 16 - adjusted defense: 1

Allied assault odds: 81 to 1


Japanese ground losses:
96 casualties reported
Guns lost 3

Allied ground losses:
43 casualties reported
Guns lost 1

killing of the para fragment...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Koepang

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 44724 troops, 643 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 966

Defending force 32544 troops, 337 guns, 5 vehicles, Assault Value = 512

Allied max assault: 897 - adjusted assault: 1362

Japanese max defense: 423 - adjusted defense: 1097

Allied assault odds: 1 to 1 (fort level 7)

Allied Assault reduces fortifications to 6


Japanese ground losses:
471 casualties reported
Guns lost 4

Allied ground losses:
870 casualties reported
Guns lost 48

another attack at Koepang, the troops landed would probably sufficient to finish the job...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Chengtu

Japanese Shock attack

Attacking force 508 troops, 1 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 27

Defending force 6158 troops, 53 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 59

Japanese max assault: 18 - adjusted assault: 0

Allied max defense: 57 - adjusted defense: 53

Japanese assault odds: 0 to 1 (fort level 5)


Japanese ground losses:
270 casualties reported
Guns lost 1

Allied ground losses:
14 casualties reported
Guns lost 1

more paras are dropped...



Sooooo.... The game ended because I refused to redo the turn. I refused to redo it before I even watched the replay (I thought about airattacks in China) and I even more refuse to redo the turn AFTER watching the replay! The Japanese launched 12! strikes against my shipping today! They launched no less than 332 aircraft, fighters, torp bombers, dive bombers and level bombers. The losses for the Japanese were high, no doubt. Sorry, but why on earth should my opponent expect me to redo? I guess he would have liked (who would not) to see one huge, combined strike with 200 fighters and 120 bombers against one of my CV TFs (best against the unarmored US carriers of course as the Brits would just laugh about 250kg bombs and it would be foul again). But that did not happen. As he has stated in the MSN conversation, one "crucial strike" didnīt launch, but still, 12 strikes from 4 or 5 different bases with over 300 aircraft attacked today! So there is NO reason for me to redo the turn. I was really nerveless when I told my opponent to stop the game in all friendship and this was BEFORE watching the replay. After watching the replay I was just glad that we had the discussion before as I do find it really ridicoulos to ask for a redo in this case. I canīt express it otherwise...

In the discussion I mentioned the happenings when Hortlund parked TWICE his BBs in an Indian port just one or two hexes away from hundreds of bombers on nav attack and also hundreds of fighters on escort and 4!!! times (2x2 phases) not a single bomber attacked his ships. Iīve mentioned it often enough in this AAR that my bombers from the carriers didnīt attack (Brit Avenger I seemed to only attack one out of 5 times). How often his ships were in range of my LBA and nothing happened, no idea, itīs countless in this 1,5 years of war. My arguments were for the and Hortlund only told me that he has brought up his arguments and he thinks that everything always has to go Castorīs way. So I think it was wise to stop it in friendship, stopping it BEFORE seeing this replay. After the replay I was just shaking my head.

Now that the game is over, I told Hortlund that I will comment the end in my AAR and heīs of course allowed to enter it and comment also.



The funny thing is that IMO there were so many bad decisions by my opponent (not attacking my first invasion, waging war in China again) which obviously are not obvious faults for my opponent but the first real good action now (letting lose the airforce against my invasion now) is the decision that brings the game to an end. All he has seen are his losses of some 200 aircraft for not much gain (he seems not to have seen how well Nikmod worked here, he unfortunately only sees the - no doubt - unstoppable 4Es) but what he seems not to see is that my carriers would have to withdraw IMMEDIATELY AT FULL SPEED! Same goes for my supply TF at Koepang. Would this attack have happend the first day my invasion was going in, then my invasion would have been STOPPED with 40% of my troops ashore with nearly no supply and 250 ships from the invasion and nearly all the USN and RN on the retreat South as after the first day there would only be a Cap of some 100-120 fighters in the air. This would make my ships HIGHLY vulnerable. So in my oppinion, this decision was good, it was a full strategic victory (I have to retreat my ships). It was a very bad timing (far too late) though. For my opponent, it was only a game bug that his "crucial strike" didnīt launch and he obviously expected to wipe out 70% of the USN and RN within one or two turns. This didnīt happen, we have been of different oppinions AND I guess I was just to close to vital areas of the Japanese Empire that it is no surprise that the game finally ends in 6/43.

Thanks again for all the readers and your comments. The rant still goes on in my game against Swift!


_____________________________


(in reply to F6frc)
Post #: 846
RE: The rant goes on... Pzjg Hortlund vs Castor Troy - 7/4/2008 4:39:39 PM   
cantona2


Posts: 3749
Joined: 5/21/2007
From: Gibraltar
Status: offline
A pity. Why doesnt H email the password to another player who might be willing to take on the mantle?

_____________________________

1966 was a great year for English Football...Eric was born


(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 847
RE: The rant goes on... Pzjg Hortlund vs Castor Troy - 7/4/2008 6:57:26 PM   
dekwik


Posts: 90
Joined: 9/22/2007
From: Atlanta
Status: offline
This is a shame. It was a really interesting AAR. I read and enjoyed both sides and think that most of the time the game and the mod worked well. After all, it's supposed to be war. You have to expect that things don't always go the way you plan. in fact I think that's part of the game's attraction.

(in reply to cantona2)
Post #: 848
RE: The rant goes on... Pzjg Hortlund vs Castor Troy - 7/4/2008 7:04:06 PM   
cantona2


Posts: 3749
Joined: 5/21/2007
From: Gibraltar
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dekwik

This is a shame. It was a really interesting AAR. I read and enjoyed both sides and think that most of the time the game and the mod worked well. After all, it's supposed to be war. You have to expect that things don't always go the way you plan. in fact I think that's part of the game's attraction.

Tell me about it lol

_____________________________

1966 was a great year for English Football...Eric was born


(in reply to dekwik)
Post #: 849
RE: The rant goes on... Pzjg Hortlund vs Castor Troy - 7/4/2008 7:13:12 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: cantona2

A pity. Why doesnt H email the password to another player who might be willing to take on the mantle?



I didnīt ask him about that but I know he wouldnīt be willing as he told me itīs a password he doesnīt only use for WITP.

_____________________________


(in reply to cantona2)
Post #: 850
RE: The rant goes on... Pzjg Hortlund vs Castor Troy - 7/4/2008 11:44:44 PM   
Johan_Banér

 

Posts: 19
Joined: 1/21/2007
From: Sweden
Status: offline
*lurking mode off*

I'm really sorry to see this AAR quit, it was a good read while it lasted.

As I know Horty from another board, I can't really say that I am suprised that he quit when the game didn't proceed in the direction he wanted, I didn't want to say anything during the AAR, but you can find alot friendlier opponents around.

But cheer up, AE is (supposedly) out soon

*lurking mode on*

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 851
RE: The rant goes on... Pzjg Hortlund vs Castor Troy - 7/5/2008 9:38:49 AM   
Hortlund


Posts: 2884
Joined: 10/13/2000
Status: offline
There is more to the desicion to drop the game than this turn and the aircraft-bug. Im not going to go into it now, but you guys reading this thread should be aware that you are only getting one side of a story.

Johan Baner, which forum is that?

< Message edited by Panzerjaeger Hortlund -- 7/5/2008 10:30:23 AM >


_____________________________

The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close.
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..

(in reply to Johan_Banér)
Post #: 852
RE: The rant goes on... Pzjg Hortlund vs Castor Troy - 7/5/2008 9:45:48 AM   
aztez

 

Posts: 4031
Joined: 2/26/2005
From: Finland
Status: offline
Sorry to see this one ended.

But I do agree with you Castor. Definately no need for redo for such combat. That actually happens all the time as you said. It goes both ways.

Maybe you will find another opponent who is willing to stick around to the end.

(in reply to Hortlund)
Post #: 853
RE: The rant goes on... Pzjg Hortlund vs Castor Troy - 7/5/2008 1:00:10 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

There is more to the desicion to drop the game than this turn and the aircraft-bug. Im not going to go into it now, but you guys reading this thread should be aware that you are only getting one side of a story.

Johan Baner, which forum is that?



At least weīre both happy that it ended... I pointed out often enough that we never agree on anything, perhaps it would have been best for us to have it ended in early 42 though.

< Message edited by castor troy -- 7/5/2008 1:02:10 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Hortlund)
Post #: 854
RE: The rant goes on... Pzjg Hortlund vs Castor Troy - 7/5/2008 1:09:00 PM   
Johan_Banér

 

Posts: 19
Joined: 1/21/2007
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

Johan Baner, which forum is that?

*lurking mode off*
Languish
*lurking mode on*

(in reply to Hortlund)
Post #: 855
RE: The rant goes on... Pzjg Hortlund vs Castor Troy - 7/5/2008 6:35:41 PM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

There is more to the desicion to drop the game than this turn and the aircraft-bug. Im not going to go into it now, but you guys reading this thread should be aware that you are only getting one side of a story.

Johan Baner, which forum is that?



At least weīre both happy that it ended... I pointed out often enough that we never agree on anything, perhaps it would have been best for us to have it ended in early 42 though.


This is an important lesson. When you find an opponent who thinks like you (in regards to playing style) it is important to cherish and maintain the relationship.

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 856
RE: The rant goes on... Pzjg Hortlund vs Castor Troy - 7/5/2008 6:54:11 PM   
thegreatwent


Posts: 3011
Joined: 8/24/2004
From: Denver, CO
Status: offline
quote:

This is an important lesson. When you find an opponent who thinks like you (in regards to playing style) it is important to cherish and maintain the relationship.


True, there are plenty of marriages that don't last as long as a campaign game. Hell, there are plenty of marriages shortened by playing too many PBEM campaign games.

_____________________________


(in reply to bradfordkay)
Post #: 857
RE: The rant goes on... Pzjg Hortlund vs Castor Troy - 7/6/2008 1:18:26 AM   
JeffroK


Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline
It probably doesnt help a marriage when only one side of the story is printed on the front page of the newspaper.   It usually pisses off one of the couple.

Personal breakups are usually best left private.

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to thegreatwent)
Post #: 858
RE: The rant goes on... Pzjg Hortlund vs Castor Troy - 7/6/2008 1:44:55 AM   
TheElf


Posts: 3870
Joined: 5/14/2003
From: Pax River, MD
Status: offline
I haven't been following this AAR but the new title caught my attention. It's unfortunate that your opponent quit for what seems to me to be normal stock gameplay. As I tell the AE testers who are looking at our A2A code in action, think about WHY something occurred that you did not like, before passing judgment as a failure of the system. Not to say a failure of the system could not be present, but from my experience there usually is a good reason.

I would ask you opponent the following.

1. Where did this strike fail to launch from?
2. How was the Weather there?
3. How was supply?
4. Did he overstack and suffer a penalty?
5. Were his units low MOR?
6. Did he forget to set a critical setting?
7. What was the type of attack?
8. Had he reconned properly/enough?
9. Did he have enough Naval Search assets?

Any one of these may have contributed to his failure. But it seems this was meant to be any way? Maybe for the best?

_____________________________

IN PERPETUUM SINGULARIS SEDES



(in reply to jumper)
Post #: 859
RE: The rant goes on... Pzjg Hortlund vs Castor Troy - 7/6/2008 3:31:15 AM   
racndoc


Posts: 2519
Joined: 10/29/2004
From: Newport Coast, California
Status: offline
Castor Troy...


Sorry to see this VERY entertaining game and thread end....Im playing the same scenario against sjohnson and I have shared many of your frustrations. My opponent and I have had many discussions throughout the gameplay(currently May 1943) and we have made compromising house rules as we have progressed thru the game....you need an active dialogue to work out issues with your opponent or else the game can easily implode on its own.

< Message edited by AdmSpruance -- 7/6/2008 6:42:53 PM >

(in reply to TheElf)
Post #: 860
RE: The rant goes on... Pzjg Hortlund vs Castor Troy - 7/6/2008 11:40:16 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
thanks for your comments guys! Seems like there still were a couple of people reading the AAR. As Hortlund said, this last turn was just the top of the iceberg. Things like this happening happened all the time in our PBEM, when two 100% different oppinions clashed. And like this it was all the 1,5 years of gametime. So it was good to end it...

_____________________________


(in reply to racndoc)
Post #: 861
RE: The rant goes on... Pzjg Hortlund vs Castor Troy - 7/7/2008 3:49:08 PM   
pauk


Posts: 4162
Joined: 10/21/2001
From: Zagreb,Croatia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Johan_Banér

*lurking mode off*

I'm really sorry to see this AAR quit, it was a good read while it lasted.

As I know Horty from another board, I can't really say that I am suprised that he quit when the game didn't proceed in the direction he wanted...


Bingo!


_____________________________


(in reply to Johan_Banér)
Post #: 862
RE: The rant goes on... Pzjg Hortlund vs Castor Troy - 7/7/2008 3:53:24 PM   
pauk


Posts: 4162
Joined: 10/21/2001
From: Zagreb,Croatia
Status: offline

Well, i'm not suprised at all. His bitching for redos are well known issues - unfortunatly for you it would be a only a matter of time for his next request.

He is just troll, nothing more...

_____________________________


(in reply to pauk)
Post #: 863
RE: The rant goes on... Pzjg Hortlund vs Castor Troy - 7/7/2008 9:07:25 PM   
jwilkerson


Posts: 10525
Joined: 9/15/2002
From: Kansas
Status: offline
I hope everyone realizes we all set the standards by which we will be judged and what we think are proper posts. If you guys think these posts are proper here I assume you will think so when these types of posts return to your own threads. And I note that Castor doesn't seem as upset by what happened as some of the other posters might seem to. This harks back to an earlier situation in which the "Andy" victim was not as concerned about his opponents actions as one antagonist would have had us believe. I guess we mostly just travel in circles, would be nice if we could rise above it and break the cycle, but not yet I suppose, not yet.

_____________________________

AE Project Lead
New Game Project Lead

(in reply to pauk)
Post #: 864
Page:   <<   < prev  25 26 27 28 [29]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> After Action Reports >> RE: The rant goes on... Pzjg Hortlund vs Castor Troy Page: <<   < prev  25 26 27 28 [29]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.078