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: I QUIT!!!!

 
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 >> RE: I QUIT!!!! Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: I QUIT!!!! - 1/15/2009 3:39:27 AM   
wwengr


Posts: 678
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin, USA
Status: offline 		OK... I'm sorry... I just couldn't help myself.

_____________________________

I have been inputting my orders for the campaign game first turn since July 4, 2009. I'm getting close. In another month or two, I might be able to run the turn!

(in reply to wwengr)
Post #: 61
RE: I QUIT!!!! - 1/15/2009 3:46:50 AM   
TOMLABEL


Posts: 5116
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: Alabama - ROLL TIDE!!!!!
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Knavey

Ok...I am not quitting, and as many have pointed out in this thread (and the others), this really did happen and just goes to show that sometimes, FACT is stranger than the coding that we have in our favorite game.

Consider all yourselves Knaveybacks for the next time...when we cross the line!  No more Knaveywogs in this thread.

And for the record, I never did (cross the line)...the Med just doesn't go that far south.




But wait!!!! It really did happen to me!!!! I swear!!!!!

Just remember, there's other Knavywogs out there to be had!!!

TOMLABEL (aka Knaveyback) Don't take it too hard guys, he had me going many times!!!!



_____________________________


Art by the Rogue-USMC

WITP Admiral's Edition: Ship & Sub Art/Base Unit Art/Map Icon Art

"If destruction be our lot - it will come from within"...Abraham Lincoln

(in reply to Knavey)
Post #: 62
RE: I QUIT!!!! - 1/15/2009 3:48:16 AM   
Sarconix

 

Posts: 86
Joined: 9/23/2008
From: Atlanta, GA
Status: offline 		"MSW Penguin" ... I am assuming this is the same vessel:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Penguin_(AM-33)

So... how does a minesweeper armed with (only?) AA guns take out two destroyers and shell an airbase? Seems like like a bug, not just unlikely. Or am I missing something?

As for two bombers taking out four out of thirteen Zeros and having a successful bombing run and with no losses, that at least appears to be possible. Well, assuming those Zero pilots were fresh out of training.

(in reply to wwengr)
Post #: 63
RE: I QUIT!!!! - 1/15/2009 3:49:36 AM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline 		Yes, the Knavey WTF? posts are a right of passage on the WITP forum. There's no way that we veterans are going to spoil the fun too early... 

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to TOMLABEL)
Post #: 64
RE: I QUIT!!!! - 1/15/2009 3:57:29 AM   
wwengr


Posts: 678
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sarconix

"MSW Penguin" ... I am assuming this is the same vessel:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Penguin_(AM-33)

So... how does a minesweeper armed with (only?) AA guns take out two destroyers and shell an airbase? Seems like like a bug, not just unlikely. Or am I missing something?

As for two bombers taking out four out of thirteen Zeros and having a successful bombing run and with no losses, that at least appears to be possible. Well, assuming those Zero pilots were fresh out of training.


How did those Lockheed 212's get to 32000 ft? They used their Irony!

_____________________________

I have been inputting my orders for the campaign game first turn since July 4, 2009. I'm getting close. In another month or two, I might be able to run the turn!

(in reply to Sarconix)
Post #: 65
RE: I QUIT!!!! - 1/15/2009 4:13:35 AM   
Knavey

 

Posts: 3052
Joined: 9/12/2002
From: Valrico, Florida
Status: offline

USS Penguin...Incredible!

_____________________________

x-Nuc twidget
CVN-71
USN 87-93
"Going slow in the fast direction"

(in reply to wwengr)
Post #: 66
RE: I QUIT!!!! - 1/15/2009 5:45:50 AM   
Sarconix

 

Posts: 86
Joined: 9/23/2008
From: Atlanta, GA
Status: offline 		Seriously, is this a bug, or I missing something about the capabilities of the fine warship pictured below?



Unless they stuck a 5-inch gun on this thing, I don't see how it will sink anything but a rowboat.

(This thread is sure going to strange places...)

(in reply to Knavey)
Post #: 67
RE: I QUIT!!!! - 1/15/2009 5:55:05 AM   
Iridium


Posts: 932
Joined: 4/1/2005
From: Jersey
Status: offline 		Do not underestimate the capabilities of a trawler.



_____________________________

Yamato, IMO the best looking Battleship.

"Hey, a packet of googly eyes! I'm so taking these." Hank Venture

(in reply to Sarconix)
Post #: 68
RE: I QUIT!!!! - 1/15/2009 7:23:54 AM   
JeffroK


Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline 		Especially one that has been sweeping mines, or drinking the local Guamainian Kava.

70 posts, must be a record for Knavey!

< Message edited by JeffK -- 1/15/2009 7:24:37 AM >

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to Iridium)
Post #: 69
RE: I QUIT!!!! - 1/15/2009 10:44:53 PM   
Knavey

 

Posts: 3052
Joined: 9/12/2002
From: Valrico, Florida
Status: offline 		I think I made it to page 4 once...but it was hijacked about half way through.

_____________________________

x-Nuc twidget
CVN-71
USN 87-93
"Going slow in the fast direction"

(in reply to JeffroK)
Post #: 70
RE: I QUIT!!!! - 1/15/2009 11:50:29 PM   
rtrapasso


Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Knavey

I think I made it to page 4 once...but it was hijacked about half way through.

Somebody hijacked a thread on the WITP forum?? When did that ever happen???

(in reply to Knavey)
Post #: 71
RE: I QUIT!!!! - 1/16/2009 12:23:51 AM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline 		It looked like the ships at Guam were bombarding.  Though there is no report of CD guns firing.  A few CD guns cound do that kind of damage.

Bill


_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to rtrapasso)
Post #: 72
RE: I QUIT!!!! - 1/16/2009 12:26:25 AM   
rtrapasso


Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

It looked like the ships at Guam were bombarding.  Though there is no report of CD guns firing.  A few CD guns cound do that kind of damage.

Bill


i was guessing this was some sort of made up report, like the original... ships do not defend in bombardment attacks... tf's can intercept, but those are reported in separate battles.

(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 73
RE: I QUIT!!!! - 1/16/2009 12:36:20 AM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline 		In CHS, at least, there are no CD guns at Guam...

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to rtrapasso)
Post #: 74
RE: I QUIT!!!! - 1/16/2009 1:08:04 AM   
wwengr


Posts: 678
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin, USA
Status: offline 		Well, The Penguin had two 3in/50 Mk 10 Guns, but clearly, I think it sunk the heavy cruiser with with its Lewis Guns.

_____________________________

I have been inputting my orders for the campaign game first turn since July 4, 2009. I'm getting close. In another month or two, I might be able to run the turn!

(in reply to wwengr)
Post #: 75
RE: I QUIT!!!! - 1/16/2009 3:55:59 AM   
seydlitz_slith


Posts: 2036
Joined: 6/16/2002
From: Danville, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: wwengr



How did those Lockheed 212's get to 32000 ft? They used their Irony!


Wait, I heard about that...they made a move about that starring Lou Gossett Jr. It was called Irony Eagle.

(in reply to wwengr)
Post #: 76
RE: I QUIT!!!! - 1/18/2009 6:24:35 AM   
Hornblower


Posts: 1361
Joined: 9/10/2003
From: New York'er relocated to Chicago
Status: offline 		be you em pee

(in reply to seydlitz_slith)
Post #: 77
RE: I QUIT!!!! - 1/18/2009 8:10:51 AM   
greycat

 

Posts: 91
Joined: 5/30/2008
From: England
Status: offline 		I think someone is pulling our legs!

< Message edited by greycat -- 1/18/2009 8:14:56 AM >

(in reply to Knavey)
Post #: 78
RE: I QUIT!!!! - 1/18/2009 3:52:32 PM   
Kull


Posts: 2625
Joined: 7/3/2007
From: El Paso, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Iridium

While escorting a convoy of transports en route to Guadalcanal, joint TFs 17 and 18 were attacked by the Japanese submarines I-15 and I-19 on 15 September 1942. Wasp (CV-7) was sunk; North Carolina (BB-55) and O’Brien were damaged by torpedo attacks.


15 September 1942 - "The explosion did little local damage, but set up severe structural stresses through the ship."

16 September 1942 - "Able to proceed under her own power, the destroyer reached Espiritu Santo, where Curtiss made temporary repairs."

21 September 1942 - "O’Brien sailed for Noumea, New Caledonia, for further repairs by Argonne (AG-31)"

10 October 1942 - "Proceeding to San Francisco...."

13 October 1942 - "She made Suva...."

16 October 1942 - "Sailed once more...."

18 October 1942 - "It was necessary for O’Brien to proceed to the nearest anchorage. Topside weight was jettisoned and preparations were made for abandoning ship, but it was still thought that the ship could be brought intact to Pago Pago."

19 October 1942 - "The bottom suddenly opened up considerably and the forward and after portions of the hull began to work independently. At 06:30 all hands except a salvage crew went over the side; and half an hour later the ship was abandoned entirely. Just before 08:00 she went under, after steaming almost 3,000 miles (5,500 km) since torpedoed. All the crew were saved."

A few thoughts.....

1) As we all know, the WitP "progressive flooding" model had no parallels in real life. Errrr....

2) And speaking of WitP craziness, only the AI would take a Destroyer topedoed near the Solomon Islands and send it all the way back to San Francisco. Errrr......


(in reply to Iridium)
Post #: 79
RE: I QUIT!!!! - 1/18/2009 4:02:42 PM   
stuman


Posts: 3907
Joined: 9/14/2008
From: Elvis' Hometown
Status: offline 		One of the reasons I really like these forums is the tidbits like this I am always picking up. I had not been aware that ships other than the Wasp had been sunk  by the same sub until Knavey " got me ".

(in reply to Kull)
Post #: 80
RE: I QUIT!!!! - 1/18/2009 5:35:11 PM   
rtrapasso


Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline
quote:

As we all know, the WitP "progressive flooding" model had no parallels in real life. Errrr....


No progressive flooding - just sudden and catastrophic structural failure... lots of stuff not modeled in WITP, like spontaneous magazine explosions destroying a BB, or ammo ship blowing up and taking numerous boats and a couple of ships with them, or grounding of ships which either destroys them or takes them our of action, collisions between ships, typhoons that sank multiple ships, etc., etc.

Most players would scream bloody murder if a CV grounded during operations (yes, it happened), or a BB blew up (again, it happened), or one of the ALMOST DAILY mishaps that occurred operationally during the war on both sides that routinely severely damaged and/or destroyed hundreds of smaller vessels through the war.

One of the precursor games to WITP had a pretty nice weather model - and you picked up more SYS damage in a hurry if you were sailing in it. It DID make it nice to sneak in a carrier group behind a weather front, though. However, i think we'll have to wait for WITP II for this to happen.

(in reply to Kull)
Post #: 81
RE: I QUIT!!!! - 1/18/2009 6:04:50 PM   
wwengr


Posts: 678
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

quote:

As we all know, the WitP "progressive flooding" model had no parallels in real life. Errrr....


No progressive flooding - just sudden and catastrophic structural failure... lots of stuff not modeled in WITP, like spontaneous magazine explosions destroying a BB, or ammo ship blowing up and taking numerous boats and a couple of ships with them, or grounding of ships which either destroys them or takes them our of action, collisions between ships, typhoons that sank multiple ships, etc., etc.

Most players would scream bloody murder if a CV grounded during operations (yes, it happened), or a BB blew up (again, it happened), or one of the ALMOST DAILY mishaps that occurred operationally during the war on both sides that routinely severely damaged and/or destroyed hundreds of smaller vessels through the war.

One of the precursor games to WITP had a pretty nice weather model - and you picked up more SYS damage in a hurry if you were sailing in it. It DID make it nice to sneak in a carrier group behind a weather front, though. However, i think we'll have to wait for WITP II for this to happen.

How many people would want to quit if the had an amunition ship spontaneously explode in San Francisco (WITP's abstraction for all ports in the Bay area) as a total loss, destroying 9 LCM's, and causing serious damage to: 2 cargo ships, 1 tanker, 1 troop ship, 1 oiler, 2 repair ships, 1 destroyer tender, 1 sub tender, 1 destroyer transport, 3 destroyer escorts, 1 destroyer, 2 escort carriers, and causing significant damage to port facilties and port supplies (abstraction of damage/destruction to numerous port vessels and small craft).

It happened in the Port Chicago disaster, when the USS Mount Hood (AE-11 exploded).

_____________________________

I have been inputting my orders for the campaign game first turn since July 4, 2009. I'm getting close. In another month or two, I might be able to run the turn!

(in reply to rtrapasso)
Post #: 82
RE: I QUIT!!!! - 1/18/2009 6:22:44 PM   
Dili

 

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline 		In Pacific War

quote:

The official death toll was 740, including 476 military personnel, with around 1,800 people injured; unofficial tallies run much higher. In total, twenty-seven other vessels were sunk or damaged in both Victoria dock and the neighbouring Prince's Dock.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombay_Explosion_(1944)

The day it rained gold
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2000/20000727/edit.htm#5

quote:

The eleven Allied merchant ships on this page were lost as a result of the two horrendous explosions aboard Fort Stikine at Bombay, India, on April 14th, 1944.


http://members.tripod.com/~merchantships/fortcreviershipslost.html



< Message edited by Dili -- 1/18/2009 6:24:27 PM >

(in reply to wwengr)
Post #: 83
RE: I QUIT!!!! - 1/18/2009 7:01:39 PM   
rtrapasso


Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline 		Another notable disaster:

"USS Mount Hood tragically exploded accidentally while moored in Seeadler Harbor on 10 November 1944. The ship was carrying ammunition and the tremendous explosion caused 378 fatalities, 372 wounded, damage to surrounding ships and base from debris and sinking or severely damaging 22 smaller craft." 9 LCMs, a floating barge and numerous boats, sunk, as well as damage to:

* USS Abarenda (IX-131)
* USS Alhena (AKA-9)
* USS Argonne (AG-31)
* USS Aries (AK-51)
* USS Cacapon (AO-52)
* USS Cebu (ARG-6)
* USS Kyne (DE-744)
* USS Lyman (DE-302)
* USS Mindanao (ARG-3)
* USS Oberrender (DE-344)
* USS Petrof Bay (CVE-80)
* USS Piedmont (AD-17)
* USS Potawatomi (ATF-109)
* USS Preserver (ARS-8)
* USS Saginaw Bay (CVE-82)
* USS Talbot (APD-7)
* USS Wann (DE-412)
* USS Young (DD-580)
* USS YF-681
* USS YMS-1
* USS YMS-140
* USS YMS-238
* USS YMS-243
* USS YMS-286T
* USS YMS-293
* USS YMS-319
* USS YMS-335
* USS YMS-340
* USS YMS-341
* USS YMS-342
* USS YMS-39
* USS YMS-49
* USS YMS-52
* USS YMS-71
* USS YMS-81
* USS YO-77

(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 84
RE: I QUIT!!!! - 1/18/2009 7:08:24 PM   
rtrapasso


Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: wwengr


quote:

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

quote:

As we all know, the WitP "progressive flooding" model had no parallels in real life. Errrr....


No progressive flooding - just sudden and catastrophic structural failure... lots of stuff not modeled in WITP, like spontaneous magazine explosions destroying a BB, or ammo ship blowing up and taking numerous boats and a couple of ships with them, or grounding of ships which either destroys them or takes them our of action, collisions between ships, typhoons that sank multiple ships, etc., etc.

Most players would scream bloody murder if a CV grounded during operations (yes, it happened), or a BB blew up (again, it happened), or one of the ALMOST DAILY mishaps that occurred operationally during the war on both sides that routinely severely damaged and/or destroyed hundreds of smaller vessels through the war.

One of the precursor games to WITP had a pretty nice weather model - and you picked up more SYS damage in a hurry if you were sailing in it. It DID make it nice to sneak in a carrier group behind a weather front, though. However, i think we'll have to wait for WITP II for this to happen.

How many people would want to quit if the had an amunition ship spontaneously explode in San Francisco (WITP's abstraction for all ports in the Bay area) as a total loss, destroying 9 LCM's, and causing serious damage to: 2 cargo ships, 1 tanker, 1 troop ship, 1 oiler, 2 repair ships, 1 destroyer tender, 1 sub tender, 1 destroyer transport, 3 destroyer escorts, 1 destroyer, 2 escort carriers, and causing significant damage to port facilties and port supplies (abstraction of damage/destruction to numerous port vessels and small craft).

It happened in the Port Chicago disaster, when the USS Mount Hood (AE-11 exploded).

No - Mount Hood exploded in Seeadler Harbor, Manus (Admirality) Island... the SS SS E. A. Bryan exploded in the Port Chicago disaster.

(in reply to wwengr)
Post #: 85
RE: I QUIT!!!! - 1/18/2009 8:20:30 PM   
wwengr


Posts: 678
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin, USA
Status: offline 		You're right! I confused the two disasters. It is interesting to note that the E.A. Bryan was obliterated and the SS Quinalt Victory was destroyed. In WITP Terms, it would be 2 AK's sunk, significant port damage and loss of about 7000 supply points or so.



_____________________________

I have been inputting my orders for the campaign game first turn since July 4, 2009. I'm getting close. In another month or two, I might be able to run the turn!

(in reply to rtrapasso)
Post #: 86
RE: I QUIT!!!! - 1/18/2009 8:22:39 PM   
wwengr


Posts: 678
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin, USA
Status: offline 		How about writing into the code, random explosions of Allied ports with random loss and damage to ships and supplies?

_____________________________

I have been inputting my orders for the campaign game first turn since July 4, 2009. I'm getting close. In another month or two, I might be able to run the turn!

(in reply to wwengr)
Post #: 87
RE: I QUIT!!!! - 1/31/2009 11:58:36 AM   
rtrapasso


Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso


quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

It looked like the ships at Guam were bombarding.  Though there is no report of CD guns firing.  A few CD guns cound do that kind of damage.

Bill


i was guessing this was some sort of made up report, like the original... ships do not defend in bombardment attacks... tf's can intercept, but those are reported in separate battles.

Just found out that this is how the game reports things when a ship is disbanded in port when it is bombarded... i think this might be a change in the reporting format since last time i had this happen to me... just had an instance on RUPD's "Repentant Samurai" AAR where something similar happened (although the ship in his report actually took a hit.)

(in reply to rtrapasso)
Post #: 88
RE: I QUIT!!!! - 1/31/2009 8:29:29 PM   
wwengr


Posts: 678
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso


quote:

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso


quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

It looked like the ships at Guam were bombarding.  Though there is no report of CD guns firing.  A few CD guns cound do that kind of damage.

Bill


i was guessing this was some sort of made up report, like the original... ships do not defend in bombardment attacks... tf's can intercept, but those are reported in separate battles.

Just found out that this is how the game reports things when a ship is disbanded in port when it is bombarded... i think this might be a change in the reporting format since last time i had this happen to me... just had an instance on RUPD's "Repentant Samurai" AAR where something similar happened (although the ship in his report actually took a hit.)

I was having fun and made up the report. While the Penguin thing looked slightly plausible from an extremely weird game result, I thought that the transports bombing bombing at night was a good clue as to the authenticity, or lack thereof...

_____________________________

I have been inputting my orders for the campaign game first turn since July 4, 2009. I'm getting close. In another month or two, I might be able to run the turn!

(in reply to rtrapasso)
Post #: 89
RE: I QUIT!!!! - 1/31/2009 8:55:11 PM   
AW1Steve


Posts: 14507
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: Mordor Illlinois
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

In CHS, at least, there are no CD guns at Guam...


In real life there were no guns at Guam. There had been but they removed as a side result of the Washington and London naval treaties (they also removed military aircraft). There were only a few hundred Marines and Sailors to act as police force, man the hospital and support the Govenor (a naval Captain). USS Peguin was the station ship at the Piti naval yard. Not much of a base , more of a boatyard.

(in reply to bradfordkay)
Post #: 90
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: I QUIT!!!! Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
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

2.031