RE: Why the 7th instead of the 10th for the PoW and Repulse?

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: Why the 7th instead of the 10th for the PoW and Repulse?

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Why the 7th instead of the 10th for the PoW and Repulse?

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Why the 7th instead of the 10th for the PoW and Rep... - 12/17/2009 8:51:32 PM

Puhis

Posts: 1737
Joined: 11/30/2008
From: Finland
Status: offline

This game cannot ever be "historical", what ever that means.

For example in a day one, every allied player knows japanese long range torpedo bombers, zero perfomance, IJN night fighting skills and where japanese are going to land. Every japanese player knows allied weak spots, coming war of attrition, deadly late war allied subs and B-29s and so on.

So I think it's fair enough that player don't have that freedom of choice in first turn. If somebody doesn't like it, there is always alternative scenario.

(in reply to Nikademus)

Post #: 31

RE: Why the 7th instead of the 10th for the PoW and Rep... - 12/18/2009 12:36:54 AM

jazman

Posts: 369
Joined: 1/20/2007
From: Crush Depth
Status: offline

Can we roll the game start date back to Dec 5? No sane American would stuff of bunch of battleships in PH, without any CAP.

_____________________________

BS, MS, PhD, WitP:AE, WitE, WitW

(in reply to Puhis)

Post #: 32

RE: Why the 7th instead of the 10th for the PoW and Rep... - 12/18/2009 4:34:19 AM

bradfordkay

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

There's plenty of fighters on Oahu to provide CAP, though maybe not enough to fight off the KB. But no one knew that at the time.

The problem is that our leaders there were so foolish as to have absolutely none up on Dec 7, not did they provide for any search aircraft to be up. Considering the 'war warning' had been floating for a week, I have always considered this to be the most serious dereliction of duty. Failure to provide the best protection they could was unforgivable.

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to jazman)

Post #: 33

RE: Why the 7th instead of the 10th for the PoW and Rep... - 12/18/2009 7:20:36 AM

Mike Scholl

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline

I played a start with a friend no surprise/non historic once. We had to re-start. Enough cap rose automatically (I hadn't changed any original settings) due to the radar warning to put a noticeable dent in KB's air strength, and more importantly prevent a substantial amount of the damage to the Navy and the airfields. I lost a lot of planes, but there's not much comparison between lossing half-trained P-26's and veteran Vals and Kates.

We were trying to simulate the gradual loss of surprise caused by the time zones and distance of the opening attacks without the "all or nothing" limits of the game's choices.

(in reply to bradfordkay)

Post #: 34

RE: Why the 7th instead of the 10th for the PoW and Rep... - 12/18/2009 1:30:49 PM

xj900uk

Posts: 1340
Joined: 3/22/2007
Status: offline

Well, hate to burst your bubble, but the IJN had no guarantee of surprise when they set out to attack PH. Nagumo half-expected to fight his way in and loose several of his precious carriers in the process,w hich is why his enthusiasm for the plan was less than 100% gushing. Naturally cautious at hte best of times, he took the opportunity to hightail it back to Japan without finishing the job properly the moment surprise was blown (a move that has been debated endlessly eveer since, both in print and on these Forums)

(in reply to Mike Scholl)

Post #: 35

RE: Why the 7th instead of the 10th for the PoW and Rep... - 12/19/2009 10:16:37 AM

bklooste

Posts: 1104
Joined: 4/10/2006
Status: offline

Obviously since the Nells and Betties cant sink them consistently the AFB devs :-) have made them into actual flying matchboxes instead of effective aircraft :-P

(in reply to xj900uk)

Post #: 36

RE: Why the 7th instead of the 10th for the PoW and Rep... - 12/19/2009 10:17:56 AM

bklooste

Posts: 1104
Joined: 4/10/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: xj900uk

Well, hate to burst your bubble, but the IJN had no guarantee of surprise when they set out to attack PH.� Nagumo half-expected to fight his way in and loose several of his precious carriers in the process,w hich is why his enthusiasm for the plan was less than 100% gushing.� Naturally cautious at hte best of times,� he took the opportunity to hightail it back to Japan without finishing the job properly the moment surprise was blown (a move that has been debated endlessly eveer since, both in print and on these Forums)

House rule should be no 2nd day attack without replacing Nagumo by a more aggresive comander.

(in reply to xj900uk)

Post #: 37

RE: Why the 7th instead of the 10th for the PoW and Rep... - 12/21/2009 1:55:36 PM

xj900uk

Posts: 1340
Joined: 3/22/2007
Status: offline

You mean like that chap Yamagushi (sorry if I've spelt it incorrectly) who commanded CarDiv 2 from the Hiryu? He was supposed to be the second best tactical aware Carrier admiral in japan (after Nagumo) with Ozawa third. Both he and Ozawa were supposed to be a lot more agressive than Nagumo

(in reply to bklooste)

Post #: 38

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Why the 7th instead of the 10th for the PoW and Repulse?

Page: << < prev 1 [2]