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: That's it for me.....

 
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: That's it for me..... Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: That's it for me..... - 3/3/2010 1:29:37 AM   
Torplexed


Posts: 305
Joined: 3/21/2002
From: The Pacific
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Reverberate

How can you continue play a game where something like this is can happen?


Tojo loves Allied players who throw in the towel at their first setback.

(in reply to Reverberate)
Post #: 31
RE: That's it for me..... - 3/3/2010 1:46:53 AM   
ETF


Posts: 1748
Joined: 9/16/2004
From: Vancouver, Canada
Status: offline 		Kinda a massive setback no? Seems this is happening in more than one or two games. Is this more an uncommon event rather than an exception to the rule?

_____________________________

My Top Matrix Games 1) CMO MP?? 2) WITP/AE 3) SOW 4) Combat Mission 5) Armor Brigade

Twitter
https://twitter.com/TacticWargamer

(in reply to Torplexed)
Post #: 32
RE: That's it for me..... - 3/3/2010 2:20:08 AM   
sfbaytf

 

Posts: 1122
Joined: 4/13/2005
Status: offline 		Its Nov 44 in my PBEM game and the IJN subs are as deadly as ever. Lost a CVE recently and had another one hit. Putting 8 DD's does not nulify the subs. The only dfference is allied ASW is better than 42-43. They do seem to be overpowered. I've just learned to live with it. I send out tons of DE's and PF's to hunt them down and just hope for the best.

They also have a nasty habit of surfacing when damaged by depth charges and hedgehogs and firing torpedoes and surface guns -after being hit by 5 inch shells, 40mm and 20mm guns fired from the ASW ships that forced it to surface.

Also never let your carrier TF's get engaged by an enemy surface TF. Even with BB's, CA's, CL's and DD' in the TF, your carriers will more than likely get shelled and hit-even if the enemy surface TF is outnumbered.

(in reply to Kwik E Mart)
Post #: 33
RE: That's it for me..... - 3/3/2010 2:22:42 AM   
treespider


Posts: 9796
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

I completely agree, check out this BS that just happened to me. No way this could happen!

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Sep 15, 42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Lunga at 114,139

Japanese Ships
SS I-19, hits 1

Allied Ships
CV Wasp, Torpedo hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
BB North Carolina
CA Canberra
CA Vincennes
CA Chicago
CL Boise
CLAA San Juan
DD O'Brien
DD Laffey
DD Perkins
DD Cushing
DD Knavey
DD Farenholt
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Lunga at 114,139

Japanese Ships
SS I-19

Allied Ships
CV Wasp, heavy fires, heavy damage
BB North Carolina, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
CA Canberra
CA Vincennes
CA Chicago
CL Boise
CLAA San Juan
DD O'Brien
DD Laffey
DD Perkins
DD Cushing
DD Knavey
DD Farenholt
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Lunga at 114,139

Japanese Ships
SS I-19, hits 1

Allied Ships
CV Wasp, heavy fires, heavy damage
BB North Carolina
CA Canberra
CA Vincennes
CA Chicago
CL Boise
CLAA San Juan
DD O'Brien, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
DD Laffey
DD Perkins
DD Cushing
DD Knavey
DD Farenholt

3 Attacks in one phase? With 2 ships sunk? Borked!





Absolutely incredulous!!! Imagine that... that could not possibly happen in real life...or could it

EDIT: Man I was late to the party again...


< Message edited by treespider -- 3/3/2010 2:27:25 AM >

_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 34
RE: That's it for me..... - 3/3/2010 2:44:37 AM   
Menser

 

Posts: 206
Joined: 5/2/2005
From: Peabody, Massachusetts
Status: offline 		The DD Knavey was present IRL Tree?

_____________________________

"Alea iacta est." Caius Julius
"If you can't beat your computer at chess, try kickboxing." Emo Philips
"Caedite eos! Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius." Abbot Arnaud Amalric

(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 35
RE: That's it for me..... - 3/3/2010 2:49:43 AM   
USSAmerica


Posts: 18715
Joined: 10/28/2002
From: Graham, NC, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Reverberate

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

You lose two CVs and a DD and you think that's somehow not within the realm of possibility?

Not in any game that I intend to play......


Hmmm. Ok, so long.

_____________________________

Mike

"Good times will set you free" - Jimmy Buffett

"They need more rum punch" - Me


Artwork by The Amazing Dixie

(in reply to Reverberate)
Post #: 36
RE: That's it for me..... - 3/3/2010 2:55:44 AM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

I completely agree, check out this BS that just happened to me. No way this could happen!

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Sep 15, 42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Lunga at 114,139

Japanese Ships
SS I-19, hits 1

Allied Ships
CV Wasp, Torpedo hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
BB North Carolina
CA Canberra
CA Vincennes
CA Chicago
CL Boise
CLAA San Juan
DD O'Brien
DD Laffey
DD Perkins
DD Cushing
DD Knavey
DD Farenholt
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Lunga at 114,139

Japanese Ships
SS I-19

Allied Ships
CV Wasp, heavy fires, heavy damage
BB North Carolina, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
CA Canberra
CA Vincennes
CA Chicago
CL Boise
CLAA San Juan
DD O'Brien
DD Laffey
DD Perkins
DD Cushing
DD Knavey
DD Farenholt
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Lunga at 114,139

Japanese Ships
SS I-19, hits 1

Allied Ships
CV Wasp, heavy fires, heavy damage
BB North Carolina
CA Canberra
CA Vincennes
CA Chicago
CL Boise
CLAA San Juan
DD O'Brien, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
DD Laffey
DD Perkins
DD Cushing
DD Knavey
DD Farenholt

3 Attacks in one phase? With 2 ships sunk? Borked!



The same thing happened to me, I swear!

_____________________________


(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 37
RE: That's it for me..... - 3/3/2010 3:21:54 AM   
Grfin Zeppelin


Posts: 1515
Joined: 12/3/2007
From: Germany
Status: offline

Fishfodder

_____________________________



(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 38
The IJN player - 3/3/2010 3:25:12 AM   
koontz

 

Posts: 274
Joined: 8/27/2009
Status: offline 		Well thats me.

When this game started ive focus 90% of my subs
to hunt down CV.

iirc ive had 2-3 attacks on CV b4 all torpedos missed from what ive now till now.

And not a single sub loss so far.


Think the trick is in ASW is to use CV A/C on 10% search 10% ASW







< Message edited by koontz -- 3/3/2010 3:27:38 AM >

_____________________________

Amateurs study tactics, professionals study logistics.

"All warfare is based on deception. There is no place where espionage is not used. Offer the enemy bait to lure him."

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 39
RE: That's it for me..... - 3/3/2010 5:40:58 AM   
bklooste

 

Posts: 1104
Joined: 4/10/2006
Status: offline 		Saratoga attack is similar.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brady

I-19's TROM:

15 September 1942:
At 0950, while running submerged, the sound operator reports a contact with many heavy screws at 12-18S, 164-15E. Kinashi orders I-19 to periscope depth. He makes a sweep with his 'scope but no ships are in sight.

250 miles SE of Guadalcanal. Captain (later Admiral) Forrest P. Sherman's USS WASP and Captain Charles P. Mason's (later Rear Admiral) HORNET (CV-8) are escorting a reinforcement convoy of six transports carrying the 7th Marine Regiment from Espiritu Santo to reinforce Guadalcanal. The carriers are steaming in sight of each other about 8 miles apart. Each carrier forms the nucleus of a task force. Captain George H. Fort's (later Rear Admiral) battleship USS NORTH CAROLINA (BB-55) is with the HORNET task force to the NE of the WASP force.

At 1050, Kinashi raises his periscope again. This time he sees a carrier, a heavy cruiser and several destroyers (Rear Admiral Leigh Noyes' Task Force 18) bearing 045T at 9 miles. Kinashi estimates the task force's course at 330 and begins a slow approach. The Americans, zigzagging at 16 knots, change course to WNW. Then at 1120, the target group again changes course -this time to SSE. WASP makes a slow left turn into the wind to launch and recover her aircraft - and heads toward the I-19.

Kinashi estimates that his target is on course 130 degrees making 12 knots. At 1145, from 50 degrees starboard, he fires a spread of six Type 95 oxygen-propelled torpedoes at the enemy carrier from 985 yards. Two or possibly three hit the WASP and start an uncontrollable fire.

HORNET force continues a right turn to a 280 degree base course. Suddenly, an alarm is heard the tactical radio speakers from USS LANSDOWNE (DD-486) in the WASP's screen "... torpedo headed for formation, course 080!"

At 1152, a torpedo from I-19's salvo hits NORTH CAROLINA in her port bow abreast of her forward main battery turret. The blast holes the side protection below the armor belt and NORTH CAROLINA takes on a thousand tons of water. She takes on a five-degree list but counter flooding quickly levels her and she makes 25 knots. [3]

At 1154, a torpedo hits destroyer O'BRIEN's (DD-415) port quarter and another just misses HORNET. [4]

I-19 dives to 265 feet under the carrier's wake. The first depth charge explodes six minutes after the last torpedo hit. Soon the depth charges were exploding all around. American destroyers try to surround I-19 to attack together and finish her off. They rain down 30 depth charges.

At noon, WASP's avgas tanks explode. At 1515, two cruisers and destroyers abandon WASP and withdraw to the south. At 1520, Captain Sherman orders "Abandon Ship". The carrier is scuttled by five torpedoes from LANSDOWNE and sinks by the bow at about 2100. WASP suffers 193 killed and 367 wounded.

O,and-I-19 was not damaged in this atack.



_____________________________

Underdog Fanboy

(in reply to Brady)
Post #: 40
RE: That's it for me..... - 3/3/2010 5:57:01 AM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline 		And loss of one CV is catastrophic to Allies in what way? Plenty of those coming in later. 

_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-


(in reply to bklooste)
Post #: 41
RE: That's it for me..... - 3/3/2010 6:16:45 AM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

And loss of one CV is catastrophic to Allies in what way? Plenty of those coming in later. 


Sardaukar don´t you see? Its not the fact that the CV is lost but the sub ignoring all those
juicy DD´s in favor of a lucky shot. TIS IS BROKAAHHHNNN...

Maybe the strange bug in PBEM where you are suddently unable to reload the turn, modify and run again?


Just kidding Reverberate.
I can assure you that most here have experienced at least as brutal setbacks without being able to
blame anything but bad luck and accepted that this is war...
If you don´t like this then this is not your game. Sad though, because its part of the suspense.

_____________________________


(in reply to Sardaukar)
Post #: 42
RE: That's it for me..... - 3/3/2010 6:28:08 AM   
Barb


Posts: 2503
Joined: 2/27/2007
From: Bratislava, Slovakia
Status: offline 		Maybe the allied player should avoid areas where there are many subs, or that are natural torpedo-junctions... Also staying on the same place for few days could give enemy chance to concentrate subs in the area. I wonder if this wasnt the case...

In guadalcanal scenario against AI, I had sunk all 4 allied CVs just by subs ... They were sitting for almost a month on the same hex with all Japs subs hunting them.


_____________________________


(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 43
RE: That's it for me..... - 3/3/2010 7:37:51 AM   
castor troy


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

ORIGINAL: Altaris

I'm not going to say the results are anywhere near feasible, but I am finding in my games that if you stick at least 8 DDs in a TF, it pretty much nullifies sub attacks. Anything less than that runs this danger. Not sure why 8 seems to be the magic number, but I've yet to have any successful sub attacks against any TF with this many DDs in it.

So I just use that as a rule of thumb, for important TFs, I always go with at least 8 DDs.



no, I had 18 DDs covering my CVs (10 in the TF and 2x4 in following ASW TFs) and IJN subs keep happily attacking and easily hitting my CVs (twice already). The subs are also more a threat to DDs than the other way around. You´re doing good if you get a 1:1 vs the subs, it´s even worse for the Japanese if you only would count hits but the MK-14 hits usually don´t ignite, that´s the only reason why my USN subs (in mid 42) haven´t got a 3:1 kill rate against IJN DDs.

_____________________________


(in reply to Altaris)
Post #: 44
RE: That's it for me..... - 3/3/2010 7:46:20 AM   
castor troy


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

ORIGINAL: ETF

Kinda a massive setback no? Seems this is happening in more than one or two games. Is this more an uncommon event rather than an exception to the rule?




this is a very uncommon event IMO, have never seen such damage done in WITP or AE. What really makes me wonder how all those subs managed to be in the same hex with the CV TF, nearly looks like the pre patch mega sub reactions with subs hunting down TFs right from Hawai to the West Coast. Haven´t seen this again since you can only set your subs to react 1 hex.

_____________________________


(in reply to ETF)
Post #: 45
RE: That's it for me..... - 3/3/2010 7:59:23 AM   
Misconduct


Posts: 1864
Joined: 2/18/2009
From: Cape Canaveral, Florida
Status: offline 		So I posted a thread few days ago about how amazing Subs were before the patch, needless to say that was my side not the Japanese AI. Well since I patched and continued my campaign, what seems to going on now is none of my submarines are hitting ASW Ships, while Japanese on the other hand are having a field day, single hitting every destroyer I had with a carrier group before making it to Australia. Is it possible that since I patched and continued the campaign I somehow messed up my game? I notice others are having hell with the Subs, and I don't complain except when it seems everytime my subs fire at a japanese destroyer they miss, while japanese sub is scoring nice 1-4 hits on a destroyer.

Only other thing I would say I do believe we need perhaps 6 ships in an ASW group, 4 might work for the allies later in the war, but right now im seeing some interesting numbers with entire groups of 4 ships getting attacked and sunk by a single submarine.

Granted my commanders and exp arn't any good, but I didn't see japanese subs being that good either.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 46
RE: That's it for me..... - 3/3/2010 8:03:41 AM   
castor troy


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

ORIGINAL: Misconduct

So I posted a thread few days ago about how amazing Subs were before the patch, needless to say that was my side not the Japanese AI. Well since I patched and continued my campaign, what seems to going on now is none of my submarines are hitting ASW Ships, while Japanese on the other hand are having a field day, single hitting every destroyer I had with a carrier group before making it to Australia. Is it possible that since I patched and continued the campaign I somehow messed up my game? I notice others are having hell with the Subs, and I don't complain except when it seems everytime my subs fire at a japanese destroyer they miss, while japanese sub is scoring nice 1-4 hits on a destroyer.

Only other thing I would say I do believe we need perhaps 6 ships in an ASW group, 4 might work for the allies later in the war, but right now im seeing some interesting numbers with entire groups of 4 ships getting attacked and sunk by a single submarine.

Granted my commanders and exp arn't any good, but I didn't see japanese subs being that good either.




I´m doing sub attack statistics in my game against Rainer79 and in 5 months Jan - Jun the USN fleet subs equipped with MK-14 torps have got a 94% !!!! hit rate. And there were a lot of attacks. Of course being Mk-14 they don´t explode 4 out of 5 times. Still, usually the Mk-14 salvoes hit their target, they´re like homing. And there´s no difference if the target is a DD, AK or PB it seems. Usually an attack means a hit, only the dud rate saves the IJN. The statistics can bee seen in my AAR every 25th of the month (game time). Hit rate of Mk-10, Dutch or British subs has been awful, after four months, Dutch hit rate was somewhere around only 40%... using the last offical patch, not the beta patch

_____________________________


(in reply to Misconduct)
Post #: 47
RE: That's it for me..... - 3/3/2010 8:07:15 AM   
Brady


Posts: 10701
Joined: 10/25/2002
From: Oregon,USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bklooste

Saratoga attack is similar.




TROM's:


9 January 1942: Operation "H" - The Invasion of the Celebes, NEI:
Vice Admiral Takahashi's forces invade Menado and Kema (11 January), Kendari (24 January), Ambon (30 January) and Makassar (9 February).

That same day, 270 miles from Johnston Island, the I-18 of the Special Attack Force sights a LEXINGTON-class carrier, a heavy cruiser and two destroyers steaming westward. I-18 reports the sighting to Headquarters, Sixth Fleet. Rear Admiral Yamazaki orders all available I-boats in the area to form a picket line.

I-6 departs her patrol area to join the hunt for USS LEXINGTON (CV-2), detected by I-18. After I-1 develops a diesel trouble, I-6 replaces her in the picket line NE of Johnston Island.

12 January 1942:
Departs her patrol sector for Kwajalein.

22 January 1942:
Arrives at Kwajalein.

11 January 1942:
At 1841, while patrolling 270 miles NE of Johnston Island, I-6 sights a destroyer and crash-dives. Soon thereafter, a LEXINGTON-class carrier, one heavy cruiser and another destroyer appear on a southeasterly course at 19N, 165W. The carrier is USS SARATOGA (CV-3) of TF 14 under Rear Admiral Herbert F. Leary, steaming at 15 knots to rendezvous with USS ENTERPRISE (CV-6).

LtCdr Inaba fires three Type 89 torpedoes with three-second intervals from 4,700 yards. At 1915, one torpedo hits SARATOGA port amidships, flooding three of her boiler rooms and killing six firemen. The carrier heels first to starboard, then to port, taking on 1,100 tons of water and losing headway. Seven minutes after the hit the escorting destroyers commence a counterattack, but fail to locate the submarine. After 2200, LtCdr Inaba reports two hits on USS LEXINGTON, claiming her as sunk and returns to Kwajalein.

SARATOGA is soon able to increase her speed to 16 knots and make it back to Pearl Harbor under her own power. As a result of subsequent repairs she is put out of the war for six months.

_____________________________





Beta Team Member for:

WPO
PC
CF
AE
WiTE

Obi-wan Kenobi said it best: A lot of the reality we perceive depend on our point of view

(in reply to bklooste)
Post #: 48
RE: That's it for me..... - 3/3/2010 8:18:33 AM   
Misconduct


Posts: 1864
Joined: 2/18/2009
From: Cape Canaveral, Florida
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Misconduct

So I posted a thread few days ago about how amazing Subs were before the patch, needless to say that was my side not the Japanese AI. Well since I patched and continued my campaign, what seems to going on now is none of my submarines are hitting ASW Ships, while Japanese on the other hand are having a field day, single hitting every destroyer I had with a carrier group before making it to Australia. Is it possible that since I patched and continued the campaign I somehow messed up my game? I notice others are having hell with the Subs, and I don't complain except when it seems everytime my subs fire at a japanese destroyer they miss, while japanese sub is scoring nice 1-4 hits on a destroyer.

Only other thing I would say I do believe we need perhaps 6 ships in an ASW group, 4 might work for the allies later in the war, but right now im seeing some interesting numbers with entire groups of 4 ships getting attacked and sunk by a single submarine.

Granted my commanders and exp arn't any good, but I didn't see japanese subs being that good either.




I´m doing sub attack statistics in my game against Rainer79 and in 5 months Jan - Jun the USN fleet subs equipped with MK-14 torps have got a 94% !!!! hit rate. And there were a lot of attacks. Of course being Mk-14 they don´t explode 4 out of 5 times. Still, usually the Mk-14 salvoes hit their target, they´re like homing. And there´s no difference if the target is a DD, AK or PB it seems. Usually an attack means a hit, only the dud rate saves the IJN. The statistics can bee seen in my AAR every 25th of the month (game time). Hit rate of Mk-10, Dutch or British subs has been awful, after four months, Dutch hit rate was somewhere around only 40%... using the last offical patch, not the beta patch


Yeah I notice it now, the Dutch and British hit rates dropped to zero since the beta patch, I am dreading it since I am running up against battleships and watching entire salvo's miss completely. Mark 14 on the other hand, I started off with good 75% hit rate then it now dropped down below 15%

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 49
RE: That's it for me..... - 3/3/2010 10:53:31 AM   
whippleofd

 

Posts: 617
Joined: 12/23/2005
Status: offline 		It is to laugh.

There were so many "close calls" in torpedo alley that could have gone a different way if a lookout was faceing the wrong way.

When the people tank gets hit by the little explosive thingys, bad stuff happens.

Whipple

_____________________________

MMCS(SW/AW) 1981-2001
1981 RTC, SD
81-82 NPS, Orlando
82-85 NPTU, Idaho Falls
85-90 USS Truxtun (CGN-35)
90-93 USS George Washington (CVN-73)
93-96 NFAS Orlando
96-01 Navsea-08/Naval Reactors

(in reply to Reverberate)
Post #: 50
RE: That's it for me..... - 3/3/2010 11:20:32 AM   
moose1999

 

Posts: 788
Joined: 10/26/2006
Status: offline 		LOL. Nice one.
quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

I completely agree, check out this BS that just happened to me. No way this could happen!

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Sep 15, 42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Lunga at 114,139

Japanese Ships
SS I-19, hits 1

Allied Ships
CV Wasp, Torpedo hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
BB North Carolina
CA Canberra
CA Vincennes
CA Chicago
CL Boise
CLAA San Juan
DD O'Brien
DD Laffey
DD Perkins
DD Cushing
DD Knavey
DD Farenholt
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Lunga at 114,139

Japanese Ships
SS I-19

Allied Ships
CV Wasp, heavy fires, heavy damage
BB North Carolina, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
CA Canberra
CA Vincennes
CA Chicago
CL Boise
CLAA San Juan
DD O'Brien
DD Laffey
DD Perkins
DD Cushing
DD Knavey
DD Farenholt
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Lunga at 114,139

Japanese Ships
SS I-19, hits 1

Allied Ships
CV Wasp, heavy fires, heavy damage
BB North Carolina
CA Canberra
CA Vincennes
CA Chicago
CL Boise
CLAA San Juan
DD O'Brien, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
DD Laffey
DD Perkins
DD Cushing
DD Knavey
DD Farenholt

3 Attacks in one phase? With 2 ships sunk? Borked!





_____________________________

regards,

Briny

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 51
RE: That's it for me..... - 3/3/2010 11:32:30 AM   
koontz

 

Posts: 274
Joined: 8/27/2009
Status: offline 		The Map the day after...



_____________________________

Amateurs study tactics, professionals study logistics.

"All warfare is based on deception. There is no place where espionage is not used. Offer the enemy bait to lure him."

(in reply to moose1999)
Post #: 52
RE: That's it for me..... - 3/3/2010 2:04:20 PM   
morganbj


Posts: 3634
Joined: 8/12/2007
From: Mosquito Bite, Texas
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Reverberate

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

You lose two CVs and a DD and you think that's somehow not within the realm of possibility?

Not in any game that I intend to play......

Then go find a copy of Chutes and Ladders and knock yourself out.

(in reply to Reverberate)
Post #: 53
RE: That's it for me..... - 3/3/2010 2:26:09 PM   
rhohltjr


Posts: 536
Joined: 4/27/2000
From: When I play pacific wargames, I expect smarter AI.
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Reverberate
Not in any game that I intend to play......


Before you take off, consider playing with the editor. Perhaps you can nerf
some aspect of the Japanese attacks or enhance the ASW.

Just a thought.

_____________________________

My e-troops don't unload OVER THE BEACH anymore, see:
Amphibious Assault at Kota Bharu
TF 85 troops securing a beachhead at Kota Bharu, 51,75
whew! I still feel better.

(in reply to Reverberate)
Post #: 54
RE: That's it for me..... - 3/3/2010 2:52:41 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline 		I would be seriously PO'd if this happened to me but with the help of another beer I'd probably get over it. I do however feel that the abilities of IJN subs in the game are way overrated. Their record from WWII includes a few spectacular successes but for such a large force its record is not very good unless one considers the number posthumous promotions awarded to its captains.
The boats were slow to dive, relatively good sonar targets and slow to manuever both on the surface and submerged. A more aggressive approach within range of Allied aircraft should result in heavier losses.

Careful selection of TROMs from Combined Fleet are not really proof of much of anything but here's one Brady should not enjoy:

quote:


10 December 1941:
I-6 reports sighting a LEXINGTON-class aircraft carrier and two cruisers heading NE. Vice Admiral Shimizu in KATORI at Kwajalein orders SubRon 1 and other boats to pursue and sink the carrier.

121 miles NE of Cape Halava, Molokai, Hawaiian Islands. After 0600 in the morning, Ens Perry L. Teaff's Douglas SBD-2 "Dauntless" dive-bomber of VS-6 from USS ENTERPRISE (CV-6) attacks I-70 on the surface and scores a near-miss with a 1,000-lb bomb that damages the submarine, preventing her submerging.

In the afternoon, another SBD of VS-6 flown by Lt (jg) Clarence E. Dickinson Jr. sights a surfaced submarine in the same area. Dickinson climbs to 5,000 ft for a diving attack. His plane is sighted from the submarine, which commences a slow turn to starboard, opening fire from her 13-mm machine guns. [3]

The bomb dropped from the "Dauntless" lands right beside the submarine, amidships. Its explosion throws several gunners over board. I-70 stops and starts to settle on the even keel, disappearing underwater about 45 seconds after the explosion at 23-45N, 155-35W.

When Dickinson returns to the scene of the sinking, he sights four IJN sailors flailing in the water. A bubble of oil and foamy water appears on the surface, followed by two more bubbles, containing oil and debris.

I-70 is the first Japanese combatant ship sunk by United States aircraft during World War II and the first fleet submarine lost in the Pacific War.

Sixth Fleet's headquarters tries to contact I-70, even after the other subs of her division return to Kwajalein. The effort is unsuccessful. I-70 is presumed lost with all 93 hands off Hawaii.

15 March 1942:
Removed from the Navy List.

(in reply to Reverberate)
Post #: 55
RE: That's it for me..... - 3/3/2010 3:00:46 PM   
Misconduct


Posts: 1864
Joined: 2/18/2009
From: Cape Canaveral, Florida
Status: offline 		Well you know, I can't complain about the Japanese subs being to strong, I sank 2 CV's, a CVL and a CVE, where the Japanese have mainly only taken a toll on my Oilers and destroyers. If that isn't proof the Subs are little overpowered what is, 4 Cv's sunk under 25 days of my campaign.


(in reply to spence)
Post #: 56
RE: That's it for me..... - 3/3/2010 3:18:44 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline 		You know, I just lost 40 P40Es to a tojo high sweep. It felt like a prison rape and I voiced my opinion here. It felt good to vent and prevented me from booting my poor dog. Let the guy have his gripe. I know how he feels. We all get a raw deal once in a while and it sucks.

We all get over it. Let him slide.


_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Kwik E Mart)
Post #: 57
RE: That's it for me..... - 3/3/2010 3:36:19 PM   
Nikademus


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

ORIGINAL: spence

I do however feel that the abilities of IJN subs in the game are way overrated. Their record from WWII includes a few spectacular successes but for such a large force its record is not very good unless one considers the number posthumous promotions awarded to its captains.


indeed. In fact, when you look at it....the entire Japanese military managed a few spectacular successes but for such a large force, its record is really not very good.



Couldn't resist.....after two new books on the Middle Sea....its interesting seeing even professional authors discount the achievements of military orgs depending on their point of view.

_____________________________


(in reply to spence)
Post #: 58
RE: That's it for me..... - 3/3/2010 3:37:27 PM   
Nikademus


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

ORIGINAL: koontz

The Map the day after...




hey! totally borked move. camping those carriers 1 hex off a target.


_____________________________


(in reply to koontz)
Post #: 59
RE: That's it for me..... - 3/3/2010 4:03:06 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

I completely agree, check out this BS that just happened to me. No way this could happen!

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Sep 15, 42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Lunga at 114,139

Japanese Ships
SS I-19, hits 1

Allied Ships
CV Wasp, Torpedo hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
BB North Carolina
CA Canberra
CA Vincennes
CA Chicago
CL Boise
CLAA San Juan
DD O'Brien
DD Laffey
DD Perkins
DD Cushing
DD Knavey
DD Farenholt
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Lunga at 114,139

Japanese Ships
SS I-19

Allied Ships
CV Wasp, heavy fires, heavy damage
BB North Carolina, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
CA Canberra
CA Vincennes
CA Chicago
CL Boise
CLAA San Juan
DD O'Brien
DD Laffey
DD Perkins
DD Cushing
DD Knavey
DD Farenholt
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Lunga at 114,139

Japanese Ships
SS I-19, hits 1

Allied Ships
CV Wasp, heavy fires, heavy damage
BB North Carolina
CA Canberra
CA Vincennes
CA Chicago
CL Boise
CLAA San Juan
DD O'Brien, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
DD Laffey
DD Perkins
DD Cushing
DD Knavey
DD Farenholt

3 Attacks in one phase? With 2 ships sunk? Borked!




Hmm, this looks strangely familiar...sort of like it might have really happened during the war.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: That's it for me..... Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   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

1.328