RE: March 1945

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: March 1945

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 >> After Action Reports >> RE: March 1945

Page: << < prev 195 196 [197] 198 199 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: March 1945 - 1/3/2018 10:25:28 PM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

Thank You John.

Anybody else have anything to add?

_____________________________

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to JohnDillworth)

Post #: 5881

RE: March 1945 - 1/4/2018 2:11:58 AM

Capt. Harlock

Posts: 5358
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Thank You John.

Anybody else have anything to add?

Yes. To be pedantic, you hit the destroyer USS Twining (DD-540). Irving was the name for the Japanese plane. Mind you, Twining was a Fletcher-class, so putting her hors de combat is a good thing.

_____________________________

Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 5882

RE: March 1945 - 1/4/2018 2:23:25 AM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

Do you think that amazing event will turn the events of the war???

I bet so. How could I have missed.

That is it. I am declaring victory, picking up my marbles, and going home. YES!

_____________________________

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Capt. Harlock)

Post #: 5883

RE: March 1945 - 1/4/2018 3:49:47 AM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

Turn Sent.

I brought in five 49 Plane Tony-100 Sentai. They were told to SWEEP and kill enemy fighters...

_____________________________

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 5884

RE: March 1945 - 1/4/2018 4:45:27 AM

SierraJuliet

Posts: 2319
Joined: 2/23/2009
From: Brisbane, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Turn Sent.

I brought in five 49 Plane Tony-100 Sentai. They were told to SWEEP and kill enemy fighters...

This bunch of pilots are going to be tad upset when they learn that you have sent them into the hornets nest at the same time as picking up you marbles and going home! I have a feeling that they think the war is still there to be won.

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 5885

RE: March 1945 - 1/4/2018 9:33:12 AM

JohnDillworth

Posts: 3100
Joined: 3/19/2009
Status: offline

BTW, what are you shooting at Tex? Are you targeting the CV's , transports or capital ships?

_____________________________

Today I come bearing an olive branch in one hand, and the freedom fighter's gun in the other. Do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. I repeat, do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. - Yasser Arafat Speech to UN General Assembly

(in reply to SierraJuliet)

Post #: 5886

RE: March 1945 - 1/4/2018 1:00:50 PM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

BTW, what are you shooting at Tex? Are you targeting the CV's , transports or capital ships?

There is, as normal, about 10-12 STF defending the hex. NO crap on that. There will be 3-4 PT TF, then 3-4 DD TF, and then 3-4 CA/CL TF, and then some large fellas named Iowa and New Jersey. This is before you even get to tankers, APA, AK, etc...

_____________________________

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to JohnDillworth)

Post #: 5887

RE: March 1945 - 1/4/2018 1:21:32 PM

zuluhour

Posts: 5244
Joined: 1/20/2011
From: Maryland
Status: offline

I would think more wind. Something in the range of 350 special attack a/c. When I was in 1946 with Lars, and I'll check with him tonight, he was prepared to deliver much larger strikes, and if memory serves me right from Greyjoy, you will overwhelm the A2A model as well as the CAP and deliver serious blows. Of course LRCAP and or escort and sweeps at various altitudes can't hurt.
just 2 cent

**another thought..... have you tried some night strikes? When I had large CVE TFs off Okinawa in 45-46 it was my biggest fear as I had neglected
night fighter deployment

< Message edited by zuluhour -- 1/4/2018 1:35:57 PM >

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 5888

RE: March 1945 - 1/4/2018 2:46:27 PM

JohnDillworth

Posts: 3100
Joined: 3/19/2009
Status: offline

quote:

There is, as normal, about 10-12 STF defending the hex. NO crap on that. There will be 3-4 PT TF, then 3-4 DD TF, and then 3-4 CA/CL TF, and then some large fellas named Iowa and New Jersey. This is before you even get to tankers, APA, AK, etc...

I presume that aircraft will ignore PT boats and then randomly select among the other ships. Wiser players would know better if there is any preference. I'd heard that transports and CVE's were more likely targeted.

_____________________________

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 5889

RE: March 1945 - 1/4/2018 2:47:39 PM

JohnDillworth

Posts: 3100
Joined: 3/19/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: zuluhour

I would think more wind. Something in the range of 350 special attack a/c. When I was in 1946 with Lars, and I'll check with him tonight, he was prepared to deliver much larger strikes, and if memory serves me right from Greyjoy, you will overwhelm the A2A model as well as the CAP and deliver serious blows. Of course LRCAP and or escort and sweeps at various altitudes can't hurt.
just 2 cent

**another thought..... have you tried some night strikes? When I had large CVE TFs off Okinawa in 45-46 it was my biggest fear as I had neglected
night fighter deployment

quote:

Greyjoy

ALL RISE!

anybody ever hear from that guy?

< Message edited by JohnDillworth -- 1/4/2018 2:48:03 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to zuluhour)

Post #: 5890

RE: March 1945 - 1/4/2018 2:51:05 PM

Chickenboy

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
Anybody else have anything to add?

I think this muted test confirmed your pre-conceived notions about the role of kamikazes, John. I lose track of how many times posters (myself included) have called for a mass attack with LBA, Carrier-based, kamikazes and surface forces simultaneously. Feeding small (and yes 250 kamikazes is small) units into the meat grinder solo and then expressing shock about their demise will not yield revolutionary thinking about a balanced attack or the role that kamikazes could have / should have played to this point.

_____________________________

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 5891

RE: March 1945 - 1/4/2018 2:59:54 PM

ny59giants

Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline

I agree with Chicken-san. Throw in the kitchen sink, two young male children, and a slightly used Union Pacific caboose into this attack.

Vary your altitude, but try to have airframes with similar cruise speed go into together from the same AF to help get larger strikes in.

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 5892

RE: March 1945 - 1/4/2018 10:01:41 PM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

I only had about 50% fly last turn due to weather. The attack should have been about 7-800 Fighters and 3-400 Attack Planes. Add another 250 Fighters, as detailed above, set for sweeps. We'll see the results this turn...

_____________________________

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to ny59giants)

Post #: 5893

RE: March 1945 - 1/5/2018 4:07:15 PM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

March 16, 1945

With school back in session I have a better opportunity to do real Reviews of the day-to-day action. Will cover March 16th and then, with later Posts, hit the major areas of action.

KOREA
Gunzan
Hardly anything flies this day. Weather was pretty bad so we'll run with that. There were two Sweeps by 34 and 18 Tony Fighters flying at 30,000 Ft. They encounter 310 Fighters. The planes do pretty well--all things being equal--and win a 3:2 exchange in the air: 20 for roughly 30. Three anemic raids go in with 11 F 5 B (no survivors), 25 F 11 DB (no survivors), and 31 F 6 TB. Surprisingly all 6 Frances get thru and SINK APA Pres. Monroe with three hits. NICE!

To get Dan to pull back troops, I ordered a brand new ID to advance on Gunzan from the South. It has caused Dan to pull troops from Taiyku and the hex between Gunzan and Keijo. He'll bombard it tomorrow and probably hit it with 200 B-24 but it has already served its purpose to distract him.

Taiyku
My opponent has pulled all but an ID and a Brigade from this base. Those units face three full strength Japanese ID and 9 AA units plus two Eng Reg. We will attack tomorrow and see if there is any chance in this hex.

Keijo
The ground between Gunzan and Keijo has 8-10 units in it. I move (very slowly) two weak Artillery units towards and into the hex--once again--to 'fix' Dan in place while I try to take Taiyku.

Moppo
Been using this as an air base and station for my Midget SS and PT Boats. The Brits pay it a visit with 2 CL and 5 DDs, fight thru two TFs of ML and PT then bombard the AF for moderate damage. There is CD and about 350 mines present here.

Fast TF
I am allowed--AGAIN--to run my APDs (10 of them) back to Fusan while racing 5 of the 1,000 supply PG thru to get to Tiensin in NE China. This exchange is now running for the 3rd time and each time the two TFs bring in 10,000 supply to what was a very supply-starved region. It is looking way better now.

CHINA
Haichow
On the coast I have been using 50 Transport planes to bring in enough supply for the defenders to crush the single Chinese Corps here. Scored a 10-1 assault today and am position to make this Corps surrender fairly soon if nothing changes.

88,45 (SE Kaifeng)
Two Japanese ID and a Brigade crush a Chinese Corps with a 20-1 assault. The Chinese are hit by nearly 50 bombers during the day and then lose 3,448 troops and 14 guns. I lose 322.

This whole area around Kaifeng, the base NW of it, and Nanyang (to the SW) has seen a growing Japanese Offensive that has trashed at least four Chinese Corps and is set to take out at least 2-3 more.

Tsinan
This is a the big banana for the China Offensive.

Dan has sent the vast majority of his troops SE to take Tsingtao. That base, delightfully, continues to hold by a shoestring and keeps his 5+ ID occupied while the 3rd Tank Div holds the road between Tsinan and Tsingtao. Yesterday saw the arrival of five Japanese IDs with 4 AA units and two Eng Reg. We shall attack tomorrow and am pretty sure we only face the 9th (re-built) Aussie ID and two Inf-Tk units I crushed taking the hex just outside the city.

There is only a thin chance of taking the base but I wanted to try and get lucky. We'll know after tomorrow's attack.

Malaya
A group of 7 Lily DB smack down a small TF trying to run supplies into Victoria Point. An AM and 3 LSM are sunk for no loss.

The enemy has just taken Singora and many troops will be trapped at Alor Star. We shall not allow them to be lost! A TF of Escorts and 20 AK/AKL depart Singers to evacuate most of the troops present. Plan to lift them off--under Fighter Cover--and then bring them back to Singers to refit before advancing north again. This delaying action in Malaya has been magnificent. It has taken him nearly six months to advance to this point for very little cost to the Japanese while keep the Northern/Central Sumatra oil facilities running full bore.

Java
Soerabaja
A total of 48 Tankers are fully loaded with two CVEs and enough escorts to make each a 25 ship TF. These ships carry 417,154 Fuel and 76,466 Oil. Time to move tomorrow towards Balikpapan. The TFs shall be escorted by 3 CV and 2 CVL as they, once again, head for the Home Isles.

West Coast
For the first time in a year, a group of six long-range I-Boats will deploy near the Los Angeles area to see how lazy my opponent is with escorts. Three of the six are uselessly huge I-400 class. Had the points and said 'why not?' so I built them for this mission. They'll probably sink without hitting anything!

Those are the events from around the map.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 5894

RE: March 1945 - 1/5/2018 11:53:56 PM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

Here is what we find at Genzan.

Should note that I was 100% on target. The great troop killers from the sky appear overhead and destroy the 150th ID. Doesn't matter. This sacrificial lamb was a distraction to occupy his attention for a few days. It entered the hex at 32% strength! The units was nailed by a total of 233 B-24 and 30 2EB...

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by John 3rd -- 1/5/2018 11:54:14 PM >

_____________________________

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 5895

RE: March 1945 - 1/8/2018 3:36:56 PM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

March 19, 1945

My 'little boys' have been doing occasional damage. Sent in two TF of MTB and 3 Midget SS to Gunzan. Lost all Midgets and 4 MTB but scored two TT his and numerous small arms hits. It is something.

The Allies have laid a crap-ton of mines in the base hex and two of the Midgets were lost to them.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 5896

RE: March 1945 - 1/8/2018 3:53:10 PM

zuluhour

Posts: 5244
Joined: 1/20/2011
From: Maryland
Status: offline

surely, his glorious highness would acquiesce to placing a Shotai special attack unit on night attack for the amusement of cadets on Kure??

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 5897

RE: March 1945 - 1/8/2018 4:08:41 PM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

That is an outstanding idea. In the interests of 'the cadets at Kure' this will be done next turn...

_____________________________

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to zuluhour)

Post #: 5898

RE: March 1945 - 1/8/2018 7:18:25 PM

Hortlund

Posts: 2884
Joined: 10/13/2000
Status: offline

There is something that I have been wondering while reading (both) your AARs.

Why did you not fight for the Phillipines? Why did you never seem to draw a red line somewhere and commit all your forces?

_____________________________

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 John 3rd)

Post #: 5899

RE: March 1945 - 1/8/2018 9:55:29 PM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

That battle was in Sumatra when Dan invaded it in 1943. The Campaign was a resounding success with the destruction of several hundred Allied ships, an immense number of airframes, and the destruction of nearly 150,000 troops. It was a magnificent VICTORY!

The impact from that victory was the gutting of the Japanese 'small boys' in the Fleet. I lost soooooooooo many DDs and CLs that the Fleet has never recovered.

Twice I planned to go 'all in' after that but was caught out of position both times. That was my mistake.

We're going to be hitting the 'campaign lessons' phase of the AAR sometime soon and one of the big ones for me is being able to pull the final trigger for the 'fight to the death.' I was reticent for waaaaaay too long to lose the Fleet. I LOVE my CVs and BIG Boys. Had a devil of a time wrapping my mind around sending them to their doom. Won't happen next campaign. Course I do have to say that my personal opinions around my noble opponent's strategy of using the ENTIRE Allied CV Fleet as nothing but Fighter cover for 1,000,000+ AK-AP-APA--etc..., therefore, making it unassailable is a hugely contributing factor to that choice.

_____________________________

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Hortlund)

Post #: 5900

RE: March 1945 - 1/9/2018 9:15:36 AM

Hortlund

Posts: 2884
Joined: 10/13/2000
Status: offline

Well, the thing is, if you say Sumatra was your red line, then that line should have covered Boela aswell. Why didnt you fight him there? I can understand not wanting to lose your ships, but the downside of not losing those ships is you lost the game instead. Despite defeating a huge army at Sumatra.

As for using the entire allied CV fleet as fighter cover for his invasion forces, well, thats just a sound strategy in my opinion. The interesting aspect of that is how do the jap player handle it.

_____________________________

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 John 3rd)

Post #: 5901

RE: March 1945 - 1/9/2018 4:45:23 PM

crsutton

Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

That battle was in Sumatra when Dan invaded it in 1943. The Campaign was a resounding success with the destruction of several hundred Allied ships, an immense number of airframes, and the destruction of nearly 150,000 troops. It was a magnificent VICTORY!

The impact from that victory was the gutting of the Japanese 'small boys' in the Fleet. I lost soooooooooo many DDs and CLs that the Fleet has never recovered.

Twice I planned to go 'all in' after that but was caught out of position both times. That was my mistake.

We're going to be hitting the 'campaign lessons' phase of the AAR sometime soon and one of the big ones for me is being able to pull the final trigger for the 'fight to the death.' I was reticent for waaaaaay too long to lose the Fleet. I LOVE my CVs and BIG Boys. Had a devil of a time wrapping my mind around sending them to their doom. Won't happen next campaign. Course I do have to say that my personal opinions around my noble opponent's strategy of using the ENTIRE Allied CV Fleet as nothing but Fighter cover for 1,000,000+ AK-AP-APA--etc..., therefore, making it unassailable is a hugely contributing factor to that choice.

A good assessment. I think there is a window of opportunity for the Japanese fleet to fight it out with the Allies in the hopes of defeating a major operation. You might say Sumatra is that example but then again despite the gain, his Sumatra campaign put you off balance for the rest of the game. I told him that it was like a brilliant queen sacrifice in chess. (That at least got Dan feeling better about losing a bundle of troops..

) One could also say that Allied divisions that can be rebuilt (mostly) are well worth trading for the loss of so many IJN light warships early on. One of my key strategic aims is to sink Japanese DDs from day one. But I think the Japanese player has to really give up fleet preservation notions because the fleet becomes more and more redundant as the death star accumulates. To play an effective game the Japanese player has to be willing to lose ships in 1944. That is the trade off for time and space. Credit to Dan is that I think his big stick-death star tactic has got Allied Fan Boys rethinking their own strategy in the future. However, is is a fair tactic to use? I don't know but there is sure be some discussion. Dan is good at tactics but not the best. However, he may be the best Allied player out there when in come to grand strategy.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 5902

RE: March 1945 - 1/9/2018 8:49:09 PM

HansBolter

Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

It's just as fair a tactic for the Americans in '44 & '45 as it is for Japan in '42 & '43.

_____________________________

Hans

(in reply to crsutton)

Post #: 5903

RE: March 1945 - 1/9/2018 10:23:29 PM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hortlund

Well, the thing is, if you say Sumatra was your red line, then that line should have covered Boela aswell. Why didnt you fight him there? I can understand not wanting to lose your ships, but the downside of not losing those ships is you lost the game instead. Despite defeating a huge army at Sumatra.

As for using the entire allied CV fleet as fighter cover for his invasion forces, well, thats just a sound strategy in my opinion. The interesting aspect of that is how do the jap player handle it.

My CVs were upgrading in the Home Islands at the time if memory serves...

_____________________________

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Hortlund)

Post #: 5904

RE: March 1945 - 1/9/2018 10:24:37 PM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

It's just as fair a tactic for the Americans in '44 & '45 as it is for Japan in '42 & '43.

Not a tactic that I have used here. Think it is borderline gamey.

< Message edited by John 3rd -- 1/9/2018 10:25:02 PM >

_____________________________

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to HansBolter)

Post #: 5905

RE: March 1945 - 1/9/2018 11:26:55 PM

BillBrown

Posts: 2335
Joined: 6/15/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

It's just as fair a tactic for the Americans in '44 & '45 as it is for Japan in '42 & '43.

Not a tactic that I have used here. Think it is borderline gamey.

I do believe that this was a tactic that was used by the USN. They put 36 F6Fs and 36 F4Us on their CVs.

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 5906

RE: March 1945 - 1/10/2018 3:01:35 AM

Bif1961

Posts: 2014
Joined: 6/26/2008
From: Phenix City, Alabama
Status: offline

We have gone down this road before but since this is a game, you don't fire yourself as the commander, having lost hundreds of ships and 150,000 men in Sumatra adventure any commander would have been relieved after that debacle. I know we often refer to civil war events and there would be many to allude to here, like Fredericksburg or Chancelorsville, after both the Union commander was cashiered with cause.

(in reply to BillBrown)

Post #: 5907

RE: March 1945 - 1/10/2018 11:08:21 AM

Bearcat2

Posts: 577
Joined: 2/14/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

It's just as fair a tactic for the Americans in '44 & '45 as it is for Japan in '42 & '43.

Not a tactic that I have used here. Think it is borderline gamey.

Looks like you will have to think up a counter as you are likely to face this tactic again. The Big Blue fleet isn't going away.

_____________________________

"After eight years as President I have only two regrets: that I have not shot Henry Clay or hanged John C. Calhoun."--1837

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 5908

RE: March 1945 - 1/10/2018 11:10:23 AM

HansBolter

Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

It's just as fair a tactic for the Americans in '44 & '45 as it is for Japan in '42 & '43.

Not a tactic that I have used here. Think it is borderline gamey.

So you didn't keep the KB concentrated in '42 and '43? Isn't that simply considered good play, to keep your carriers concentrated instead of using them in penny packets so they can be defeated in detail?

What I don't grasp is why that would be considered sound gaming tactics for one side and gamey for another.

_____________________________

Hans

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 5909

RE: March 1945 - 1/10/2018 11:12:53 AM

HansBolter

Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bif1961

We have gone down this road before but since this is a game, you don't fire yourself as the commander, having lost hundreds of ships and 150,000 men in Sumatra adventure any commander would have been relieved after that debacle. I know we often refer to civil war events and there would be many to allude to here, like Fredericksburg or Chancelorsville, after both the Union commander was cashiered with cause.

And the Japanese commander would have been sacked for refusing to commit the navy to stop the Allies from surrounding Japan.

It is pointless and disrespectful to keep denigrating players for the mistakes they make.

Please stop this.

_____________________________

Hans

(in reply to Bif1961)

Post #: 5910