Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Withdrawl of sunk ships

 
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 >> Withdrawl of sunk ships Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Withdrawl of sunk ships - 6/22/2013 8:40:48 AM   
olorin42

 

Posts: 74
Joined: 12/24/2007
From: Charlotte NC
Status: offline 		What happens if a ship that will withdraw is sunk? Do political points get taken for the rest of the game?
Post #: 1
RE: Withdrawl of sunk ships - 6/22/2013 8:57:03 AM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline 		There is no penalty. The AI Churchill forgives lost ships.

Bill

_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to olorin42)
Post #: 2
RE: Withdrawl of sunk ships - 6/22/2013 1:07:23 PM   
dr.hal


Posts: 3335
Joined: 6/3/2006
From: Covington LA via Montreal!
Status: offline 		An option that I thought should be considered (that players could elect to use) is that the Allied player would have to send off an "equivalent" ship (class? VPs?) to satisfy the requirements. The rationale is simple, this ship was recalled due to needs in the European theater, those needs still exist so something should leave if the original ship was sunk. Thoughts???

_____________________________


(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 3
RE: Withdrawl of sunk ships - 6/22/2013 1:33:28 PM   
tocaff


Posts: 4781
Joined: 10/12/2006
From: USA now in Brasil
Status: offline 		Good idea about an alternate ship being required to meet European needs. It would be best served with an ON/OFF switch in the Realism Options screen.

_____________________________

Todd

I never thought that doing an AAR would be so time consuming and difficult.
www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2080768

(in reply to dr.hal)
Post #: 4
RE: Withdrawl of sunk ships - 6/22/2013 1:50:31 PM   
Historiker


Posts: 4742
Joined: 7/4/2007
From: Deutschland
Status: offline 		We had that in WitP.
Problem: If you have to withdraw a british CV and all british CVs are sunk...

_____________________________

Without any doubt: I am the spawn of evil - and the Bavarian Beer Monster (BBM)!

There's only one bad word and that's taxes. If any other word is good enough for sailors; it's good enough for you. - Ron Swanson

(in reply to tocaff)
Post #: 5
RE: Withdrawl of sunk ships - 6/22/2013 3:52:24 PM   
czert2

 

Posts: 508
Joined: 2/10/2013
Status: offline 		so withdraw  us :)

(in reply to Historiker)
Post #: 6
RE: Withdrawl of sunk ships - 6/22/2013 4:03:40 PM   
Dili

 

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline 		This kind of ship trade needs to be done for any Mediterranean game that will ever be build. Either side. But in the Axis side is only submarines.

quote:

Problem: If you have to withdraw a british CV and all british CVs are sunk...


In that case ship points equivalence. Could be a BB+DD.

< Message edited by Dili -- 6/22/2013 4:10:55 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to czert2)
Post #: 7
RE: Withdrawl of sunk ships - 6/22/2013 6:05:03 PM   
dr.hal


Posts: 3335
Joined: 6/3/2006
From: Covington LA via Montreal!
Status: offline 		I agree tocaff, it must be a choice, off or on. There should also be some limits. I don't think sending a US CV to cover a UK one is valid due to the differing national leadership. However that's a detail that would be worked out if it goes forward. But I do think it is worth thinking about. I don't recall it being in WITP original, but that was a long time ago.... Hal

_____________________________


(in reply to tocaff)
Post #: 8
RE: Withdrawl of sunk ships - 6/22/2013 9:00:56 PM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

This kind of ship trade needs to be done for any Mediterranean game that will ever be build. Either side. But in the Axis side is only submarines.


There was the Italian Navy. I think they had a bit more than just submarines.

The Germans also operated a number of E-Boats in the Med. German Navy presence in the Med was fairly minor though.

US ships would not have been withdrawn in place of British ships. In some cases ships were not withdrawn due to any burning need on another front. British battleships were mostly used as a force in being. The only time they were really used was supporting landings.

I expect that if the Hermes had survived, she probably would have been used as a convoy escort CVE until enough purpose built CVEs were available. She was more useful in that role than just about anything else.

The only ships the British had a burning need for were convoy escorts. The rest of the RN mostly sat around in case the Italian or German surface fleets decided to sortie.

Bill

_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 9
RE: Withdrawl of sunk ships - 6/22/2013 9:31:16 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

This kind of ship trade needs to be done for any Mediterranean game that will ever be build. Either side. But in the Axis side is only submarines.



The only ships the British had a burning need for were convoy escorts. The rest of the RN mostly sat around in case the Italian or German surface fleets decided to sortie.

Bill
warspite1

Which period of the Med War are you referring to? Royal Navy carriers, battleships and cruisers were heavily involved throughout, from June 1940 onwards. Whether it was Cunningham's attempts to bring the Italian Fleet to battle, the attempts to intercept the enemy fleet, the attempts to deliver/save the British Army, or the main convoy engagements (and the engagements that resulted from these operations). I don't think the RN - Force H, the Malta Striking Force or the Mediterranean Fleet - ever had the chance of sitting around

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 10
RE: Withdrawl of sunk ships - 6/22/2013 10:17:19 PM   
Dili

 

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline
quote:

There was the Italian Navy. I think they had a bit more than just submarines.


I think you didn't understand what i was trying to say.

Italian submarines were the only Regiamarina ships that went out of Mediterranean until armistice. So if one of this boats was sunk before going to Atlantic another should have take its place -there could be an allowance that Mediterranean was more important that Atlantic so a 2:1 proportion, so for 2 of those sinkings the player only have to send to Atlantic one submarine that didn't operated in Atlantic, if we want to be even more perfect we restrict it to oceanic classes.

While Allied carriers, Battlehips, cruisers, destroyers, escorts, submarines etc entered the Med and get out of it often.
That is an issue that any developer of a Mediterranean game has to solve. Since if all Royal Navy ships remain then around 1941 almost all Royal Navy is in the game inside the Med. There are no ships to go hunt the Bismarck, to North Sea and Asia.

quote:

The rest of the RN mostly sat around in case the Italian or German surface fleets decided to sortie.


There was no British fleet in the Med since attack in Alexandria in late 1941 that sunk 2 battleships in shallow water harbor until Torch (Nov42). After that they were only in convoys to Malta from Gibraltar.

That is a reason that the British had to get an old ship Centurion and desguise it as a Battleship. Photo of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Centurion_(1911) desguised as a KGV.

2nd Sirte Battle was a classic case of those times.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Battle_of_Sirte

Or Vigourous
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Vigorous


< Message edited by Dili -- 6/22/2013 10:23:47 PM >

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 11
RE: Withdrawl of sunk ships - 6/22/2013 11:06:54 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

quote:

The rest of the RN mostly sat around in case the Italian or German surface fleets decided to sortie.


There was no British fleet in the Med since attack in Alexandria in late 1941 that sunk 2 battleships in shallow water harbor until Torch (Nov42). After that they were only in convoys to Malta from Gibraltar.

warspite1

There was a full year and a half of war between June 1940 and the Italian attack that took out Valiant and Queen Elizabeth!


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 12
RE: Withdrawl of sunk ships - 6/22/2013 11:42:18 PM   
Dili

 

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline 		Yes, and in that period the Italian fleet was often at sea.

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 13
RE: Withdrawl of sunk ships - 6/23/2013 12:00:04 AM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

Yes, and in that period the Italian fleet was often at sea.
warspite1

? Are we talking about two different things? I was answering wdolson's comment that "The rest of the RN mostly sat around in case the Italian or German surface fleets decided to sortie" as this was not the case.

...and then your response to it that "There was no British fleet in the Med since attack in Alexandria in late 1941", which seemed to ignore 18 months of intensive naval operations.

You have now answered "Yes, and in that period the Italian fleet was often at sea", but I did not dispute that - indeed my initial comment makes clear that it was the fact the RM WAS at sea, that made the RN's operations so intense.

I suspect we are talking at cross purposes


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 14
RE: Withdrawl of sunk ships - 6/23/2013 6:18:37 AM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson
The only ships the British had a burning need for were convoy escorts. The rest of the RN mostly sat around in case the Italian or German surface fleets decided to sortie.

Bill
warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Which period of the Med War are you referring to? Royal Navy carriers, battleships and cruisers were heavily involved throughout, from June 1940 onwards. Whether it was Cunningham's attempts to bring the Italian Fleet to battle, the attempts to intercept the enemy fleet, the attempts to deliver/save the British Army, or the main convoy engagements (and the engagements that resulted from these operations). I don't think the RN - Force H, the Malta Striking Force or the Mediterranean Fleet - ever had the chance of sitting around


I was largely thinking about the Home Fleet which spent a lot of time sitting in Scapa Flow in case the Germans sortied. But I believe the RN also spent a lot of time in port in Alexandria and Gibraltar too.

In the Med and Atlantic, the only ships that were regularly at sea and actually in regular action were convoy escorts except for the relatively rare occasion of invasion support. Most if not all ships DD and larger were sunk by air or sub.

The Pacific didn't have many surface actions, but there were more of them than in the Med.

Bill

_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 15
RE: Withdrawl of sunk ships - 6/23/2013 7:01:59 AM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson


quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson
The only ships the British had a burning need for were convoy escorts. The rest of the RN mostly sat around in case the Italian or German surface fleets decided to sortie.

Bill
warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Which period of the Med War are you referring to? Royal Navy carriers, battleships and cruisers were heavily involved throughout, from June 1940 onwards. Whether it was Cunningham's attempts to bring the Italian Fleet to battle, the attempts to intercept the enemy fleet, the attempts to deliver/save the British Army, or the main convoy engagements (and the engagements that resulted from these operations). I don't think the RN - Force H, the Malta Striking Force or the Mediterranean Fleet - ever had the chance of sitting around


I was largely thinking about the Home Fleet which spent a lot of time sitting in Scapa Flow in case the Germans sortied. But I believe the RN also spent a lot of time in port in Alexandria and Gibraltar too.

In the Med and Atlantic, the only ships that were regularly at sea and actually in regular action were convoy escorts except for the relatively rare occasion of invasion support. Most if not all ships DD and larger were sunk by air or sub.

The Pacific didn't have many surface actions, but there were more of them than in the Med.

Bill
warspite1

I guess everything is relative, but I personally would not characterise the RN’s time – whether Force H or the Mediterranean Fleet – in the Med as one of being holed up in port for any length of time. You say convoy escorts, but with the centrally placed RM, the British heavy units were usually part of the escort.

Indeed the same was true – though perhaps to a lesser extent – for the Home Fleet, particularly after the Russian convoys started.

The RN was simply too stretched to enjoy the luxury of sitting in port. I won’t bother listing all the battles and engagements, but the RN were constantly at sea in the Med war – defending its own convoys, seeking out Italian convoys, trying to bring the RM to battle e.g. Calabria, Spartivento, Matapan, naval reinforcement convoys e.g. Excess, the aircraft reinforcement of Malta, troop support in North Africa etc, delivering troops to Greece, Sicily, Torch, Mainland Italy etc, trying to save the army in Greece and Crete, Battles against Vichy forces e.g. Catapult, Syria.

As to how many surface actions there were in the Pacific compared to the Med War, given the size of the respective fleets (IJN, RM, RN and USN) and the geography of the Pacific, I have no doubt there were more naval surface engagements in the Pacific.



< Message edited by warspite1 -- 6/23/2013 7:02:58 AM >

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 16
RE: Withdrawl of sunk ships - 6/23/2013 10:10:21 AM   
Dili

 

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline
quote:

I was largely thinking about the Home Fleet


Okay that explains the German fleet reference. I was bit puzzled because there wasn't a German fleet in Med. The biggest they had was a captured Greek destroyer.


quote:

trying to bring the RM to battle


Did the British refused to give battle to Italians after bombarding Genova?

I spent all my initial learning of Mediterranean war reading British books and the meme was RM didn't get out to fight. Then i started to read in more detail and count the times that Regia Marina was out to get the British and the whole meme crashed like a house of cards...
The Italian fleet in being was not by staying in the harbor it was by when fighting doing it prudently.
You can count the times that Italian fleet went out to seek battle. There were several. And certainly much more than German fleet for example.
Plus the British didn't made it much different either, when Italian rounds were near any of their ships they run away and tried to break the straddling, fights to dead only happened when one side had almost all cards - usually the British - absent that, no one committed fully.

If you are interested you can check the Battleship and Cruiser TROMs here:https://sites.google.com/site/davidijn/regiamarina2

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 17
RE: Withdrawl of sunk ships - 6/23/2013 12:37:06 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

quote:

I was largely thinking about the Home Fleet


Okay that explains the German fleet reference. I was bit puzzled because there wasn't a German fleet in Med. The biggest they had was a captured Greek destroyer.


quote:

trying to bring the RM to battle


Did the British refused to give battle to Italians after bombarding Genova?

I spent all my initial learning of Mediterranean war reading British books and the meme was RM didn't get out to fight. Then i started to read in more detail and count the times that Regia Marina was out to get the British and the whole meme crashed like a house of cards...
The Italian fleet in being was not by staying in the harbor it was by when fighting doing it prudently.
You can count the times that Italian fleet went out to seek battle. There were several. And certainly much more than German fleet for example.
Plus the British didn't made it much different either, when Italian rounds were near any of their ships they run away and tried to break the straddling, fights to dead only happened when one side had almost all cards - usually the British - absent that, no one committed fully.

If you are interested you can check the Battleship and Cruiser TROMs here:https://sites.google.com/site/davidijn/regiamarina2
warspite1

As far as I was aware, the British were unaware of the fact that Iachino had sailed.

I think the difference was leadership. The Second Battle of Sirte is probably the most extreme example.

O'Hara makes the case for the RM. Whilst has argument has some merit, the fact is, with its central position, the RM should have done MUCH better against the RN.


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 18
RE: Withdrawl of sunk ships - 6/23/2013 1:06:59 PM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline 		I guess my knowledge of the Med naval campaign is less than complete. Most of my reading has been more on the air side of things which tends to paint the picture that operating in the Med carried a lot of risk from air attack. I can't find any good statistics at the moment, but while I have read about some small ship surface actions such as S-boats, MTBs, and other small craft, I have the impression that engagements of larger ships was rare.

There are few places in the Med where you aren't in range of land based air from one side or the other. In some places both sides could reach you. That made air threat a constant issue whenever surface ships sortied any distance from their home bases. The RAF had Beauforts based at Malta for a while which put all the water in a 300 mile radius at risk of air attack. From what statistics I can find (which don't break down losses by attack type and ship type together), the most common cause of ship loss in the Med was air attack.

I do admit it is not an area I have studied in depth though.

Bill

_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 19
RE: Withdrawl of sunk ships - 6/24/2013 12:37:00 PM   
Dili

 

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline 		The British admiral could have stayed around if he wanted to have a chance.

quote:

RM should have done MUCH better against the RN.


I have no disagreements over that with just a small caveat that is difficult to access the impact of Ultra.


quote:

I guess my knowledge of the Med naval campaign is less than complete. Most of my reading has been more on the air side of things which tends to paint the picture that operating in the Med carried a lot of risk from air attack.


That is correct.
But losses were heavy also. For example the No.107 sqn lost 24 of 26 crews in 3 months based in Malta.
US medium bombers after an initial period doing low level bombing abandoned it since every ship or boat was full of AA.

quote:

I have the impression that engagements of larger ships was rare.

That depends on what "rare" means. And could have been more with another God roll dice.



< Message edited by Dili -- 6/24/2013 12:43:49 PM >

(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 20
RE: Withdrawl of sunk ships - 6/24/2013 4:12:47 PM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline 		Let's not forget that RN submarines were very active on Mediterranean, primarily based on Malta.

http://www.killifish.f9.co.uk/Malta%20WWII/Submarines.htm

< Message edited by Sardaukar -- 6/24/2013 4:14:22 PM >

_____________________________

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


(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 21
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Withdrawl of sunk ships Page: [1]
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

1.875