Matrix Games Forums

To End All Wars: Video, AAR and Interview!Ageod's To End All Wars: Video, AAR and Interview!To End All Wars: Artillery Battle Academy 2: Eastern Front - End of Early Access Space Program Manager unveils its multiplayer modes Another update for Commander: The Great War!Distant Worlds: Universe gets a new updateDeal of the Week: Eagle Day to Bombing the Reich Advanced Tactics Gold is coming to SteamMatrix Games now speaks German!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Boom!

 
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: Boom! Page: <<   < prev  29 30 31 32 [33]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Boom! - 1/9/2011 3:15:56 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 12262
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Castor,

I'm not going to get into this further with you beyond this post. Historically when the USN and RN operated together it was not at all unknown for one carrier to carry the fighters and another to carry the bombers in order to ease logistics. There is even literature about how some of the later USN fighters were too large to allow such cross-decking because of the small sizes of the RN hangar decks. So, CVs with 100% fighter loadouts did happen in the war. Was it rare? Yes. But so were torpedo attacks with special assemblys attached to the torpedo to prevent it hitting the bottom of a shallow harbour. We don't ban torpedoes in PH attacks because of that.

Even if it never happened I wouldn't be too bothered as it was certainly possible and my arbiter of what is fair in-game is what was possible in real life, not what was necessarily done. It was possible, carries a risk and is counterable by the enemy ( whether they be Allies or Japanese ). You may not like it but saying it was impossible is ignorant of historical fact. Use google to do a search of the forum. Several posts here recently spoke about RN/USN cross-decking in mixed TFs. Again you might say that isn't "valid" somehow but it shows it happened and the difference is only a matter of degree.

Again though, as usual, you mistake something you don't like for something which shouldn't be allowed and never happened. Let us be clear, I believe things which historically happened are perfectly valid irrespective of your opinion... especially when you have a history of foregoing facts for hyperbole and complaint.

Invernomuto,
Aye, it was done in real life so I see no problem with doing it in-game.

Complaining that doing it with a lot of fighters is "gamey" is ridiculous because if that's the yardstick we will use for gamey then none of us should be allowed to fly any missions in greater strength than the Allies or Japanese achieved on the same date in the war. If I want that level of orthodoxy I'll go watch a documentary.



I often wonder if people realize what they write! First you say 6 CV with fighters only (of 6 CV in a TF). Then you talk about one or some carriers in a TF with fighters only (the example I´ve brought up). This is a completely different thing than a WHOLE TF loaded up with fighters only. And noone can show me a real life example of a carrier TF like KB being sent out with only fighters aboard because it never happened and would have never happened. You could have also sent out a tank division with only MG ammo for the tanks because this would be "possible" also. And if I would say no general on Earth would have ever done it I would probably hear, it would be possible, why not doing it in the game... No carrier task force of such a size ever left port with fighters only aboard to go onto a combat mission (and don´t come up with a transfer mission to Malta now ).

I don´t even talk about your history because it always makes me shaking my head when I hear these fantasy comments masked in lots of your psycho blah blah, sorry.

< Message edited by castor troy -- 1/9/2011 3:16:38 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 961
RE: Boom II - 1/9/2011 5:48:33 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
Castor,
Whatever.

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 962
RE: Boom II - 1/21/2011 9:54:32 AM   
veji1

 

Posts: 958
Joined: 7/9/2005
Status: offline
So what's occuring in this game ?

_____________________________

Adieu Ô Dieu odieux... signé Adam

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 963
RE: Boom II - 1/21/2011 1:21:57 PM   
d0mbo

 

Posts: 577
Joined: 8/21/2009
From: Holland
Status: offline
Nemo and Castor stalemated in their verbal battle.......

Other than that, who knows?


(in reply to veji1)
Post #: 964
RE: Boom II - 1/23/2011 1:24:11 AM   
stuman


Posts: 3864
Joined: 9/14/2008
From: Elvis' Hometown
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: d0mbo

Nemo and Castor stalemated in their verbal battle.......

Other than that, who knows?





WiTE !

_____________________________

" Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room. " President Muffley


(in reply to d0mbo)
Post #: 965
RE: Boom II - 2/7/2011 2:56:59 PM   
rmlpanzer08

 

Posts: 15
Joined: 7/28/2010
Status: offline
Hi Cap & Gown,

Thank you for your great AAR, it has been very insightful, and I have learned alot. I really hope your battle & AAR will be continued soon.


(in reply to stuman)
Post #: 966
RE: Boom II - 3/8/2011 1:24:53 AM   
cap_and_gown


Posts: 2691
Joined: 3/6/2001
From: Virginia, USA
Status: offline
Feb. 18, 1944

It has been a good long while since I updated this AAR. Work pressures and in-game demoralization have delayed this game, but I still owe it to my opponent to press on, even though the allied juggernaut is becoming unstoppable.

Truk had to be abandoned. The service damage is at 100 and planes were not being repaired. The runway is less the 50% damaged, but the service damage won't come down until the runway is completely repaired and the allies have made sure the runway stays damaged. We will see if they go for an invasion. Perhaps they are just neutralizing it so they can go around it? Maybe invade northern New Guinea as a way to isolate the Solomons?

T-bolts and Spit VIIIs have been sweeping my bases around Raheng in Thailand. My Tojo IIc's were getting slaughtered. The IJA has run out of trained fighter pilots, and my supply of armored fighters has not kept up with casualties. Frank production is at 200 a month and climbing, but not climbing fast enough. I can't really push it any more because I am concerned about running down supplies in the Home Islands which are needed for the troops as well as factory expansion/conversion. This turn I did get lucky and more T-bolts and Spits were shot down than my own planes. Not sure what happened there!

Recon indicates the allies are sending more tanks south from Moulmein towards Bangkok than the Germans had panzers at Kursk. And the Chinese are advancing on all fronts. Next month the allies get 3 new fleet carriers meaning they will be back to where they were when they invaded Ponape. Plus they will have more CVEs. They get about 5 CVEs a month starting in January.

My intuition and intelligence hints seem to point to a major allied operation directed into the eastern DEI. My carriers are based at Morotai ready to react to an invasion of either the DEI (can be in position in one turn) or of Truk/Marianas (can be in position in about 3 turns at most). The slow CV/L/Es (Junyo, Hiyo, Ryuho, and all CVEs) are based in the northern Marianas. I am expecting an invasion of Marcus and they are tasked with guarding against just such a threat. That leaves 13 CV and 5 CVL at Morotai. Numerous surface groups are also based around the northern Celebes and the Moluccas.

It is quite discouraging playing when your troops can't seem to accomplish anything. Watching my pilots futilely contest the skies over their own bases and accomplish nothing at all is disheartening. If only the allied navy would come out and play. At least my surface forces can no doubt dish out as much if not more than they take.


< Message edited by cap_and_gown -- 3/8/2011 1:27:19 AM >

(in reply to rmlpanzer08)
Post #: 967
RE: Boom II - 3/8/2011 1:47:30 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 5663
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline
Welcome back!

Sorry to hear the discouraging news, but you are '44 with the DEI still intact?

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to cap_and_gown)
Post #: 968
RE: Boom II - 3/8/2011 2:25:30 AM   
witp1951


Posts: 118
Joined: 12/2/2009
From: Tennessee
Status: offline
Also glad to see U back.

_____________________________

Baka wa shinanakya naoranai

Dog

(in reply to cap_and_gown)
Post #: 969
RE: Boom II - 3/8/2011 2:49:33 AM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 17966
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: Twin Cities, MN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: cap_and_gown

Feb. 18, 1944

It is quite discouraging playing when your troops can't seem to accomplish anything. Watching my pilots futilely contest the skies over their own bases and accomplish nothing at all is disheartening. If only the allied navy would come out and play. At least my surface forces can no doubt dish out as much if not more than they take.


It's almost as if you need a 'divine wind' to come from the sky to smite the invaders.

_____________________________


(in reply to cap_and_gown)
Post #: 970
RE: Boom II - 3/8/2011 8:25:15 AM   
FatR

 

Posts: 2516
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline
Well, such is the lot of a Japanese player. Eventually Allies, under all but most incompetent players will grow too strong, to do more than delay them. At least you've managed to made them pay for Truk, and your opponent will need to keep the pressure constantly. It seems, you've made a mistake of not attriting Chinese numbers, and now Japanese situation in CBI is critical... I'd advise stripping non-essential island garrizons, like in Andamans, to at least hold Bangkok.

Also, how big is your pilot training program? I find it disconcerting that pilot attrition started to tell already.

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 971
RE: Boom II - 7/15/2011 7:42:03 PM   
Wirraway_Ace


Posts: 1143
Joined: 10/8/2007
From: Briz Vegas
Status: offline
Bump. Cap_and_gown, can you tell us how it has gone since early feb 44? It is like purchasing a used book of great wisdom and insight to find the last couple of chapters are missing...

(in reply to FatR)
Post #: 972
RE: Boom II - 6/2/2012 1:44:44 AM   
bigred


Posts: 2877
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wirraway_Ace

Bump. Cap_and_gown, can you tell us how it has gone since early feb 44? It is like purchasing a used book of great wisdom and insight to find the last couple of chapters are missing...

bump

_____________________________

---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2597400

(in reply to Wirraway_Ace)
Post #: 973
RE: Boom II - 6/2/2012 4:28:32 AM   
Mac Linehan

 

Posts: 1243
Joined: 12/19/2004
From: Denver Colorado
Status: offline
cap_and-gown -

Welcome back! You have been missed; I am delighted that you are back with us.

Yes - you face a tough situation. I must respectfully point out that - to my limited knowledge - most games end long before 1944. You are remarkable in hanging in there against difficult odds, an achievement that reflects well on your playing ability and commitment to honoring the game. Your opponent is very fortunate to have you in a pbem.

Keep us posted. Think out of the box (and I am sure you are doing that already). Make it costly for the Allies - as it was in real life up to the very end.

You have my respect, Sir, and - I suspect - of the other forumites.

Mac

< Message edited by Mac Linehan -- 6/2/2012 4:29:01 AM >


_____________________________

LAV-25 2147

(in reply to cap_and_gown)
Post #: 974
Page:   <<   < prev  29 30 31 32 [33]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Boom! Page: <<   < prev  29 30 31 32 [33]
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

0.125