Matrix Games Forums

Command Ops gets a Massive Update!Lost Battles AAR: Smolensk 41War in the East: Lost Battles is here!Conflict of Heroes: Awakening the Bear! Let's Play videoLost Battles Scenario Manual excerpts available!A sneak peek from Allied Corps!Harpoon 3 ANWs Free Ultimate Update!All good Deals always come in threesDistant Worlds: Shadows Approaches!Lost Battles AAR: Moscow 41		 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

In game penalty for US subs

 
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 >> Scenario Design and Modding >> In game penalty for US subs Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
In game penalty for US subs - 1/20/2013 7:37:54 PM   
Buck Beach

 

Posts: 1869
Joined: 6/25/2000
From: Covina,CA,USA
Status: offline 		I recently have been reading the book "Chronology of the War at Sea 1939-1945" and I am/was struck by the number of Japaneses ships sunk by U.S. subs in 1942. I further check on line an counted some 100 merchant and a dozen warships that met their fate by U.S. subs before October 1942. Given that some were sunk by surface action (unknown number) I was wondering if the forum members feel as I do that maybe penalty maybe should be lifted earlier than mid-1943?

Buck
Post #: 1
RE: In game penalty for US subs - 1/20/2013 7:56:55 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 39884
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		100 ships before 10/42 is doable in the game. The penalty is on the Mk 14 torpedo, which was garbage, not the boats.

_____________________________

There is no version of this where you come out on top - Tony Stark


(in reply to Buck Beach)
Post #: 2
RE: In game penalty for US subs - 1/20/2013 8:19:18 PM   
Symon


Posts: 272
Joined: 11/24/2012
From: De Eye-lands, Mon
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

I recently have been reading the book "Chronology of the War at Sea 1939-1945" and I am/was struck by the number of Japaneses ships sunk by U.S. subs in 1942. I further check on line an counted some 100 merchant and a dozen warships that met their fate by U.S. subs before October 1942. Given that some were sunk by surface action (unknown number) I was wondering if the forum members feel as I do that maybe penalty maybe should be lifted earlier than mid-1943?

Buck

Exactly what Terminus said.

And yes, there were skippers that turned off the mag disploaders, But can you imagine the complexity of the code if it has to check every Sub Skipper for a new box called "initiative"? And how would you ever set that?

Adm Christie was fundamental in developing the Mk-14 torpedo. He believed in it, and it took a long time to convice him it sucked. The game is set up to follow certain trends in thought and development, so Christie sits in the same chair as Yamamoto, Nagumo, and all the rest. One must take what one gets, for either side.

Ciao. JWE

(in reply to Buck Beach)
Post #: 3
RE: In game penalty for US subs - 1/20/2013 10:02:05 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 9057
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		The pace CR is moving with our RA Campaign (Feb 14, 1942), he'll make 100 ships!

Christie should have been relieved of command for sticking to that worthless piece of S*** exploder. Criminal what he did/did not do...


_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

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


(in reply to Symon)
Post #: 4
RE: In game penalty for US subs - 1/20/2013 10:54:26 PM   
Symon


Posts: 272
Joined: 11/24/2012
From: De Eye-lands, Mon
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

The pace CR is moving with our RA Campaign (Feb 14, 1942), he'll make 100 ships!

Christie should have been relieved of command for sticking to that worthless piece of S*** exploder. Criminal what he did/did not do...


John, I understand exactly what you are saying. But if you want to scar Christie for his misapprehensions, you also have to scar Yamamoto, Nagumo, Nagami, for theirs, and where does it all end???

Understand you are modding, so it doesn't make much difference in your world, but in the stock world, one must take what one gets, with the grain of salt for the goose, as well as for the gander.

Ciao. JWE

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 5
RE: In game penalty for US subs - 1/21/2013 12:34:16 AM   
Buck Beach

 

Posts: 1869
Joined: 6/25/2000
From: Covina,CA,USA
Status: offline 		Thanks guys.

Buck

(in reply to Symon)
Post #: 6
RE: In game penalty for US subs - 1/21/2013 1:20:31 AM   
dwg

 

Posts: 265
Joined: 1/22/2008
Status: offline 		The other thing to remember is that some of the merchants, particularly smaller ones, may have been sunk with the deck gun. Faulty torpedoes does not mean unarmed.

(in reply to Buck Beach)
Post #: 7
RE: In game penalty for US subs - 1/21/2013 5:27:01 PM   
DaveConn

 

Posts: 215
Joined: 5/3/2001
From: Washington
Status: offline 		Wasn't there also a problem with the contact fuse, so that even if the mag detonator was disabled it did not necessarily solve the problem?

(in reply to Symon)
Post #: 8
RE: In game penalty for US subs - 1/21/2013 5:34:30 PM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 6144
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DaveConn

Wasn't there also a problem with the contact fuse, so that even if the mag detonator was disabled it did not necessarily solve the problem?


Yes. Also the depth keeping. Also sometimes the rudder. The pre-war Mk-14 was, as they say in New Yawk, a piece of work.


_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to DaveConn)
Post #: 9
RE: In game penalty for US subs - 1/22/2013 1:06:46 AM   
msieving1

 

Posts: 313
Joined: 3/23/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58


quote:

ORIGINAL: DaveConn

Wasn't there also a problem with the contact fuse, so that even if the mag detonator was disabled it did not necessarily solve the problem?


Yes. Also the depth keeping. Also sometimes the rudder. The pre-war Mk-14 was, as they say in New Yawk, a piece of work.



Pretty good article on the Mark 14 torpedo problems here: http://www.historynet.com/us-torpedo-troubles-during-world-war-ii.htm

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 10
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> In game penalty for US subs 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

0.249