Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed

 
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 >> O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed - 3/6/2017 4:15:42 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 12212
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
Also no one named Stephen, Steph, Estefan, Stefan or any other variation allowed here. If your actual name is one of those excluded, please use a pseudonym. Girls named "Stevie" are welcome without restriction.

I'd like to keep this thread fairly businesslike, unlike all my other threads. I'll add color when appropriate and time allows.

I'd like this AAR to be neophyte friendly, which is to say lots of explanation in detail and a minimum of OT material (but use your own judgement there). Feel free to post relevant questions and criticisms to you heart's content here and humour (for the most part) and other stuff in my other thread "The Gorn Supremacy".
Post #: 1
RE: O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed - 3/6/2017 4:18:45 PM   
dave sindel

 

Posts: 309
Joined: 3/13/2006
From: Millersburg, OH
Status: offline
Are you able / willing to share your plans ? Your goals for the "amphibious bonus" period ?

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 2
RE: O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed - 3/6/2017 4:20:58 PM   
zuluhour


Posts: 4288
Joined: 1/20/2011
From: Maryland
Status: offline
Oh so tempted.............

(in reply to dave sindel)
Post #: 3
RE: O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed - 3/6/2017 4:39:45 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 34184
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

Also no one named Stephen, Steph, Estefan, Stefan or any other variation allowed here. If your actual name is one of those excluded, please use a pseudonym. Girls named "Stevie" are welcome without restriction.

I'd like to keep this thread fairly businesslike, unlike all my other threads. I'll add color when appropriate and time allows.

I'd like this AAR to be neophyte friendly, which is to say lots of explanation in detail and a minimum of OT material (but use your own judgement there). Feel free to post relevant questions and criticisms to you heart's content here and humour (for the most part) and other stuff in my other thread "The Gorn Supremacy".

Etienne

Bonjour. A question/request. Will you/Can you please provide lots of pictures with this AAR to aid being able to follow what is going on?

Merci

_____________________________

22nd November 1944 - The British Pacific Fleet is born (temporary avatar changes to commemorate the ships and aircraft). HM Ships Formidable, Illustrious, Victorious



(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 4
RE: O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed - 3/6/2017 4:56:17 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 12212
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
I have begun doing my first turn going through my air units with a fine toothed comb. Here's a guiding principle I try to keep in mind: The Pacific War is above all other things an air war. Especially for the Japanese player air crew training is critical. For the Japanese there are two groups of aviators which are entirely separate (unlike to some extent the US Marines and USN, or any UK or Commonwealth forces. The Japanese are not rich in anything and certainly not in available recruits for aviation. This is particularly true for the IJN. The war cannot be won without aircraft carriers, their aircraft and aircrews. Furthermore, the job of being a naval aviator is more complex than one necessarily is for an army aviator. In my doctrine torpedo bomber crews must be proficient in naval search because of the superior range of Kates over Vals. The opposite is true for the USN. Training to attack with torpedoes is a whole separate program and can only be done with torpedo planes, initially Kates, Jeans, Mabels, Bettys, Nells, Emilys and Mavises. Val crews must be proficient in naval attack with bombs and ASW. ASW because you don't need a lot of range to protect your CVs from submarines. It is handy if both your Kate and Val crews were proficient at ground attack, but less of a priority. Don't plan on using carrier aircraft for doing recon, that is not a proper mission for an aircraft carrier or a valid reason to risk same. US excluded here as in many things because of their almost infinite resources. The need for training IJN TB crews in torpedo attack is so great that most of the planes I listed above that are not assigned to carriers must concentrate on training aircrews to do torpedo attacks. Because the IJA doesn't have aircraft of sufficient range to search vast areas of the Pacific, some of the IJN 2 and 4 engine bombers will have to be employed in that way, and especially initially Bettys and Nells in the DEI as active anti ship missionholders. IJN fighter crews need to be proficient in one thing: fighting. Ground attack, naval attack and especially strafing anything is prohibitively expensive. I'll do a little of that anyway on day 1 but I won't train for it.

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 5
RE: O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed - 3/6/2017 4:57:24 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 12212
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

Also no one named Stephen, Steph, Estefan, Stefan or any other variation allowed here. If your actual name is one of those excluded, please use a pseudonym. Girls named "Stevie" are welcome without restriction.

I'd like to keep this thread fairly businesslike, unlike all my other threads. I'll add color when appropriate and time allows.

I'd like this AAR to be neophyte friendly, which is to say lots of explanation in detail and a minimum of OT material (but use your own judgement there). Feel free to post relevant questions and criticisms to you heart's content here and humour (for the most part) and other stuff in my other thread "The Gorn Supremacy".

Etienne

Bonjour. A question/request. Will you/Can you please provide lots of pictures with this AAR to aid being able to follow what is going on?

Merci


I am quite proficient at that.

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 6
RE: O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed - 3/6/2017 5:19:32 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 12212
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
Back to business. The IJN has a severe shortage in the game of available recruits. An Allied player can understand this by looking at the UK pools. Sad. The only significant attrition that is sustainable is in carrier battles, where you cannot avoid significant attrition. IJN aviators have so much training required that fully half or more of your active crews must be doing nothing but training. Here's where the IJA aviators come in. You must train them to do tasks that you might otherwise intuitively assign to navy crews. Naval search in areas where their aircraft have sufficient range (such as the DEI). ASW from any and all land bases. As I mentioned, DB crews in the IJN need to be proficient at ASW, and it's also not a bad idea for IJN TB crews to be good at it since they are going to be doing search anyway, but they can't afford to be used to do that from land bases, the army has to do that job and they have some wonderful planes for doing just that. Ann, Mary and to a great extent Lily should be used in that capacity, guarding ports and various chokepoints where US subs will proliferate. I have even used Sally and Helen in that role.

The point is this: Preserve IJN planes and aviators, and conserve IJN planes and aviators. You'll never really have enough of them. Preserve by keeping them out of fights and enemy airspace when unnecessary. Conserve by training them to the max so that attrition favors you (which it almost never does) and they can contribute more efficiently to the destruction of floating enemy airbases.

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 7
RE: O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed - 3/6/2017 5:25:50 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 12212
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dave sindel

Are you able / willing to share your plans ? Your goals for the "amphibious bonus" period ?


That period is not a driver. You use it as best you can to do that which is prudent. I will perhaps do imprudent things on occasion, but just to avoid being boring.

(in reply to dave sindel)
Post #: 8
RE: O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed - 3/6/2017 5:31:59 PM   
Lowpe

 

Posts: 14633
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
A lot of JFB's over expand their Navy planes. They use Carriers to resize groups and CS to resize Floatplanes.

This puts a huge demand on the Naval Pilot pool.

I think past the first three months of the war, the Zero and then the Nick (to the degree you have them) are your primary anti-bomber/air superiority plane. Sweeping with Oscars gets real hard, real fast.

So from your description you plan on having a fairly mild 1942 in the air...if the Allies let you?

When the George arrives you plan on using that defensively?

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 9
RE: O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed - 3/6/2017 5:56:04 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 12212
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

A lot of JFB's over expand their Navy planes. They use Carriers to resize groups and CS to resize Floatplanes.

This puts a huge demand on the Naval Pilot pool.

I think past the first three months of the war, the Zero and then the Nick (to the degree you have them) are your primary anti-bomber/air superiority plane. Sweeping with Oscars gets real hard, real fast.

So from your description you plan on having a fairly mild 1942 in the air...if the Allies let you?

When the George arrives you plan on using that defensively?



My approach is winning carrier battles. Jack and George are very nice planes and I will certainly build them but since they aren't carrier capable I'll likely use them for CAP over important airbases only. You're right about Oscar until you get to Ic. I will use them aggressively to sweep as long as I have an advantage and again because they will have army pilots. Tojo is my air superiority weapon but there are situations where she hasn't the range and Oscars do. Oscar really isn't much different than Zero except in armament especially early on. I will however use them judiciously until IIb when they have armoured cockpits. Also, beginning with IIa you have a very serious fighter-bomber capable of sinking ships. I keep that in mind. I have a lot of respect for Oscar, I just wish they were properly armed from the get-go. In the meantime before Frank, Tojo will do most of the sweeping and dying. Anyways, if you have a disadvantage in aircraft quality, the only way to overcome that is with numbers, and the IJN simply cannot play that game as long as they have carriers to man. If you send twice as many Oscars against a given number of P-38s, you may get results you can abide.

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 10
RE: O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed - 3/6/2017 7:35:56 PM   
pontiouspilot


Posts: 892
Joined: 7/27/2012
Status: offline
I'm curious about whether Gorna is related to Ben Doone??

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 11
RE: O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed - 3/6/2017 8:27:11 PM   
Zorch

 

Posts: 3335
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline
May I be permitted a small joke?



I'm shocked, shocked, to find turns being played here!

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Zorch -- 3/6/2017 8:28:02 PM >

(in reply to pontiouspilot)
Post #: 12
RE: O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed - 3/6/2017 8:29:30 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 12212
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
C'mon, there's plenty of room in the other thread for that stuff, and I'm still contributing there.

(in reply to Zorch)
Post #: 13
RE: O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed - 3/6/2017 8:39:06 PM   
Zorch

 

Posts: 3335
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline
<Sniff>Well all right...

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 14
RE: O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed - 3/6/2017 8:52:24 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 12212
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
OK, those who frequent the thread "Off to see the Lizard" and post there, and you know who you are, the following is Tippy Top Secret and please don't give it away, even though I expect my opponent expects it. Here is strategy being unveiled. Just a bit of it anyway. I hate two Allied ships with a passion. I hate them more than any other two Allied ships. I hate them because they are fast. In addition one of them is superlatively armoured and the other is a killer. I'm talking about PoW and Repulse. When I played the Allied side I used them as the core of a screening force for the US CVs. My day one plan takes that into account although I fear I will not get them. A subject I will discuss a little is in the same way it is better to sink an enemy ship at sea than do so in harbor is that the enemy ship sunk at sea will not come back. In that same way enemy aircraft destroyed in the air are preferable to enemy aircraft destroyed on the ground. It's highly unlikely you'll kill any aircrews when you are severely abusing enemy aircraft on the ground. Not saying don't do that, I'm saying airframes for some are easier to replace than pilots.

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 15
RE: O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed - 3/6/2017 9:19:13 PM   
Zorch

 

Posts: 3335
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline
How about Boise? She can wreak havoc with transports until her ammo runs out.

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 16
RE: O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed - 3/7/2017 1:56:38 AM   
geofflambert


Posts: 12212
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
The only people who discuss running out of ammo in this thread are Viagra salespersons. Are you one of those, Zorch?

(in reply to Zorch)
Post #: 17
RE: O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed - 3/7/2017 2:22:29 AM   
Zorch

 

Posts: 3335
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline
I respectfully beg to differ. The only people who don't run out of ammo are the good guys in Hollywood movies, the kind of movies where the bad guys never hit anything.

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 18
RE: O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed - 3/7/2017 3:27:57 AM   
geofflambert


Posts: 12212
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
Well, Spielberg has so far not made a movie about him, but should. Fearless Fosdick never failed to get hit but they were always just flesh wounds.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Zorch)
Post #: 19
RE: O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed - 3/7/2017 3:34:09 AM   
geofflambert


Posts: 12212
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
How did this start? This kinda stuff was supposed to be segregated into other threads. Everyone try harder.

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 20
RE: O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed - 3/7/2017 4:32:10 AM   
Aurorus

 

Posts: 1048
Joined: 5/26/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert


My approach is winning carrier battles. Jack and George are very nice planes and I will certainly build them but since they aren't carrier capable I'll likely use them for CAP over important airbases only. ... Anyways, if you have a disadvantage in aircraft quality, the only way to overcome that is with numbers, and the IJN simply cannot play that game as long as they have carriers to man.



Carriers. Yes. Why does it seem that all the JFBs have forgotten about the carriers? As Japan, you can only win the game if you win the carrier war in the first 18 months (or if the allies refuse to fight and Sir Robin all the way to San Francisco).

< Message edited by Aurorus -- 3/7/2017 4:36:20 AM >

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 21
RE: O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed - 3/7/2017 8:48:30 AM   
adarbrauner

 

Posts: 857
Joined: 11/3/2016
Status: offline
My feeling is that "preservation" or "conservation" of attack airplanes and pilots, lies first and foremost on their pilots defensive capabilities; I think that this specialty is meant to simulate gunners and crew's skills in fending off attackers; I hadn't tested it yet, but if true, that should result in less losses when intercepted; also, defensiveness may play a role (together with flyght experience) in avoiding flak and maybe, who knows, also in the probabilties for an air formation to slip off from troubles unintercepted or to avoid interception (not tested);

I really don't know if defensiveness plays any in a pure air to air fight between fighters only; intuitively, it may affect the ability for the chased fighter to avoid being hit, if this not exclusively determined by air to air skill only; I can only say that this value tend to increases with fights, or even as consequence of CAP only missions (at a modest rate), so maybe this is a clue;

I've found, until know, that the best training type to improve this trait is Ground Bombing, with which the crews improve that skill quite fast, relatively; I have the impression, not yet confirmed, that naval bombing for example increases this value at a sensibly lower rate;
for me personally, when the crews reach 50 (better 55 or more) in defensiveness, so only then they are ready to pass on training on other skills, or to the field if they are already good enuogh in them;

second best and must specialty/trait for bomber/attacker crews is of course general air experience, good and very important for everything; for fighters/patrols, this can be best achieved assigning them to CAP missions, by which they accrue really fast experience and air to air skills;
I found that other training missions do yes affect also experience, but not as much and definitely not at the same ratio, but for attackers/bombers you don't have room for many choices; it MAY be that search training yields better fly experience progresses, but I'm not sure of this and not tested; naval attack training misson is also good in this, as well as ground bombing theefore if the pilot has already acquired enough defensiveness skills with one on these two training courese alternatively, he should step to next training course with a good defensiveness trait already;

Once my airframe pools are riper, I find resizing aboard carriers and tenders vital, crucial and more than that to create sizeble units to train pilots and make pools; I can't imagine what Japan could possibly achieve without the possibility to resize and enlarge some of its units;
2 engines bombers units cannot unfortunately be resized, but in any case their production cost is so high that usually Jplayer would not either have airframes to reequip them; we are not in America!

Lacking a PBY Catalina in its arsenal, and being anyhow industrially limited, for the vital search and ASW duties Japan relies mainly on the Jakes, that for a single engine airplane is just fenomenal and remarkable, apart from lack of heavier ordenance;

The army bombers you mentioned are very good for asw tasks, apart from somehow limited range, but this comes with the cost:that you cannot use them offensively on ground (for example in China); plus, I feel uneasy in excessively devolving to the army navy duties, at least at the beginning of the war...;

< Message edited by adarbrauner -- 3/7/2017 8:58:12 AM >

(in reply to Aurorus)
Post #: 22
RE: O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed - 3/8/2017 7:24:53 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 12212
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
Thanks for your effort and input. First off let me put a bug in your ear. Jakes can be used to train in Sweep! When they're not being used for search they can turn out Zero pilots. As for the defensive skill thing, I've heard it said that training at low altitude advances that needle the quickest. For fighter pilots, if you train in strafe at 100 feet that def number will rise faster. Just don't use them for strafe, in most cases your casualties will be unsustainable. The number 50 is pretty much minimum for active front-line pilots but 60 is more like it. If a pilot reaches 70 in a training only program he cannot improve except in action.

(in reply to adarbrauner)
Post #: 23
RE: O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed - 3/8/2017 7:40:01 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 12212
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
About the range issue in ASW, the most important places to do that (I'm talking Japanese only, the Allied thing is a different kettle of fish) are choke points that don't require much range. The strait between Formosa and Luzon, the Tsushima strait and the strait betwixt Honshu and Hokkaido need intensive ASW. Also bomb load. Ann and Mary each can deliver a 250k package on a surfaced sub. That's fatal. In the soon to not be DEI those ranges are not adequate and you should use the Lily there. Otherwise Sally or Helen. I'm not a big fan of using them as aerial artillery except in special circumstances so don't much mind using a few squadrons for ASW. If you don't have enough trained pilots, don't worry, the best way to train is on the job when it comes to that and search.

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 24
RE: O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed - 3/8/2017 8:13:37 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 22886
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert
If you don't have enough trained pilots, don't worry, the best way to train is on the job when it comes to that and search.


Respectfully....ah, who the **** am I kidding? I disrespectfully disagree. And if you don't like it, you can shove it where the sun don't shine.



I find that it's more worthwhile to train ASW and search in a training program *first* and then field the pilots. Pilots with ASW skills substantially below 70 will be worthless in this capacity and will take much longer to train to that level if they are tasked with performing those duties instead of 100% training.

Same goes with search, but to a lesser degree. They are capable of pulling their weight in a naval search context when their skills are >55 or so. With a good training program, this only takes 1-2 months. It probably takes more than double that to get the ASW skills up there.

_____________________________


(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 25
RE: O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed - 3/8/2017 8:24:26 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 12212
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
Yes, with ASW you have to search, you have to co-ordinate with surface ASW and you have to be able to hit the target. I guess my point is, when the game begins the Japanese player will find that about half his squadrons of whatever type are understaffed. I believe in fully staffing them even if I have to use recruits who are in the 30s in most every category. Not on carriers though. Put them on a Mavis crew. By the time you bother to come back and check them out the recruits will be a lot better.

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 26
RE: O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed - 3/8/2017 8:34:06 PM   
adarbrauner

 

Posts: 857
Joined: 11/3/2016
Status: offline
My Lily superdedicated ASW group ( patrolling the Formosa straits) took some 3-4 month to achieve 60 % average ASW skills, on the job only; not so bad;

I still find unsustainble to mass deploy army groups or squadrons in naval duties; moreover though in the war, army units super experts and trained for naval duties are pure gold, so better to have them started early; meanwhile we have to rely mainly on jacks, on the other outdated floatplanes and on the few Nells and Mavis you can spare to this task;

as Slow Large Target has palced it in the opening of his AAR, even some 60 kg bombs can bother and do bad to a submarine; in addition, I think that pure detection from the air for example in choke and straits waters, in conjuction with ASW surface forces by themselves or as direct escort, can be much beneficial against subs; as in RL btw;

< Message edited by adarbrauner -- 3/8/2017 8:40:43 PM >

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 27
RE: O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed - 3/8/2017 8:36:59 PM   
adarbrauner

 

Posts: 857
Joined: 11/3/2016
Status: offline
I read, in a very authoritative source, tha Japan, toward the end of the war, used Zero-sens in its first asw hunter - killer formations!

(in reply to adarbrauner)
Post #: 28
RE: O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed - 3/8/2017 8:40:27 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 12212
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
So, turn 1. Staffing. As the Japanese player you will come across many squadrons that don't even have as many pilots as planes (including reserves). In my doctrine a squadron be it active or training should always be fully staffed. You're not going to be able to achieve that right away because there's not that many cookies in the cookie jar. One thing really irritates me. The default option when adding crew to squadrons is not to draw from a particular pool but to draw "ANY". I wish they'd get rid of that option. I've mistakenly done that and the mindless AI may rob other squadrons that need them far more. First thing you do, even if you're not drawing any additional crew is set that to "recruits". The other options are "reserves" and "TRACOM". I never use TRACOM so there's never anyone there. Never trust the AI to do anything for you and I mean NEVER.

One thing about bringing recruits into a squadron. Many Naval squadrons can be divided into three. Consider making one of those thirds active and the other two training. If you are going to do that, divide the squadron first. Then you can put the vets from the two training thirds into reserve and draw recruits to fill them out. Another thing. I generally disapprove of flying commanders. I suggest letting them attrite away and replace them with desk jockeys, or just remove them to the reserve. If they get killed in combat the AI that I told you never to trust will replace them with the wrong guy.


< Message edited by geofflambert -- 3/8/2017 8:54:32 PM >

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 29
RE: O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed - 3/8/2017 8:48:56 PM   
adarbrauner

 

Posts: 857
Joined: 11/3/2016
Status: offline
I do it the hard way; if the Group is first line operative and in need for pilot replacement, I hit (after having shifted the required pilot experience to 50-60%, or to manual selection only) the "choose vetern" options and browse;

I write down what are the "Flying school", in Japan or anywhere else, and if the general reserve pool does not suffice to the needs, look for appropriate pilots in the school formations - if there are left;

of course, "school-training formations should have "recruits" as their default selection baisin, as you wrote;

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> O'Gorna Doone. Nobody named Steve allowed Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   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

0.203