Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Collisions

 
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 >> Collisions Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Collisions - 5/28/2009 4:40:51 PM   
dazoline II


Posts: 400
Joined: 11/5/2007
Status: offline
Hi,

Posted this in Andies AAR but it quickly became buried. I don't remember if any details surrounding collisions (other than with torpedos, bombs and shells) has been a topic before so here's some questions. My apologies if this has been mentioned.

I noticed a collision in the reports on March 19th.
"xAK Shikano Maru collides with xAK Sensan Maru at 55 , 102"

Both ships are mentioned after said collision and neither have heavy damage at the later time. So I'm guessing the damage is variable for a collision.

Is the damage rated as both system and float damage?
Is there potential to sink a ship from it?
Does a smaller ship take more damage when colliding with a large one?



_____________________________

Moscow by winter? Only if you send Fast Heinz to Kiev.
Post #: 1
RE: Collisions - 5/28/2009 4:54:37 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8172
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dazoline II
Is the damage rated as both system and float damage?

Sort of, Engine damage is also in the mix.


quote:


Is there potential to sink a ship from it?

Yes


quote:


Does a smaller ship take more damage when colliding with a large one?

Probably, but random chance is in there.

(in reply to dazoline II)
Post #: 2
RE: Collisions - 5/28/2009 6:13:08 PM   
Cavalry Corp

 

Posts: 2882
Joined: 9/2/2003
From: Sampford Spiney Devon UK
Status: offline
I am glad this is in collisions seemed quite common

This also raises the question of storm ( Hurricane ) loss and say random strange loss like Mutsu ???

cav


(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 3
RE: Collisions - 5/28/2009 6:32:33 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8172
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: cavalry

I am glad this is in collisions seemed quite common

This also raises the question of storm ( Hurricane ) loss and say random strange loss like Mutsu ???

cav




Visibility and speed are factors. There is no "it just happened" loss, like Mutsu. There is a slight chance of "events" during repair, rearming, and loading.


(in reply to Cavalry Corp)
Post #: 4
RE: Collisions - 5/28/2009 7:50:19 PM   
dazoline II


Posts: 400
Joined: 11/5/2007
Status: offline
Thanks for the answers Don.

_____________________________

Moscow by winter? Only if you send Fast Heinz to Kiev.

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 5
RE: Collisions - 5/28/2009 8:04:01 PM   
Cavalry Corp

 

Posts: 2882
Joined: 9/2/2003
From: Sampford Spiney Devon UK
Status: offline
Interesting all this sounds encouraging

Dare I ask is there a chance of collision during surface action ???

Cav

(in reply to dazoline II)
Post #: 6
RE: Collisions - 5/28/2009 9:53:52 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8172
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: cavalry

Interesting all this sounds encouraging

Dare I ask is there a chance of collision during surface action ???

Cav


Yes (there are collisions during combat, not that you should dare).

Surface combat in a minefield is not a good idea, either.

(in reply to Cavalry Corp)
Post #: 7
RE: Collisions - 5/28/2009 10:19:58 PM   
Charbroiled


Posts: 1181
Joined: 10/15/2004
From: Oregon
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


quote:

ORIGINAL: cavalry

Interesting all this sounds encouraging

Dare I ask is there a chance of collision during surface action ???

Cav


Yes (there are collisions during combat, not that you should dare).

Surface combat in a minefield is not a good idea, either.


For both side? Or does the owner of the minefield have an advantage?

_____________________________

"When I said I would run, I meant 'away' ". - Orange

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 8
RE: Collisions - 5/28/2009 10:27:36 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8172
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Charbroiled


quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


quote:

ORIGINAL: cavalry

Interesting all this sounds encouraging

Dare I ask is there a chance of collision during surface action ???

Cav


Yes (there are collisions during combat, not that you should dare).

Surface combat in a minefield is not a good idea, either.


For both side? Or does the owner of the minefield have an advantage?



Owner of the minefield always has an advantage, but still can get tagged when maneuvering during combat.

(in reply to Charbroiled)
Post #: 9
RE: Collisions - 5/28/2009 10:41:06 PM   
Charbroiled


Posts: 1181
Joined: 10/15/2004
From: Oregon
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


quote:

ORIGINAL: Charbroiled


quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


quote:

ORIGINAL: cavalry

Interesting all this sounds encouraging

Dare I ask is there a chance of collision during surface action ???

Cav


Yes (there are collisions during combat, not that you should dare).

Surface combat in a minefield is not a good idea, either.


For both side? Or does the owner of the minefield have an advantage?



Owner of the minefield always has an advantage, but still can get tagged when maneuvering during combat.


Good to know...thanks Don.

_____________________________

"When I said I would run, I meant 'away' ". - Orange

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 10
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Collisions 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

0.219