From: Upstate SC
It is an abstraction of what happened in RL.
In the pre information age, stubby pencil, world where hundreds of operational reports are transmitted through multiple HQs across the Pacific then are sorted through and analyzed by hand, the chances of getting accurate and timely information is not as good as you think.
As a guy who had to pour through literally millions (yes, millions) of operational reports while doing analysis of operations in Iraq, it was not always easy determining what actually happened in engagements at HQ level. Operational reports varied, with some being incomplete, some describing the same event in a different way (conflicting at times), some with the data being incorrect (remember geocoding one engagement based on the coordinates and it was in Iran), and a whole host of blanks/incompletes in the reports. Even today it isn't easy.
ORIGINAL: Don Bowen
But the ship was sighted that's the point.
Listed first as sunk on 31st January, then it was sighted again on 14th February in a sub attack but without taking any hits, now its still listed as sunk but dated on 14th February and location changed to a point close to the sub attack.
I really do not understand the confusion.
You received an incorrect sinking report (fog of war).
You later enaged the ship reported as sunk so you know the report was false.
When engaged it was again reported as sunk (may fog of war, maybe not).
Confusing is whether he really reported the ship as sunk or if the sunk ship list didn't update the info correctly, I mean in the combat report he didn't even score a hit on it and it wasn't listed as sunk either in that report so how can he report it as sunk?
If only he scored at least one hit it would be understandable but the way it is now seems strange.
Reported sunk + sighted later + attacked without scoring a hit = SHIP NOT SUNK
That's what I can get out of the reports I got and I don't get how the game can pull something different out of them without giving the player a clue where that info comes from.
Any even the silliest explanation in that combat report would have solved why the ship is still listed as sunk, simply because it was reported as sunk or at least as hit.
If I get one report of a pilot telling me he hit the CL with his 1000lb bomb and is sure it sank later = Ship sunk
If I get one report of a captain telling me he attacked that ship but without hitting it = Ship not sunk
I can either believe the pilot or the captain but can't "merge" the two reports to make something out of it that doesn't make any sense like it's now with changing date & location but not the sunk by reason or that it's sunk at all.
< Message edited by denisonh -- 2/14/2012 8:58:18 PM >
"Life is tough, it's even tougher when you're stupid"
-SGT John M. Stryker, USMC