Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns

 
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] >> World in Flames >> Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns - 5/15/2019 8:24:11 PM   
Courtenay


Posts: 3436
Joined: 11/12/2008
Status: offline
I suggest that all comments on warspites "Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns" go here, and reserve the "Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns" thread for warspites postings only. That way the thread will only have the losses on it, and if people want to look at them, they won't have to wade through a bunch of commentary.

I think having only the loss postings will look better, too.

_____________________________

I thought I knew how to play this game....
Post #: 1
RE: Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns - 5/15/2019 8:25:03 PM   
Orm


Posts: 18265
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline
Hear, hear.

_____________________________

Intend attacking at dawn high water.

(in reply to Courtenay)
Post #: 2
RE: Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns - 5/15/2019 9:02:00 PM   
brian brian

 

Posts: 3021
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline
The Royal Navy took losses in WWII. It didn’t sit in port and wring it’s hands - “but they have NAV bombers out there!” And the result was that then Rommel sometimes didn’t have enough shells and gasoline in his Panzers.

(in reply to Orm)
Post #: 3
RE: Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns - 5/16/2019 12:08:30 PM   
Neilster


Posts: 2907
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

The Royal Navy took losses in WWII. It didn’t sit in port and wring it’s hands - “but they have NAV bombers out there!” And the result was that then Rommel sometimes didn’t have enough shells and gasoline in his Panzers.

Whilst they took losses, they didn't have to contend with MWiF's land-based air rules

Cheers, Neilster

(in reply to brian brian)
Post #: 4
RE: Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns - 5/16/2019 2:21:44 PM   
brian brian

 

Posts: 3021
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline
True. But many players simply refuse to risk battle with the Royal Navy and just sit and watch while the Axis takes over the Med. Until the air-to-sea factors reach a critical quantity, ships with good AA factors can contest the seas just fine. For the entire first year of the war, the Axis have exactly 2 TRS in the Med, and that’s it. If you make search rolls looking for them, their life span should be short.

Good players operate the Royal Navy aggressively, reinforce it correctly (repair the good AA ships, build FTR 2/3 and all the CVplanes, send in SUBs; not building the Lions and Implacables), and force many a good Axis player to conclude that the Italian force pool is more effective by not sending it overseas at all. The Royal Navy is the most dominant Allied force on the board at the start of the game, but not if it cowers in fear turn after turn. “They sank my cruiser - the Med is a death trap now...”

(in reply to Neilster)
Post #: 5
RE: Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns - 5/16/2019 3:24:14 PM   
Cohen_slith

 

Posts: 1786
Joined: 10/5/2010
From: Italy
Status: offline
Yes, the Royal Navy has no problems operating in the Mediterranean at all during the first year of the game.
Axis does not have enough NAV to scare them away, and the CVPs can still kick the arse of Axis LBA FTRs (Especially as German FTRs are needed in France and cannot exactly go help in the Med. Usually it's Italy sending 1 FTR in France!)

In late '40 when Euro-Axis can pack together 4-6 NAVs, then yes, there could be problems!

(in reply to brian brian)
Post #: 6
RE: Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns - 5/16/2019 11:15:06 PM   
Neilster


Posts: 2907
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline
I agree that the Royal Navy should be used boldly in MWiF. It's the best thing the Allies have at the beginning of the war and the Axis needs to be distracted as much as possible.

Cheers, Neilster

(in reply to Cohen_slith)
Post #: 7
RE: Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns - 5/17/2019 2:56:37 AM   
brian brian

 

Posts: 3021
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline
We are coming up on an historical loss that Courtenay has mentioned, which can’t be replicated in WiF: the Blucher.

In the new Collectors Edition rules, that possibility is getting closer, with new rules for Coastal Forts (not in MWiF), which impose some risk on naval units shore bombarding or disembarking troops onto their hex. However, Oslo does not have one of these. Yet?


Here is an historical loss + WiF trivia question. What aircraft model sank a Cruiser in history, but it’s WIF counters could not do so, as there is no air-to-sea factor? (The right honorable Sir Warspite is still some turns away from listing the ship involved).

(in reply to Neilster)
Post #: 8
RE: Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns - 5/17/2019 6:22:52 AM   
Orm


Posts: 18265
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline
The black on red makes the table unreadable to me (for Norway).

And is it possible to get the original 'chart' instead of the picture when it is all done?

_____________________________

Intend attacking at dawn high water.

(in reply to brian brian)
Post #: 9
RE: Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns - 5/17/2019 6:30:22 AM   
warspite1


Posts: 40194
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

The black on red makes the table unreadable to me (for Norway).

And is it possible to get the original 'chart' instead of the picture when it is all done?
warspite1

It was supposed to be Dark Blue on Red - I wanted to keep the MWIF counter colours for the table. Sadly I don't think this will be possible in the interests of legibility and I will need to replace the lettering with white.

I am keeping the excel spreadsheet so yes.


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Orm)
Post #: 10
RE: Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns - 5/18/2019 1:35:15 PM   
Courtenay


Posts: 3436
Joined: 11/12/2008
Status: offline
Posting mainly to bump thread up.

To repeat, all comments on warspites "Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns" go in this thread.

_____________________________

I thought I knew how to play this game....

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 11
RE: Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns - 5/19/2019 3:32:57 PM   
Courtenay


Posts: 3436
Joined: 11/12/2008
Status: offline
quote:

Jul/Aug 1940

The Italian losses were relatively light during the turn, 1 light cruiser in a surface action, and 4 destroyers to Fleet Air Arm bombers (although Pancaldo would be later salvaged. Just one submarine was lost courtesy of a British submarine.

Three of these destroyers were lost to night air attack by the Fleet Air Arm bombers, showing that even in 1940, night air missions could be made.

_____________________________

I thought I knew how to play this game....

(in reply to Courtenay)
Post #: 12
RE: Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns - 5/19/2019 4:57:58 PM   
paulderynck


Posts: 7805
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline
Good thing Fleet Air Arm was not using the latest CE rules.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to Courtenay)
Post #: 13
RE: Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns - 5/19/2019 6:04:07 PM   
Courtenay


Posts: 3436
Joined: 11/12/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Courtenay

quote:

Jul/Aug 1940

The Italian losses were relatively light during the turn, 1 light cruiser in a surface action, and 4 destroyers to Fleet Air Arm bombers (although Pancaldo would be later salvaged. Just one submarine was lost courtesy of a British submarine.

Three of these destroyers were lost to night air attack by the Fleet Air Arm bombers, showing that even in 1940, night air missions could be made.

Just realized I should have said night port strikes. (Yes, strikes.)

_____________________________

I thought I knew how to play this game....

(in reply to Courtenay)
Post #: 14
RE: Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns - 5/21/2019 8:31:30 PM   
Orm


Posts: 18265
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Courtenay


quote:

ORIGINAL: Courtenay

quote:

Jul/Aug 1940

The Italian losses were relatively light during the turn, 1 light cruiser in a surface action, and 4 destroyers to Fleet Air Arm bombers (although Pancaldo would be later salvaged. Just one submarine was lost courtesy of a British submarine.

Three of these destroyers were lost to night air attack by the Fleet Air Arm bombers, showing that even in 1940, night air missions could be made.

Just realized I should have said night port strikes. (Yes, strikes.)

And just how many WIF counters would have been lost by the night port strikes during the war? Enough to include night port strikes in WIF?

_____________________________

Intend attacking at dawn high water.

(in reply to Courtenay)
Post #: 15
RE: Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns - 5/21/2019 11:38:10 PM   
ashkpa


Posts: 1492
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline
quote:

And just how many WIF counters would have been lost by the night port strikes during the war? Enough to include night port strikes in WIF?
Well, it's not like we don't have access to planes that were never built. Justifying anything in this game by actual history is fraught with conflicts.

(in reply to Orm)
Post #: 16
RE: Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns - 5/22/2019 5:19:19 AM   
Courtenay


Posts: 3436
Joined: 11/12/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ashkpa

quote:

And just how many WIF counters would have been lost by the night port strikes during the war? Enough to include night port strikes in WIF?
Well, it's not like we don't have access to planes that were never built. Justifying anything in this game by actual history is fraught with conflicts.

A single night strike at Truk during operation Hailstorm accounted for about 50,000 tons of shipping, one-third of the damage inflicted during operation Hailstorm, despite the fact that there were more than twenty strikes during the day as opposed to one at night. During that operation the only serious damage inflicted by the Japanese was done in a night air attack, which torpedoed the Intrepid.

_____________________________

I thought I knew how to play this game....

(in reply to ashkpa)
Post #: 17
RE: Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns - 5/24/2019 10:17:08 PM   
Courtenay


Posts: 3436
Joined: 11/12/2008
Status: offline
Please try and keep comments on warspite's posts here, not in the Historical Naval Losses thread.

One of the Italian submarines that was sunk this turn, the Tarantini, was interesting, not for itself, but for the British submarine that sank it, HMS Thunderbolt. Why is Thunderbolt interesting? I had never heard of it. Thunderbolt was not always its name. Earlier it had been HMS Thetis, the victim of one of the worst accidents suffered by the Royal Navy in peacetime, when in 1938 they managed to open both the inner and outer doors of one of the torpedo tubes simultaneously. (Don't do this at home. In fact, don't do this, period.) There were only four survivors, and 99 fatalities. The submarine was salvaged and recommissioned as Thunderbolt.

_____________________________

I thought I knew how to play this game....

(in reply to Courtenay)
Post #: 18
RE: Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns - 5/25/2019 2:42:32 AM   
warspite1


Posts: 40194
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Courtenay

Please try and keep comments on warspite's posts here, not in the Historical Naval Losses thread.

warspite1

I've asked one of the mods to move the comment to this thread and will look at it at that time.


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Courtenay)
Post #: 19
RE: Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns - 5/25/2019 3:23:38 AM   
rkr1958


Posts: 17614
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline
I'm currently in the second book, "Day of Battle", of Rick Atkinson's, "The Liberation Trilogy" and ran across this bit about the HMS Warspite -

"Fritz-X attacks in the coming day would also cripple the battleship H.M.S. Warspite and the cruiser H.M.S. Uganda, among eighty-five Allied vessels hit by German bombs at Salerno."

The Fritz-X was a bomb guided by a German bomber pilot using a joystick from his cockpit. It nearly sunk the U.S.S. Savannah and did sink the Italian battleship Roma as she was sorting to join the British fleet at Malta after Italy's surrender.

All of this was during Operation Avalanche in September 1943.

The first known attack by the Fritz-X was in late August 1943 in the Bay of Biscay in which a British sloop was sunk.

I know all this is way ahead of where you are now ... but I wasn't aware that Germany made use of guide bombs during WW2.

< Message edited by rkr1958 -- 5/25/2019 3:25:59 AM >


_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 20
RE: Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns - 5/25/2019 4:28:02 AM   
warspite1


Posts: 40194
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: Courtenay

Please try and keep comments on warspite's posts here, not in the Historical Naval Losses thread.

warspite1

I've asked one of the mods to move the comment to this thread and will look at it at that time.

warspite1

Apparently the post can't be moved and has been deleted instead.

To Centuur. I think you said the second country from the bottom but that would be Holland. I assume you mean Norway? I don't want to change this as - as far as possible - I want the colours to reflect the MWIF counters. However, I've annotated Norway with an 'No' (white on red) to the left which hopefully meets your requirements? Please let me know.


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 21
RE: Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns - 5/25/2019 11:11:00 AM   
Centuur


Posts: 8239
Joined: 6/3/2011
From: Hoorn (NED).
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: Courtenay

Please try and keep comments on warspite's posts here, not in the Historical Naval Losses thread.

warspite1

I've asked one of the mods to move the comment to this thread and will look at it at that time.

warspite1

Apparently the post can't be moved and has been deleted instead.

To Centuur. I think you said the second country from the bottom but that would be Holland. I assume you mean Norway? I don't want to change this as - as far as possible - I want the colours to reflect the MWIF counters. However, I've annotated Norway with an 'No' (white on red) to the left which hopefully meets your requirements? Please let me know.



That's good. Thanks. Keep up the good work...

_____________________________

Peter

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 22
RE: Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns - 5/25/2019 2:55:10 PM   
Courtenay


Posts: 3436
Joined: 11/12/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

I'm currently in the second book, "Day of Battle", of Rick Atkinson's, "The Liberation Trilogy" and ran across this bit about the HMS Warspite -

"Fritz-X attacks in the coming day would also cripple the battleship H.M.S. Warspite and the cruiser H.M.S. Uganda, among eighty-five Allied vessels hit by German bombs at Salerno."

The Fritz-X was a bomb guided by a German bomber pilot using a joystick from his cockpit. It nearly sunk the U.S.S. Savannah and did sink the Italian battleship Roma as she was sorting to join the British fleet at Malta after Italy's surrender.

All of this was during Operation Avalanche in September 1943.

The first known attack by the Fritz-X was in late August 1943 in the Bay of Biscay in which a British sloop was sunk.

I know all this is way ahead of where you are now ... but I wasn't aware that Germany made use of guide bombs during WW2.

The Fritz-X and Hs 293 were initially effective, but the Allies rapidly figured out how to spoof the radio guide beams, more or less neutralizing it, at least against larger vessels that were equipped with the spoofers.

By the end of the war, the Germans were working on wire guided air-launched missiles, but while they had trials, I don't think they were ever used operationally.

_____________________________

I thought I knew how to play this game....

(in reply to rkr1958)
Post #: 23
RE: Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns - 5/25/2019 4:42:03 PM   
rkr1958


Posts: 17614
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Courtenay


quote:

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

I'm currently in the second book, "Day of Battle", of Rick Atkinson's, "The Liberation Trilogy" and ran across this bit about the HMS Warspite -

"Fritz-X attacks in the coming day would also cripple the battleship H.M.S. Warspite and the cruiser H.M.S. Uganda, among eighty-five Allied vessels hit by German bombs at Salerno."

The Fritz-X was a bomb guided by a German bomber pilot using a joystick from his cockpit. It nearly sunk the U.S.S. Savannah and did sink the Italian battleship Roma as she was sorting to join the British fleet at Malta after Italy's surrender.

All of this was during Operation Avalanche in September 1943.

The first known attack by the Fritz-X was in late August 1943 in the Bay of Biscay in which a British sloop was sunk.

I know all this is way ahead of where you are now ... but I wasn't aware that Germany made use of guide bombs during WW2.

The Fritz-X and Hs 293 were initially effective, but the Allies rapidly figured out how to spoof the radio guide beams, more or less neutralizing it, at least against larger vessels that were equipped with the spoofers.

By the end of the war, the Germans were working on wire guided air-launched missiles, but while they had trials, I don't think they were ever used operationally.
However, during the Salerno landings that allies hadn't yet developed any effective countermeasures. According to Vice Admiral Hewitt, commander of the invasion fleet, their "best" countermeasure was to hope that the bomb would miss. Their next best was to have the men who owned electric razors turn them on during an attack. While this had no impact on the bomb's accuracy it did make the men feel a bit better.

Honestly, you can't make this stuff up.


_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to Courtenay)
Post #: 24
RE: Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns - 6/15/2019 1:04:03 PM   
Courtenay


Posts: 3436
Joined: 11/12/2008
Status: offline
HMS Kelly had a rather famous commander.

_____________________________

I thought I knew how to play this game....

(in reply to rkr1958)
Post #: 25
RE: Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns - 6/15/2019 1:19:29 PM   
Courtenay


Posts: 3436
Joined: 11/12/2008
Status: offline
Ignore. Had not realized that all CW destroyer losses were lumped together, not broken out by country.

< Message edited by Courtenay -- 6/15/2019 1:22:34 PM >


_____________________________

I thought I knew how to play this game....

(in reply to Courtenay)
Post #: 26
RE: Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns - 6/15/2019 1:32:44 PM   
Courtenay


Posts: 3436
Joined: 11/12/2008
Status: offline
Reading the histories of the CW destroyers sunk the last couple of months, I am amazed at how good the CW destroyers were at running into things. A good number of those ships were involved in collisions, sometimes sidelining them for months.

_____________________________

I thought I knew how to play this game....

(in reply to Courtenay)
Post #: 27
RE: Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns - 6/15/2019 1:39:16 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 40194
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Courtenay

Reading the histories of the CW destroyers sunk the last couple of months, I am amazed at how good the CW destroyers were at running into things. A good number of those ships were involved in collisions, sometimes sidelining them for months.
warspite1

Accidents have always been a sad feature of life at sea - and in war time, with the safety net off, these just increased. All navies suffered losses to accident.

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Courtenay)
Post #: 28
RE: Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns - 6/16/2019 2:42:29 AM   
paulderynck


Posts: 7805
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline
What I find quite surprising is how many subs were sunk by other subs. I was under the impression that was a rare event.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 29
RE: Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns - 6/18/2019 3:22:08 PM   
rkr1958


Posts: 17614
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

What I find quite surprising is how many subs were sunk by other subs. I was under the impression that was a rare event.
Didn't subs in WW2 generally travel on the surface when moving to their patrol areas? Is so, I wonder how many of these sub sinking were when they were travelling on the surface.


_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> Comments on Historical Naval Losses in MWIF Turns Page: [1] 2   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

0.156