Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commissioned ships

 
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 >> RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commissioned ships Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commission... - 6/9/2021 4:23:01 PM   
LargeSlowTarget


Posts: 4256
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R

Whenever there is a complaint that something or some capability is "unhistorical" or "ahistorical" around here, it only ever seems to be about the United Nations side.


Nonsense. With all due respect, but I believe your strong pro-Allied bias has left you blind on one eye. Über-Netties, Über-Zeros, overavailability of air-launched torpedoes, too much idle merchant shipping, insane Japanese R&D advancements, ridiculously high airframe production figures, the magic highway, China Blitzkrieg - just to name the most blatant examples - have all been complained about on the forum as being unhistorical or ahistorical - and justly so.

Fact is - both sides get their share of unhistorical capabilities, and both JFBs and AFBs have been complaining bitterly about the other side's advantages in the past - while often ignoring or belitteling the advantages given to their side.

_____________________________


(in reply to Ian R)
Post #: 61
RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commission... - 6/9/2021 4:53:37 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 21565
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget


Fact is - both sides get their share of unhistorical capabilities, and both JFBs and AFBs have been complaining bitterly about the other side's advantages in the past - while often ignoring or belitteling the advantages given to their side.


About the only thing I complain about is some tough game mechanics that can be abused by either side....mass 1 ship task forces designed to eat op points for example.


(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 62
RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commission... - 6/9/2021 8:12:05 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 7529
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R

Whenever there is a complaint that something or some capability is "unhistorical" or "ahistorical" around here, it only ever seems to be about the United Nations side.


Nonsense. With all due respect, but I believe your strong pro-Allied bias has left you blind on one eye. Über-Netties, Über-Zeros, overavailability of air-launched torpedoes, too much idle merchant shipping, insane Japanese R&D advancements, ridiculously high airframe production figures, the magic highway, China Blitzkrieg - just to name the most blatant examples - have all been complained about on the forum as being unhistorical or ahistorical - and justly so.

Fact is - both sides get their share of unhistorical capabilities, and both JFBs and AFBs have been complaining bitterly about the other side's advantages in the past - while often ignoring or belitteling the advantages given to their side.



So now it starts.

It's clear you misunderstood his comment.

Unlike you, I clearly understood it to mean the only complaints that are ever accepted as valid.
Your response proves his point.
Thank you for being gullible enough to take the bait.

Since the Japanese ahistorical abilities were auspiciously added to make the poor, weak, underpowered Japanese side viable to play as a side in a game, any and all complaints by AFBs get disregarded and excused away.
Followed by multiple references by JFBs that the Allies will always be powerful enough to overrun Japan in '44 so all of the early Japanese advantages are moot.
If only every game made it to '44 they might actually have a valid argument. Too bad they, and you don't.

Kindly keep your holier than thou indignation to yourself.


_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 63
RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commission... - 6/10/2021 6:24:04 AM   
LargeSlowTarget


Posts: 4256
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline
I expected that at least one of the resident AFB ultras would come charging in - and as predicted, not a single word of recognition about the advantages given to the Allies, just one-sided hateful JFB bashing.

I'm not a native speaker, but in my English lessons I have learned that "Whenever" means "always, everytime, all the time, under any circumstances" - therefore I do not see any qualifier in Ian's sentence that could be interpreted as a restriction "to mean the only complaints that are ever accepted as valid".

But what do I know, as you made it clear, I'm just a dumb JFB and you have superior knowledge.

Kindly keep your arrogance to yourself.

_____________________________


(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 64
RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commission... - 6/10/2021 8:40:02 AM   
Ian R

 

Posts: 3081
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Cammeraygal Country
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R

Whenever there is a complaint that something or some capability is "unhistorical" or "ahistorical" around here, it only ever seems to be about the United Nations side.


Nonsense. With all due respect, but I believe your strong pro-Allied bias has left you blind on one eye. Über-Netties, Über-Zeros, overavailability of air-launched torpedoes, too much idle merchant shipping, insane Japanese R&D advancements, ridiculously high airframe production figures, the magic highway, China Blitzkrieg - just to name the most blatant examples - have all been complained about on the forum as being unhistorical or ahistorical - and justly so.

Fact is - both sides get their share of unhistorical capabilities, and both JFBs and AFBs have been complaining bitterly about the other side's advantages in the past - while often ignoring or belitteling the advantages given to their side.


I'm happy to admit to being pro UN.

What can be annoying, is seeing complaints based on 'truisms' that 15 minutes of research on the internet would debunk.

_____________________________

"You may find that having is not so nearly pleasing a thing as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true."
- Cdr Spock


Ian R

(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 65
RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commission... - 6/10/2021 11:26:20 AM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 12057
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: online
Please be polite to each side.

Each side had "gifts" otherwise the game would not be as much fun nor as challenging.

Remember, as the IJ player, you get to force the Army and Navy to work together while also making best use of all available assets - even if the Japanese did not.

As the Allied player, you don't have to worry about the political ramifications of your moves. Think that China really had a unified government with one leader able to coordinate everything? How about more Americans in the SEAC theatre than in actuality?

Both sides can look at the database and see what the other side has and its capabilities. You get to see the upgrades plus the downgrades to each side and you can even forgo some of them if you want to. You can load the game and look at what the other side gets and when although the IJ player can manipulate the airplane production but at a cost, the same with weapons and vehicles. If the IJ player does not expend the supplies on research, he will still get the aircraft if he is still playing the game. The Allies should know the problems and bottlenecks of the IJ economy plus the problems with things such as the Mark 14 torpedo and play accordingly.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to Ian R)
Post #: 66
RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commission... - 6/10/2021 11:32:07 AM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 12057
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

I expected that at least one of the resident AFB ultras would come charging in - and as predicted, not a single word of recognition about the advantages given to the Allies, just one-sided hateful JFB bashing.

I'm not a native speaker, but in my English lessons I have learned that "Whenever" means "always, everytime, all the time, under any circumstances" - therefore I do not see any qualifier in Ian's sentence that could be interpreted as a restriction "to mean the only complaints that are ever accepted as valid".

But what do I know, as you made it clear, I'm just a dumb JFB and you have superior knowledge.

Kindly keep your arrogance to yourself.


To me, I understand "Whenever" to mean "When/if it does happen" so it is more like a "If Then" in programming. It is not always but only at certain times.

Both of you have superior knowledge based upon your perspectives, so have a good bier and relax - it is only a game for enjoyment and not a simulation as work.

< Message edited by RangerJoe -- 6/10/2021 11:33:57 AM >


_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 67
RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commission... - 6/10/2021 4:29:18 PM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 1966
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline
Cool so many posts in my thread... just wanna clarify:

I meant the 1st or 2nd assault/opposed landing at a build up enemy base w/ forts and many guns etc (like in my example Shortland is), not a 3rd or 4th wave bringing in supplies, replacements etc. Possibly by then most of the guns that can reach out, are already cleared by the troops landed in the first assault(s)-

I even would not have posted if it was a small base w/ eg. forts 2 and only 2-3 small inf. units without art and CD etc. Then it can be realistic ex luxury liners being used as not much resistance at the shore..

< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 6/10/2021 4:30:50 PM >

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 68
RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commission... - 6/10/2021 4:48:37 PM   
Yaab


Posts: 4346
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline
But in the RL , the luxury liners would be great for cover-up. Imagine some Marines being loaded onto one, being told they go to Australia, to be billeted at Roy's Naumur hotel and they end up storming Roi-Namur instead.

(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 69
RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commission... - 6/10/2021 5:16:15 PM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 1966
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline
I above case more ex-Liberty cargo ships Anyone has data how many could and were converted in real war?

(X)

Btw. got a turn and add insult to injury my subs could not even hit the wounded ships that even hit by so many CD gun shells, still were unloading it seems in the night phase.

In daylight everyone was gone, I hope at least 3-4 of the xAPs went down (have only 1 listed as sunk ) not that it would hurt the Allies much...

And 2 subs lost right away 2 more big damage

(X): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_ship

In the Wiki is a section about the converted ships were quite a lot ("about 225"!): "While most of the Liberties converted were intended to carry no more than 550 troops, thirty-three were converted to transport 1,600 on shorter voyages from mainland U.S. ports to Alaska, Hawaii and the Caribbean.[28]"

< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 6/10/2021 5:36:13 PM >

(in reply to Yaab)
Post #: 70
RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commission... - 6/10/2021 6:40:58 PM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 9446
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: online
How about we all just get along?

_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-


(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 71
RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commission... - 6/10/2021 9:56:31 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 12057
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

How about we all just get along?


I think that most of us will agree on somethings.






Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to Sardaukar)
Post #: 72
RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commission... - 6/10/2021 10:56:57 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 17126
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

How about we all just get along?


I think that most of us will agree on somethings.






Beer? What beer?!




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 73
RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commission... - 6/10/2021 11:18:36 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 12057
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

How about we all just get along?


I think that most of us will agree on somethings.






Beer? What beer?!









Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 74
RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commission... - 6/10/2021 11:21:25 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 12057
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe


quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

How about we all just get along?


I think that most of us will agree on somethings.






Beer? What beer?!












His favorite. RIP harry.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 75
RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commission... - 6/11/2021 12:30:22 AM   
fcooke

 

Posts: 1148
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: offline
Agree with the beer swilling young ladies. As to the cranky old guys - grab a beer......

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 76
RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commission... - 6/11/2021 12:42:40 AM   
fcooke

 

Posts: 1148
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: offline
Speaking of beer I almost lost my Dad's boat once. We anchored off an island (there were no slips open), Georges Island for those of of you of Massachusetts background. We swim in and muck about for a couple of hours - go back to where we left the boat - no boat. She had pulled the anchor and floated over to the next island. So 18 YO walks up to the kind Coasties and asks for a lift. They say yes even though we must have all smelt like a brewery. They take us to the boat and the damn engine won't turn over. I start to get some questionable stares from the Coasties but the engine finally turned over. I have been lucky in life. I don't think I was technically drunk but I was 18 in a 21 YO drinking age state.

(in reply to fcooke)
Post #: 77
RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commission... - 6/11/2021 12:53:41 AM   
fcooke

 

Posts: 1148
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: offline
Speaking of beer stories....some of you may have seen that I Spent a semester abroad 'a few years ago'. Our flight back to the Northeast could not make it direct so we stopped in Vancouver to fuel up. Only about an hour so we did not deplane. Of course it was Delta so we had to go to Atlanta. On the way to Boston I decide to order my first 'legal' beer. Lovely middle aged woman across the aisle decides to open the overhead above me. Her luggage ends up in my beer and lap. No apologies, no offer to replace my now worn beer, but I will always remember that first sip.

(in reply to fcooke)
Post #: 78
RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commission... - 6/11/2021 1:12:18 AM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 12057
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: fcooke

Speaking of beer stories....some of you may have seen that I Spent a semester abroad 'a few years ago'. Our flight back to the Northeast could not make it direct so we stopped in Vancouver to fuel up. Only about an hour so we did not deplane. Of course it was Delta so we had to go to Atlanta. On the way to Boston I decide to order my first 'legal' beer. Lovely middle aged woman across the aisle decides to open the overhead above me. Her luggage ends up in my beer and lap. No apologies, no offer to replace my now worn beer, but I will always remember that first sip.


So she wet your pants.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to fcooke)
Post #: 79
RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commission... - 6/11/2021 2:22:28 AM   
fcooke

 

Posts: 1148
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: offline
indeed - not the way I was hoping for.










HATE autocorrect

< Message edited by fcooke -- 6/11/2021 2:24:44 AM >

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 80
RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commission... - 6/11/2021 5:23:00 AM   
rustysi


Posts: 7222
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: online
quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

quote:

You can fuel a PT boat from barrels


Technically they use supply not fuel.



They are created from supply, but use fuel in their operations like any other ship.


I know that, but in a perfect game they'd be refueled from supply stocks not fuel. Now how difficult that would be to code, I've no idea. My guess is that it would not be too easy or it would have been done.

_____________________________

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb

(in reply to fcooke)
Post #: 81
RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commission... - 6/11/2021 10:30:59 AM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 1966
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline
Can ppl stop posting huge pics in "my" thread, if at least they were on topic.

Also what I noted (I mean in general on this or other forums) if you quote someone you do not need to quote a big picture with your quote

Also I do not know why people when a specific issue is brought up - then rather post that the other side is way over rated (in their mind) so "all is fine with this issue"??
That has nothing to do with each other. Also it goes both ways the Japanese must be able to do such landing with "X" ships too in simmilar speed I guess (?)

I have not even an issue with X being used for landings as said above I meant more the speed so much AV gets ashore and dissapointing resistance / very low losses for attacker

However it is possible the devs took real life losses of "bigger" landings ships into account, I believe those were quite low in WW2. Mostly the smaller "boats" that approached the beach got hit, the bigger ships not so much. I mean obviously losses at landing direcly not on the way in or out the operations area.
So might be somewhat historical I guess


@Lowpe:
Seems even the IJ picks this up once in while, indeed there were 2 messages in sigint for Tulagi. You said xAP are slower? I do not see this, xAP seem quite fast. Not the ones converted from Liberty ships but most others.


< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 6/11/2021 10:52:35 AM >

(in reply to rustysi)
Post #: 82
RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commission... - 6/11/2021 12:06:43 PM   
Ian R

 

Posts: 3081
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Cammeraygal Country
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe


quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

How about we all just get along?


I think that most of us will agree on somethings.






Beer? What beer?!












His favorite. RIP harry.





Yes, RIP. A sad early loss.

_____________________________

"You may find that having is not so nearly pleasing a thing as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true."
- Cdr Spock


Ian R

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 83
RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commission... - 6/11/2021 2:50:18 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 17126
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline
A77, I am not sure if you know this so I will mention that non-coastal/fortress artillery does not fire at ships at all (DP guns are considered coastal artillery) but they do fire at landing boats and troops crossing the beach. This is abstracted into the landing losses, along with losses from lack of prep, weather and random hazards (like hidden reefs/rocks).

Also bear in mind that an island has multiple sides and big guns set up in the wrong place cannot easily be moved to fire on the actual direction of attack. Most amphib landings took into account the location of such defences and used alternate beaches if any were available. Hence the algorithm for big coastal guns firing at ships may have some die rolls for whether they can bear on the target ships. Just conjecture on my part, but it would probably have been thought of by the brilliant people who designed this game.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 84
RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commission... - 6/11/2021 3:07:19 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 12057
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

A77, I am not sure if you know this so I will mention that non-coastal/fortress artillery does not fire at ships at all (DP guns are considered coastal artillery) but they do fire at landing boats and troops crossing the beach. This is abstracted into the landing losses, along with losses from lack of prep, weather and random hazards (like hidden reefs/rocks).

Also bear in mind that an island has multiple sides and big guns set up in the wrong place cannot easily be moved to fire on the actual direction of attack. Most amphib landings took into account the location of such defences and used alternate beaches if any were available. Hence the algorithm for big coastal guns firing at ships may have some die rolls for whether they can bear on the target ships. Just conjecture on my part, but it would probably have been thought of by the brilliant people who designed this game.


I have had 40mm AAA fire at, hit, and even get credited with kill on Japanese invasion TFs. But I think that after the landing boats/barges are coming in, that those guns fire at those more dangerous targets.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 85
RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commission... - 6/11/2021 3:09:38 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 17126
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe


quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

A77, I am not sure if you know this so I will mention that non-coastal/fortress artillery does not fire at ships at all (DP guns are considered coastal artillery) but they do fire at landing boats and troops crossing the beach. This is abstracted into the landing losses, along with losses from lack of prep, weather and random hazards (like hidden reefs/rocks).

Also bear in mind that an island has multiple sides and big guns set up in the wrong place cannot easily be moved to fire on the actual direction of attack. Most amphib landings took into account the location of such defences and used alternate beaches if any were available. Hence the algorithm for big coastal guns firing at ships may have some die rolls for whether they can bear on the target ships. Just conjecture on my part, but it would probably have been thought of by the brilliant people who designed this game.


I have had 40mm AAA fire at, hit, and even get credited with kill on Japanese invasion TFs. But I think that after the landing boats/barges are coming in, that those guns fire at those more dangerous targets.

I haven't seen that myself RJ, but then I don't watch animations of artillery fire.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 86
RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commission... - 6/11/2021 4:28:29 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 12057
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe


quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

A77, I am not sure if you know this so I will mention that non-coastal/fortress artillery does not fire at ships at all (DP guns are considered coastal artillery) but they do fire at landing boats and troops crossing the beach. This is abstracted into the landing losses, along with losses from lack of prep, weather and random hazards (like hidden reefs/rocks).

Also bear in mind that an island has multiple sides and big guns set up in the wrong place cannot easily be moved to fire on the actual direction of attack. Most amphib landings took into account the location of such defences and used alternate beaches if any were available. Hence the algorithm for big coastal guns firing at ships may have some die rolls for whether they can bear on the target ships. Just conjecture on my part, but it would probably have been thought of by the brilliant people who designed this game.


I have had 40mm AAA fire at, hit, and even get credited with kill on Japanese invasion TFs. But I think that after the landing boats/barges are coming in, that those guns fire at those more dangerous targets.

I haven't seen that myself RJ, but then I don't watch animations of artillery fire.


I opened up my game and looked, no such ship kills registered in my current game. They must have been killed on the way to the beaches. I wonder why . . .

On the other hand, can you tell me what ship is credited with sinking the Mutsu from this list?






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by RangerJoe -- 6/11/2021 4:34:09 PM >


_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 87
RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commission... - 6/11/2021 4:39:19 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 17126
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline
BC Repulse, BB Warspite or Valiant, or any of the R class British BBs.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 88
RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commission... - 6/11/2021 4:47:10 PM   
Ian R

 

Posts: 3081
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Cammeraygal Country
Status: offline
On 21-12-41? Most probably the Repulse.

_____________________________

"You may find that having is not so nearly pleasing a thing as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true."
- Cdr Spock


Ian R

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 89
RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commission... - 6/11/2021 4:53:07 PM   
fcooke

 

Posts: 1148
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: offline
Yep - USN never had 15 " as far as I recall.

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 90
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: "Blitzkrieg landings" with not commissioned ships Page: <<   < prev  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

0.367