Another 17

[Ike99]

Ship Class, Name, Night fighting Experience...

CA Takao 96
CL Senda 82
CL Tatsuta 80
DD Makinami 80
DD Arare 83
DD Hatsushimo 84
DD Yayoi 83
DD Yuzuki 82
DD Matsukaze 81

BB North Carolina 36
CA Minneapolis 40
CL Phoenix 35
DD Conyngham 40
DD Cushing, Shell hits 40
DD Perkins, Shell hits 44
DD Smith, Shell hits 36
DD Preston, Shell hits 41

14 Long Lance torpedo attacks were launched by my ships from 8,000-3,000 yards.

One destroyer fired Long Lance at 740´ North Carolina from 4,000 yards and another destroyer from 3,000 yards.

Out of 14 torpedo attacks, including an intitial ¨Japanese Conduct Long Lance Torpedo Attack¨ from moderate to extremley close range against large targets not a single torpedo hit despite being fired by some of the best in the business.

Seems to me we need another patch...

[Nomad]

ORIGINAL: Ike99

Ship Class, Name, Night fighting Experience...

CA Takao 96
CL Senda 82
CL Tatsuta 80
DD Makinami 80
DD Arare 83
DD Hatsushimo 84
DD Yayoi 83
DD Yuzuki 82
DD Matsukaze 81

BB North Carolina 36
CA Minneapolis 40
CL Phoenix 35
DD Conyngham 40
DD Cushing, Shell hits 40
DD Perkins, Shell hits 44
DD Smith, Shell hits 36
DD Preston, Shell hits 41

14 Long Lance torpedo attacks were launched by my ships from 8,000-3,000 yards.

One destroyer fired Long Lance at 740´ North Carolina from 4,000 yards and another destroyer from 3,000 yards.

Out of 14 torpedo attacks, including an intitial ¨Japanese Conduct Long Lance Torpedo Attack¨ from moderate to extremley close range against large targets not a single torpedo hit despite being fired by some of the best in the business.

Seems to me we need another patch...

Actual experience, the day before battle:

BB North Carolina 51
CA Minneapolis 50
CL Phoenix 47
DD Conyngham 53
DD Cushing, Shell hits 55
DD Perkins, Shell hits 54
DD Smith, Shell hits 50
DD Preston, Shell hits 54

[borner]

nice victory for the US. unusual for LL's to miss that close, but I think it's just bad luck. Looks like except for that CA, the US got away prety clean.
 

[Ike99]

Actual experience, the day before battle:

BB North Carolina 51
CA Minneapolis 50
CL Phoenix 47
DD Conyngham 53
DD Cushing, Shell hits 55
DD Perkins, Shell hits 54
DD Smith, Shell hits 50
DD Preston, Shell hits 54

Still, from what I can see is the program does not take into account target range or target size during Long Lance Torpedo attacks.

I see no difference in hit % from 10,000 yards or 3,000 yards or if the target is 100´ long or 700´long.

At 1st Savo Island 4 out of 8 cruisers were hit and sunk by long lance. Here, a much larger force firing more Long Lance torpedos couldn´t hit 2 cruisers and a 740´ battleship a single time despite making a Long Lance torpedo attack.

Needs a patch.

[Nomad]

I only posted the true experiences for completness. I agree that a number of things are not modeled or are modeled poorly. One thing is the use of RADAR. In RL many of the higher ranking USN commanders did not fully understand or trust the early forms of RADAR. The battle you mention at Salvo was one of those. In our game battle I saw messages about your TF being detected by RADAR and tracked by RADAR. I do think I got lucky but at the same time it is a part of the game and real war that sometimes things just do not go right. I doubt very much that any new patches are coming out, so this is the game we will have to play.

[RGIJN]

I´d like to have more manual, direct control of surface engagements AT ALL! In this way, I miss the old QQP game "Battles of the south pacific" so much!!!
There you could select targets (when in range), you could split targets between main armament, secondary and torpedos. And you could even steer the maneuvers of each ship to a decent degree. And still there was enough dice-roll and fortune in it. And it had NO sense of micro-management on this. You had kinda chance to influence a surface battle. These battles always were a DELIGHT! [8D]

Anyone out there thinks so too? (who is familar to this game)

[Ike99]

I only posted the true experiences for completness. I agree that a number of things are not modeled or are modeled poorly. One thing is the use of RADAR. In RL many of the higher ranking USN commanders did not fully understand or trust the early forms of RADAR. The battle you mention at Salvo was one of those. In our game battle I saw messages about your TF being detected by RADAR and tracked by RADAR. I do think I got lucky but at the same time it is a part of the game and real war that sometimes things just do not go right. I doubt very much that any new patches are coming out, so this is the game we will have to play.

Oh no it´s nothing against you Nomad. Take the results and run with it. As you say this is the game we got so we love it. [:D]

Still though...I´m picturing a 740´ battleship being shot at by a Long Lance torpedo spread from 4,000 and 3,000 yards. How could they have missed!? [X(]

Then when we factor in a total of 9 ships making 14 torpedo attacks with night EXP in the 80´s and one in the 90´s at a maximum range of 8,000 without a single hit...hmmm, that baffles.

But about a patch, I don´t know, They´re making carrier force and it uses the same engine. I can´t imagine it would be like digging a ditch to go in and change a few numbers.

We can hope.

[Ike99]

Well despite the very unlucky surface action at Wunpuko there were other good things happening around the board on the 25th...

RO-33 put torpedos in two Allied transports before being destroyed by depth charge.

I-22 put torpedos into another Allied transport.

At Lae Lae beach the remnants of the Kanga Force was destroyed by Japanese attack and S-41 hit a mine.

Both PT boats, 48&61, strike mines and are sunk attempting to intercept barges going to Nevea.

[borner]

Actally, US BB's were usually able to turn far tighter than US CA's. One rumor/story I have seen is an Iowa BB could nearly out-turn pre-war DD classes. I wonder if that is built into the game and that is part of it?

[Ike99]

Me and Ken have entered November-42. The score is...

Japan-8,167
Allies-3,489
Difference-4,687

Small air to air engagement over Nevea...

[Nomad]

This game is over. I find Ike99s political stand too repugnant to me to continue.

[Wirraway_Ace]

ORIGINAL: Nomad

This game is over. I find Ike99s political stand too repugnant to me to continue.

There is an irony here. Strongly held political points of view generally start wars, rather than end them...Too bad guys, it looked like an interesting campaign.

[Ike99]

This game is over. I find Ike99s political stand too repugnant to me to continue.

Nomad I have never spoken of politics to you and if you wish too forfeit a game because of whatever reason that´s your perogative to do so. However I find this manner of publicly trying to smear me a bit revolting.

You could have simply said you forfeit without the forum politicking.

I feel you have a small problem with the Japanese people and carry a bit of a grudge against them for an event 70 years old. I find this also repugnant.

Your acting in a very childish manner.

I´ve never asked a person their views on Hiroshima or Nagasaki and don´t really care enough to not play a game with them. So I don´t care if you hate Japanese people and throw darts at Hirohitos picture all day. To throw away a game because of something like this is incredibly childish.

Grow up. The wars over. It ended 70 years ago.

[Nomad]

Maybe when I asked for a couple of days to cool down and think about it since I grew up with my father not always being able to do what he wanted because of injuries inflicted by the IJN, you should not have sent me the mesage "Think about the people of Nagasaki and Hiroshima." I guess that is not some political statement. Grow up yourself.

[Ike99]

Maybe when I asked for a couple of days to cool down and think about it since I grew up with my father not always being able to do what he wanted because of injuries inflicted by the IJN, you should not have sent me the mesage "Think about the people of Nagasaki and Hiroshima."

Yes I did say think about and you should. All are victims. All of them. If victims can be avoided in a war they should be for this very reason.

I am of the opinion Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not needed for a Japanese surrender. The senior Allied military commanders agree with me. What would those who commanded your father, if they would have had their way have done?

So you really need to let go of your bitterness and think about this.

But whatever your conclusion, I still fall back to the war is over and has been over for 70 years. There is no point carrying such strong grudges today where they effect your decision in a trivial game. I never spoke of Hiroshima and Nagasaki to you.

[Nomad]

I have no hate or grudge against the Japanese. My father didn't either and would have whipped my butt if I had every said something against them.
I find it odd that you think that I have to value the lives of the Japanese that were killed or maimed at Hiroshima and Nagasaki more than I do my father. For your information, the entire issue is you trying to push your political view on this forum, emails to me and your demeaning PM to me.

For whatever it is worth to you, you can have a "win" in the game we were playing.

[Ike99]

Ken listen to me.

You brought up to me in an email you were angry about what I said on the forum and were thinking about quitting the game and wanted to think about quitting.

I asked you to think about the issue from both perspectives.

Now, this being said. However you feel about the A bombs being dropped your entitled to it. How I feel about it I´m entitled to too.

That being said. How I feel about the a-bombs being dropped and how you feel about it should not be an issue if we play this game against each other.

I´ve never brought up any politics in an email to you or the Atomic bombs, you brought it up to me. I responded with one sentence.

Further more, I do not push any political issue on this forum. I did not bring up the A bombs to you in an email, I did not bring up the A bomb on this forum.

I have attempted to let the issue go three times now!

Tankerace locked the 1st thread up. Done. It was started up again in the ¨PEACE¨ thread, not by me. Yes I responded after it was brought up but I didn´t bring it up.

Then I said, we´ll never agree, let´s agree we disagree and let it go. It was responded to again on a legal point, so yes I responded too.

Then some others said they want to debate it and borner started a new thread. Three times Ken, not by me. I push nothing.

But listen. Like I said, how you feel is how you feel and how I feel is how I feel. I never brought up anything ¨political¨ to you and can continue as so if you want to continue.

This game is going into 1943´ and we both have put time in on it. Are you certain you can not put your emotions aside?

I have refrained from putting my password out there. So I ask you one more time nicely are you certain you want to end this game?

[Ike99]

Oh no, it´s very clear you don´t hold grudges against anyone Nomad.

Whatever, Japanese victory. Of interesting note in this game. Japan had only lost 22 transports.

Thanks for wasting my time when I could have been playing someone else without these issues.