Son Impressed

[Bill Durrant]

Well I downloaded it this morning.

First thing I did was show my 9 year old son the captain of HMS Vendetta - his response -"How cool is that Dad - well done and congratulations on commanding your own ship"

Worth the $45 alone.

Thanks Tankerace[&o][&o][&o]

[String]

Hmm, I'd better be careful with her then. I'm not sure but i think she is still afloat in my game vs Roger Neilson [:D]

[Bill Durrant]

Hi String

Long time no speak. I'm watching the AAR very carefully[;)]

[Bill Durrant]

DD Vendetta, Shell hits 4, on fire

Hey get me back to port quickly[:(][:(]

[Roger Neilson]

Regret to inform you the Vendetta received four direct hits from a BB near Hong Kong, unlikely its still afloat though we didn't see it sink.

Roger

[Bill Durrant]

need ............ glug .................. help .................... glug ............... ple................. glug...glug ....................................................

[String]

ORIGINAL: Roger Neilson

Regret to inform you the Vendetta received four direct hits from a BB near Hong Kong, unlikely its still afloat though we didn't see it sink.

Roger

Japanese propaganda! .. Most hits weren't from BB, instead they were wimpy shells from DD's. Vendetta is fine, and has been docked in Hong Kong with 36 system damage.

[Bill Durrant]

Japanese propaganda! .. Most hits weren't from BB, instead they were wimpy shells from DD's. Vendetta is fine, and has been docked in Hong Kong with 36 system damage.

Hurrah - Captain "Pheonix" Durrant rises from the ashes[:D]

[general billy]

I bet u must be enjoying WPO, no Death Star CV's to worry about huh??? [:D]

WPO , Im tempted to buy it. But have they improved the code for surface engagements?

[String]

ORIGINAL: general billy

I bet u must be enjoying WPO, no Death Star CV's to worry about huh??? [:D]

WPO , Im tempted to buy it. But have they improved the code for surface engagements?

I have no idea if they 'improved' it, but so far it's working fine [:)]

[Roger Neilson]

Propaganda...... no just artistic licence!

Roger

[:'(]

[kkoovvoo]

ORIGINAL: String

ORIGINAL: general billy

I bet u must be enjoying WPO, no Death Star CV's to worry about huh??? [:D]

WPO , Im tempted to buy it. But have they improved the code for surface engagements?

I have no idea if they 'improved' it, but so far it's working fine [:)]

In WiTP surface naval combat choosing the targets doesnt make sense. The ships fight like in 18th century. They fire on opposite ship, regardless the importance of target.

For example if you have SC TF of 5 CAs and you engage TF composed of 1 BB and 4 DDs, usually one of your CAs attacks BB and rest attack opposite DDs. The result of such *choice of target* usually is that BB escape relatively unharmed and DDs are on the bottom.

Is this somehow improved in WPO?

[String]

ORIGINAL: kkoovvoo

ORIGINAL: String

ORIGINAL: general billy

I bet u must be enjoying WPO, no Death Star CV's to worry about huh??? [:D]

WPO , Im tempted to buy it. But have they improved the code for surface engagements?

I have no idea if they 'improved' it, but so far it's working fine [:)]

In WiTP surface naval combat choosing the targets doesnt make sense. The ships fight like in 18th century. They fire on opposite ship, regardless the importance of target.

For example if you have SC TF of 5 CAs and you engage TF composed of 1 BB and 4 DDs, usually one of your CAs attacks BB and rest attack opposite DDs. The result of such *choice of target* usually is that BB escape relatively unharmed and DDs are on the bottom.

Is this somehow improved in WPO?

Actually, especially when considering ww1 era, it's quite logical that each ship picks its own target and starts shooting at it, as a vital part of gunnery was observing the shell splashes, and with several ships firing, one could never be sure which ones were your own ships shells. This is especially true with regard to same class, and similar number confrontations (5bb's vs 6bb's and such)

Now in the example you posted it would be quite logical that only one cruiser engaged the battleship and the rest dealt with the destroyers, as it would be the task of the destroyers to keep the cruisers at bay and keep them busy. Therefore you can imagine that they probably charged the cruisers (a'la taffy 3) or laid smoke etc. Which exposes them to the cruiser fire, whilst the BB would remain relatively unexposed, and thus, only one cruiser would engage it.

So far, I've had plenty of surface engagements in my PBEM vs Roger Neilson, and not once have I seen an unplausible result.

[Roger Neilson]

So far, I've had plenty of surface engagements in my PBEM vs Roger Neilson, and not once have I seen an unplausible result.
[/quote]

I would agree, though they have been bloody nasty ones!

Roger

[8|][8|][8|][8|][8|][8|][8|][8|][8|][8|][8|][8|]

[kkoovvoo]

Hi String,
i am sure that in WiTP the ships are simply firing usually on opposite ship regardless how serios thread the ship is to them.

When I have time I sometimes set some battle in Tutorial scenario just to see how it works (WiTP).

For example I tried day surface combat with 3 BBs (2 Hiei class + Nagato) + DDs vs. 2 BBs, CL and some DDs.

The ships were firing against opposite ships. Hieis were firing against battleships (non-penetrating hits until they closed below 15.000 yards) and BB Nagato fired its 16.1 inch guns during entire battle against light cruiser. That really doesnt make sense. Nagato, the most powerful ship of this fleet, sunk light cruiser but both Hieis were hit much more seriously than they could return.

I believe at Surigao strait Fuso and Yamashiro got most attention from six US battleships.

[KingMississippi]

I watched a battle today and the results were this:
Me (Allies)
2 CA (6 shells, 1 shell)
2 CL (4 shells, untouched)
4 DD (4 shells, 8 shells w/1 critical, untouched)

Japanese
12 Cargo Ships
4 DD (2 untouched, 4 shells, 67 shells)

I had 8 ships concentrating all of their firepower on a single destoyer but the Japanese spread out all of their firepower. My more powerful squadron took similar casulties as the Japanese with 1 critically damaged ship vs. 1 sunk, but all but 2 of my ships took some various degree of damage. Plus I could "see" 4 of the cargo ships and all 4 DD but I only fired at 1 enemy.

[String]

ORIGINAL: KingMississippi

I watched a battle today and the results were this:
Me (Allies)
2 CA (6 shells, 1 shell)
2 CL (4 shells, untouched)
4 DD (4 shells, 8 shells w/1 critical, untouched)

Japanese
12 Cargo Ships
4 DD (2 untouched, 4 shells, 67 shells)

I had 8 ships concentrating all of their firepower on a single destoyer but the Japanese spread out all of their firepower. My more powerful squadron took similar casulties as the Japanese with 1 critically damaged ship vs. 1 sunk, but all but 2 of my ships took some various degree of damage. Plus I could "see" 4 of the cargo ships and all 4 DD but I only fired at 1 enemy.

http://www.combinedfleet.com/btl_bad.htm

Shit happens