Page 63 of 85
RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE
Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 10:19 pm
by hades1001
yeah,you are right, I'm going to stop following troll's side simple because he is too lazy to write anymore. [:D]
Actually I was not trying to warn G.H., I was trying to make G.H. thinking about the risk, and obviously G.H. know troll's KB is around somewhere and he choose to be risky. Though he choose to do the wrong thing but it is
his choice.
Just don't ruin this AAR, G.H. and troll are both good players and this AAR should be fun all the way to the end.~
ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns
ORIGINAL: hades1001
And I tried to warn G.H. by a indirect way
Well if that's true, then shame on you. I personally refrain from reading the opposing thread because I want to discuss strategy here. If you're going to give advice whether directly or indirectly due to what you've read elsewhere then it's wrong pure and simple no matter how you phrase that advice.
But I agree with you on your main point and I for one am deleting my post. Me and others piling on does not help anything and only leads to bad feelings, so I take your point to heart. I think everyone should delete their posts concerning the question raised.
Jim
RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE
Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 10:26 pm
by Gen.Hoepner
Guys, please.
TenChiMato and Hades are right.
My attack was predictable. I knew that.
I've done it because of this. Because it was predictable.
I thought. No, better, i hoped that given the logistical and strategical situation an attrition battle between my CVs and his KB and my LBAs at Eniwetok was somewhat favourable....facts prooved i was wrong.
Trollelite has just done what everyone else here would have done.Ambush me where was sure i was coming. Plain and simple.
The CVs reaction was a mess...totally...if they didn't react i would have been under the umbrella of 100 more fighters and with the beauforts at Eniwetok....bad luck...bad planning...and Trollelite's skills.
He played as a master here.
I wanna stress this thing.
He managed to keep his KB in the shade, despite my strong and long range recon.
He calculated where and when to come out.
Was his victory this one. Not my defeat.
So please give to Caesar what is Caesar's.
At the last time i formed 3 CVTFs...2 single CV TFs and one double CV TF...was a bad choice,but i don't think this changed much the things...
Well...however...the war is not lost. Not yet.
He will surely get the autovictory, but we're not going for autovictory anyway.
We're gonna keep on fighting. everywhere.
We'll slow down in the pacific. That's for sure. But the match isn't over.
Com'on! I still have the spirit!![8D]
RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE
Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 10:41 pm
by Gen.Hoepner
Ok, Ponape will be conquered however. We'll postpone the operation for at least one week.
Now the priority is to save what's left of our fleet. Many BBs, 2 CVs...these must be saved!!
Then we'll think about some other strategies.
It's time to build up PM i think and Darwin...
Pity...it could have gone in another way[;)]...but that's war anyway.You have to suffer to see the end of the tunnell!![8D]
RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE
Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 10:43 pm
by hades1001
good for you, G.H.!
keep beating those japanese bastards[:D]
just curious, how did you set up your auto reaction for the CV TF?
RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE
Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 10:45 pm
by Nomad
My dear General, please try using a Surface Combat TF as the lead for your CV TFs. If the CV TFs are set to follow the SC TF, then most of the time they will not react. I say most of the time because others have said they have had some react. I have NEVER had a CVTF that was following as SCTF react towards the enemy. But, remember that you will have no reaction which can lead to problems also. But, at least the CV TFs should be together and where you order them to go.
RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE
Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 10:46 pm
by Gen.Hoepner
ORIGINAL: hades1001
good for you, G.H.!
keep beating those japanese bastards[:D]
just curious, how did you set up your auto reaction for the CV TF?
I set them to "0"...so they shouldn't have reacted...but we all know that the code here isn't that good...the CVs always react anyway...so it's juts a matter of luck.
Anyway...the UberCAP is still there.....gotta try another approach.
RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE
Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 10:49 pm
by Gen.Hoepner
ORIGINAL: Nomad
My dear General, please try using a Surface Combat TF as the lead for your CV TFs. If the CV TFs are set to follow the SC TF, then most of the time they will not react. I say most of the time because others have said they have had some react. I have NEVER had a CVTF that was following as SCTF react towards the enemy. But, remember that you will have no reactioni which can lead to problems also. But, at least the CV TFs should be together and where you order them to go.
I'll keep that in mind, thanks Nomad...didn't know that[:(]
However i've learnt something today...never, NEVER go overconfident.
In China i've lost because of that.
In the pacific now the same...
sooner or later i'll learn the lesson, i promise[:D]
RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE
Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 10:49 pm
by anarchyintheuk
Somewhat weasily, but it also allows you to lrcap your sctf w/o the cvtf penalty. Reading that sentence back, it looks like gibberish or witpspeak.
RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE
Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 11:13 pm
by Nomad
As far as I know, CAP is not affected by coordination penalities.
RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE
Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 12:05 am
by Jim D Burns
ORIGINAL: Gen.Hoepner
Anyway...the UberCAP is still there.....gotta try another approach.
Since there is no house rule preventing it, replace all your torpedo plane squadrons with a 16 plane F4F squadron. It’s not a perfect solution but it will help make up for the loss of the two 36 plane squadrons that just went down with their ships.
Four remaining CV’s times 16 planes means you’ll have another 64 F4F’s for CAP duties in late 42 or early 43 when you’ll need to go on the offensive again. Don’t use them on escort as they’re just CV capable, not trained, so they’ll take higher op losses on longer range missions. Just use them for CAP.
Jim
RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE
Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 12:46 am
by 1275psi
ORIGINAL: hades1001
Shame on someone here in this thread.
I knew where troll's KB is because I'm following both sides movements. And I tried to warn G.H. by a indirect way.(I can't do more because it woulb unfair for troll). You guys can check the last several posts written by me.
And the attack of G.H. is going in such a noisy way and so obvious that any experienced IJ player will notice it. It is common sense that send in the KB to stop the Allies.
Anyone said this mission should be kept more sneaky, they are right.
Anyone doubt about troll's dishonesty, shame on you, your vicious voice will do nothing good but ruin this interesting AAR.
Again, shame on you know whom!
As the co creator of the duel AAR, and as someone who's played that way for nearly 5 years, I think I have more than a fair enough reason to make the call that I did.
The ability to write AARs has always depended on total trust.
Facts show some now break that trust.
I still say -some one breaks that trust -in any way -even by giving hints -let alone peeking -which some one has already been shown to do on another AAR - should get NO chances -they attack the very core of AARs.
Further to the above.
Troll may well have guessed where the general was going to attack - I can usually tell Where Tabpub is going to strike weeks in advance -but it wont change my view on where we stand with the AARs.
he got caught peeking twice - why should I be shamed to think that he might have this time -its not me with the reputation..
Looks like its plan B - write AArs only weeks after the turns involved if we don't watch out.
RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE
Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 1:31 am
by hades1001
ORIGINAL: 1275psi
ORIGINAL: hades1001
Shame on someone here in this thread.
I knew where troll's KB is because I'm following both sides movements. And I tried to warn G.H. by a indirect way.(I can't do more because it woulb unfair for troll). You guys can check the last several posts written by me.
And the attack of G.H. is going in such a noisy way and so obvious that any experienced IJ player will notice it. It is common sense that send in the KB to stop the Allies.
Anyone said this mission should be kept more sneaky, they are right.
Anyone doubt about troll's dishonesty, shame on you, your vicious voice will do nothing good but ruin this interesting AAR.
Again, shame on you know whom!
As the co creator of the duel AAR, and as someone who's played that way for nearly 5 years, I think I have more than a fair enough reason to make the call that I did.
The ability to write AARs has always depended on total trust.
Facts show some now break that trust.
I still say -some one breaks that trust -in any way -even by giving hints -let alone peeking -which some one has already been shown to do on another AAR - should get NO chances -they attack the very core of AARs.
Further to the above.
Troll may well have guessed where the general was going to attack - I can usually tell Where Tabpub is going to strike weeks in advance -but it wont change my view on where we stand with the AARs.
he got caught peeking twice - why should I be shamed to think that he might have this time -its not me with the reputation..
Looks like its plan B - write AArs only weeks after the turns involved if we don't watch out.
I really hope you can talk to troll directly rather talk in other people's AAR and ruin a game. I hold my point, shame on you.
RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE
Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 1:34 am
by hades1001
Let me make this clear, no matter what's troll's personality, this should NOT be an issue in THIS AAR.
RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE
Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 6:47 am
by Gen.Hoepner
Herbie, please, i ask you to restrain yourself from these kinds of comments.
I trust my opponent. And that's why i won't change the way this AAR is being made. It will be up to date.
If i fall into the malicious trap of non-confiding my very opponent, then i should stop playing at all.
I was really pissed when, few months ago, Trollelite pointed out that someone was reading his own aar and then suggesting me what to do... i defined those accusations "crap".
Now, wanting to be a "honest" person, i have to define as "crap" the same accusations that are made up against him.
So please, let's talk about what are the next objectives of the campaign.
Let's talk about how to save my fleet from the KB's threat.
No more of this...please.
PS: i don't want to be rude...just understand my policy about this aar... still thanks
RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE
Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 8:00 am
by cantona2
Lets put an end to it as GH says. Dnt like Troll either but this is GH's AAR and not a Troll gripe therapy session

Just get your ships the hell out of there GH

RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE
Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 12:35 pm
by Gen.Hoepner
ORIGINAL: cantona2
Lets put an end to it as GH says. Dnt like Troll either but this is GH's AAR and not a Troll gripe therapy session

Just get your ships the hell out of there GH
Thanks mate.
Turn hasn't arrived yet...Trollelite will have to study hard in the next days...so no updates before the Week End...[:(]
RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE
Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 1:58 pm
by Feinder
Well, it couldda been worse Hop. At least you haven't lost 5 out of 6 like me!
In the immortal words...
"Run away! Run away!"
Scoot back towards your LBA by any means. If he chases you, we'll you've maximized your defense (maybe your LBA get a lucky hit). If he doesn't chase, you've "only" lost 2x CVs.
-F-
RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE
Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 3:32 pm
by mlees
What is the experience levels of your LBA in the Marshalls?
I have found that LBA don't seem to get much hits until they are in their 70's... and they won't even launch against CAP-defended CVTF's if their exp is in the 50's...
RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE
Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 3:41 pm
by hades1001
when RADM Spruence meet this same situation with Mr. troll after the Midway, he said:"
this is enough, retreat.
I'm sure troll won't do the same thing, so, you might able set a trap for him with your LBA?[;)]
RE: DISASTER AT PONAPE
Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 4:04 pm
by pauk
guys, please calm down. If you want to comment AAR i suggest reading only one part of the AAR (where you are posting your thoughts, advices and that stuff).
Both "sides" here risks with "killing the players fun and enjoyment". Trust me i know what i'm talking.
You really all should refrain posting stuff like this (he is cheating, he is gamey opponent etc). Sooner or latter you will found yourselves in similar situations you will change your minds (like our very special PzjHortlund - he is actually now considering gamey ground training - which was in his eyes very gamey[:'(], until it is not his game[:D])
If GH and Trollelite have issues they will solve them directly. I'm reading both sides of AAR and not commenting anything. Please, lets focus on the game[:)]