Page 86 of 125
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land
Posted: Tue May 11, 2010 4:54 am
by Froonp
ORIGINAL: Extraneous
ORIGINAL: Mziln
warspite1, for any credit for work done in the write-ups:
You are not authorized to use the name “Mziln” or “Jesse G. Nelson” or “Jesse Nelson” or variations on these names.
You are authorized to use “Anonymous”, “Patrice Forno”, or take the credit yourself.
This was discussed by email with Patrice Forno, Shannon V. Okeets, and one other (I forget who and have deleted the email).
Further discussion about the usage of these names and the “Mziln” account is not allowed due to possible violation of the NDA.
Jesse G. Nelson, to make it clear,
no one can use "Patrice Forno" except me, so you don't have to authorize the use of
my name to others.
If you don't want your name, or any other alias you use, be it "Mziln" or "Extraneous" or any other of your devising, you have the right to ask to be called "Anonymous", but not my name.
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land
Posted: Tue May 11, 2010 12:37 pm
by MajorDude
Maybe we should add
"People Descriptions" to the thread's name... or start a new thread called
"People Descriptions"... 
[:D]
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land
Posted: Tue May 11, 2010 2:02 pm
by Extraneous
ORIGINAL: Froonp
ORIGINAL: Extraneous
ORIGINAL: Mziln
warspite1, for any credit for work done in the write-ups:
You are not authorized to use the name “Mziln” or “Jesse G. Nelson” or “Jesse Nelson” or variations on these names.
You are authorized to use “Anonymous”, “Patrice Forno”, or take the credit yourself.
This was discussed by email with Patrice Forno, Shannon V. Okeets, and one other (I forget who and have deleted the email).
Further discussion about the usage of these names and the “Mziln” account is not allowed due to possible violation of the NDA.
Jesse G. Nelson, to make it clear,
no one can use "Patrice Forno" except me, so you don't have to authorize the use of
my name to others.
If you don't want your name, or any other alias you use, be it "Mziln" or "Extraneous" or any other of your devising, you have the right to ask to be called "Anonymous", but not my name.
Remember what I said in the emal Patrice? You could have the credit for
all my work if you wanted it. So I had to offer the credit again since
you didn't refuse it then.
I didn't and still don't care who gets the credit for the work.
Just don't use my name or handle.
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land
Posted: Tue May 11, 2010 3:20 pm
by Froonp
ORIGINAL: Extraneous
Remember what I said in the emal Patrice? You could have the credit for all my work if you wanted it. So I had to offer the credit again since you didn't refuse it then.
Well, I don't want to have credit for anything but things I did or wrote.
You are posting interesting informations sometimes, and no one but you will get the credit for that.
I don't remember you proposing me to take credit for things you wrote, maybe you did and I flushed that from my memory, but if you are proposing that to me, I don't want to.
I didn't and still don't care who gets the credit for the work.
Just don't use my name or handle.
I don't think anyone will do that Jessie, so it's just fine.
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land
Posted: Tue May 11, 2010 4:17 pm
by Shannon V. OKeets
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land
Posted: Sun May 16, 2010 2:33 pm
by Patience
quote:
ORIGINAL: warspite1
Mziln - if you are still around - can you let me know which source you used to identify Takachiho and Saien as Oyodo-class please? Many thanks
I checked a 1938 and 1946 version of Jane's Fighting Ships and found no reference to these 2 cruisers. If anyone has an earlier version of this publication you may be able to find it there.
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land
Posted: Sun May 16, 2010 4:48 pm
by warspite1
ORIGINAL: Patience
quote:
ORIGINAL: warspite1
Mziln - if you are still around - can you let me know which source you used to identify Takachiho and Saien as Oyodo-class please? Many thanks
I checked a 1938 and 1946 version of Jane's Fighting Ships and found no reference to these 2 cruisers. If anyone has an earlier version of this publication you may be able to find it there.
Warspite1
Patience - thanks but you won't find them in Jane's - they never existed. Only one Oyodo was completed and only two were named - In WIF/MWIF the Japanese have the option of building both. However, what I was trying to find out was whether it was likely the two ships identified were meant to be two of the other seven unbuilt/unnamed Oyodos or whether the Japanese had another planned cruiser design that ADG were allowing the Japanese player the option to build.
Unless something else comes to light, I have taken the approach that ADG have given the Japanese player the option of building two more Oyodos. Thanks anyway [:)]
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land
Posted: Sun May 16, 2010 5:03 pm
by Patience
Thank you.
That seems logical. The earlier references to these vessels by wiki indicates they were no longer in service for ww2. That being the case it would be ridiculous to include them in WiF.
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land
Posted: Sun May 16, 2010 8:36 pm
by Anendrue
ORIGINAL: Patience
Thank you.
That seems logical. The earlier references to these vessels by wiki indicates they were no longer in service for ww2. That being the case it would be ridiculous to include them in WiF.
Except WiF allows for the what ifs in life within the context of playable game history. Whatever the heck that means [:D].
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land
Posted: Mon May 17, 2010 1:08 am
by Patience
Historically speaking, right? LOL.
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land
Posted: Mon May 17, 2010 3:56 pm
by Extraneous
Most of the “What if ships” represent proposed ship construction as part of a 9-year plan starting in 1942 and ending in 1950.
See: Chart 8 — Fifth Armament Replenishment Plan
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land
Posted: Mon May 17, 2010 5:50 pm
by Patience
It looks like they are a what if. I suppose if japan doesn't need more carriers they could potentially build the extras.
Oyodo (
Japanese
?, named after a river in
Japan, literally means "big stagnant water") was a
light cruiser of the Imperial
Japanese Navy, the only ship of her class. Her design was basically an improved version of the
Agano-class cruisers, though while the same general hull form as
Agano was adopted, with flush deck and bulbous bow, the armament differed both in layout and weapons, and the armour protection scheme was reduced.DesignThe
Oyodo design was approved under the 1939 4th Replenishment Programme. However, out of the 2 ships authorised, only one (Oyodo) was laid down ? immediately after she was completed all available shipbuilding resources at that yard were used to build more
aircraft carriers. In line with contemporary Japanese
submarine tactics, the
Oyodo class were to be the flagships of scouting submarine flotillas. To this end, the Oyodo class was to operate up to six of the upcoming
Kawanishi E15K1 Shiun floatplanes; however, the requirements for these planes were issued only in mid-1939.
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land
Posted: Tue May 18, 2010 1:16 am
by Extraneous
ORIGINAL: Patience
It looks like they are a what if. I suppose if japan doesn't need more carriers they could potentially build the extras.
Oyodo Japanese?, named after a river in
Japan, literally means "big stagnant water") was a
light cruiser of the Imperial
Japanese Navy, the only ship of her class. Her design was basically an improved version of the
Agano-class cruisers, though while the same general hull form as
Agano was adopted, with flush deck and bulbous bow, the armament differed both in layout and weapons, and the armour protection scheme was reduced.DesignThe
Oyodo design was approved under the 1939 4th Replenishment Programme. However, out of the 2 ships authorised, only one (Oyodo) was laid down ? immediately after she was completed all available shipbuilding resources at that yard were used to build more
aircraft carriers. In line with contemporary Japanese
submarine tactics, the
Oyodo class were to be the flagships of scouting submarine flotillas. To this end, the Oyodo class was to operate up to six of the upcoming
Kawanishi E15K1 Shiun floatplanes; however, the requirements for these planes were issued only in mid-1939.
Try this
"Oyodo" (the dash above the O doesent display in the forums).
Where did you get a translation to "big stagnant water"?
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land
Posted: Tue May 18, 2010 12:16 pm
by Patience
Here is the link I used to get the info. There are obviously several web pages that describe this vessel. I guess we can pick and choose. I didn't browse any other pages that included the translation so I used this one.
http://www.spiritus-temporis.com/japane ... esign.html
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land
Posted: Sun May 23, 2010 5:07 pm
by warspite1
Okay back to What ship am I?
I have the following two clues for each of the two ships in question (Froonp and abj9562 are NOT allowed to "guess")
SHIP 1 (Easy Question)
a) I am represented by a counter in World In Flames.
b) Neither I nor my sister survived the war, although at least my sister was lost fighting heroically at sea…unlike me.
SHIP 2 (Difficult Question)
a) I am represented by a counter in World In Flames, but really I should have two counters.
b) I had seven sisters, although eleven sisters was the original plan.
More clues tomorrow unless someone gets it.
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land
Posted: Mon May 24, 2010 1:49 am
by Patience
For Ship one, I'll go out on a limb. Its Bismark
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land
Posted: Mon May 24, 2010 3:05 am
by warspite1
ORIGINAL: Patience
For Ship one, I'll go out on a limb. Its Bismark
Warspite1
A good guess Patience - but incorrrect I'm afraid.
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land
Posted: Mon May 24, 2010 3:32 am
by BallyJ
Primed by the last poster.
I will guess Tirpitz!!!
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land
Posted: Mon May 24, 2010 3:45 am
by warspite1
ORIGINAL: BallyJ
Primed by the last poster.
I will guess Tirpitz!!!
Warspite1
A more logical conclusion given the second clue but....no cigar.
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land
Posted: Mon May 24, 2010 7:33 am
by Orm
ORIGINAL: warspite1
Okay back to What ship am I?
I have the following two clues for each of the two ships in question (Froonp and abj9562 are NOT allowed to "guess")
SHIP 1 (Easy Question)
a) I am represented by a counter in World In Flames.
b) Neither I nor my sister survived the war, although at least my sister was lost fighting heroically at sea…unlike me.
I am going with Musashi since trying to put the ship on ground to avoid beeing sunk can hardly be called fighting
heroically at sea.
