Page 2 of 3

RE: A new kind of operational loss for me....

Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2004 7:47 pm
by Koniev
You guys are scarin' me. Git WitP last week but havn't had time to do much except print out the Tutorial. Thought I'd jump in this week. I've been reading the posts on this and the other threads and am beginning to wonder if all the detail is really worth the trouble.

RE: A new kind of operational loss for me....

Posted: Sat Jul 17, 2004 4:06 am
by Titanwarrior89
Couldn't help but smile when i seen that number of lost B-17's.[:'(]
ORIGINAL: Grotius

I'd never crated up planes before, so I was quite excited about putting 45 big bad B-17s in boxes and shipping 'em from San Francisco to Noumea. Of course, it didn't occur to me to give my Transport TF an escort. In fact, somewhere along the way, I split off the AK so that it was all by its lonesome. The IJN hadn't shown off many subs yet, so I guess I got a little lazy.

Weeks later, four hexes east of Noumea, a submarine attacks the transport. Massive FLT damage. My DDs and ASW planes from Noumea race to the rescue. A day later, the ship sinks, and apparently DDs and other transports don't rescue sinking crates, because I got the following figure for operational losses. <sigh>

Image

RE: A new kind of operational loss for me....

Posted: Mon Jul 19, 2004 5:03 am
by dtravel
ORIGINAL: AmiralLaurent

Sexual needs are a part of military logistics that are widely ignored by most books and also wargames (and I agree on the last part) but were not ignored by military commands at the time. Military brothels were following at least the Italian, German, Japanese (comfort women) and French armies in WWII, and probably others I don't know. As far as I know, the American don't have any and so turn some of the countries they spend a lot of time in in giant brothels (WWII Southern Italy and 60's Vietnam coming to mind).

US military policy regarding soldiers' sexual activities has pretty much always been "Our pure, good boys don't need to be debased by all that moral corrupting <shudder> 'sex' stuff."

During WWII the Army would actually send MPs in to towns and cities near training facilities in the US to permanently shut down brothels.

RE: A new kind of operational loss for me....

Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2004 3:31 pm
by PeteG662
And medical units had condoms as part of their kit!

RE: A new kind of operational loss for me....

Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2004 12:30 am
by dtravel
ORIGINAL: Tallyman662

And medical units had condoms as part of their kit!

Their intended purpose (I kid you not) was to protect the end of the barrel of a soldier's rifle when crossing water.

RE: A new kind of operational loss for me....

Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2004 1:09 am
by von Murrin
Sounds correct to me.[:'(]

RE: A new kind of operational loss for me....

Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2004 10:35 am
by kokubokan25
Sorry for you lost Grotius but as jap let me put a little smile in my face.
In my play have a very very serious problem with the American SS despite have a very lot of DD escort my automatic convoys. I have no yet a useful tactic versus the under deep menace, my groups of ASW only catch a Submarine in SEVEN months!

RE: A new kind of operational loss for me....

Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 8:22 pm
by tbridges
How do you crate up aircraft and transport them? I can't seem to find anything in the manual on how to do this? [&:]

RE: A new kind of operational loss for me....

Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 8:25 pm
by DuckofTindalos
"Crating up" aircraft just means putting them on an AK. It refers to the fact that they can't fly while they're being transported.

RE: A new kind of operational loss for me....

Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 8:27 pm
by DuckofTindalos
And as for dumb mistakes, I forgot to set the single FG I had left on the West Coast to "do not upgrade". The result: they were the first to get P-38's, rather than the actual front line fighter units battling the Japanese in the South Pacific. Said a bad word or two about that...[:)]

RE: A new kind of operational loss for me....

Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 8:28 pm
by tbridges
How do get the AK to load planes? The only loading options I see are for troops, supplies, resources, there is no way to select "Load planes"

RE: A new kind of operational loss for me....

Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 8:38 pm
by Feinder
Here's a question. Will that b-17 group come back? or is it destroyed permanetnly?

-F-

RE: A new kind of operational loss for me....

Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 8:48 pm
by Charbroiled
Do "Load Troops"...the available squadrons will be listed with the troops.

RE: A new kind of operational loss for me....

Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 8:51 pm
by tbridges
Thanks Char...this game has a talent for making me feel stupid![X(]

RE: A new kind of operational loss for me....

Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 9:49 pm
by SgtSwanson
Who are you guys kidding!! As an infantryman for 8 years I can safely say that I did have a couple of condoms in my ruck for the end of my rifle. And each M16 came with a hard plastic dust cap. The guys had a tendency to forget them or worse, forgot to take them off and would fire a round through them. Plastic when it heats up is a SOB to get off the barrel when you have to clean the waepon. But a condom will litteraly melt away completely and you don't have to worry about it.

In the ETO troops could get a ready supply of them from the medics or supply sgt.s b4 going on pass to keep the STD rates down so they could return to duty. The Army knew it couldn't stop them from getting laid, so it became proactive in preventing the spread of the diseases. A lot of kids learned about sex for the first time in Europe and Oz to the detrement of the American girls back home.

Other neat little tricks of the trade:

Nylons - Keeps you from getting blisters on road marches. Silk or Satin was the best. Also kept the sweat away from your skin.

Small sterno cans or a small stove with detachable cans of propane/gas mix for heating food. Don't need them now as they have heater pack that come with the MRE's (just add water and put food pouch in it).

Parachute cord (550 cord) for tying things or POW's hands


RE: A new kind of operational loss for me....

Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 10:50 pm
by cookie monster
ORIGINAL: Feinder

Here's a question. Will that b-17 group come back? or is it destroyed permanetnly?

-F-

Yes it comes back

15.2 AIR UNITS

Allied air units that are sunk while on a ship and that are not part of that ship’s normal air
group complement will return to the game as a reinforcement after 120 days.

RE: A new kind of operational loss for me....

Posted: Sat Jul 02, 2005 2:21 am
by Feinder
Well that's a relief. Erstad just pasted a freighter I was trying to sneak out with a group of P-39s. Weather forcast was T-storms, and there were other burning ships about (not even a scorch mark on her paint tho, brand new!), had 800 ops points, and so I thought, "She'll make it out."

Naturally, every Val from mega-KB attacked the thing. Poor thing got vaporized with 16 bomb hits.

Ouch.

Small consolation is that a lone SBD made it past mega-KB CAP, and landed a bomb in the center of Ryujo's flight deck. So at least that's one carrier that'll be in the yards for a while.

-F-

RE: A new kind of operational loss for me....

Posted: Sat Jul 02, 2005 11:16 am
by SgtSwanson
Damn!![8D] Give that man a DFC and some time off. [:D]

RE: A new kind of operational loss for me....

Posted: Sat Jul 02, 2005 2:03 pm
by Ddog
ORIGINAL: dtravel
ORIGINAL: AmiralLaurent

Sexual needs are a part of military logistics that are widely ignored by most books and also wargames (and I agree on the last part) but were not ignored by military commands at the time. Military brothels were following at least the Italian, German, Japanese (comfort women) and French armies in WWII, and probably others I don't know. As far as I know, the American don't have any and so turn some of the countries they spend a lot of time in in giant brothels (WWII Southern Italy and 60's Vietnam coming to mind).

US military policy regarding soldiers' sexual activities has pretty much always been "Our pure, good boys don't need to be debased by all that moral corrupting <shudder> 'sex' stuff."

During WWII the Army would actually send MPs in to towns and cities near training facilities in the US to permanently shut down brothels.


I would have to disagree. There was a show on the History channel dedicated to this very subject. The "working women" in Honolulu made so much money, they started investing and became some major players in the economy in Hawaii. The going rate was 3 dollars for 3 minutes. They had lines out of the buildings and down the block. The women would work several rooms at a time, so that you would go into a room and prepare, she would come in for 3 minutes, then while you were getting dressed, she was in the next room. Army and Navy personel were actually assigned to inspect the brothels and women that worked there. Major bucks were spent by the US for this purpose.

Also, when I was in Korea in 87/88 for operation "Team Spirit", there was an entire town outside the base I was on, that was for the sole purpose of housing prostitutes during the exercise each year. Corpsman would inspect the women, assign them numbers (in case you caught something), supplied them with American toiletries and health and comfort items. Then they contracted buses to transport us to the town and supplied us with unlimited protection. This had to cost the US hundreds of thousands of dollars.

My point is, what they want thought of their boys, and what actually happens is 2 different things.

I'm sure a few guys in the forums have been to Korea, PI, and a few other places?

RE: A new kind of operational loss for me....

Posted: Sat Jul 02, 2005 9:39 pm
by SgtSwanson
In Germany it was totaly legal. The girls had to go in for check ups every 6 months and carry a med card with them. Believe it or not, there were very few sreet walkers before the wall fell. But afterward..... well, let's just say you took your chances with those. Some of them from what I heard were trying to run some hellified scams to get the most money out of you BEFORE they even performed. A lot of them got run out of town before long.