multi players

Post here to meet players for PBM games and generally engage in ribbing and banter about your prowess

Moderators: wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami

User avatar
Feinder
Posts: 7177
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 7:33 pm
Location: Land o' Lakes, FL

RE: multi players

Post by Feinder »

FWIW, being in the team game with LtFighter/KBullard vs Me/Knavey

Knavey is USN and Canada, and I'm basically everything else. For about a 3 weeks, he thought I was running China, and I thought he was running it (nobody was). But since it impacted India/Burma as such, I took it over (wish I hadn't). I -can- do it, but handling Oz, DEI, India -and- China is just a little much.

Knavey is my brother, and lives in a nearby town, so we can easliy get on the phone an argue over the situation for an hour or so. That's an advantage over KBullar/LtFighter, because they probbaly have to resort to email, and don't have the luxury of knowing each others schedules, so they're probably limited to a short email or two discuss current/future ops. Still, we had some interesting tug-o-wars.

SWPac region is truely annoying, because it's on the border of commands. I'd say creates a realistic feel for the historical situation.

Again, Knavey is USA.
I'm everybody else (so therefore own Oz).

Feinder = Ok, so I'll have conceed East Oz to SWPac, altho but don't have PPs to convert it.
Feinder = So why am I garrisoning it?
Feinder = And Port Moresby for that matter?
Knavey = Because you have troops there already.
Feinder = But I want YOUR troops there. I want to use MY troops to whack LtFighter up-side the head.
Knavey = I need transports.
Feinder = Are you kidding? You've got a billion transports.
Knavey = They're hauling stuff from the West Coast.
Feinder = I sent you 30 transports last month.
Knavey = KB clobbered half of them near Canton Island.
Feinder = Not my fault. You shouldda sailed further south. And her Majesty will be sending you a bill by the way.
Knavey = I've got guys about 10 days out, they'll be ready to be deployed in about 2 weeks. KB is patrolling Oz coast by the way.
Feinder = You think so? Maybe that's why I just had 80 Zeros show up over Port Moresby. Why am I still there by the way?
Knavey = Because I'm on the way.
Feinder = And my crappy fighters are gonna help your P-40s how? Which they totally sucked by the way. Tell 'em to get out of the o-club and practice their gunnery a little more.
Knavey = Your crappy fighters are better than nothing.
Feinder = No, it's NOT better than nothing. Nothing -IS- better than nothing. Don't feed the KB! I'm not throwing them away against his Zeros.
Feinder = Not to mention your B-17s didn't do squat. I told you they wouldn't fly. I want your guys off my AFs sooner than later, so I have room for my own planes. You Americans are like the frickin' creeping doom. You get on the continent, and take the whole place over.
Knavey = By the way, there's an enemy TF north of Luganville. We need your fleet from xxxx, how fast can you make it?
Feinder = Where is YOUR fleet? We used MY fleet to intercept the Rabaul Op. Your CAs only showed up for the closing act. That was -my- cruiser group you "borrowed" again at Ndini, to protect YOUR PBY base. Luganville is your base (oh wait, MY guys are still on the ground there, bah). Use your own fleet.
Knavey = We need your fleet, because it has radar. Mine doesn't.
Feinder = What good is your fleet good for then?
Knavey = Escorting my carriers.
Feinder = And where are they...?

We actually do play quite well together (have a game with the two of us vs. U2 also). But like I said, there can be some interesting "discussions".

My suggestions for two allied players :

UK, Dutch, Oz/NZ
USA, Canada, China

You'll probably get conflict in SWPac and China, just like we do, simply because they heavily impact the shared situation.


or

UK, Dutch, China
USA, Canada, Oz/NZ

Here the zones impact each other less. But the UK player might get a little bored after DEI falls.

I think LtFighter/Kbullard have theaters set up for Japan. Something like a line from Japan to Truk to NG and points east is one, and points west is the other. Not sure who does China for them.

-F-
"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me

Image
User avatar
dirtyharry500
Posts: 94
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2004 2:58 pm
Location: France
Contact:

RE: multi players

Post by dirtyharry500 »

salut laurent[:)]
are yu interested by my offer ? i'm playing actually as yu know a campaign with some guys but in can spent more time and i'm enjoyed to play with guys from other countries and matrix's forum is the best for this purpose.
yu can reply in french for more details on my email.
regards[:)]
i'm the real slim shady
User avatar
String
Posts: 2661
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 7:56 pm
Location: Estonia

RE: multi players

Post by String »

I still support the five player solution

IJA and IJN for japanese side

British/china, Australia/DeI, US/pacific

allied control areas can be changed later on when DeI is captured by the japanese, but i think that it will be a long time before that happens [:D]
Surface combat TF fanboy
User avatar
Hoplosternum
Posts: 663
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2002 8:39 pm
Location: Romford, England

RE: multi players

Post by Hoplosternum »

Well I have sent my email to DirtyHarry. I am still happy to play on either team.

Feinder - your game sounds great. Do you think it's best to have geographical, country or service splits? And do you share out the choice assets (CVs and BBs especially) or one of you use them for one operation and the other the next?

PS - I have just started playing LtFightr in a PBEM and played him at UV until his offline period ended the game. Any bad habits / weaknesses of his you'd like to share [:D]
User avatar
Hoplosternum
Posts: 663
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2002 8:39 pm
Location: Romford, England

RE: multi players

Post by Hoplosternum »

ORIGINAL: String

I still support the five player solution

IJA and IJN for japanese side

British/china, Australia/DeI, US/pacific

allied control areas can be changed later on when DeI is captured by the japanese, but i think that it will be a long time before that happens [:D]

I believe that we are 5 as DirtyHarry says Bill Durrant is in too.

Just waiting to see which team I am put on.
User avatar
String
Posts: 2661
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 7:56 pm
Location: Estonia

RE: multi players

Post by String »

ORIGINAL: Hoplosternum
ORIGINAL: String

I still support the five player solution

IJA and IJN for japanese side

British/china, Australia/DeI, US/pacific

allied control areas can be changed later on when DeI is captured by the japanese, but i think that it will be a long time before that happens [:D]

I believe that we are 5 as DirtyHarry says Bill Durrant is in too.

Just waiting to see which team I am put on.


well pick one yourself.. only I and AmiralLaurent have picked.. others are free
Surface combat TF fanboy
User avatar
mlees
Posts: 2263
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2003 6:14 am
Location: San Diego

RE: multi players

Post by mlees »

Feinder - your game sounds great. Do you think it's best to have geographical, country or service splits? And do you share out the choice assets (CVs and BBs especially) or one of you use them for one operation and the other the next?

Well, I assume that one the purposes of multiplayer games like this is the interservice (interplayer) squabbles over naval assets and operational goals. Don't iron these out before the game starts, and have fun!! [8D]
User avatar
Feinder
Posts: 7177
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 7:33 pm
Location: Land o' Lakes, FL

RE: multi players

Post by Feinder »

Hop,

Well, when it's divided by country, he gets his toys, and I get mine. I'm not allowed anywhere near his CVs. Frankly, I don't want them anyways. If they end up at the bottom of a trench somewhere, I can say it's all his fault.

We just trade stuff. If I've got extra (transports), I send them. If he's not using something, I'm usually asking for it. I've also grabbed a sqdn of B-17s and a group of LB-30s (the LB-30s started as SEAC anyways). Most of my RAN and RDN CA/CL/DD have radar, so he gets a few of those on loan, because none of the USN CA start with it (didn't realize that you). If he gets them shot up, I send him a nasty note and "borrow" the Louisville until RMAS Oz gets out of the yards.

Since SanFran is the only place to do conversions, I put in my order, and sent a like number of ships for conversion (altho he went ahead and started the conversion, before the ships arrived).

And make USN bring it's own gas. You'll -never- satisfy the USN CVs. Lay the law down early and make the USN early to bring their own fuel. Otherwise there'll be cold nights in Brisbane because all the gas has gone Nimitz gassing up his CVs.

Oh, and it's best to put one person in charge of PPs (in our case, me). Pool your requests and discuss it. But only have one persons spending them. Otherwise you get the situation where you -need- to convert something, but your Ally has already spent all the points for the turn.

Knavey probably gets tired of me saying,

So when are you gonna attack something...?
So when are you gonna attack something...?
So when are you gonna attack something...?
So when are you gonna attack something...?
So when are you gonna attack something...?
So when are you gonna attack something...?
So when are you gonna attack something...?
So when are you gonna attack something...?
So when are you gonna attack something...?
So when are you gonna attack something...?
So when are you gonna attack something...?
So when are you gonna attack something...?
So when are you gonna attack something...?
So when are you gonna attack something...?
So when are you gonna attack something...?
So when are you gonna attack something...?
So when are you gonna attack something...?

Go bomb something already!

[;)]
-F-
"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me

Image
User avatar
dirtyharry500
Posts: 94
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2004 2:58 pm
Location: France
Contact:

RE: multi players

Post by dirtyharry500 »

hi string the team is growing if yu join us[:)]
so, you, bill durant and me as allies ,hoplosternum and amiral laurent as japs [:)],may be wating another jap ? even we are ready to fight.
you could contact to me on my email and together we'll begin to plan the game.
best regards
i'm the real slim shady
User avatar
String
Posts: 2661
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 7:56 pm
Location: Estonia

RE: multi players

Post by String »

ORIGINAL: dirtyharry500

hi string the team is growing if yu join us[:)]
so, you, bill durant and me as allies ,hoplosternum and amiral laurent as japs [:)],may be wating another jap ? even we are ready to fight.
you could contact to me on my email and together we'll begin to plan the game.
best regards

I did add you to my MSN earlier already (string58@hotmail.com)
Surface combat TF fanboy
AmiralLaurent
Posts: 3351
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2003 8:53 pm
Location: Near Paris, France

RE: multi players

Post by AmiralLaurent »

Can we make a situation briefing ?

Five players now on the team: String, DirtyHarry500, Hoplosternum, Bill Durrant & AmiralLaurent (me)

I volunteered to lead IJA and String the British/Chinese forces.

Any idea of the home rules used ? Historical turn or not ? Variable reinforcements ? No sub doctrine ? And so on...

As soon as I have a Japanese team mate, I will mail him directly to set a strategy.
User avatar
Hoplosternum
Posts: 663
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2002 8:39 pm
Location: Romford, England

RE: multi players

Post by Hoplosternum »

ORIGINAL: AmiralLaurent

As soon as I have a Japanese team mate, I will mail him directly to set a strategy.

You have one. Me [:D]

I don't know if we are going to wait for a third Japanese player? With two there is a good IJA/IJN split. But three is fine as well as we could do a geographical split.

I'm still at work at the moment but please email me.

Cheers
User avatar
String
Posts: 2661
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 7:56 pm
Location: Estonia

RE: multi players

Post by String »

ORIGINAL: Hoplosternum
ORIGINAL: AmiralLaurent

As soon as I have a Japanese team mate, I will mail him directly to set a strategy.

You have one. Me [:D]

I don't know if we are going to wait for a third Japanese player? With two there is a good IJA/IJN split. But three is fine as well as we could do a geographical split.

I'm still at work at the moment but please email me.

Cheers


I think he did mean just two japanese players, he as IJA and his mate as IJN [;)]

Anywayz i think we should start with a historic first turn (scen 15) with allied sub doctrine off, jap doctrine on,
Surface combat TF fanboy
User avatar
DuckHunt
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2004 1:36 pm
Location: Paris, France

RE: multi players

Post by DuckHunt »

Hi,
well if you think you can accept one more japanese player then I would be very happy to play with you all. If not, well best of luck to all of you, and more than anything best of fun
User avatar
dirtyharry500
Posts: 94
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2004 2:58 pm
Location: France
Contact:

RE: multi players

Post by dirtyharry500 »

salut laurent
ok allied team seems to be completed :string ,bill durrant and me.
japs you,hoplosternum and duckhunt asking for a place.
about rules why not these rules we are using in my french 2nd campaign ? have a look on and yu will make comments.

scénario 15 or 115 if andrew’s map mod used

- Japanese Sub Doctrine : off
- Allied sub Doctrine : Off
- Fog of War : ON
- Advanced Weather Effects : ON
- Allied Damage Control : ON
- Variable Turn One : OFF
- December 7th Surprise : ON
- Historical First Turn : ON
- Reinforcements : +/- 1 month
- Replacements: Off and toggled for each unit depends on the decision of the zone commander.
as yur convenience
[:)]
i got yur email adress on CF to simplify communication by passing the site.
i'm the real slim shady
AmiralLaurent
Posts: 3351
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2003 8:53 pm
Location: Near Paris, France

RE: multi players

Post by AmiralLaurent »

I'm OK with the rules proposed by DH500
ORIGINAL: DuckHunt

Hi,
well if you think you can accept one more japanese player then I would be very happy to play with you all. If not, well best of luck to all of you, and more than anything best of fun

Why not ? In this case a geographical division will be necessary. The same as Allies ?
User avatar
Hoplosternum
Posts: 663
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2002 8:39 pm
Location: Romford, England

RE: multi players

Post by Hoplosternum »

Welcome aboard DuckHunt [:)]

We will probably split the forces geographically now so please email me / and or AmiralLaurent and we will discuss it.

DirtyHarry's rules seem fair and balanced.
User avatar
Bill Durrant
Posts: 963
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2003 1:39 am
Location: Oxfordshire

RE: multi players

Post by Bill Durrant »

Are we using the map mod - if so i need to install it
Sunk by 35cm/45 1YT Gun - Near Singapore
User avatar
Hoplosternum
Posts: 663
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2002 8:39 pm
Location: Romford, England

RE: multi players

Post by Hoplosternum »

Hi Laurent,

I have tried emailing you about 4 times but I keep getting Postmaster failures. I'll try again in the morning if my last try did not get through!

Will
User avatar
dirtyharry500
Posts: 94
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2004 2:58 pm
Location: France
Contact:

RE: multi players

Post by dirtyharry500 »

hi laurent,check yur mail box yu 've some message from allied in
we're are ready steady,waiting the japanese storm[:)]
i'm the real slim shady
Post Reply

Return to “Opponents wanted”