Page 172 of 788
RE: Bernard Law
Posted: Sat Jan 15, 2011 9:42 pm
by Cap Mandrake
ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft
Size 5 or greater ...
You mean a size 5 or greater
PORT with a shipyard?
That was my assumption as I can find no shipyard size figure other than tonnage.
RE: Bernard Law
Posted: Sat Jan 15, 2011 10:29 pm
by Mynok
All shipyards have a size. Click on the city, click on the shipyard icon below. It will show the the shipyard size.
RE: Bernard Law
Posted: Sat Jan 15, 2011 11:11 pm
by Captain Cruft
The size is the tonnage divided by 1,000
RE: Bernard Law
Posted: Sat Jan 15, 2011 11:18 pm
by Cap Mandrake
ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft
The size is the tonnage divided by 1,000
Ah..good to know. That means Sydney will work for the two US carriers asking for an upgrade but it will have to be one after the other.
RE: Bernard Law
Posted: Sat Jan 15, 2011 11:19 pm
by Cap Mandrake
ORIGINAL: Mynok
All shipyards have a size. Click on the city, click on the shipyard icon below. It will show the the shipyard size.
I never tried that. [:)]
RE: Bernard Law
Posted: Sat Jan 15, 2011 11:34 pm
by Cap Mandrake
[font="Courier New"]Admiral Lord SPrior
Evil Genius in charge of Operation Weasel
My dearest Spri;
What do you think of the idea of a demonstration South of Katherine to suggest an overland offensive toward Darwin? Is there some way to have a noisy build-up at Daly for eg. This would have the effect of making recon and attacks on Wyndham look like part of a land offensive. Also, if we could tempt the Jap divisions at Katherine onto the track South of town we might even be able to get ashore at Darwin. Also, I just noted that Aus I Corps HQ is way up the track. That might be useful for overland exploitation if the Jap troops pull back from Katherine, but I Corps HQ would also be useful in the landing. I think we could get the staff to Alice by air and thence to Perth by train. Also, I am trying to gage how severly to strip troop transports from the Pacific. Will US 32nd ID be going by ship?
One Bn M-10's just landed at Melbourne and will go by train to Perth. An EAB is North of Tahiti and will be there in a few weeks. More aviation support has left San Diego. I have about 35 C-47's leaving from Pearl and Samoa for Australia.
Lastly, there are a couple of mobile CD units in Australia that could be used for Wyndham and Port Headland. They will require points to transper to SWPAC.
With sincere sincerity
Admiral of the Fleet Mandrake[/font]
RE: Bernard Law
Posted: Sun Jan 16, 2011 12:19 am
by erstad
ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake
ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft
The size is the tonnage divided by 1,000
Ah..good to know. That means Sydney will work for the two US carriers asking for an upgrade but it will have to be one after the other.
No, you can upgrade them both at the same time. the shipyard just acts as an enabler.
And if one or more ships end up in the shipyard using capacity following an upgrade, you can change them to pierside to rid out the rest of the upgrade time (I think even readiness but I use pierside).
RE: Bernard Law
Posted: Sun Jan 16, 2011 12:30 am
by Moondawggie
ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft
The size is the tonnage divided by 1,000
Wow! Someone who not only reads the manual but understands it!
[&o]
RE: Bernard Law
Posted: Sun Jan 16, 2011 1:19 am
by Chickenboy
ORIGINAL: erstad
ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake
ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft
The size is the tonnage divided by 1,000
Ah..good to know. That means Sydney will work for the two US carriers asking for an upgrade but it will have to be one after the other.
No, you can upgrade them both at the same time. the shipyard just acts as an enabler.
And if one or more ships end up in the shipyard using capacity following an upgrade, you can change them to pierside to rid out the rest of the upgrade time (I think even readiness but I use pierside).
This works for upgrades, sometimes NOT conversions, FWIW.
RE: Bernard Law
Posted: Sun Jan 16, 2011 3:52 am
by stuman
ORIGINAL: Nemo121
If we're invoking the spirit of Monty can I point out that that map was FAR too wide... Everyone knows a good narrow thrust is all you need. I think we need a MUCH narrower but longer map.
P.s. Monty was a Freudian analyst's dream. All that repressed sexuality.
Isn't that true for all Brits ? [;)]
RE: Bernard Law
Posted: Sun Jan 16, 2011 3:54 am
by stuman
ORIGINAL: Onime No Kyo
This is way too complicated for me. [X(]
I am with you. That Battle Plan sprung from one brilliant mind.
RE: Bernard Law
Posted: Sun Jan 16, 2011 4:22 am
by Roger Neilson II
Hey my teddy bear and me resent that statement....
Roger
RE: Bernard Law
Posted: Sun Jan 16, 2011 8:33 am
by sprior
mobile CD units in Australia
We're not doing a remake of "Priscilla, Queen of the Desert". Are we?
RE: Bernard Law
Posted: Sun Jan 16, 2011 8:34 am
by sprior
ORIGINAL: stuman
ORIGINAL: Nemo121
If we're invoking the spirit of Monty can I point out that that map was FAR too wide... Everyone knows a good narrow thrust is all you need. I think we need a MUCH narrower but longer map.
P.s. Monty was a Freudian analyst's dream. All that repressed sexuality.
Isn't that true for all Brits ? [;)]
Mother says that's not very nice.
RE: Bernard Law
Posted: Sun Jan 16, 2011 10:05 am
by Itdepends
ORIGINAL: sprior
We're not doing a remake of "Priscilla, Queen of the Desert". Are we?
I believe inflicting that on the WJD would be against the Geneva convention and entirely unkeeping with the spirit of things what?
RE: Bernard Law
Posted: Sun Jan 16, 2011 10:19 am
by Chickenboy
ORIGINAL: sprior
mobile CD units in Australia
We're not doing a remake of "Priscilla, Queen of the Desert". Are we?
[:D]
Lord Admiral Sprior: I believe the references to "CD" that you quoted alluded to "Coastal Defense", not "Cross Dresser" units.
ETA: However, if you can find a subject that can shoot ping pong balls out of unexpected orifices, perhaps you'll find a terrific distraction for JJ and friends.
I can see it now: A skirmish line of ping-pong ball firing bar ho's assaulting the Japanese lines en masse, whilest a brigade or two or your lads slipped around the flank and gives the WJDs the what for.
ETA II: I'd better go and take my medication for the day.
RE: Bernard Law
Posted: Sun Jan 16, 2011 11:28 am
by Grollub
This has to be the wackiest AAR ever. You're all a bunch of screwballs
[;)][:D]
RE: Bernard Law
Posted: Sun Jan 16, 2011 11:54 am
by Alfred
ORIGINAL: Itdepends
ORIGINAL: sprior
We're not doing a remake of "Priscilla, Queen of the Desert". Are we?
I believe inflicting that on the WJD would be against the Geneva convention and entirely unkeeping with the spirit of things what?
Au contraire, mon frere, there would be no real problem with the Geneva Convention of the time as IIRC, Japan was not a signatory. In fact they probably would view it as some sort of Western version of Shinto.
Alfred
RE: Bernard Law
Posted: Sun Jan 16, 2011 12:48 pm
by sprior
A skirmish line of ping-pong ball firing bar ho's assaulting the Japanese lines en masse
I suspect would look like this:
Le Lotus
Posted: Sun Jan 16, 2011 12:55 pm
by Cap Mandrake
******Le Lotus bar, Papaete, July 7, 1942, Plenary Command July Fact-Finding Tour******
Admiral of the Fleet Mandrake, CIC Pacific Ocean Areas, Canada West of Great Slave Lake, Easter Is., Panama and La Tortuga: <reading message from Eastern Fleet HQ..doubtless some charming colonial building with a polo and cricket field outside and lots of brown-skinned waiters in starched white jackets> ..."Priscilla, Queen of the Desert"??? This is still in code. <takes a sip of cognac>
Aide: No sir, that is how it decodes.
Admiral of the Fleet Mandrake, CIC Pacific Ocean Areas, Canada West of Great Slave Lake, Easter Is., Panama and La Tortuga: Goddamnit, then find out what "Priscilla, Queen of the Desert" is. I am so tired of these pedantic 19th century literature references. Probably some quivering romance novel. I knew we were going to have trouble when we lost Warspite. I told you they would be mad about that.....