The problem about when folks complain about PTs is

Gary Grigsby's strategic level wargame covering the entire War in the Pacific from 1941 to 1945 or beyond.

Moderators: Joel Billings, wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami

User avatar
castor troy
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:17 am
Location: Austria

RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is

Post by castor troy »

ORIGINAL: Feinder

I just get tired of 10% of the people using 1% of the game to make 90% of the noise.

Look at "the other" thread. Is he willing to post EVERY PT action, win or lose? Doubt it. It's just here's 3 actions from one game, where PTs won, and suddenly the whole blanket of PTs is a menace that that destroys Japan. That thread -is- blatently a "JFB thread".

-F-


Are you joking??? You must be! When I read all this BS on this thread I get so upset the thing I´m thinking about is so .....

The difference between people that aren´t an English native speaker is that those people are reading what was written. The people that are native speaker are mostly only picking out two or three words out of five sentences.

If niceguy referres to "he didn´t even answer why he doesn´t strafe those PTs" then what should I say? People must be NUTS??

I answered long enough and detailed enough. I´M NOT THE JFB I´VE GOT JUST ONE PBEM MORE AS JAPANESE THAN AS ALLIED!! I´M NOT HAVING THE PROBLEM THAT I´M AMERICAN AND BECAUSE OF THAT, EVERYONE THAT SAYS SOMETHING ABOUT AMERICAN EQUIPMENT IS DUMB OR A FANBOY!

God damn the next who wants me to strafe Palmyra gets a medicament against Alzheimer´s disease sent from me. Just post your adress.
User avatar
Charles2222
Posts: 3687
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2001 10:00 am

RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is

Post by Charles2222 »

ORIGINAL: Oliver Heindorf
ORIGINAL: Charles_22

From what I'm seeing here, the main issue seems to be that the DD's are far too easily hit by torps. In every engagement where you can see a DD is hit by a torp, is it assumed that all PT's fire all the torps? As the game works, don't ships always fire their first salvo of torps at it's maximum range (assuming some of the battles start at a range further than that)?

hmm, I never had a PT hitting anything with a torp in 2 years of game play. intresting.

A lot of ANY kind of results depends on WHO you are playing. Funny, I think I have told you this before on another subject. Anyway, if you are the Allies the torps won't probably hit. If you're the IJN they hit. If you're playing against a pbem'er I have no idea.
User avatar
castor troy
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:17 am
Location: Austria

RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is

Post by castor troy »

PBEM against Przemcio! Losses are 18 US PTs against 3 Jap DDs with 5 or 6 damaged more than 30 sys (mostly because of .50 cal critical hits [8|]).

Encounters were below 10. If people aren´t believing me then just ask Przemcio if the numbers are correct.
Andy Mac
Posts: 12577
Joined: Wed May 12, 2004 8:08 pm
Location: Alexandria, Scotland

RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is

Post by Andy Mac »

ORIGINAL: pauk

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

12 DD's for 92 PT Boats is a ratio I am unhappy with especially as some of the DD's were to some extent damaged by POW 1st.

You must be joking, right? You should try Japanese side some day and would know that 12 DDs are enormous loss for the Japanese. Especially when they are lost for nothing in return (if you don't count some of the cheap 350 PTs)... the funny thing is that the whole Combined fleet now fears of couple PTs.... very realistic, right[:D]..

Once again, i do not have nothing against such results if these PTs were backed with surface capital ships (DDs, CAs) but this is not a case...Surigao strait!!!!

No I am not joking you lost c 100 points against my 100 points seems about right to me if not against me.

If 12 DD's are a heavy loss then dont raid my bases where PT boats are present unless you mean it and are willing to losew ships - Jap DD's are not good enough to take on odds of 3:1 at night with a raidar disadvantage -

Re DD's v PT boats Surigaoa Strait had BB's and Cruisers - Mogami's searchlight illuminated the PT Boats and the PT Boats radar got confused by Nishimuras BB Group, the PT boats engaged at 3 miles range after being detected not 1,000 yards sorry I dont see how that one engagement relates to an unsupported 3 or 4 DD section taking on 12 PT Boats -
I say again early war Jap DD's are Torp heavy andf with few exceptions they are designed for the decisive battle at night against an enemy battle line not fighting off torpedo boats you are trying to use DD's for a role they are not suited for (they get better as they gain auto weapons and AA as time goes on) but in the early and mid phases of the war its only the disparity in night fighting exp that gives the Japs the edge.

Anyway I dont think we are adding anything new to the debate so i think I will go do some turns !!!
User avatar
Charles2222
Posts: 3687
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2001 10:00 am

RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is

Post by Charles2222 »

Oliver Heindorf: Oh. I'm sorry, I forgot to mention that the Allies get the raw end of PT torps if you're playing the Ai, while with playing as Japan against the allied AI you get ripped off.
User avatar
pauk
Posts: 4156
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Zagreb,Croatia

RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is

Post by pauk »

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

ORIGINAL: pauk

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

12 DD's for 92 PT Boats is a ratio I am unhappy with especially as some of the DD's were to some extent damaged by POW 1st.

You must be joking, right? You should try Japanese side some day and would know that 12 DDs are enormous loss for the Japanese. Especially when they are lost for nothing in return (if you don't count some of the cheap 350 PTs)... the funny thing is that the whole Combined fleet now fears of couple PTs.... very realistic, right[:D]..

Once again, i do not have nothing against such results if these PTs were backed with surface capital ships (DDs, CAs) but this is not a case...Surigao strait!!!!

No I am not joking you lost c 100 points against my 100 points seems about right to me if not against me.

If 12 DD's are a heavy loss then dont raid my bases where PT boats are present unless you mean it and are willing to losew ships - Jap DD's are not good enough to take on odds of 3:1 at night with a raidar disadvantage -

Re DD's v PT boats Surigaoa Strait had BB's and Cruisers - Mogami's searchlight illuminated the PT Boats and the PT Boats radar got confused by Nishimuras BB Group, the PT boats engaged at 3 miles range after being detected not 1,000 yards sorry I dont see how that one engagement relates to an unsupported 3 or 4 DD section taking on 12 PT Boats -
I say again early war Jap DD's are Torp heavy andf with few exceptions they are designed for the decisive battle at night against an enemy battle line not fighting off torpedo boats you are trying to use DD's for a role they are not suited for (they get better as they gain auto weapons and AA as time goes on) but in the early and mid phases of the war its only the disparity in night fighting exp that gives the Japs the edge.

Anyway I dont think we are adding anything new to the debate so i think I will go do some turns !!!

Yes, this debate becoming pointless. I have other view on the Battle of Surigao strait than you - we are not going to agree there. 100 points for 100 points seems like simple math, i do agree. But if Allies have 350 points avaliable only in PTs (didn't mentioned DDs!) while Japan have ummm... lets say 1000 points available with all DDs... well this is different story.

As i've said, i agree with you "do not raid bases where PTs are present". It is my only choice.

oh, well...
Image
User avatar
pauk
Posts: 4156
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Zagreb,Croatia

RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is

Post by pauk »

ORIGINAL: castor troy

... IS DUMB OR A FANBOY!

I'm dumbass!
[;)][:D]
Image
User avatar
castor troy
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:17 am
Location: Austria

RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is

Post by castor troy »

ORIGINAL: pauk

ORIGINAL: castor troy

... IS DUMB OR A FANBOY!

I'm dumbass!
[;)][:D]


We better should refrain from posting our thoughts and become the "Yes Sir, you´re rigth Sir" people.
User avatar
castor troy
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:17 am
Location: Austria

RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is

Post by castor troy »

Just stumbled over that one from Raverdaves and Luskans AAR: Seems to me he´s one of the guys here with bad luck too. All others besides Pauk and me must be the lucky ones. But of course, just another negative one.....

Night Time Surface Combat, near Kragen at 22,63

Japanese Ships
CA Chokai
CL Naka
DD Natsugumo
DD Asagumo
DD Harusame, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
DD Yudachi
DD Sagiri

Allied Ships
PT TM-4
PT TM-5
PT TM-6, Shell hits 4, and is sunk
PT TM-7, Shell hits 4, and is sunk
PT TM-8, Shell hits 1, and is sunk
PT TM-9, Shell hits 33, and is sunk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Kragen at 22,63

Japanese Ships
CA Chokai
CL Naka
DD Natsugumo
DD Asagumo, Shell hits 1
DD Harusame, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
DD Yudachi
DD Sagiri

Allied Ships
PT TM-10
PT TM-11
PT TM-13
PT TM-14, Shell hits 6, and is sunk
PT TM-15

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Kragen at 22,63

Japanese Ships
CA Chokai
CL Naka
DD Natsugumo
DD Asagumo
DD Yudachi
DD Sagiri

Allied Ships
PT TM-4
PT TM-5, Shell hits 4, and is sunk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Kragen at 22,63

Japanese Ships
CA Chokai
CL Naka
DD Natsugumo, Shell hits 2
DD Asagumo
DD Yudachi
DD Sagiri

Allied Ships
PT TM-10
PT TM-11
PT TM-13
PT TM-15

User avatar
Terminus
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is

Post by Terminus »

ORIGINAL: pauk

ORIGINAL: castor troy

... IS DUMB OR A FANBOY!

I'm dumbass!
[;)][:D]

You're a dumbass JFB...[:'(]
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
User avatar
pauk
Posts: 4156
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Zagreb,Croatia

RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is

Post by pauk »

Nah, Castor stop it! It can't be... you must be dreaming [:D]
ORIGINAL: castor troy

Just stumbled over that one from Raverdaves and Luskans AAR: Seems to me he´s one of the guys here with bad luck too. All others besides Pauk and me must be the lucky ones. But of course, just another negative one.....

Night Time Surface Combat, near Kragen at 22,63

Japanese Ships
CA Chokai
CL Naka
DD Natsugumo
DD Asagumo
DD Harusame, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
DD Yudachi
DD Sagiri

Allied Ships
PT TM-4
PT TM-5
PT TM-6, Shell hits 4, and is sunk
PT TM-7, Shell hits 4, and is sunk
PT TM-8, Shell hits 1, and is sunk
PT TM-9, Shell hits 33, and is sunk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Kragen at 22,63

Japanese Ships
CA Chokai
CL Naka
DD Natsugumo
DD Asagumo, Shell hits 1
DD Harusame, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
DD Yudachi
DD Sagiri

Allied Ships
PT TM-10
PT TM-11
PT TM-13
PT TM-14, Shell hits 6, and is sunk
PT TM-15

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Kragen at 22,63

Japanese Ships
CA Chokai
CL Naka
DD Natsugumo
DD Asagumo
DD Yudachi
DD Sagiri

Allied Ships
PT TM-4
PT TM-5, Shell hits 4, and is sunk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Kragen at 22,63

Japanese Ships
CA Chokai
CL Naka
DD Natsugumo, Shell hits 2
DD Asagumo
DD Yudachi
DD Sagiri

Allied Ships
PT TM-10
PT TM-11
PT TM-13
PT TM-15

Image
User avatar
pauk
Posts: 4156
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Zagreb,Croatia

RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is

Post by pauk »

ORIGINAL: Terminus

ORIGINAL: pauk

ORIGINAL: castor troy

... IS DUMB OR A FANBOY!

I'm dumbass!
[;)][:D]

You're a dumbass JFB...[:'(]

Great D. T. has spoken![&o]
Image
User avatar
tsimmonds
Posts: 5490
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2004 2:01 pm
Location: astride Mason and Dixon's Line

RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is

Post by tsimmonds »

A total of 808 PT boats had been built or contracted for by 1/1/45.

Of these 85 had been transferred to the RN, and 181 to the USSR, and 136 had not yet been delivered.

That leaves 406 available to the USN by 1/1/45. At this time, 71 boats had been stricken, leaving 335 in commission. The vast majority of these boats were in the Pacific, mainly assigned to 7th fleet (MacArthur's Navy).
Fear the kitten!
User avatar
m10bob
Posts: 8583
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2002 9:09 pm
Location: Dismal Seepage Indiana

RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is

Post by m10bob »

ORIGINAL: Terminus

ORIGINAL: pauk

ORIGINAL: castor troy

... IS DUMB OR A FANBOY!

I'm dumbass!
[;)][:D]

You're a dumbass JFB...[:'(]
[/quote


Terminus....ever the diplomat! [:D]
Image

User avatar
Terminus
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is

Post by Terminus »

You've heard of gunboat diplomacy... This is sledgehammer diplomacy; only kind Pauk understands...[;)]
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
User avatar
castor troy
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:17 am
Location: Austria

RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is

Post by castor troy »

Here´s the next engagement. This time the PTs were surprised and weren´t able to shoot back (range?). I´m NOT only realizing bad results. [:-]

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 11/17/42

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Baker Island at 94,92

Japanese Ships
CL Natori
DD Makigumo
DD Takanami
DD Yugure
DD Ariake
DD Asagiri

Allied Ships
PT PT-66
PT PT-68
PT PT-77, Shell hits 7, and is sunk
PT PT-81, Shell hits 20, and is sunk
PT PT-82
PT PT-84, Shell hits 14, and is sunk
User avatar
m10bob
Posts: 8583
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2002 9:09 pm
Location: Dismal Seepage Indiana

RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is

Post by m10bob »

ORIGINAL: castor troy

Here´s the next engagement. This time the PTs were surprised and weren´t able to shoot back (range?). I´m NOT only realizing bad results. [:-]

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 11/17/42

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Baker Island at 94,92

Japanese Ships
CL Natori
DD Makigumo
DD Takanami
DD Yugure
DD Ariake
DD Asagiri

Allied Ships
PT PT-66
PT PT-68
PT PT-77, Shell hits 7, and is sunk
PT PT-81, Shell hits 20, and is sunk
PT PT-82
PT PT-84, Shell hits 14, and is sunk

Very valid example of "the other side of the coin"..
ONE shell equals ONE PT boat..
One might consider it impossible for the larger ships to have this advantage at night, but PT 109 never saw *nor heard* that DD in the Blackett Straits, (which like the entire "slot" has noisy surf.)

The PT boat itself is not the offensive weapon that kills Japanese DD's, merely the vehicle which carries the PT boat torpedo.
If the PT's can get close enough to launch, it's not a matter of how many "shells" hit th DD, but how many torpedoes hit the DD..
The DD might take a hundred shells from a PT, and those MG slugs might scratch the paint, but ANY ship taking a torpedo has limited flotation value from then on.
One might begin to curse the local CD guns as to complain about the torpedoes!
Why do people not send their DD's to engage in a bombardment?
Because they know the DD's will take the most damage,(because with shallower gun range, they must get closer to the shore..
No thanks, I'll use my CA's and BB's and lob shells in, thank you..
(Contrary to some opinion, this is NOT being gamey, it just makes sense!)..
O/K., if the Japanese know the Solomon "slot" is patrolled by PT boats, one would not expect him to SACRIFICE his vulnerable and VERY IMPORTANT DD's cleaning out the "slot".
If he does, he takes the risk..
BTW, somebody wanted to know how many PT's actually made it to the Pacific rather than Atlantic"
Suggest "Two Ocean Navy" by Samuel Elliott Morrison............Excellent read..........[8D]
Image

User avatar
Demosthenes
Posts: 525
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 6:41 pm
Location: Los Angeles CA

RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is

Post by Demosthenes »

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

A total of 808 PT boats had been built or contracted for by 1/1/45.

Of these 85 had been transferred to the RN, and 181 to the USSR, and 136 had not yet been delivered.

That leaves 406 available to the USN by 1/1/45. At this time, 71 boats had been stricken, leaving 335 in commission. The vast majority of these boats were in the Pacific, mainly assigned to 7th fleet (MacArthur's Navy).

After reading both current PT Boat threads, it appears to me that a legitimate case for TOO MANY PT Boat losses can just as easily be made.

It looks to me that the emotion being vented lamenting PT Boats is nothing more than people just not liking ship losses.

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

RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is

Post by Feinder »

"Just the facts mam!" - Dragnet.

May brings another un-miraculous month for PTs. Poor little IJN PT got mixed up with the wrong invasion TF...




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Akyab at 30,29

Japanese Ships
CA Chokai, on fire
CA Mogami
CA Mikuma
CA Suzuya
CA Kumano
CA Aoba

Allied Ships
PT PT-36
PT PT-37
PT PT-38
PT PT-40



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF, near Suva at 86,114

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 20

No Japanese losses

Allied Ships
PT PT-30, Shell hits 12, Bomb hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
PT PT-29, Shell hits 8

Aircraft Attacking:
4 x A6M2 Zero attacking at 100 feet
4 x A6M2 Zero attacking at 100 feet
4 x A6M2 Zero attacking at 100 feet
4 x A6M2 Zero attacking at 100 feet
4 x A6M2 Zero attacking at 100 feet


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat at 94,95

Japanese Ships
PC Shimushu
PT Gyoraitei #1
MSW Choun Maru #21, Shell hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
MSW Hinode Maru #17
MSW Tasei Maru
PC Ch 3
PC Ch 7
PC Ch 8
AP Eihuku Maru, Shell hits 2
AP Koei Maru
AP Ryoyo Maru
AP Takuei Maru, Shell hits 6, on fire, heavy damage
AP Takunan Maru
AP Tsunushima Maru
AP Unkai Maru #6
AP Yoshinogawa Maru, Shell hits 2, on fire
AP Meikai Maru
AP Tamatsu Maru
AP Miyako Maru

Allied Ships
DD Electra, Shell hits 7, on fire (went down fighting!)

Japanese ground losses:
152 casualties reported
Guns lost 2



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat at 94,93

Japanese Ships
PC Shimushu
PT Gyoraitei #1, Shell hits 2, and is sunk
MSW Tasei Maru
PC Ch 3
PC Ch 7, Shell hits 8, and is sunk
PC Ch 8, Shell hits 4, on fire, heavy damage
AP Eihuku Maru, Shell hits 8, and is sunk
AP Koei Maru, Shell hits 1, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
AP Ryoyo Maru
AP Takuei Maru, on fire, heavy damage
AP Takunan Maru
AP Tsunushima Maru
AP Unkai Maru #6
AP Yoshinogawa Maru, Shell hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
AP Meikai Maru, Shell hits 4, on fire
AP Miyako Maru

Allied Ships
BC Repulse, Shell hits 1
CL Adelaide
DD Litchfield
DD Parrott

Japanese ground losses:
2699 casualties reported
Guns lost 10
"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me

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

RE: The problem about when folks complain about PTs is

Post by Feinder »

Only one combat in June.

Poor widdle guy...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Lunga at 67,97

Japanese Ships
PT Gyoraitei #6, Shell hits 4, and is sunk

Allied Ships
BB Colorado
DD Waters
DD Talbot
DMS Lamberton
DMS Perry
DMS Chandler
DMS Wasmuth
PG Charleston



.
.
.

As a post-note to that battle for the JFBs, LtFightr did send down the Atago and some friends a few days later. They put 3x torps into Colorado, she rolled over and sank in 18 minutes with great loss of life.

[:(]

Atago ate 3x 16" shells, but appearenly has made it back to Rabaul.

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

Image
Post Reply

Return to “War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945”