Rookie II - Saving MacArthur - against opponent no. 5

[Buckrock]

Thanks. I asked only because I just wanted to confirm the point in this AAR after which the serious player vs player action would be present.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: Leandros

ORIGINAL: witpqsA few years ago I aided another forum member and amateur historian who felt the same way about the USN unreliable torpedo parameters and set out to research the issue. My aid was a little software help with conversion and compilation. What he did was go through the war patrol records for all the USN subs in the Pacific and compile attacks, hits, targets, targets sunk, and so on to gain an idea of the numbers involved in malfunctions. He put tons of work into the project.

At the end, as I recall, the forum either did not hear about it or heard very little about it. Why? Because (as I recall) his research confirmed they had the numbers pretty much right.

In real life the torpedo issues were much more complicated than the game treats them as there were a number of malfunctioning features and the game simply gives two dates were the dud rate is reduced. That means any comparison with history will show differences with the game, but taken in the big lumps the game presents for the dud rate, the game is pretty accurate. Quite impressive, IMO.

To repeat myself, the purpose is not to test if "reliable" torpedoes would have changed history. Please see my previous posting.

I insisted on "reliable" torpedoes because my experience with the game so far is that this "unreliability" is exaggerated in the
game - just my opinion. "Reliable" torpedoes shall also to some degree (hopefully) mirror the more aggressive attitude of both
the US leadership and how this was conveyed to its boat commanders. To that purpose commanders have also been "topped" to some
deggree.

However.....on the afternoon of December 15th, in spite of aggressive positioning and numerous targets and contacts, allied
submarines have only sunk two enemy ships, one by a Dutch submarine, which were supposed to have reliable torpedoes as well
as able crews. Japanese boats have sunk thirteen allied ships, 64 allied ships in total till now. So, even with "reliable"
torpedoes it seems the game is playing tricks.

On the other hand, Japanese sub-chasers and sub-hunting destroyers live a charmed life as well as achieve good results against
allied submarines, several have been sunk.

Reliable torpedoes are certainly not changing this history, so far, anyway, but you are free to have your own opinion on this.
I have a war to fight so I won't use more time on this part of the game....[;)]

Fred

You have misunderstood my point. You expressed doubt about the unreliable torpedo setting, suspecting that it is *too* unreliable. My point is that a forum members research into original sources indicates it is pretty close to the mark.

Can't say if or why the game is playing tricks. [8D]

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: Leandros

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

6. I noted your use of submarines in coastal port hexes several times in our short game. This is a very risky disposition
for your submarines. If spotted, with enemy ASW in the hex, they are at risk of being lost. Coastal hexes are also at
greater risk from defensive minefields. Since you cite the unencumbered ability of your opponent's ASW, how have your
'several' Allied submarines been lost? Could it be that you exposed them to destruction in an ahistoric and injudicious
manner? I think that's more likely than 'the game is borked'.

Thank you for excellent advice - but taking them literally would be "ahistoric" - would it not? I mean, the allies were the
amateurs. There are limits, though...[;)]...

Please, guys, file your opinions to your heart's content but do not expect me to use much time on replying. I have set the
parameters and I only hope my opponent shall uphold his patience, which has been excellent so far, to see this experiment
through. It is quite time-demanding. And it's my wife's birthday today... [:)]

Fred

Your wife's birthday! So, does this mean you have to let her play a turn at the game? [:D]
What will you do if she does better than you? [:)]

[Leandros]

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Your wife's birthday! So, does this mean you have to let her play a turn at the game? [:D]
What will you do if she does better than you? [:)]

That shouldn't take much...[&:]

Fred

[Leandros]

ORIGINAL: Buckrock

Thanks. I asked only because I just wanted to confirm the point in this AAR after which the serious player vs player action would be present.

No problem!

Fred

[Leandros]

This better for you, Buckrock - I have upped the fonts a little?

Fred

[Bif1961]

Lose lips sink ships the world now wonders where the KGV has gone and with whom?

[Buckrock]

ORIGINAL: Leandros

This better for you, Buckrock - I have upped the fonts a little?

Fred

Much easier to read. Thanks.

[Leandros]

Brisbane Evening Star December 20th, 1941

[BBfanboy]

Heh, 140 ton PT Boats! Some FOW or "BS of Press" happening here- my PT boats are 35 tons in game. [;)]

Interesting overall picture. Still waiting for the first significant black eye for the Japanese.

[Leandros]

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
Heh, 140 ton PT Boats! Some FOW or "BS of Press" happening here- my PT boats are 35 tons in game. [;)]

You know - reporters...[&:]..maybe they're German S-boote..?

Fred

[Leandros]

Here is what I consider a very interesting link. Navigating through time and pages can be a little awkward but what impresses
me is the speed and accuracy of much of the presented information. It (the immediate news), for a large part, conforms with
what happened historically.

https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/arti ... 04/1107186#

Fred

[Leandros]

Brisbane Evening Star December 24, 1941

[BBfanboy]

First fighter ace? Surely the Australian pilots in the Battle of Britain and the desert war produced some aces?

[Leandros]

December 29th 1941

[Macclan5]

Following .....

Interested as well.

@ Leandros:

Good Luck.

In a sense Leandros you are going to handicap yourself with a public AAR [:D]

I think I can safely suggest most of the forumites here are (1) well read in the subject (2) with opinions of course and (3) generally more than amateur historians although that is the only title I will lay claim to...


@ Chickenboy:

Indeed the power of the game is the multiple purposes, playstyles, and aggressiveness it can adopt and satisfy.

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: Macclan5

Following .....

Interested as well.

@ Leandros:

Good Luck.

In a sense Leandros you are going to handicap yourself with a public AAR [:D]

I think I can safely suggest most of the forumites here are (1) well read in the subject (2) with opinions of course and (3) generally more than amateur historians although that is the only title I will lay claim to...


@ Chickenboy:

Indeed the power of the game is the multiple purposes, playstyles, and aggressiveness it can adopt and satisfy.

Hi Macclan5,

Thanks for the note. Just on the off chance that you were operating under a dated assumption, I'll remind you that I'm no longer involved in this game. I believe Dili has picked it up from the Japanese side of things.

Cheers.

[Leandros]

ORIGINAL: Macclan5

Following .....

Interested as well.

@ Leandros:

Good Luck.

In a sense Leandros you are going to handicap yourself with a public AAR [:D]

Hmm...thank you..that depends....[;)]..

Fred

[Leandros]

Brisbane evening Star January 3rd 1942

[BBfanboy]

Given the emphasis on carrying out a determined defense in the Pacific, has the "No Unit Withdrawals" switch been set to "ON"? It would not make sense to withdraw ships and units if Germany is not the priority.