Crash&Burn: Timtom's view of history: Scn.5, toraq VS timtom

[anarchyintheuk]

Scattershooting:

I always wished that there was some sort of free deployment for this scenario absent using the editor.

Just my personal preferences, but I have (a):

no problem w/ >70% CAP.
no problem w/ transferring carrier air to land bases.
problem w/ Corsairs on carriers.
problem w/ massed night bombing.

Forgot to add that the combat results are a pain to read but they do give you a good idea of the correlation of forces in particular areas.

problem w/ decoy task forces, altho I blame the lack of a truly discerning targeting system more.

Excellent AARs, great job of explaining your plans. It's always more interesting to read the whys than the whats. I look forward to the next one.

[timtom]

When I myself read AAR's, I must admit that I skip through 90%-odd of the combat reports. I don't think they make for a great read, but as you say, hold important information about what's actually going on. Maybe because I've had a bit of extra time on my hands lately, I have been able to to some editing of the combat report. I've tried a compromise, by cutting out no-casualty incidents and amalgamating as many entrys as possible. This obviously somewhat misrepresent whats going on, but makes the remaining entries easier to take in. Would it be better to dispense with the report altogether, making my own report of important events - such-and-such a ship sunk or damaged here or there and how and why etc?