Page 4 of 5
RE: Med Wars! - Chuck vs Nik
Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 2:27 pm
by Speedysteve
ORIGINAL: pauk
ORIGINAL: Speedy
LOL[:D]
Desperatly seeking for an ally, eh?
Still, i must congrats on extraordinary draw against...errrr... cant recall whom?[:'(]
I don't need Allies.........all I need are enemies like you.
You mean our victory over Andorra
RE: Med Wars! - Chuck vs Nik
Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 2:30 pm
by Speedysteve
ORIGINAL: Terminus
ORIGINAL: Nikademus
ORIGINAL: Terminus
And you're very fat. Is this a State The Obvious contest?[:'(]
Bah...says the man who refuses to post his mug much less
his pudgy body. pffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
You're aware that this is a wargaming forum, right?[:'(]
Yeah. Come on. It's down right rude to slate other people - Nik and I when you don't have the cajones to show your own pic. Bwak bwak bwak[:'(]
RE: Med Wars! - Chuck vs Nik
Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 2:37 pm
by Nikademus
meanwhile....back in the Med.....gallant Italian forces continue to move southward....causing tense anxiety for sheppard's pie lovers everywhere.....
<cue scary music>
[:D]
RE: Med Wars! - Chuck vs Nik
Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 3:28 pm
by DuckofTindalos
Yeah, the theme from "Barney"...

RE: Med Wars! - Chuck vs Nik
Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 3:44 pm
by Nikademus
nope....maybe the theme from Empire strikes back however.....
RE: Med Wars! - Chuck vs Nik
Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 3:46 pm
by DuckofTindalos
I'd think the Barney theme would be scarier...
RE: Med Wars! - Chuck vs Nik
Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 4:21 pm
by ctangus
Yikes - I am scared if capture means listening to Barney! [X(]
RE: Med Wars! - Chuck vs Nik
Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 4:23 pm
by ctangus
ORIGINAL: Terminus
And you're very fat. Is this a State The Obvious contest?[:'(]
Nik's not fat. He's just steatopygous.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=2&q=steatopygia
RE: Med Wars! - Chuck vs Nik
Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 4:27 pm
by ctangus
Back to the game for a moment - I noticed that at least for the moment I have the range to rotate squadrons in and out of Malta from Egypt. Does anyone know if that was feasible IRL? I've of course read about carriers ferrying planes there.
RE: Med Wars! - Chuck vs Nik
Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 4:33 pm
by AmiralLaurent
ORIGINAL: ctangus
Back to the game for a moment - I noticed that at least for the moment I have the range to rotate squadrons in and out of Malta from Egypt. Does anyone know if that was feasible IRL? I've of course read about carriers ferrying planes there.
Hurricane and Spitfire had not the range to reach Egypt but may and did fly between Lybia and Malta. That was the reason why CVs were needed to launch them when Lybia was into Axis hands.
Other RAF AC (Beaufighter, Hudson, Wellington) had the range to fly from Malta to Egypt or Gibraltar. In fact Malta was a major stop on the airborne reinforcement path from England to Middle East and Far East (for example the Hudson of 53 Sqn were crossing Med via Malta in January 1942 and were flying to Burma/Malaya.... suffering 40% op losses on the way)
RE: Med Wars! - Chuck vs Nik
Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 4:47 pm
by ctangus
Thanks Amiral! [:)] I'm at work now but if I recall correctly I would have to fly the Spits & Hurricanes via Libya.
I might just be able to put up a prolonged defense of Malta afterall. Should be interesting.
RE: Med Wars! - Chuck vs Nik
Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 4:52 pm
by Nikademus
.

RE: Med Wars! - Chuck vs Nik
Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 4:58 pm
by ctangus
[:'(]

Blasting Barney
Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 7:41 pm
by Capt. Harlock
Oh -- well done, ctangus!
On a more serious note, should the Italians have enough fuel to sail four BB's and numerous other ships at once? I don't recall more than two RM BB's at sea at one time historically. Might be time to tune the beginning supply levels a bit . . .
RE: Blasting Barney
Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 7:43 pm
by Speedysteve
I agree Capt.
As has been mentioned before I think the abiity for the Axis to transfer large amounts of fuel and supply to NA should be restricted.
They didn't have the capacity to do so in the war.
RE: Blasting Barney
Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 10:57 pm
by ctangus
ORIGINAL: Capt. Harlock
Oh -- well done, ctangus!
Thanks Captain! [;)]
No turn from Nik - he must be scared of the valiant allied forces [:'(] - so I'll lay out some of my initial impressions.
First - fremen - I know others have said this already but great job! I can't imagine how much time went into it. And though I've only played two turns so far I'm already having fun with it - thanks!
Nik - we'll see how it plays out but without further tweaking I think you've made the airspace over Malta defensible. It's certainly not a sure thing but I think I have a chance. My concerns are how do I get supplies and airframes to the island. Kind of like IRL. I like it.
I'm also worried about how do I blunt the inevitable DAK drive - also like IRL. Difficult, but possibly doable. The more a scenario makes me think like the historic commanders, the better it is IMO.
A couple thoughts/suggestions:
Tobruk starts at fort level 2. I'm not exactly sure how such things should be rated but my initial thought is it should be fort level 4 or 5.
Perhaps some of the hexsides south of El Alamein should be made impassable, to represent the Qattara depression and force a DAK offensive through El Alamein.
RE: Blasting Barney
Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 11:09 pm
by ctangus
For fremen - Nothing game-breaking but I've noticed a few minor OOB errors -
Unit 103 - Allied Supreme CM HQ - has no objective set.
Unit 105 - Mediterranean CM Army - Objective is Singapore.
Unit 106 - Cyrenaica Command Army - Objective is Homan & it has no leader.
Unit 2393 - 9th Indian Brigade - the OOB rightly contains Indian squads but the initial TO&E has British squads.
Unit 2414 - Benghaisa Fortress CD - has no leader
Also another suggestion:
Units 2416, 2428 & 2429 - Alexandria, Port Said & Haifa CD units. Should these be made static? You could add static "fortification" devices like CHS has.
RE: Blasting Barney
Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 7:33 am
by kokubokan25
Unit 103 - Allied Supreme CM HQ - has no objective set.
Unit 105 - Mediterranean CM Army - Objective is Singapore.
Unit 106 - Cyrenaica Command Army - Objective is Homan & it has no leader.
Unit 2393 - 9th Indian Brigade - the OOB rightly contains Indian squads but the initial TO&E has British squads.
Unit 2414 - Benghaisa Fortress CD - has no leader
The mod had no leaders (axis) and use the japanese or allied. I use the "Random" leader in most cases.
I not set objectives, imagine those objectives are the original from WITP. I think in PBEM game the objectives had no importance in all.
The question of the TOEs was mentioned earlier. The WITM Team is working in this issue now. Be ready in the next patch.
Units 2416, 2428 & 2429 - Alexandria, Port Said & Haifa CD units. Should these be made static? You could add static "fortification" devices like CHS has.
AFIIK, those units are static now because all of them are CD Units with big guns.
RE: Blasting Barney
Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 12:41 pm
by Nikademus
No turn????
bah....sent it just before heading off to the Wine Bar and some Swing music with the GF unit yesterday afternoon. Nothing much to report. Malta is burning, and a pathetic British bomb bounced off the mighty Littorio. ha ha ha.
-Supreme Commander Barney
PS.....I luv U......U luv me. We're a happy fam-il-y......
RE: Blasting Barney
Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 12:46 pm
by DuckofTindalos