The problem about when folks complain about PTs is

[Feinder]

Always glad to be a service to this community Rainerle. Anything to promote peace, love, and cuddling between the JFB and AFB communities.



-F-

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Some people just can't get through the day without a good whiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiine...[8|]

Well, some people can´t get through the day without a good spaaaaaaaaaaaaam...[8|]

[Terminus]

ORIGINAL: castor troy

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Oooooh, what overpowered PT-boats...

Wow!!! [X(] That helps... [8|]

Are you "helping"? Raising the same "issue" over and over and over and over again? Whining about the same thing again and again?

That's all you and those like you do. Just play the game or don't. Give it a REST already.

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: Knavey

And of course...I haven't heard anyone argue that the IJN is bombarding too many AFs which tends to bring the PTs to the defense since they are a good counter to the bombardment groups.  If the IJN player bombarded at a historical rate, perhaps they would not encounter so many USN PTs.

Just a thought.

Whenever I read such a statement then I think on my dozens of Allied BBs that are doing bombardments all over the map even more (because of their number) then I do with Japanese BBs in the first year... [8|]

And for those who complain about the IJN doing it I wonder if they ever played further then 1942 and IF THEY THEN RESTRICT THEMSELFES TO NOT USING THEIR 50 ALLIED BBS TO BOMBARD OR ONLY ONE BOMBARDMENT PER BB??? [:-]

[tsimmonds]

ORIGINAL: Knavey

And of course...I haven't heard anyone argue that the IJN is bombarding too many AFs which tends to bring the PTs to the defense since they are a good counter to the bombardment groups.  If the IJN player bombarded at a historical rate, perhaps they would not encounter so many USN PTs.

Just a thought.

Exactly. What looks to some like overpowered PTs is just PTs doing their job in response to enemy actions....

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

ORIGINAL: castor troy

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Oooooh, what overpowered PT-boats...

Wow!!! [X(] That helps... [8|]

Are you "helping"? Raising the same "issue" over and over and over and over again? Whining about the same thing again and again?

That's all you and those like you do. Just play the game or don't. Give it a REST already.

I´m raising an "issue" over and over and over again and you´re spamming and giving strange comments over and over again. That´s the only thing someone can expect from your side...

Glade that you are unique and there aren´t more of those...

[tsimmonds]

Whenever I read such a statement then I think on my dozens of Allied BBs that are doing bombardments all over the map even more (because of their number) then I do with Japanese BBs in the first year...

When is this taking place? If it is post mid-1943, it is entirely historical. If it is before then, the IJ player is missing something.

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

Whenever I read such a statement then I think on my dozens of Allied BBs that are doing bombardments all over the map even more (because of their number) then I do with Japanese BBs in the first year...

When is this taking place? If it is post mid-1943, it is entirely historical. If it is before then, the IJ player is missing something.

Sure, 200+ (even more, let me think...) bombardments of BBs are perfectly historical. You don´t want to tell me that, do you?

[afspret]

Has anybody looked at what the loss rates were during the real war? I'll bet you'll find almost similar numbers. Remember, no USN boats made out of the PI, they didn't sweep the seas clean in the Solomons, and IIRC, none of the newer heavily armed boats deployed in the Surigao Straits in '44 did any real damage.

[tsimmonds]

ORIGINAL: castor troy

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

Whenever I read such a statement then I think on my dozens of Allied BBs that are doing bombardments all over the map even more (because of their number) then I do with Japanese BBs in the first year...

When is this taking place? If it is post mid-1943, it is entirely historical. If it is before then, the IJ player is missing something.

Sure, 200+ (even more, let me think...) bombardments of BBs are perfectly historical. You don´t want to tell me that, do you?

Depends what you are calling a bombardment. There were probably at least 200 days worth of allied naval bombardments in the Pacific during the war. That most of them were in support of landings does not change the fact that they took place. If you aren't using your bombardments to cover landings, that's not my fault.[;)]

[spence]

none of the newer heavily armed boats deployed in the Surigao Straits in '44 did any real damage

 
At least 30 men manning #1 Fireroom on HIJMS Abukuma would disagree; except that they died when a PT torpedo hit their ship.
 
[And not to rub salt in anybody's old wounds but Abukuma was later hit multiple times by 4E bombers which started fires which, ultimately reached her torpedos, exploding them and finishing off the ship.  (That makes around 7-8 IJN cruisers that died from wounds inflicted by their own torpedos - the USN's decision to remove torpedos from their cruisers doesn't look so faulty in light of the damage done to their IJN counterparts by their own onboard torpedos).]

[Charbroiled]

This thread is a very interesting read, but the first thing that comes to my mind is that this game is not 100% historic and never will be....but it is a fun game.

As with all games , a person needs to find a tactic that will work for individual situations. If I take 4 DDs to a base that has 6 PTs, in this game, then I would figure that I just lost 4 DDs.....but if I take 2 BBs, a couple of CAs, maybe a few CLs thrown in with DD escorts, chances are the PTs will become fish habitat and my SF will be unharmed. Is it historic that I had to use a SF in this manor in order to elliminate a few PTS? Probably not, but it works....and it helps me keep my blood pressure from boiling over.

Sometimes I wonder that if the battle of Midway had never happened IRL, how much discussion would there be on this forum on the realism of 3 allied CVs being able to sink 4 Japanese CV in June of 42.

[pauk]

ORIGINAL: castor troy

Whenever I read such a statement then I think on my dozens of Allied BBs that are doing bombardments all over the map even more (because of their number) then I do with Japanese BBs in the first year... [8|]

And for those who complain about the IJN doing it I wonder if they ever played further then 1942 and IF THEY THEN RESTRICT THEMSELFES TO NOT USING THEIR 50 ALLIED BBS TO BOMBARD OR ONLY ONE BOMBARDMENT PER BB??? [:-]

Look Castor, you still don't get it? There is a UAFB (ultimate AFB) bunch of guys here (fortunatly there is a numerous but mostly silent Allied players community) and every debate with UAFB is pointless.

Please, let me explain their behaviour:

1. when someone posted a well documented issue the their first step is negating:

No way, this is not a happening. Why don't you post details? (of course you've posted details but they are ignoring the facts...

if this is not working, then they start:

2. talking about isolate (1%) cases. To prove that, they are start to post examples from their games, while ignoring your data: IMPORTANT NOTE: you MUST accept their examples as the completely truth. Your data worths nothing

Then they just sit and wait knowing that other UAFB will joins the disscusion.

2. Then we can witness a mutual back slapping : oh how smart you are, how good are your arguments.. In addition they offers "historical arguments".

3. Please do not get pissed off when your's "historical arguments" are ignored. What this have with a truth? Even if you still arent convinced it is still not the end:

4.next step: all you have to do is mention is "uber japanese weapons" and you gone off topic but it serves to your purpose. BBs on the bombardment runs, uber powered japanese LBA etc...IMPORTANT NOTE: you are not allowed to argue that same goes for the Allied side...are you nuts?. You can even try late war campaign just to find arguments how much Japan is overpowered - 50 exp pilots can kill one or two Superforts etc...???? IMPORTANT NOTE: do not ever, NEVER ask the question how many games past historical date if Japan is so overpowered. Are you nuts?

Finally, they start to puts words in your mouths, which you didn't say - everEXAMPLE: we are talking about PTs and clearly state more than once it wasnt bombardment TFs. Their responds always ended with "what did you expect that you can bombard my bases in the late 43 without punishment"?


Finally you really should be discouraged an walk away (i have witnessed that quite a lot reasonable players gave up and deosn't allow to themselves to be get involved in pointless "disscusion" anymore)... UAFB continues with drunken party...

I guess these guys are just want to win but they don't know how - so they needs/deserves all help they can get....

God, i wish that someone makes a movie about this... it would be a hell funny movie[:D]... just imagine...[:D]

[Feinder]

"The lady doth protest too much, methinks. "
- William "Billy" Shakespeare.

[pauk]

why do you feel offended? Ah... the truth hurts.....

[Big B]

ORIGINAL: pauk

why do you feel offended? Ah... the truth hurts.....

"Always with the negative waves...."

Pauk - don't be grumpy! [:)]

[RUPD3658]

ORIGINAL: KDonovan

i'll chime in with my results from my PBEM game...now in May 1943

63 PT - sunk

for

2 Jap DD - sunk
2-4 Jap DD - damaged

seems fair to me (btw not one of my PT's were sunk by aerial strafing...all surface engagements)

Actually you have sunk 4 DDs and 3 more will likely sink. All of these were lost recently after encountering massed PTs and some were finished off by AC after being damaged by the PTs.

I lost 5 of the 6 Jap PTs for nothing in return vs a bombardment TF at Wake.

PTs are annoying but far from a mennace.

[bradfordkay]

"2. talking about isolate (1%) cases. To prove that, they are start to post examples from their games, while ignoring your data: IMPORTANT NOTE: you MUST accept their examples as the completely truth. Your data worths nothing"

So, in your world I guess that their data is worth nothing as well?

Feinder posted a series of reports, comprising the whole of a recent game - and that information is absolutely worthless in your eyes? It looks like a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

To me, I see this as another example that the game can have some exaggerated results as well as results that are right on target. Must the game designers castrate every combat routine because some players experience a few of the exaggerated examples and get their panties in a wad?

[pauk]

Greetings Brad,

Every time when i post my experience, i'm being accused of exaggerating. My datas worths nothing for that person - he just ignoring my statistics and expect that his data will be accepted as a truth and nothing but the truth. (sorry guys, but i'm not "Yes massa kind of person")

So, why i would trust the person who clearly state he doesn't care for other's opinion? To answer to your original question, yes i decide not to belive his data. Because I'f i'm the one who exaggerating, then he is exaggerating too...

I won't explain once again, i belive i was quite clear and informative in my analysis. It is up to you to choose if you will trust me or not. But i think i know what you will choose.

If someone doesn't believe that PTs are overpowered, ok it is his opinion. But do not expect that i should be convinced i'm wrong just because someone told me so....

[Speedysteve]

ORIGINAL: pauk
It is up to you to choose if you will trust me or not. But i think i know what you will choose.

Pffft....too right[:'(]