Matrix Games Forums

Notice that the two torpedo tubes and all but one turret have been destroyed...

This CA participated to two battles duirng the night
CA Haguro, Shell hits 4, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
CA Haguro, Shell hits 4, on fire, heavy damage

And was then attacked twice during the day by LBA, having only been able to sail one hex

CA Haguro, Shell hits 92, Bomb hits 24, on fire, heavy damage
CA Haguro, Shell hits 104, Bomb hits 6, on fire, heavy damage

But she survived long enough to be scuttled in the evening

Hey;

The float plane is still there too!

Barkhorn.

dam

tough little ship.........

ORIGINAL: AmiralLaurent



Notice that the two torpedo tubes and all but one turret have been destroyed...

This CA participated to two battles duirng the night
CA Haguro, Shell hits 4, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
CA Haguro, Shell hits 4, on fire, heavy damage

And was then attacked twice during the day by LBA, having only been able to sail one hex

CA Haguro, Shell hits 92, Bomb hits 24, on fire, heavy damage
CA Haguro, Shell hits 104, Bomb hits 6, on fire, heavy damage

But she survived long enough to be scuttled in the evening

Ouch, your luckly she survived long enough for the crew to remove the Emperors Portrait in the morning. What she run into? Australia or Leander cus the Yank can't hit shit with torps!

The CA Shropshire wrecked her during the night with 2 torpedoes and severals 8in shells. Then Beaufighters, SBD, B-25J and P-39D attacked during the day

We Yanks don't need no damn torps. We can shoot better than anyone out there.

ORIGINAL: AmiralLaurent

The CA Shropshire wrecked her during the night with 2 torpedoes and severals 8in shells. Then Beaufighters, SBD, B-25J and P-39D attacked during the day

HA HA! Knew it! RN Rules the waves![:D]

It's RAN here to be precise. I haven't see the Victorious yet in theater. First time I have ever seen Shorpshire in surface battle and she was quite efficient.

Ad for American markmanship, well, in 1943 they will hit with shells between 3 and 5 more times than IJN with equal TF. So the base of my startegy is to never engage the USN on equal terms. When a DD fires on a CA, I don't care that the DD hits 25 times and gets hits only 4. The CA won't be damaged while the DD will be.

ORIGINAL: AmiralLaurent

It's RAN here to be precise. I haven't see the Victorious yet in theater. First time I have ever seen Shorpshire in surface battle and she was quite efficient.

Ad for American markmanship, well, in 1943 they will hit with shells between 3 and 5 more times than IJN with equal TF. So the base of my startegy is to never engage the USN on equal terms. When a DD fires on a CA, I don't care that the DD hits 25 times and gets hits only 4. The CA won't be damaged while the DD will be.

I know! British built and RN trained crew so as dam near as you can get!

In the beginning Aus and Nz crewed ships are better as they are more experienced, the US crews do catch up later thought, but they just arn't as good with their torps in the game.

ORIGINAL: grraven2004

We Yanks don't need no damn torps. We can shoot better than anyone out there.

HOOOAHH!

DAMN straight

and we didnt need r butts to be saved from germany AGAIN [:D]

DON'T start that!
[:-]

That is an arguement that will get very nasty very quickly!

ya

we know

truth hurts [:D]

hahahahahahahahahahahahaaahaaaahaaaa

and technically germany didnt start the war

all they did was invade poland

BRITAIN and FRANCE declared war on GERMANY, NOT the other way around[8|]


(note - this matrix hero is NOT a nazi supporter, never has been, never will be)

im just stating the facts........

ORIGINAL: neuromancer

DON'T start that!
[:-]

That is an arguement that will get very nasty very quickly!

o we see

u can dish it out but ya cant TAKE IT

[:D]


u can insult the mighty USN

but u cant take a little history lesson

ORIGINAL: marky

ORIGINAL: grraven2004

We Yanks don't need no damn torps. We can shoot better than anyone out there.

HOOOAHH!

DAMN straight

and we didnt need r butts to be saved from germany AGAIN [:D]

We certainly didn't need your help the first time around!

u certainluy did

the uboats were killing ur convoys

I had not dissed the USN. In fact I hadn't said anything at all on this topic.

And if anyone needs a history lesson, it is anyone that thinks the United States 'saved' Europe.

ORIGINAL: marky

u certainluy did

the uboats were killing ur convoys

And the USN did what about that?

By 1942 when the United States actually started to contribute to WW2 - instead of just profiting from it - the Battle of the Atlantic had already been decided. It wasn't over certainly, but it was decided. It was only a matter of time.


The Battle of Britain was decided in 1940, a year and a half before the US became involved. It can be argued that there never had been a realistic chance of Sealion being pulled off, but with the failure of the German air campiagn over Britain, it was guarenteed to never happen.

The bomber campaigns of the USAAF and RAF - while impressive - had been established after the war to have a minimal effect on the war. This was established by the USAAF itself.
The real difference was made by the RN and (later) the Russians to strangle supplies of raw materials coming into Germany - oil and steel for example.

By 1944 when Overlord was launched, Germany's defeat was already assured. The Russians alrready had the Germans in full retreat. Britain, the US, and Canada could have simply left it all to the Russians, but that was not a good idea, not at all. But beleive me, we didn't do it for the benefit of the Europeans, don't kid yourself, we did it to keep the Soviet Union as far back as possible, and delay WW3.

The American contribution to the war sped up the resolution to be sure, and helped keep the Soviets from completely dominating Europe, but it was not a deciding factor.

Many would argue it was a team effort, which is much more accurate.



Now, the Americans did handle the Japanese quite ably, and that was a vast majority US effort. In fact, as too many Australian and New Zealand troops were running around North Africa, the Coral Sea campaign covered in Uncommon Valor was necessary to prevent Japan invading Australia and New Zealand.



I told you not to start this.

But oh no, you have to shoot off your mouth and diss everyone else with your Hollywood fed Yankee egocentricity.

ORIGINAL: neuromancer

I had not dissed the USN. In fact I hadn't said anything at all on this topic.

And if anyone needs a history lesson, it is anyone that thinks the United States 'saved' Europe.

ORIGINAL: marky

u certainluy did

the uboats were killing ur convoys

And the USN did what about that?

By 1942 when the United States actually started to contribute to WW2 - instead of just profiting from it - the Battle of the Atlantic had already been decided. It wasn't over certainly, but it was decided. It was only a matter of time.


The Battle of Britain was decided in 1940, a year and a half before the US became involved. It can be argued that there never had been a realistic chance of Sealion being pulled off, but with the failure of the German air campiagn over Britain, it was guarenteed to never happen.

The bomber campaigns of the USAAF and RAF - while impressive - had been established after the war to have a minimal effect on the war. This was established by the USAAF itself.
The real difference was made by the RN and (later) the Russians to strangle supplies of raw materials coming into Germany - oil and steel for example.

By 1944 when Overlord was launched, Germany's defeat was already assured. The Russians alrready had the Germans in full retreat. Britain, the US, and Canada could have simply left it all to the Russians, but that was not a good idea, not at all. But beleive me, we didn't do it for the benefit of the Europeans, don't kid yourself, we did it to keep the Soviet Union as far back as possible, and delay WW3.

The American contribution to the war sped up the resolution to be sure, and helped keep the Soviets from completely dominating Europe, but it was not a deciding factor.

Many would argue it was a team effort, which is much more accurate.



Now, the Americans did handle the Japanese quite ably, and that was a vast majority US effort. In fact, as too many Australian and New Zealand troops were running around North Africa, the Coral Sea campaign covered in Uncommon Valor was necessary to prevent Japan invading Australia and New Zealand.



I told you not to start this.

But oh no, you have to shoot off your mouth and diss everyone else with your Hollywood fed Yankee egocentricity.

i know u didnt diss the USN

others did

the US DID save Europe

just cuz britain beat hitler in the battle of britain doesnt mean they would have won the war by themselves

and britain would not have beat germany in the battle of britain if the luftwaffe had free reign, and a better commander

the RAF was this close _ to collapse, wen the pressure was IDIOTICALLY taken opff the RAF, by switching targets from the airfields to the cities


and we had been contributing in the battle of the atlantic for sum time

in fact we lost 2 usn destroyers and over 150 men wile we were NEUTRAL

and we didnt contribute cuz we didnt want to get involved with another idiotic european war

a post world war 1 poster said it best =

europe - we cant afford to pay our war debts!

USA - well, at least u can agree on SOMETHING

and yes we were profiting sumwat, cuz we needed to get wat was left of r industry in gear to save UR BUTTS

the battle of atlantic was decided in MAY OF 43 NOT in 42

britain would have been starved if we hadnt come into it

alot of times britain was down to about 2 WEEKS worth of food and fuel

and there HAD BEEN a realistic chance of pulling off sea lion, if hitler and the luftwaffe hadnt screwed up so badly

and britain certainly wouldve fallen if that IDIOT hadnt invaded russia

he knew the lessons from napoleon and others but said -

o no it wont happen to us, we are supermen!

then they went into russia, won a few great victories

but then WINTER came

they had no winter clothes and their supply lines got cut off

game over for that great plan

just liek the japanese, the germans had the VICTORY disease

and the air raids DID have a decent effect on germany

killing rail lines
bridges
communications
air defenses

which paved the way for d day

and no, my friend

the outcome of the war became certain on december 7th 1941, and 3 days later wen hitler stupidly declared war on america

u want proof u say?

http://www.combinedfleet.com

it only makes references to japan and their defeat, but the same holds true for germany

the fate of the world, and the axis, was sealed on december 7th

their fate?

DEFEAT



and yes, we did want to keep russia out of europe

BUT

without the arsenal of democracy - AMERICA

britain would have fallen

and possibly russia 2

they would have had all those resources, the med wouldve been an axis lake

they wouldnt have the springboard of britain to launch overlord

and germany and itlay would have had a HELL of a decent stockpile of resources

the american intervention WAS the deciding factor in the defeat of the axis

uboats were sinking british ships 4 TIMES faster than they could be replaced

if we hadnt come into the war, by 44 britan would have HAD to surrender

why?

UBOATS

and i dont think it was a team effort

take for example the siciliy campaign

the great patton had to support montys advance and stay BY him, so monty could take messina and ALL the credit

he also took a GREAT deal of credit for north africa

make NO mistake

if monty hadnt had the advantage of supplys, greater numbers, ULTRA
AND being on the defensive, rommel wouldve zapped his little tail

that is why monty was NOT named supreme commander, cuz he was too in love with his own self image

and u can bet ur butt that monty didnt give a $%^ about his troops


and yes we handled the japs quite well thank u

of course we had help from the great and noble australians and new zealanders who fought VERY WELL




and this smart mouth comment is JUST ARROGANT =

I told you not to start this.

But oh no, you have to shoot off your mouth and diss everyone else with your Hollywood fed Yankee egocentricity.


it is not hollywood fed, and it is NOT ego

it is HISTORICAL FACT!


[:-][:-]

ORIGINAL: marky

ORIGINAL: neuromancer

I had not dissed the USN. In fact I hadn't said anything at all on this topic.

And if anyone needs a history lesson, it is anyone that thinks the United States 'saved' Europe.

ORIGINAL: marky

u certainluy did

the uboats were killing ur convoys

And the USN did what about that?

By 1942 when the United States actually started to contribute to WW2 - instead of just profiting from it - the Battle of the Atlantic had already been decided. It wasn't over certainly, but it was decided. It was only a matter of time.


The Battle of Britain was decided in 1940, a year and a half before the US became involved. It can be argued that there never had been a realistic chance of Sealion being pulled off, but with the failure of the German air campiagn over Britain, it was guarenteed to never happen.

The bomber campaigns of the USAAF and RAF - while impressive - had been established after the war to have a minimal effect on the war. This was established by the USAAF itself.
The real difference was made by the RN and (later) the Russians to strangle supplies of raw materials coming into Germany - oil and steel for example.

By 1944 when Overlord was launched, Germany's defeat was already assured. The Russians alrready had the Germans in full retreat. Britain, the US, and Canada could have simply left it all to the Russians, but that was not a good idea, not at all. But beleive me, we didn't do it for the benefit of the Europeans, don't kid yourself, we did it to keep the Soviet Union as far back as possible, and delay WW3.

The American contribution to the war sped up the resolution to be sure, and helped keep the Soviets from completely dominating Europe, but it was not a deciding factor.

Many would argue it was a team effort, which is much more accurate.



Now, the Americans did handle the Japanese quite ably, and that was a vast majority US effort. In fact, as too many Australian and New Zealand troops were running around North Africa, the Coral Sea campaign covered in Uncommon Valor was necessary to prevent Japan invading Australia and New Zealand.



I told you not to start this.

But oh no, you have to shoot off your mouth and diss everyone else with your Hollywood fed Yankee egocentricity.

i know u didnt diss the USN

others did

the US DID save Europe

just cuz britain beat hitler in the battle of britain doesnt mean they would have won the war by themselves

and britain would not have beat germany in the battle of britain if the luftwaffe had free reign, and a better commander

the RAF was this close _ to collapse, wen the pressure was IDIOTICALLY taken opff the RAF, by switching targets from the airfields to the cities


and we had been contributing in the battle of the atlantic for sum time

in fact we lost 2 usn destroyers and over 150 men wile we were NEUTRAL

and we didnt contribute cuz we didnt want to get involved with another idiotic european war

a post world war 1 poster said it best =

europe - we cant afford to pay our war debts!

USA - well, at least u can agree on SOMETHING

and yes we were profiting sumwat, cuz we needed to get wat was left of r industry in gear to save UR BUTTS

the battle of atlantic was decided in MAY OF 43 NOT in 42

britain would have been starved if we hadnt come into it

alot of times britain was down to about 2 WEEKS worth of food and fuel

and there HAD BEEN a realistic chance of pulling off sea lion, if hitler and the luftwaffe hadnt screwed up so badly

and britain certainly wouldve fallen if that IDIOT hadnt invaded russia

he knew the lessons from napoleon and others but said -

o no it wont happen to us, we are supermen!

then they went into russia, won a few great victories

but then WINTER came

they had no winter clothes and their supply lines got cut off

game over for that great plan

just liek the japanese, the germans had the VICTORY disease

and the air raids DID have a decent effect on germany

killing rail lines
bridges
communications
air defenses

which paved the way for d day

and no, my friend

the outcome of the war became certain on december 7th 1941, and 3 days later wen hitler stupidly declared war on america

u want proof u say?

http://www.combinedfleet.com

it only makes references to japan and their defeat, but the same holds true for germany

the fate of the world, and the axis, was sealed on december 7th

their fate?

DEFEAT



and yes, we did want to keep russia out of europe

BUT

without the arsenal of democracy - AMERICA

britain would have fallen

and possibly russia 2

they would have had all those resources, the med wouldve been an axis lake

they wouldnt have the springboard of britain to launch overlord

and germany and itlay would have had a HELL of a decent stockpile of resources

the american intervention WAS the deciding factor in the defeat of the axis

uboats were sinking british ships 4 TIMES faster than they could be replaced

if we hadnt come into the war, by 44 britan would have HAD to surrender

why?

UBOATS

and i dont think it was a team effort

take for example the siciliy campaign

the great patton had to support montys advance and stay BY him, so monty could take messina and ALL the credit

he also took a GREAT deal of credit for north africa

make NO mistake

if monty hadnt had the advantage of supplys, greater numbers, ULTRA
AND being on the defensive, rommel wouldve zapped his little tail

that is why monty was NOT named supreme commander, cuz he was too in love with his own self image

and u can bet ur butt that monty didnt give a $%^ about his troops


and yes we handled the japs quite well thank u

of course we had help from the great and noble australians and new zealanders who fought VERY WELL




and this smart mouth comment is JUST ARROGANT =

I told you not to start this.

But oh no, you have to shoot off your mouth and diss everyone else with your Hollywood fed Yankee egocentricity.


it is not hollywood fed, and it is NOT ego

it is HISTORICAL FACT!


[:-][:-]

Hate to dis-agree with you there but Russia had already defeated Germany it was just a matter of time, Allied offences in Italy and France helped but by the time D-Day kicked off Germany was loosing in the East and there was nothing the German could do about it and yes lend lease helped massively but in the End Russia would have tipped the balance of forces againt the Germans.

Britain was week enough to be invaded by Germany for a while after Dunkirk but Germany could not have forced an invasion across the channel there navy was not large enough to clear the channel of RN naval forces. The U-boats might has stopped the Uk from taking offencive action but we would not have surrendered. By 44 we had more asw ships and aircraft and we were actively hunting and killing U-boats in great numbers.

Team work wone the war not one nation alone, The US economic power help to win the war but US could not and did not win it alone.

"that is why monty was NOT named supreme commander, cuz he was too in love with his own self image ( and patton wasn't!!!)

and u can bet ur butt that monty didnt give a $%^ about his troops" And thats complete bollocks.

Can we UN-hijack Mr.Laurent's thread - and take the who one WW2 rhetoric elsewhere - someplace useful like usenet or another forum [:-]

All these off-topic side posts detract from my gloating over the damage I did to the IJN Haguro [:D]

ORIGINAL: USSMaine
Can we UN-hijack Mr.Laurent's thread - and take the who one WW2 rhetoric elsewhere - someplace useful like usenet or another forum [:-]

I said not to start this, because I knew this would result.

just cuz britain beat hitler in the battle of britain doesnt mean they would have won the war by themselves

Nope. Never said they would. The Russians would have.

and britain would not have beat germany in the battle of britain if the luftwaffe had free reign, and a better commander

Not strictly true. Churchill knew how to play Hitler, and did it on several occassions. He was very good at jerking Hitler's chain, and getting him to make stupid decisions.

In this case, the Germans stopped bombing the RAF airfields beause they thought they weren't being very effective, and Britain bombed German cities so Hitler wanted revenge.

The reason the Germans thought they weren't being very effective was because of 3 things.
1. The Luftwaffe Enigma codes had very sloppy operational security. Making them very easy for the code breakers to crack (the naval Enigma was the toughest of the three service Enigmas in use to crack). So the code breakers knew what the Germans were going to do before they did it (of course hey had to be careful not to use that too obviously, Coventry is an example of a decision not to immediately act on Enigma information).

2. British Radar and tracking was much more effective than the Germans could even imagine. Thus it was fairly easy for the RAF to react in force to a Luftwaffe attack.

3. They made a point of always having their Spitfires attack in large concentration. Even if it meant showing up late for the battle, they attacked in force.

The net effect of these was to make the Germans think the RAF had far more aircraft, and more functional airfields, than they really did. Thus they concluded that they weren't doing significant damage to the RAF, and basically at that point conceeded the BoB.

But really, what Germany could have done in the BoB is irrelivant. They didn't, and it had nothing to do with the US. So what?

in fact we lost 2 usn destroyers and over 150 men wile we were NEUTRAL

That doesn't make the US a contributor. That simply means the Germans shot at everything they saw on the ocean.

and we didnt contribute cuz we didnt want to get involved with another idiotic european war

As opposed to another stupid Middle Eastern war?

That again is not a point in your favour. Many beleive that if Germany had not declared war on the US, the US would bever have gotten involved in Europe. And it could be argued that if the Japanese hadn't attacked Pearl Harbour, the US would have slowly withdrawn from the Pacific and let the Japanese do as they will.

The US policy up until WW2 was complete isolationism. There was no interest in helping or 'saving' anyone.

and yes we were profiting sumwat, cuz we needed to get wat was left of r industry in gear to save UR BUTTS

Quick Geography lesson. Canada is in North America. We're that big country nort of the United States. We were never in any danger here.

As for getting the industry in gear to 'save anyone'. See earlier comments about never intending to get involved in the war in the first place. The US did not really start ramping up their industry for war until after Pearl Harbour, because they hadn't planned on being in a war.

There was money to be made selling stuff to the Commonwealth, Russians, Germans, and Japanese though.

the battle of atlantic was decided in MAY OF 43 NOT in 42

Interesting date... I'd like to see what you base that on.

At any rate, the USN did not do much convoy duty. The RCN and RN were the ones doing the convoy duty.

britain would have been starved if we hadnt come into it

alot of times britain was down to about 2 WEEKS worth of food and fuel

No... Britain would have starved if Canada hadn't been contriuting food and materials. A lot of aircraft and other equipment for the UK was also built in Canada.

That is not to say that the US didn't contribute when they finally did get involved, but to say they 'saved' Britain and Europe is nothing but hubris.

and there HAD BEEN a realistic chance of pulling off sea lion, if hitler and the luftwaffe hadnt screwed up so badly

and britain certainly wouldve fallen if that IDIOT hadnt invaded russia

Irrelivant. I'm talking about what did happen, not what might have happened.

and the air raids DID have a decent effect on germany

killing rail lines
bridges
communications
air defenses

Again, no.

They had an effect, yes. But not a crippling effect. More of an irritation than anything else.

D-Day actually showed that, they had a huge bombardment before the attack. Which did almost nothing, except wake up the Germans.

Close support aircraft flying low level attacks strafing the hell out of anything that moved, and blowing up bridges and so on, had a much more significant impact than the Strategic Bombing did.

that is why monty was NOT named supreme commander, cuz he was too in love with his own self image

Agreed. Monty was a complete ass.
And he certainly was not very good at playing with the other generals.
He did however understand that the inital notion of the invasion (too few troops on the first day on too narow a front with way too many troops following up in the next couple weeks) was not going to work.

He did understand the concept of logistics - as was pointed out to me elsewhere - and that was one of his strengths as a land comnmander.

So he suggested the broader front, with more troops (on the first day), and indicated how crucial it was to get a real port as soon as possble, and the temporary ports until then. As it was, there were problems with too many troops stuck in a traffic jam on the beaches within a few days, but it could have been worse.

and patton wasn't

Patton was just a big an ass as Monty. He very much pissed off his own people, which is why he wasn't involved in the initial landings. Instead they used him as a decoy - which was a good idea to be sure, but he wanted to be on the front lines.

Pattn was a very good general, he knew the businsess of war. His failing was he did not understand how to deal with people very well.


And I won't bother dealing with the rest of that crap. It is pure American arrogance, nothing more.

But you call me arogant, while sitting there insulting the nations and soldiers who fought and died for years before the US were finally dragged kicking and screaming into the war. And then have the audacity to think that they saved the entire bloody world all by their lonesome.

It is not hollywood fed, and it is NOT ego

it is HISTORICAL FACT!

No, 'fraid not. Sorry.

Case in point of Hollywood propoganda, U-571. They went off and had Americans getting the Unterseeboot version of the Enigma codes. In actual fact, and as listed at the end of the film, almost all cases of the U-Engima being captured was by the Royal Navy. But unless you made a point of reading that, a casual viewer would hink it was the american navy that usually did that.

I've already said my piece. Bobthehatchit, added to it. Any more would be pointless. You want to beleive the Hollywood version of WW2 where the US did everything all by themselves, fine, go ahead, no skin off my butt. The US has made a point of beleiving the world revolves around them since their inception, you can just be one more.

And you can continue to be all shocked when they get nothing but scorn from many Europeans and Asians, and hatred from most Arabs.

I'm sure you'll come back with some trite like 'the truth hurts' or some such B.S. But what do you know about he truth? Apparently nothing from what you've said here.