Page 1 of 1
Location of US Carriers???
Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2005 11:58 pm
by akdreemer
Okay everyone, a bit of a history lesson is on order. Can someone explain where precisely the USS Enterprise and USS Lexington Task Forces are located at dawn, 7 Dec 41?? At the end of the first turn CHS the Enterprise is some 800+ miles away heading away from Oahu. Historically, at dawn she was some 215 miles W/SW of Oahu heading for Pearl... Can anyone please explain the discrepency?? [:-]

RE: Location of US Carriers???
Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 12:14 am
by Don Bowen
ORIGINAL: AlaskanWarrior
Okay everyone, a bit of a history lesson is on order. Can someone explain where precisely the USS Enterprise and USS Lexington Task Forces are located at dawn, 7 Dec 41?? At the end of the first turn CHS the Enterprise is some 800+ miles away heading away from Oahu. Historically, at dawn she was some 215 miles W/SW of Oahu heading for Pearl... Can anyone please explain the discrepency?? [:-]
This is a concession to game mechanics and is inherited from Scenario 15. If the carriers are placed in their historical positions they are found and un-historically destroyed by the Japanese carrier force.
RE: Location of US Carriers???
Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 12:25 am
by akdreemer
ORIGINAL: Don Bowen
ORIGINAL: AlaskanWarrior
Okay everyone, a bit of a history lesson is on order. Can someone explain where precisely the USS Enterprise and USS Lexington Task Forces are located at dawn, 7 Dec 41?? At the end of the first turn CHS the Enterprise is some 800+ miles away heading away from Oahu. Historically, at dawn she was some 215 miles W/SW of Oahu heading for Pearl... Can anyone please explain the discrepency?? [:-]
This is a concession to game mechanics and is inherited from Scenario 15. If the carriers are placed in their historical positions they are found and un-historically destroyed by the Japanese carrier force.
Oh great, all the work that went into this and this is the best solution we can come up with? I would at least have the Big E hanging around Johnston Is., and not way to the west where she would conceivable be able to interfere with the Wake Island operation. May place her in a holding pattern 2 to 3 hexes E/NE of Johnston might be better? Far enough to keep her from getting "sunk".
RE: Location of US Carriers???
Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 12:54 am
by Don Bowen
Oh great, all the work that went into this and this is the best solution we can come up with?
Yup!
RE: Location of US Carriers???
Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 1:22 am
by Ron Saueracker
Best solution would be to add her to the Dec 8th or 9th reinforcement arrival at PH but some sort of house rule would need be made to not have Japanese player "game" this knowledge.
Don's solution is great to but the opposing players need to refrain from gaming the knowledge as well.
RE: Location of US Carriers???
Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 1:53 am
by Don Bowen
ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker
Best solution would be to add her to the Dec 8th or 9th reinforcement arrival at PH but some sort of house rule would need be made to not have Japanese player "game" this knowledge.
Don's solution is great to but the opposing players need to refrain from gaming the knowledge as well.
Actually this implementation is mostly Matrix - scenario 15. We experimented with purely historical placements but the game's "reaction" function made the Japanese carriers move West or even Southwest of Hawaii to strike the U.S. carriers. No way Nagumo would have been so foolish.
Finally we went back to the Matrix solution, changing it only so that Lexington does not make an non-historical "raid" on the Japanese Wake Invasion Force.
RE: Location of US Carriers???
Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:23 am
by Ron Saueracker
ORIGINAL: Don Bowen
ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker
Best solution would be to add her to the Dec 8th or 9th reinforcement arrival at PH but some sort of house rule would need be made to not have Japanese player "game" this knowledge.
Don's solution is great to but the opposing players need to refrain from gaming the knowledge as well.
Actually this implementation is mostly Matrix - scenario 15. We experimented with purely historical placements but the game's "reaction" function made the Japanese carriers move West or even Southwest of Hawaii to strike the U.S. carriers. No way Nagumo would have been so foolish.
Finally we went back to the Matrix solution, changing it only so that Lexington does not make an non-historical "raid" on the Japanese Wake Invasion Force.
Works for me. The first few months are always weird because all locs are known...the players have to curb their enthusiasm for anything to even vaguely resemble "plausable".
RE: Location of US Carriers???
Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 11:28 am
by m10bob
ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker
ORIGINAL: Don Bowen
ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker
Best solution would be to add her to the Dec 8th or 9th reinforcement arrival at PH but some sort of house rule would need be made to not have Japanese player "game" this knowledge.
Don's solution is great to but the opposing players need to refrain from gaming the knowledge as well.
Actually this implementation is mostly Matrix - scenario 15. We experimented with purely historical placements but the game's "reaction" function made the Japanese carriers move West or even Southwest of Hawaii to strike the U.S. carriers. No way Nagumo would have been so foolish.
Finally we went back to the Matrix solution, changing it only so that Lexington does not make an non-historical "raid" on the Japanese Wake Invasion Force.
Works for me. The first few months are always weird because all locs are known...the players have to curb their enthusiasm for anything to even vaguely resemble "plausable".
Excellent point Ron...I am for leaving the units at the present locations in this instance..The FOW can take over the next day..