|
Just about all scuttlings of capital ships in the Pacific, on either side, I'm aware of were done with torpedoes off friendly destroyers. The 5" shells would have been basically pointless, so that portion was indeed effectively just a waste of ammunition. Blowing giant holes under the waterline, with no damage control operating on the ship, theoretically sinks a ship fairly fast.
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 22:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 23:01 |
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:Wait they tried to scuttle the Hornet via friendlies shooting it up? It didn't have a more purposeful method of scuttling available (say, propping open all the bulkheads and opening up the seacocks/setting off some demolition charges)? Seems like a lot of risk to add to the design of a ship that will never be operating without escorts. e: Although I guess you need stuff like that for intentional flooding? 
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 23:30
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Also I imagine that when you scuttle a capital ship in shallow waters, you don't want it to be easily raisable by the enemy. You want big goddamn holes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 23:35
|
|
|
If you read about SMS Emden, it took them a hell of a long time to scuttle freighters even with charges and seacocks open, and that's without trying to risk dudes going aboard / staying aboard a completely hosed up ship.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 23:42
|
|
|
Plus you want to be quick. You are a sitting duck for enemy subs while sitting still around a crippled ship.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 00:03
|
|
|
Decoy Badger posted:B-17s really are indestructible, aren't they? I don't think we've seen more than a handful get downed by air-to-air combat. Gort posted:Is there any flak that'll stop a B17? I guess with more flak they have to fly higher.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 04:42
|
|
|
   Clunk!  Deck guns it is then!   One of our subs gets a nice hit in.  The bombing raids continue. With the bombers gone, I've limited our losses though.   Oh god, they didn't automatically cancel the attack!   Our men are forced to give up the Kodika pass.   Owch, that was some heavy losses again today. I have cancelled the attack at Hankow.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 18:01
|
|
|
How the gently caress did they manage to lose that many men in an attack with 2-1 AV?
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 19:10
|
|
|
goatface posted:How the gently caress did they manage to lose that many men in an attack with 2-1 AV? Attacking an urban hex is like a 4x bonus or something.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 19:37
|
|
|
I thought that got added in to the adjusted AV?
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 19:59
|
|
|
The bombings will continue until morale improves!
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 19:59
|
|
|
goatface posted:I thought that got added in to the adjusted AV? Adjusted AV ratio that is below what is required for a decisive victory still gets treated as a repulsed attack, which is arguably a poor design choice in a game where a hex covers something like 70km.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 23:26
|
|
|
What on earth happened at Kodika?
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 02:58
|
|
|
  I've started working on taking some of the odd bases lying around.  We've come into range of their bombers, and take a hit.  I think she's dead. Jim.  At least their not bombing packed runways now.  We take out third ship loss of the month.  We take one of them with us though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 04:17
|
|
|
  The enemy bombers keep coming. Its good practice for our fighter pilots.  We take one undefended base and move into the next – their only worth six points each, but six points is six points.  We're back into the dull days it seems. Airfield construction is going well, so we should be able to throw away plane after plane hitting a major airfield as cover for an attack soon. Its going to be bloody.  We're having a late month run on ship kills. Grey Hunter fucked around with this message at 18:36 on Oct 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 17:52
|
|
|
Meant to post the 29th? 
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 18:09
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:Meant to post the 29th? Time flies when you have kids.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 22:11
|
|
|
Not gonna lie, that was a pretty quick Battle of Guadalcanal.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 23:02
|
|
|
Grey Hunter posted:
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 12:44
|
|
|
You're probably not getting any of the good land-based bomber hunters until mid '43.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 16:23
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:Meant to post the 29th?
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 16:27
|
|
|
Roller Coast Guard posted:Are there options for cannon-armed interceptors you can pursue as Japan at this stage? THe Ki-45 Nick is your only remotely useful interceptor for early game.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 16:29
|
|
|
  Clunk! Thank god!  Again!  Lunga falls to our troops, but most of the enemy retreat into the jungle. We shall have to pursue.  And that's a solid hit for us!  Dear air-plane designers. Build something with cannons. Thanks. Command.  Not a bad day, but we did get lucky with those two torpedoes!  A new kill and a confirmed kill.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 18:37
|
|
|
I reflexively clenched for that tanker 
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 18:47
|
|
|
  More targets! And this time the bombers run into no fighter cover!  I finally get to launch proper Betty raids!   Erm. How packed were those two ships?  We continue to take losses from B-17 raids.  Well. Not much more to say there is there? The 100 point jump in enemy ground losses confirms that the Allies lost a lot of men to our bombers today. That's not going to look good in the papers!  The sunk Presidents society.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 18:05
|
|
|
I don't remember president Flattery
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 18:55
|
|
|
Ah yes, good old President "Gets you Nowhere" Flattery, who served for six hours in the early 1800s when President James Madison was temporarily unconscious from ether treatments during a complicated unplanned tooth extraction, and his vice president George Clinton was unable to be located (it would later turn out that he had been sleeping off a night of heavy drinking at his home and had not responded to federal marshals pounding at his front door).
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 19:17
|
|
|
Uh... that's clearly President Cape-Flattery who had to be removed from office because he was susceptible to bribes from superheroes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 19:29
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Ah yes, good old President "Gets you Nowhere" Flattery, who served for six hours in the early 1800s when President James Madison was temporarily unconscious from ether treatments during a complicated unplanned tooth extraction, and his vice president George Clinton was unable to be located (it would later turn out that he had been sleeping off a night of heavy drinking at his home and had not responded to federal marshals pounding at his front door). Really makes you long for the good old days of American politics, doesn't it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 19:40
|
|
|
Grey Hunter posted:
And mostly non-combat squads? For someone who's never played this, is that at all normal?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 21:20
|
|
|
The Fillmore would have turned into the USAHS Marigold in about a year, so she was even full of fit soldiers. Probably about 2000 troops and crew on each.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 21:21
|
|
|
Drone posted:Really makes you long for the good old days of American politics, doesn't it. I just want to point out here that I actually learned today that Madison's running mate really was a man named George Clinton.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 21:29
|
|
|
So that's about half a division sunk? Pretty good, almost makes up for losing a whole division last game!
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 21:37
|
|
|
Half a division of Australians would be good hunting.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 21:46
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:I just want to point out here that I actually learned today that Madison's running mate really was a man named George Clinton. There's a shitload of Clinton's out there. Amusingly enough in the American Revolutionary Wars, there are Generals Clinton on both sides.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 21:52
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:And mostly non-combat squads? For someone who's never played this, is that at all normal? Sure, depending on what he had loaded. If he had a Base Support unit, Engineers, or an HQ (  ) that's to be expected.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 22:24
|
|
|
Grey Hunter posted:
I can just read the spotter's report now: Japanese Betty Spotter's log posted:We must have killed, like, a million dudes down there!
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 05:03
|
|
|
How does the game handwave the reporting of casualties stuff? Are you supposed to have the enemies codes cracked and are listening in to their reports of losses? Is there some other explanation? Also, same question about ships reported sunk then confirmed later?
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 05:37
|
|
|
Confirming sunk ships at the very least is the enemy government/press officially admitting to the world that Ship X has in fact been sunk.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 05:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 23:01 |
|
|
PittTheElder posted:There's a shitload of Clinton's out there. Amusingly enough in the American Revolutionary Wars, there are Generals Clinton on both sides. Weren't they brothers or cousins, too? I vaguely remember that they were in some way related.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 09:39
|
|