|
Jobbo_Fett posted:
Oh well. I guess I'll take the Ryuho since I know it will appear soon and hasn't been claimed. Maybe my pixel-aircraft will avenge the Akagi, but probably not. The Yorktown isn't in too bad of shape, with only "fires" instead of "heavy fires", and it's only been hit by bombs so far. Grey may have to hit it again, although it should be slow-ish though. The Lexington escaped unscathed, while the Enterprise may have been hit by a bomb and a torpedo (but no "heavy damage" so torpedo hit may be fog of war). Maybe Grey has some subs in the area who can try to hit the CV's as they escape. At the very least he should expect the AI to go that route again.
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 17:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 05:22 |
|
|
Pervis posted:Oh well. I guess I'll take the Ryuho since I know it will appear soon and hasn't been claimed. done
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 19:11
|
|
|
Grey Hunter posted:Torpedo wise, you can only order 20 at a time, so every time you see 40 Betties attack something, that means I have to manually got the air HQ. click "order torpedoes" type in "20" then OK. Then do that again. If you selected the Air HQ, press to show the TOE, the torpedo number turns yellow and you're allowed to input a value between 0-9999 for how many torpedos you want the HQ to keep on hand at all time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 23:41
|
|
|
Kemper Boyd posted:If you selected the Air HQ, press to show the TOE, the torpedo number turns yellow and you're allowed to input a value between 0-9999 for how many torpedos you want the HQ to keep on hand at all time. Yup, just tell the air HQ that its equipment now includes 60 torpedoes and forget about it forever.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2016 01:52
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:
Well... poo poo! Not really a surprise, though. I guess I'll take CA Nachi next.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2016 02:07
|
|
|
Winter Stormer posted:Well... poo poo! Not really a surprise, though. code:
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2016 02:25
|
|
|
   Another good hit for our subs.  The flak carrying ships get closer and closer.   A lot of bombers get lost, but we still manage to get a deck penetration on this AA cruiser.  The afternoon strike hits both cruisers and further cripples the Yorktown.  Finally a torpedo confirms our second carrier kill.  The US carriers hit that troop convoy again.  Its a painful attack.   We clear the forts at Nanning.  The force at Chunking continue to do a Stirling job of preventing Chinese reinforcements from going anywhere useful.   We come out ahead on carriers today, and I've killed so many allied troop convoys I can't be too angry about losing one of my own. I just need to hunt those carriers down!  The kill tracker tries to hide my prize. I am having none of this.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2016 06:35
|
|
|
Ow, that's a lot of soldiers. So you've taken out two US Carriers at the cost of one of your own and one light carrier. On theother hand, the AMericans still clearly have enough planes operational to launch largescale raids left so further engagement is going to be messy. So with the remaining damaged ships, are you keeping them with the KB or did you detatch them to send them back to port? As it looks like you're keeping up with the engagement.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2016 06:39
|
|
|
When does the second Yorktown arrive in-theater (assuming it hasn't already)? I can foresee that causing some confusion a few months/year(s) down the line when people see it and say she's already been sunk.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2016 06:47
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2016 06:54
|
|
|
Drone posted:When does the second Yorktown arrive in-theater (assuming it hasn't already)? I can foresee that causing some confusion a few months/year(s) down the line when people see it and say she's already been sunk. Yorktown II arrives ~08 Jul 43, at Balboa
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2016 06:58
|
|
|
Can I claim USS Yorktown CV-10 as my lucky ship, then  edit: In game terms, if the CV-5 Yorktown doesn't get sunk, does the CV-10 keep its original name? algebra testes fucked around with this message at 07:11 on Nov 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2016 07:07
|
|
|
algebra testes posted:Can I claim USS Yorktown CV-10 as my lucky ship, then It stays as the Yorktown II, afaik Also  Lord Pants
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2016 07:20
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:It stays as the Yorktown II, afaik Yeah but you can rename it I believe. At least some (or all) of the Essex-class (Hornet, Wasp, Lexington?, Yorktown) II's can be renamed to whatever, though you may have to actually do it before they arrive.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2016 07:58
|
|
|
Pervis posted:Yeah but you can rename it I believe. At least some (or all) of the Essex-class (Hornet, Wasp, Lexington?, Yorktown) II's can be renamed to whatever, though you may have to actually do it before they arrive. Yeah but manually renaming it isn't a thing we'll come across with the allies seeing as Grey's playing the Japanese
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2016 08:14
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:
That's me, GBS Name change thread owned me
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2016 09:39
|
|
|
Do the raids today suggest tge Enterprise being functional or not?
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2016 10:56
|
|
|
1.5 carriers for 3 carriers so far. We're winning guys! 
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2016 12:44
|
|
|
RA Rx posted:Do the raids today suggest tge Enterprise being functional or not? Hard to say - its only one carrier's worth of planes, but the enterprise could just be empty and/or unable to launch due to deck damage. Or she could have gone belly up during that first engagement. I'm going to have to assume she's afloat, but hope she's sunk!
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2016 13:06
|
|
|
Couldn't the rest of the planes just be somewhere else or is the AI unlikely not to fully commit (especially on the second wave) to such a juicy, undefended target?
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2016 13:22
|
|
|
From my experience, a single torpedo won't do much to a Yorktown-class. Might be different for AI
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2016 18:13
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:Yeah but manually renaming it isn't a thing we'll come across with the allies seeing as Grey's playing the Japanese Well now I feel stupid. I would have guessed 2 USN carriers survived (Enterprise and Lexington), but the plane numbers on the attacks seem very low, as did the attacks the whole battle. Attrition is a major bitch during carrier battles though, on both sides. Operational losses are attrition, destroyed on field are planes that went down with the ship.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2016 19:46
|
|
|
  Erm. Did you guys decide to hide in the port in range of basically all of my bombers?  I'm actually a little disappointed about the hit rate here. The flak is powerful.  Wegotonewegotonewegotone!  So the battleships have abandoned their carriers? Does this mean they sank? Unlikely as we didn't hit one of them.  Time to let the battleships play.....
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 05:32
|
|
|
S-S-S-Surface Action!
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 05:39
|
|
|
Interesting. Going to be continuously a messy next few days..
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 06:30
|
|
|
Uh, will setting the TF to Bombardment instead of Surface Combat negatively affect combat performance?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 06:52
|
|
|
Why is the main battle fleet commanded by Captain Whosethatguy?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 07:40
|
|
|
Dreamsicle posted:Uh, will setting the TF to Bombardment instead of Surface Combat negatively affect combat performance? For all the things this game models, I'm pretty sure that the difference in shell types isn't one of them. The main differences between a bombardment and surface combat mission is how the task force moves. Under bombardment, it moves in such a way that the bombardment will occur at night, and if set to mission speed, they'll steam at cruise speed until they get close enough that a full speed movement will get them to the target during the night movement phase. Basically, the idea is that they want to use the cover of night to avoid air attacks until after they've cratered the airfield at their target. Surface combat, on the other hand, occasionally reacts to enemy surface TFs and tries to intercept them (if given a reaction range and not set to "remain on station"). Either way, if they encounter an enemy surface force, they'll fight it out just the same.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 08:24
|
|
|
Holy poo poo we're actually going to have a battleship on battleship battle without any carriers in World War loving 2. Did that ever actually happen in real life?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 08:45
|
|
|
This will either go very well or very badly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 08:48
|
|
|
Cantorsdust posted:Holy poo poo we're actually going to have a battleship on battleship battle without any carriers in World War loving 2. There was the Battle fo Surgao Straight (I think) in the Phillipines during the Battle of Leyte Gulf where the advancing Japanese Battleships engaged an American fleet which included (I believe) one or two Battleships that were refloated from Pearl Harbor. Also there were a number of surface actions around Guadalcanal where Japanese and American BB's ran intoone another but they were night battles.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 08:50
|
|
|
Surigao Strait was ALSO a night battle. The US also brought 6 battleships, 5 of which had been sunk at Pearl, along with a huge number of support ships (4 heavy cruisers, 4 light cruisers, 28 destroyers) compared to the IJN with a whole two battleships - specifically the two rather aged Fuso-class - with only a single heavy cruiser and four destroyers in attendance. And the US destroyers still did most of the work, with one battleship and 3 destroyers sunk well before the gun lines even closed. The massed guns of the US fleet did manage to sink the other battleship and, uh, that's it. The OTHER part of the IJN force that was supposed to go through the strait with them did manage to sink that surviving heavy cruiser, Mogami, later that (very early) morning though. Lord Koth fucked around with this message at 09:24 on Nov 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 09:20
|
|
|
Cantorsdust posted:Holy poo poo we're actually going to have a battleship on battleship battle without any carriers in World War loving 2.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 09:56
|
|
|
Cartoon posted:Most famously The Bismark and The Hood. Not Pacific theatre but your question wasn't specific. You mean the Bismarck, whose rudder was jammed by Swordfish from a British Carrier?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 10:22
|
|
|
algebra testes posted:You mean the Bismarck, whose rudder was jammed by Swordfish from a British Carrier? That was later; in the first engagement the Bismark had, she and her escort went toe to toe with the Hood and the Prince of Wales, I think? Can't remember exactly. No air support, 2 v 2 gun duel, like Nelson intended.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 10:33
|
|
|
sullat posted:That was later; in the first engagement the Bismark had, she and her escort went toe to toe with the Hood and the Prince of Wales, I think? Can't remember exactly. No air support, 2 v 2 gun duel, like Nelson intended. Oh I misread the post, yeah that makes total sense.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 10:40
|
|
|
sullat posted:That was later; in the first engagement the Bismark had, she and her escort went toe to toe with the Hood and the Prince of Wales, I think? Can't remember exactly. No air support, 2 v 2 gun duel, like Nelson intended. It was Bismark and Prinz Eugen vs the Hood and the Prince Of Wales. It was a short engagement.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 15:32
|
|
|
You might throw in North Cape (Duke of York vs Scharnhorst) and several actions involving French warships after the Fall of France. 18 November 1942 Norwegian corvette Montbretia, torpedoed near Iceland by U-262. Russian gunboat Kraznoye Znamya, torpedoed in the Gulf of Finland by a Finnish MTB.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 17:03
|
|
|
Gnoman posted:It was Bismark and Prinz Eugen vs the Hood and the Prince Of Wales. It was a short engagement. Yeah, the British still hadn't ironed out the whole "battlecruiser sudden explosion" problem that had plagued them during the last war.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 17:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 05:22 |
|
|
Cantorsdust posted:Holy poo poo we're actually going to have a battleship on battleship battle without any carriers in World War loving 2. Just last week (in the historical updates), at the 2nd Naval Battle of Guadalcanal (Nov 14), South Dakota suffered a nearly-complete electrical failure and was targeted by Kirishima, but then the radar-directed fire from Washington crippled Kirishima, subsequently capsizing the next day.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 20:43
|
|
