|
Looks like Tromp didn't make it to the 20th 
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 18:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 16:47 |
|
|
A loss ratio of 1:13.8 in aircraft (5:69) is a pretty bad day.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 18:29
|
|
|
So, how many average-quality planes and pilots for a hundred points?
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 20:33
|
|
|
17 January 1943 Italian destroyer Bombardiere, torpedoed northwest of Sicily by British submarine United.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 21:44
|
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:Dude starts crying and goes drat near catatonic because of some security padding. I can think of very few examples of people with thinner skins. Almost all the admirals and generals were like that. Clark, MacArthur, Bradley, Montgomery were all extremely vain and immediately shut anyone out that wasn't part of their circle that worshiped them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 21:54
|
|
|
Spruance gave no fucks, though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 22:08
|
|
|
And I like literally none of the people listed there. For big macho military men, a lot of these people are incredibly childish. Not Nimitz/Eisenhower, though, they're the dream team.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 22:16
|
|
|
dtkozl posted:Almost all the admirals and generals were like that. Clark, MacArthur, Bradley, Montgomery were all extremely vain and immediately shut anyone out that wasn't part of their circle that worshiped them. how do you post this list and not include Patton
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 22:37
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:how do you post this list and not include Patton He was certainly vain but his relationship to Bradley was more complicated, when Bradley was serving under him to keep tabs on Patton for Eisenhower, Patton certainly knew what was up, but maybe he was so vain he didn't give an f?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 00:25
|
|
|
Patton's only objection to the Nazis was apparently 'I'm being told to kill them' and otherwise he thought they were p great, especially on the subject of the Jewish Question.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 00:31
|
|
|
Night10194 posted:especially on the subject of the Jewish Question. Link to sources? Not being a smartass but I had not read anything on that angle of his personality. The stories of wanting to continue onto Moscow are well known but I had not heard that before.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 00:39
|
|
|
RestRoomLiterature- posted:Link to sources? Not being a smartass but I had not read anything on that angle of his personality. The stories of wanting to continue onto Moscow are well known but I had not heard that before. It was an NPR radio show, don't remember which, but it was about us repatriating the Nazis as sources against Soviet intelligence and stuff, and it mentioned that Patton was happy to put the original commandants back in charge of liberated concentration camps and things during the immediate post-war chaos.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 00:42
|
|
|
Patton was certainly anti-semitic and apparently didn't approve of prosecuting Nazis for war crimes. I dunno if he was entirely on board with Nazis exactly, but he made statements that suggest he viewed them as just another political option not unlike making the choice between Democrat or Republican. His letters home apparently are full of all sorts of terrible stuff. https://www.amazon.com/Patton-Papers-1940-1945-Martin-Blumenson/dp/0306807173
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 01:08
|
|
|
glynnenstein posted:Patton was certainly anti-semitic and apparently didn't approve of prosecuting Nazis for war crimes. I dunno if he was entirely on board with Nazis exactly, but he made statements that suggest he viewed them as just another political option not unlike making the choice between Democrat or Republican. His letters home apparently are full of all sorts of terrible stuff. https://www.amazon.com/Patton-Papers-1940-1945-Martin-Blumenson/dp/0306807173 that book posted:During the immediate postwar months of the Occupation, he could see that transportation was restored, that sanitation was practiced, that food was distributed, that heat was provided, that housing was rehabilitated. But the subtle nuances of political dialogue were beyond him. What did he care about German political parties? Why couldn't everyone forget the war and Nazism, and settle down to building a Germany that resembled his conception of America? So he was more really self centered than ok with nazis.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 02:12
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:yeah but like, do your loving job instead of sulking like a child To be fair to Halsey here he was pursuing a massive Japanese carrier fleet and still couldn't be sure that the action off Samar wasn't a diversion. An hour isn't really that much time to deliberate. He didn't know that the carriers were a toothless diversion. Murgos fucked around with this message at 03:18 on Jan 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 03:15
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:how do you post this list and not include Patton Well specifically I was talking about it in regards to them being able to command. Patton had his issues obviously but I've never really read anything where he really hosed over the troops by playing favorites or politics. I know he got men killed going after his son in law but that is the only thing that comes to mind. Patton really seemed to shun politics more than most, correct me if I'm wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 03:56
|
|
|
dtkozl posted:Almost all the admirals and generals were like that. Clark, MacArthur, Bradley, Montgomery were all extremely vain and immediately shut anyone out that wasn't part of their circle that worshiped them. This is a really unfair categorization. Many of the more well-known commanders were like that, but there were plenty of generals and admirals who were far more thoughtful and less egotistical. In fact, promoting "team players" was a specific policy under George Marshall, and if anything blowhards like MacArthur were the exception rather than the rule.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 06:14
|
|
|
Murgos posted:To be fair to Halsey here he was pursuing a massive Japanese carrier fleet and still couldn't be sure that the action off Samar wasn't a diversion. An hour isn't really that much time to deliberate. But he DID know a major IJN operation was occurring, that the channel had been lit up, that a IJN task force had been headed straight for it (before turning back for a short time) and didn't leave so much as a PT boat to watch it. Granted, he may have been playing War in the Pacific, and the UI probably caused it anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 09:50
|
|
|
Murgos posted:To be fair to Halsey here he was pursuing a massive Japanese carrier fleet and still couldn't be sure that the action off Samar wasn't a diversion. An hour isn't really that much time to deliberate. He instead managed to not make a decision, meaning that his forces didn't contribute to the outcome at all! Great!
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 16:30
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:He instead managed to not make a decision, meaning that his forces didn't contribute to the outcome at all! Great! Wasn't it Arleigh Burke who said the main difference between a great officer and a bad one is about 10 seconds?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 16:38
|
|
|
Halsey also had a lot of other people telling him he was wrong and he just ignored them. There was a lot going on so some decisions can be forgiven, but it's not unfair, at least, to argue that he may have gotten fixated on a chance for glory. His rather dramatic reaction may have been in part because he recognized that he had been wrong while others understood the true situation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 17:18
|
|
|
glynnenstein posted:Halsey also had a lot of other people telling him he was wrong and he just ignored them. There was a lot going on so some decisions can be forgiven, but it's not unfair, at least, to argue that he may have gotten fixated on a chance for glory. His rather dramatic reaction may have been in part because he recognized that he had been wrong while others understood the true situation. I'd agree with this assessment, Halsey was talented and headstrong, not an uncommon mixture with commanders. His reaction is one of the realization of the depths of his failure.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 17:46
|
|
|
   Christmas Island 10 is the target of the Battleships.   We trade shots with a sub.   Flak is increasing at Akyab.  The Liberators are getting annoying now.   Our planes make another suicide run.  The snipers are out again.   I have to assume that most of those 17.000 soldiers are clerks and mechanics. They won't die though!  Our casualties are lower than theirs! We have turned a corner and the battle will be won sometime in the next year!   The enemy planes are making themselves felt more and more now, we have reached a tipping point where their ability to manufacture new airframes will be much higher than ours.  At least we are losing cheap ships while killing expensive ones.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 18:16
|
|
|
It gives me no end of joy that the AI is using the B-17 for what it was originally "designed" for and it works.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 18:24
|
|
|
These battles in this universe's Sino-Japanese War are so bloody that they may actually be remembered by anyone outside of East Asia. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 18:40
|
|
|
think you'll be able to get a Butai in range of those Battleships before they slink off to Australia?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 19:02
|
|
|
How many Christmas Islands are there?
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 00:27
|
|
|
A handful. I assume the 10 is actually an IO for Indian Ocean.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 00:33
|
|
|
Grumio posted:think you'll be able to get a Butai in range of those Battleships before they slink off to Australia? You madman! Our carriers are too valuable for shore bombardment actions, a modern battleship force will rip them apart!
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 00:47
|
|
|
  We continue to see bombers going after our ships.  Our battleships are still in the area apparently.  That's it. I'm reducing the range so they can't reach this base.  I think I forgot to mention this, but the attack on Efate has been called off until I can deal with these patrol boats – I have a task force heading to the island.  Now this is interesting – an escort carrier? I'll send someone to have a look.  Time to scramble some carriers!  Once again, we are ahead in the points for today's sinking report.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
Hunter Liggett was also sunk on the 19th!
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 18:29
|
|
|
Sovy Kurosei posted:Hunter Liggett was also sunk on the 19th! And the 18th and the 16th! (Which is why you never trust those reports unless its your own ships)
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 19:49
|
|
|
   Its going to be a long few years now.  I fix our planes, and they pick a non defended target today.  Good Bettys.  63 on 3, and you can't even bring one down!  We lose a plane but get another hit.  We lose a couple of planes – but much more interesting are the scouting reports, which have both the Stingray and the CVE hit by scouting bombers.  Oh, Hello!  And Goodbye!  Now we are just murdering them.  We destroy a large number of enemy squads.  A good day!  Another carrier down!
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 20:56
|
|
|
Nice find! Historically, the Suwannee hasn't even been in theater for a month! Jobbo_Fett fucked around with this message at 21:21 on Jan 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 21:19
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:Nice find! I tell you the experiment with putting planes on boats has been a complete failure. Ikasuhito fucked around with this message at 21:42 on Jan 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 21:34
|
|
|
Ikasuhito posted:I tell you the experiment with putting planes on boats has been a complete failure. So much for victory through air power. Age of Sail gun decks are looking like a real good idea now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 22:09
|
|
|
It would be nice if there was a way to influence AI behavior, so it changes from building carriers to building more battleships, but I suppose it would be too much to ask from game like this.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 22:45
|
|
|
How many American fleet carriers, light carriers, and escort carriers are still in the theater?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 00:26
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:The Allies should have received 11 carriers to supplement the starting 4. This post was two months ago. Between the start of November 1942 and January 21, the Allies have received: CVE Sangamon CVE Suwanee (Dead) CVE Chenango (All three of these CVE's are the same class - Worth 93 VP, max aircraft capacity of 31 airframes, and with a tonnage of 10494.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 01:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 16:47 |
|
|
Hermes is still alive? Does she have a withdrawal date?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 01:19
|
|