War in the Pacific Day by Day - Imperial Edition

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Video Games > Let's Play! > War in the Pacific Day by Day - Imperial Edition

NGDBSS: Dec 30, 2009

Put me down for the Mogami (Mogami-class heavy cruiser) as a lucky ship. (It's one of the few in the IJN that used damage control well.)

# ¿ Dec 7, 2015 22:49

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 4, 2024 19:55

NGDBSS: Dec 30, 2009

Chunky Monkey posted:

From what I understand, Japanese damage control was pretty awful so I wouldn't put any faith in their ability to put the fires out.

To put things in perspective, the Yorktown had to be hit on several occasions before the Japanese finally managed to sink it at the Battle of Midway. In contrast, each of the four Kido Butai carriers in that battle ultimately sank as a result being hit with one (not necessarily identical) wave of bombers. (I'm counting hits here, not attacks, considering that carriers could and did dodge hostile fire with judicious maneuvering.) That's why I chose my lucky ship to be the Mogami - it was one of the few IJN ships that successfully pulled off damage control (after colliding with one of its sister ships and then being bombed). Funny enough, it eventually sank after ramming another Japanese cruiser as an example of the IJN's tragicomedy.

# ¿ Jan 16, 2016 22:44

NGDBSS: Dec 30, 2009

Cythereal posted:

Any questions?

How long until someone takes the Mikuma as their lucky ship? :v:

# ¿ Jan 19, 2016 06:10

NGDBSS: Dec 30, 2009

Jobbo_Fett posted:

Already claimed by Bacarruda

Really? Then at least one of us is likely to lose our lucky ship in comedic fashion over the coming year.

# ¿ Jan 19, 2016 06:16

NGDBSS: Dec 30, 2009

Cythereal posted:

See also the Sea Shadow project, a stealth ship built by the same group that brought us the U-2, SR-71, and F-117. According to the memoirs of the guy in charge of the group at the time, the Navy hated the Sea Shadow and killed the program for some goddamn ridiculous (but extremely Navy) reasons.

What was the story behind this? From a cursory search I'm getting a bunch of articles on the event of it being scrapped, but not why it was scrapped.

# ¿ Apr 4, 2016 23:34

NGDBSS: Dec 30, 2009

Omobono posted:

Nah, the DF dev can and will admit problems in the simulation and work to fix them ("I think I made the carp too hardcore"). I don't really see these devs do it.

Wait, how do you make a carp "too hardcore"? Given the reputation of DF I know it's possible, but what happened in the game in this case?

# ¿ Jun 23, 2016 23:10

NGDBSS: Dec 30, 2009

Grey Hunter posted:

Our own ship is slowed, but in no danger of sinking � this is a win for us!

Oh hey, unlike in real life it won't just drop dead after a single bombing salvo! :toot:

(Technically, several salvos of bombs or torpedoes were released at it during the Battle of Midway, but only one bombing salvo hit.)

# ¿ Aug 3, 2016 08:02

NGDBSS: Dec 30, 2009

Leperflesh posted:

Gold and lead close enough in density that for thousands of years, alchemists were convinced it would be possible to turn one into the other, and many a counterfeiter used gold-painted or coated or encased lead to pass off bad coinage.

Lead has a density of about 11.3 grams per cc
Gold has a density of about 19.3 grams per cc

That's different enough to easily tell the difference with a scale, but if you're hefting 3mm Napoleonic soldiers in your hand, you would very likely not notice the difference.

In fact this was part of the premise for The Lavender Hill Mob, in which a group of thieves attempts to smuggle stolen gold by casting it into Eiffel Tower statuettes and then covering the exterior with something less valuable.

# ¿ Nov 12, 2016 05:36

NGDBSS: Dec 30, 2009

Jeek posted:

Almost a year late but I wonder if I can still pick a lucky ship among them?

I'll claim USS Heermann if that is in the game. May it send Yamato away once again.

I recall that it was also the only destroyer in Taffy 3 to survive the Battle off Samar, so it should be doubly lucky!

# ¿ Jan 2, 2017 23:11

NGDBSS: Dec 30, 2009

Crazycryodude posted:

TURKEY TROTS TO WATER GG FROM CINCPAC ACTION COM WHEN DID THE JAPS INVENT TIME TRAVEL TO MAKE THE 16TH HAPPEN TWICE RR THE WORLD WONDERS

I love that this isn't even the first time someone's referenced that famous message in this thread. (Though at least this time there shouldn't be any inadvertent probations.)

# ¿ Jan 18, 2017 06:34

NGDBSS: Dec 30, 2009

Jesenjin posted:

Oh my God!!!!
It is listed to be play 1200 hours, with 10 players!
I've never seen such an atrociously poorly thought out game.
...
...
Grey, is there any chance to LP this game day by day?

To be fair to the game, that's only for the full campaign. The game also offers smaller scenarios and in fact suggests playing them beforehand.

To also be fair to the game, there's this paragraph at the end of the Sequence of Play. (I poo poo you not; despite how obsessive the game is it does have a sense of self-awareness.)

Campaign for North Africa posted:

VI. END OF GAME-TURN
You have now completed one Game-Turn, a full week of the real campaign. Take a breather, have a beer and a sandwich, contact your loved ones to let them know you're still alive, and return for another Game-Turn.

That said, if/when I look more deeply over this crazy thing in detail I will check out close air support.

# ¿ Aug 9, 2017 03:29

NGDBSS: Dec 30, 2009

Mountaineer posted:

It's on the LP Archive: https://lparchive.org/Distant-Worlds-(by-Grey-Hunter)/

For some reason it's labelled only as a Distant Worlds LP.

Which update was it? I skimmed the Distant Worlds portion but didn't spot anything relevant to that.

# ¿ May 10, 2018 03:02

NGDBSS: Dec 30, 2009

Drone posted:

What funding level do we need to clear to get Grey and Ugleb to run through an entire game of The Campaign for North Africa?

It's not about funding level, at least not directly. (It's an out-of-print collecter's item valued at several hundred dollars, but with the internet and OCR there are ways to fake access.) Instead the concern is going to be about where to physically house the game since it never got updated to a PC format. Also there's the question of which scenario they'd even play, since the grand campaign is very much not intended to be run without some experience under one's belt from shorter playthroughs.

# ¿ Aug 9, 2018 20:38

NGDBSS: Dec 30, 2009

Drone posted:

(I wasn't serious. Nobody should play Campaign for North Africa )

There's even a little section at the end of the scenario book where the designer directly talked about "but why play this arcane kudzu of a game". The primary takeaway there was to deliberately be as immersed as possible, to have to deal with all the crazy minutiae that real-world officers had to care about. And I can respect that, even if asking players to put in that level of commitment is almost certainly nonsense.

Ugleb posted:

So you're saying that once we are two years in we will realise that we got something wrong way back at the start and broke the whole thing?

IIRC the rulebooks are clear on the steps you need to follow, so you can just work them out like a tedious checklist. But otherwise check my above statement on authorial intent.

# ¿ Aug 9, 2018 20:59

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 4, 2024 19:55

NGDBSS: Dec 30, 2009

I should point out that the thousand-hour slog through Campaign for North Africa is only for the full campaign scenario. Other scenarios, while still long at tens or hundreds of hours, are presented first and more importantly suggested for play first. So you might more likely see the El Alamein portion or even the "tutorial" that lasts only a week of in-game time.

Also I understand that anyone suggesting Campaign for North Africa is not entirely serious, because it's loving Campaign for North Africa.

# ¿ Oct 17, 2018 13:52

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Video Games > Let's Play! > War in the Pacific Day by Day - Imperial Edition