+- PG-HQ Forums (https://www.pg-hq.com/comms)
+-- Forum: Panzer Grenadier (https://www.pg-hq.com/comms/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: General Discussion (https://www.pg-hq.com/comms/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Thread: Saipan 1944 (/showthread.php?tid=297)
RE: Saipan 1944 - JayTownsend - 09-29-2012
[attachment=183]Japanese barges & Landingcrafts took part on a counter landing from Tanapag in the north in a attempt to land troops to the south of the Island.
RE: Saipan 1944 - armyduck95 - 09-30-2012
Jay,
Great work. Saipan has moved to the top of my list.
To answer questions as to why the Marines had the increased firepower vs. European Army MTOE- the bottom line is that by 44 the South Pacific experience proved the need for increased automatic firepower to overcome the Japanese penchant for close combat, and the restricted terrain aspects of jungle, caves, beach landings, etc. In the European theater the ability to move and mass armor, airpower, and artillery enabled the infantry. In the Pacific - limitations in those capabilities and the nature of the Japanese doctrine required greater squad firepower at the point of decision.
RE: Saipan 1944 - JayTownsend - 09-30-2012
[attachment=184]On the night of June 15-16 3 of these Type 2 Ka-Mi Japanese amphibious tanks were involved in a spoiling attack on the US invasion beaches. A much larger tank assault would take place the following night 16-17.
These Amphibious tanks never got to be used in the correct manner they were meant to on Saipan and were used and normal land-tanks.
RE: Saipan 1944 - JayTownsend - 09-30-2012
[attachment=185]Very close Cave demo!
RE: Saipan 1944 - JayTownsend - 09-30-2012
[attachment=186]I am not sure how any Japanese aircraft survived the American heavy naval and air bombardment on the Aslito Airfield but these captures ones seem to have.
RE: Saipan 1944 - JayTownsend - 09-30-2012
[attachment=187]On the road again!
RE: Saipan 1944 - JayTownsend - 09-30-2012
[attachment=188]Another destroyed Japanese!
RE: Saipan 1944 - JayTownsend - 09-30-2012
[attachment=189]American Tankers didn't always have a good day either!
RE: Saipan 1944 - JayTownsend - 09-30-2012
[attachment=190]Bazooka Teams really got used a lot on Saipan!
RE: Saipan 1944 - vince hughes - 10-03-2012
Jay,
Whilst taking some details for my own documents from PGHQ and working on Nihon Silk, I see that you have rated EVERY scenario as a '4' or '5' rating.
Now I know some people here are going to disagree with me when I write this and they will feel free to jump over me I am sure. But if Saipan has 40 scenarios, I think, like some of the other designers here do, that you might consider refraining from rating the 40 scenarios if they are going to be all, or even 75% of them rated as a 4 or 5 by yourself. The reason I say this is that with 40 such ratings in the 4 and 5 levels, then Saipan will come out as statistically way way WAY above any PG set that has ever gone before. This may of itself place it as a much too highly rated box-set relative to other sets.
Maybe the product WILL be that much better. But I would suggest that if such ratings for it come from us plebs AND they ARE that high consistently, then it would be a far fairer and more ringing endorsement of the set. (probably more satisfying for you too). It would also serve to place it statistically more realistically in its proper and deserved position in the PG Series pecking order.
Just a suggestion and opinion from a 'neutral' that you may or may not take on board. As I said in another post, I know as a fact that some of our PG designers, as a deliberate policy WILL NOT give ratings to their own designs. I have only chosen to write this after seeing your NS ratings. I am currently waiting for these games to arrive here in the UK and look forward to diving in (pun intended on the PARA theme) AND rating them.
Cheers Jay !