fred1451
Banned
It seems to me the moment any AH situation is discussed, the Japanese always seem to do worse than they did historically. I take you must think that Nimitz, King, Fletcher, etc., had to all be totally incompetent? Because what other explanation than US commanders being incompetent could account for the fact that ANY other scenario plays out worse for the IJN. How did Nimitz do so badly that you would think another outcome must be worse for the IJN?
Or maybe they think that if you give the man more resources to use against the IJN he'll use them, the odds will be worse than the OTL, so things will be worse than OTL for the IJN?