Hitech, Please define the problem.

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by Oedipus
They were mini subs. They were NOT suicide subs.
 Where do you people find or make this stuff up?


Oed

http://www.combinedfleet.com/kaiten.htm

[Turbot]

All these replies, but he was asking the question of hitech eh?

[Arfann]

Originally posted by Turbot
All these replies, but he was asking the question of hitech eh?

As usual, they engage fingers while leaving brain in park.  Nice try, Eskimo, but the agendas of the wordy must be served.

[AtmkRstr]

The pilots of the mini subs were not expected to return according to the TV program.  The program speculated on what a Japanese soldier would do when they expected to be captured.  Maybe that answers your question.

[MwKAZ]

Originally posted by Widewing
.

As to the CV being a fortress - hardly. We only have two manned 5" turrets. Actual carriers had four 5" dual turrets, with four more individual 5" guns. Add to that 72 40mm and 52 20mm guns for close range. Baltimore class cruisers (which is what we have) had six 5" turrets, They also had 22 40mm, with 28 20mm Orlikon mounts as well. Indeed, the volume of triple A put up by our TGs is a small fraction of what was actually available. Even the destroyers are well under-modeled. We are also limited to 6k of visual range. By 1943, radar ranging triple A was deadly out to 15,000 yards and sight optics made visual shooting practical out that far, albeit with less accuracy.



I tend to agree.  Even opening up the existing 5" and 40mm that are now currently on the cruiser and carrier.  Take a close look and you will see 4 dual 5" and 4 40mm on the carrier.  Even the cruiser has 2 1/2 times more gunnery for air defense than allowable to man.  All these should be opened up for manning.  And if not enough people man them, than AI takes over as usual on the ones not manned.

At least that would give it way more survivability chances seeing how manned ack is more accurate than the AI. Seeing how they are already in place, I don't know much about programming, but I don't think it would be to hard to incorporate.

[whels]

Originally posted by cobia38
corect me if im wrong but didnt japan use these tactics to sink u.s. ships.if AH is a ww 2 sim then cuicide cv runs should be eceptable. why the fuss.      

Kamakazi attacks never sank a FLEET CV , i dont think.
they did sink several  light CVs.

we have a Fleet CV.

whels

[muckmaw]

Amtrakster:

I suggest readins an excellent book on the subject called "At Dawn we Slept".

It seems to be THE reference for the attack on Pearl harbor.

In this book, they refer to the Mini-Sub attack, in detail. So much so as to give their tender subs, crews, missions, and locations. The Japanese mentality at the time was simple. Do evrey thing you can to hit your target, and try to survive. They went with little fear of death, but they were in no way suicidal. Many expressed great relief in their personal diaries for surviving the raid, and being able to see their families again.

At the pre-flight briefing, the commander of the mission (his name escapes me) was asked what he would do if his plane was disabled. He said he would crash into a target instead of being captured. He stressed that he would not ask any of his pilots to do the same.

As for the Mini-sub, the only one of the four we know about that could be classified suicidal would be the 3rd launch, which left it's mothership with a faulty gyro. That crew was pretty sure they would not return, but wanted to hit their targets anyway.

So, in summation, I am of the opinion from what I've read that the mentality of the IJN was not one of suicide, but of acceptance of a High-Risk mission.

Sorry for the HiJack

[Sox62]

If you want Cv's toughened up,and more "realistic" ack,that's fine...just be sure to model damage to the cv as well.

It shouldn't just suddenly sink after a certain amount of ordnance hits it.You would think that 2,4k of eggs would do some damage that would actually impair it's operations.Maybe reduce fuel and ordnance thats available,the amount or how fast planes can take off,and maybe the ability to kill the acks-5"guns-cruiser cannons also.

It just seems that some wish to make it a nearly impregnable fortress that never actually suffers damage until it is sunk.

Just my .02

[AtmkRstr]

Thanks Muck I've been looking for some reading material.  If I find it hopfully I'll be able to forget about the crap I see on TV.

[rabbidrabbit]

One way to cut down on sucide attacks is to have a 10-15 min death penalty at the base the person launched from.  In short, you can not take off from the base you took off from but can leave from another.  This helps out on gaining dominance over a capped base too.

[Grizzly]

The issue isn't if suicide attacks are unrealistic or if the mini-subs were on a suicide mission, it's that a kamikazi was a one shot deal.

Suicide jabos against either a carrier or field, using either a fighter or bomber, is easier to accomplish if the player rides the plane all the way to the target. Releasing at an altitude and speed from which you can recover is just too hard for some. So the easy way out is used... affective but darn irritating.

I've spent many hours gunning CV groups and have seen both dweebs and accomplished players attack. The dweebs can usually be killed but keep coming back until they ankle-bite the carrier to death. Some of the accomplished players leave me no real opportunity to kill them. Clue time... there are ways to attack a carrier and survive that are very hard to defend against... but require a bit of learning.

Defending a base is near impossible when something like twenty players get together to do suicidal attacks on it, followed by an endless stream of suicidal P51s until the base is useless.

I've suggested a life regen time penalty for suicide bombers (forced realism) as have others here. Another suggested a suicide bomber not be given bombs for an hour after. My squad leader suggested placing manable 88s at each field (and move the map room back to the airfield). I think all these would be affective in reducing the suicidal gaming of AH, or provide a way to defend against it.

The purpose of the game is to have fun. Some of the tactics used is not fun, except for the mindless hamsters doing it... and then I wonder how much fun that really is.

How about the kill shooter and proximity kills? Both are a pain in the butt, but together they are intolerable  >=o|

[Tumor]

Originally posted by Blindman
suicide jabo on a CV is a legit tactic as long as the CV launches more planes than it was actually designed to carry
Both side have the ability to re up with a new life instantly
its a game(y)

Not a chance.  The nearby bases that also have the ability to launch just as many and MORE airframes totally offsets this concept.  Yes... this is a game.  Unfortunately it's becoming a gamey game rather than a simulation game.

[Tumor]

Originally posted by Ripsnort
http://www.combinedfleet.com/kaiten.htm

Slightly out of context Rip:

"By late 1944[/size][/color], the war situation had deteriorated for Japan to the point where extraordinary measures were seen as offering the only way out of an increasingly grim military predicament."

[Tumor]

Originally posted by AtmkRstr
The pilots of the mini subs were not expected to return according to the TV program.  The program speculated on what a Japanese soldier would do when they expected to be captured.  Maybe that answers your question.

However they at least one was trying to escape (I saw the program too).

[muckmaw]

Rooster...

If you really want the book, e-mail me your address,and I'll send it to you when I'm done. I should finish it this week (700 Page book)

jpizzo127@yahoo.com