RE: Should I scrap the Yamato on turn one?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Should I scrap the Yamato on turn one?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: Should I scrap the Yamato on turn one?

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Should I scrap the Yamato on turn one? - 6/30/2004 8:16:47 PM

Xargun

Posts: 3690
Joined: 2/14/2004
From: Near Columbus, Ohio
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kaleun

At the risk of giving my future PBEM opponent ideas, that would be like the use of the pocket battleship as a commerce raider a la Graf Spee.
Maybe Yamato is not that fast, but with a couple of Destroyers could be quite dangerous

Just looked. The Yamato has a max speed of 27 and a cruise speed of 15. She will be done in 5.5 months with her sister ship being done in just under a year - I thought there were more than 2 of them ? But they are the only BBs in the Japanese production list...

Xargun

(in reply to kaleun)

Post #: 31

RE: Should I scrap the Yamato on turn one? - 6/30/2004 8:19:55 PM

rlc27

Posts: 306
Joined: 7/21/2001
From: Connecticut, USA
Status: offline

Shinano would have made a great fleet support vessel had she lived. At the time she was kommished it would have been foolhardy to make her a supercarrier as there were no pilots! Don't forget the Japaners were using AC's as DECOYS at that point in the war.

Now, if she had been around at Midway things might have been different. I wonder how she would have stoof up to an air attack?

_____________________________

"They couldn't hit an elephant from this dist--"

--John Sedgwick, failing to reduce suppression during the Battle of the Wilderness, U.S. Civil War.

(in reply to jnier)

Post #: 32

RE: Should I scrap the Yamato on turn one? - 6/30/2004 8:29:41 PM

tsimmonds

Posts: 5498
Joined: 2/6/2004
From: astride Mason and Dixon's Line
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jnier

Is it possible to prevent the conversion of the Shinano to a CV? Can she be built as a BB?

And what about the hybrids BB/CV's? Can you keep them as BB's?

No. Yes.

_____________________________

Fear the kitten!

(in reply to jnier)

Post #: 33

RE: Should I scrap the Yamato on turn one? - 6/30/2004 8:33:56 PM

doktor1957

Posts: 134
Joined: 6/6/2004
Status: offline

I think the Yamato fulfilled Mahan's threat of a 'Fleet-in-being'. The mere existance of such a titan (though I've seen comparisons that show the Iowa class as being superior), compels one's enemies to change their tactics and strategy just in case it suddenly showed up in a line of battle. Wow, that's the longest sentence I've ever written. Please Matrix, I must have this game today! My vacation is starting!

Dave
San Diego

(in reply to jnier)

Post #: 34

RE: Should I scrap the Yamato on turn one? - 6/30/2004 8:40:23 PM

Subchaser

Posts: 1201
Joined: 11/15/2002
Status: offline

Japanese player should not scrap Yamato, he should use this powerful ship whenever it�s possible, in 1942-43 Yamato can beat any Allied warship�even just presence of this ship could be a very serious factor.

_____________________________

(in reply to doktor1957)

Post #: 35

Think of all those subs I could make - 6/30/2004 8:42:51 PM

Posts: 26
Joined: 6/3/2004
Status: offline

Maybe in reality the japanese could not scrap their biggest BB. But If I want to win there is no rule against scrapping it? Does anyone know if I get the steel back for the thing for use in Subs, MSW, and PC type ships?

How many sub sorties could I make on the fuel from one equa-distant / equal time length Yamato Sortee? Can someone give me some numbers?

Thanks for the fanatical comments, but I just wanna win the game as a game, I don't really care about the historic past of it all.

The allied player doesn't know I scrapped it, so it is still a threat.

yours
Og

< Message edited by Og -- 6/30/2004 6:45:56 PM >

(in reply to Og)

Post #: 36

RE: Think of all those subs I could make - 6/30/2004 8:44:56 PM

kaleun

Posts: 5145
Joined: 5/29/2002
From: Colorado
Status: offline

considering the way the allied asw is modelled, just about one per sub.

_____________________________

Appear at places to which he must hasten; move swiftly where he does not expect you.
Sun Tzu

(in reply to Og)

Post #: 37

RE: Should I scrap the Yamato on turn one? - 6/30/2004 8:53:24 PM

Mike Scholl

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kaleun

I guess we can't convert the Mushashi to a CV can we?

In December, 1941, Yamato was "working up", and Musashi was in the final "fitting out"
stages. Doing anything with them except using them would be a tremendous waste
of effort and materials. Trying to disassemble one of these monstrosities would take
almost as much work as puting it together did. They are the only two Japanese BB's
with enough AAA to be actually worth sailing with the CV's. And in a "pinch" they can
fight a he11 of a rearguard action. Why would you want to scrap them now? The time
to scrap them was in 1936, before they were built---then you might have been able to
use the resources for something else. 1942 is too late..., so use them for what they are.

(in reply to kaleun)

Post #: 38

RE: Think of all those subs I could make - 6/30/2004 9:02:47 PM

Xargun

Posts: 3690
Joined: 2/14/2004
From: Near Columbus, Ohio
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Og

Maybe in reality the japanese could not scrap their biggest BB. But If I want to win there is no rule against scrapping it? Does anyone know if I get the steel back for the thing for use in Subs, MSW, and PC type ships?

How many sub sorties could I make on the fuel from one equa-distant / equal time length Yamato Sortee? Can someone give me some numbers?

Thanks for the fanatical comments, but I just wanna win the game as a game, I don't really care about the historic past of it all.

The allied player doesn't know I scrapped it, so it is still a threat.

yours
Og

In WitP you can HALT the production of ANY ship until its produced - but halting it does nothing for you - you simply stop spending ship points on it - halting the Yamato (or her sister ship) doesn't really benefit you much - you might get some smaller ships faster, but the firepower these two ships have is well worth it. I plan on using them to blow the hell out of any Allied ship I see in 42 and 43 - at least until the Iowas show up - then its a more even slugfest... I just have to keep them safe from Allied air power til then.

I would think 1 Yamato is worth a dozen or more lesser ships in combat and especially in bombardment missions... imagine sitting at Port Moresby thinking your safe when up sails the Yamato at night and bombards the hell out of you and sails out of range before you can strike back.... a nightmare to be sure.

Or think of 2 Yamatos and some escorts sailing between the West coast and PH blockading it ? Or down near Suva blockading Oz from the US ? They will blow the hell out of anything less than a cruiser easily - and probably even them too...

Xargun

< Message edited by Xargun -- 6/30/2004 7:03:52 PM >

(in reply to Og)

Post #: 39

RE: Think of all those subs I could make - 6/30/2004 9:11:08 PM

tbone1218

Posts: 41
Joined: 6/3/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kaleun

considering the way the allied asw is modelled, just about one per sub.

LOL!

(in reply to kaleun)

Post #: 40

RE: Think of all those subs I could make - 6/30/2004 9:16:19 PM

Posts: 26
Joined: 6/3/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Xargun

I just have to keep them safe from Allied air power til then.

Or think of 2 Yamatos and some escorts sailing between the West coast and PH blockading it ? Or down near Suva blockading Oz from the US ? They will blow the hell out of anything less than a cruiser easily - and probably even them too...

Xargun

You don't have to blow the hell out of a ship to put it out of action and delay the end of the war. I would rather disable 4 or 5 essex carriers with my sub fleet that go on a joy-ride on the yamato.

This seems like a war of attrition, with US subs being the number one threat. Coherent ASW plan sound much more useful than wasting rescources on giant air targets. When they get sunk, I lose a ton of exp points too.

If players ever do reach late 43 in this game, the advantages of this strategy may become obvious. If you don't really plan to finish a game, sure the Yamato is an amusing interlude.

I hope I get some players with your notions when I am the USA though.

yours
Og

< Message edited by Og -- 6/30/2004 7:21:42 PM >

(in reply to Xargun)

Post #: 41

RE: Think of all those subs I could make - 6/30/2004 9:17:12 PM

Onime No Kyo

Posts: 16842
Joined: 4/28/2004
Status: offline

quote:

would think 1 Yamato is worth a dozen or more lesser ships in combat and especially in bombardment missions... imagine sitting at Port Moresby thinking your safe when up sails the Yamato at night and bombards the hell out of you and sails out of range before you can strike back.... a nightmare to be sure.

If UV has taught me anything, its that sailing anywhere south of PM is asking for it. I've always marched my troops overland from Buna. Its a pain to the grunts but at least the floating stuff is safe. Its enough of a problem just to keep Buna supplied.

_____________________________

"Mighty is the Thread! Great are its works and insane are its inhabitants!" -Brother Mynok

(in reply to Xargun)

Post #: 42

RE: Think of all those subs I could make - 6/30/2004 9:26:49 PM

Xargun

Posts: 3690
Joined: 2/14/2004
From: Near Columbus, Ohio
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Onime No Kyo

If UV has taught me anything, its that sailing anywhere south of PM is asking for it. I've always marched my troops overland from Buna. Its a pain to the grunts but at least the floating stuff is safe. Its enough of a problem just to keep Buna supplied.

You keep forgetting how wide open the Southern Pacific Ocean is... You stay away from Noumea and I think thats the only real airbase in that area.. There's a lot of open ocean to hide a fleet in.. Just hide in a hex with react on and let them come to you...

As for using subs - subs are slower to get anywhere and only have a couple of shots (and so far 75% of all my subs have missed every shot) before they have to sail all the way back to a size 9 port or a AS ship for resupply... A surface TF is much more efficient... plus, if the Allied player sees a sub he'll either go around it, or send a DD TF to sink it.. Its much harder to avoid a roving TF and the Yamatos are not that easy to sink without air power... and IF he brings his CVs to hit you, you run... and while his CVs are chasing you, you strike Port Moresby, Darwin, Pearl Harbor or such more important targets with your CVs...

Most of all the Japanese must maintain the initiative through 43 or you will loose.. Make the Allies keep reacting to you and you'll keep him offbalance and make it harder for him to counter attack... Let him wait til he's ready and you have lost.

Xargun

(in reply to Onime No Kyo)

Post #: 43

RE: Should I scrap the Yamato on turn one? - 6/30/2004 9:31:21 PM

Aloid

Posts: 47
Joined: 6/2/2000
From: Simi "touchme feelme" Valley
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Yamato or 500+ ASW escorts? I'd rather have the escorts and leave the Japanese fixation for sword size to weirdo zaibatsu execs who like to knaw on Walrus knob, Bluefin Tuna horn and dirty school girl panties. Essentially, Yamato class were basically just a "mine is bigger" venture.

Might catch some flak for that one...

Ron, that's funny! Made my Day..
Cheers!

(in reply to Ron Saueracker)

Post #: 44

RE: Think of all those subs I could make - 6/30/2004 9:40:58 PM

UncleBuck

Posts: 633
Joined: 10/31/2003
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: offline

That is my thought exactly. There is a great deal of Blue Water in the Pacific. You only need to worry about the Allied players carriers. You know where his bases are and can stay in the open spaces between them. If as you said, he sends his carriers to take out your Raider force, you are free to do bad things elsewhere without their interference. I think the Aw S*&T factor a BB group Yamato or not would have to the Allied player when it is discovered say between the US and PH, or Australia and Fiji would be worth the fuel and the loss of the Yamato. He could never be certain you aren't trying it again and will have to place forces in his rear to protect the supply lines from a serious threat.

Another Cooky Idea would be to stick a CVL like Shoho with the Yamato. Use its planes to search and add that extra to the strike force. Would be expensive to lose but, you could probably play it safe and just spread havoc behind the lines.

UB

(in reply to Xargun)

Post #: 45

The Lurking Yamato Fantasy - 6/30/2004 9:49:54 PM

Posts: 26
Joined: 6/3/2004
Status: offline

US Cls have float planes ya know, and then there are jeep carriers etc. Does the Yamato run at high speed as soon as it is spotted (kinda like the Bizmark)? or does it move a little and then lurk again, hoping the carriers aren't on the way?

Does the Yamato have ASW escorts for all this, and if so does it have the AOs to constantly refuel them?

This sounds like a costly venture that risks losing the Yamato and 5 support ships for 20 AKs at the most.

You are right about one thing, if you just gotta do this, you would be better off just sending the Shoho, at least it can actually find enemy task forces with some reliability.

A stack of Subs would do a much batter job--their best weapon is their torpedo ya know, but by all means, don't let me discourage you from these antics.

yours
Og

< Message edited by Og -- 6/30/2004 7:57:55 PM >

(in reply to UncleBuck)

Post #: 46

RE: The Lurking Yamato Fantasy - 6/30/2004 10:15:32 PM

gunnergoz

Posts: 447
Joined: 5/21/2002
From: San Diego CA
Status: offline

Playing against the computer AI - It won't care a whit if I scrap the Yamato/Mushashi...but a human opponent probably would. In the "real" world, the ships are a very powerful force in being to be reckoned with, just the same as the Bismarck and Tirpitz. The poster noting that the time to scrap the ships would have been before they were complete on the ways is correct. Once built, there was little practical benefit to scrapping them.

As to the Shinano and it's potential at say, Midway...my guess is that it would have fared equally badly insofar as that most of the damage to the Japanese CV's came from exploding a/c and ordnance on the flight and hangar decks. Given that the Shinano still had a very heavily armored main deck (hangar deck), they probably couldn't have penetrated much past that, but once you get strong fires going, especially avgas, stopping them is a real challenge...one the Japanese could seldom do as effectively as US ships could. US shipboard damage control practice and effectiveness was then, and remains, some of the best in the world.

Were I the Japanese in '36, I'd not have built the super BB's and would have spent more on pilot training infastructure, CV's, effective AA, radar, ASW and long-range subs. Once the things were built, however, they should have been used more aggressivley, I agree.

_____________________________

"Things are getting better!
...Well, maybe not as good as they were yesterday, but much better than they will be tomorrow!"
-Old Russian saying

(in reply to Og)

Post #: 47

RE: The Lurking Yamato Fantasy - 6/30/2004 10:19:43 PM

UncleBuck

Posts: 633
Joined: 10/31/2003
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: offline

Again OG, Subs are not much threat to the Yamato. If they hit her and you think it needs to be withdrawn you can. A US sub is very unlikely to sink the Yamato. Also remember that with JP sub doctrine on, you will sink very, very few AK's with them. I am sure the Yamato can find the enemy reliably. Even if it does not sink anything, but makes my opponent move stuff around to avoid it would be worth it. The Patrol planes on the CL's are no threat. A CL will not harm the Yamato. If you don't think the tactic is worth it OG don't try it. But the question was should the Yamato be scrapped. I propose this as a viable and I believe an effective tactic to make use of the ship before the US gets enough CV based airpower to hunt the ship down without affecting the rest of the campaign.

Remember the loss of the AK's is not the real purpose of sinking them. The loss of what they are carrying is. If the 1st Marines don't reach the battle field because their convoy was sunk, or that 20K in supplies does not make it to the battle, it will hurt far more than the loss of shipping.

UB

(in reply to Og)

Post #: 48

RE: The Lurking Yamato Fantasy - 6/30/2004 10:25:01 PM

kaleun

Posts: 5145
Joined: 5/29/2002
From: Colorado
Status: offline

I hadn't thought of using the Yamato this way, but now I'm just dying to try it.
Next two hours will be spent deciding what should the exact composition of this long range commerce raider TF.

_____________________________

Appear at places to which he must hasten; move swiftly where he does not expect you.
Sun Tzu

(in reply to UncleBuck)

Post #: 49

RE: The Lurking Yamato Fantasy - 6/30/2004 10:26:25 PM

Posts: 26
Joined: 6/3/2004
Status: offline

So let me get this stright, UncleBuck, you think sending the Yamato alone to lurk between PH and SanDiego is a good Idea? Or to lurk, alone between PH and Australia someplace?

< Message edited by Og -- 6/30/2004 8:28:39 PM >

(in reply to UncleBuck)

Post #: 50

RE: Think of all those subs I could make - 6/30/2004 10:26:38 PM

ZOOMIE1980

Posts: 1284
Joined: 4/9/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Xargun

quote:

ORIGINAL: Onime No Kyo

If UV has taught me anything, its that sailing anywhere south of PM is asking for it. I've always marched my troops overland from Buna. Its a pain to the grunts but at least the floating stuff is safe. Its enough of a problem just to keep Buna supplied.

You keep forgetting how wide open the Southern Pacific Ocean is... You stay away from Noumea and I think thats the only real airbase in that area.. There's a lot of open ocean to hide a fleet in.. Just hide in a hex with react on and let them come to you...

As for using subs - subs are slower to get anywhere and only have a couple of shots (and so far 75% of all my subs have missed every shot) before they have to sail all the way back to a size 9 port or a AS ship for resupply... A surface TF is much more efficient... plus, if the Allied player sees a sub he'll either go around it, or send a DD TF to sink it.. Its much harder to avoid a roving TF and the Yamatos are not that easy to sink without air power... and IF he brings his CVs to hit you, you run... and while his CVs are chasing you, you strike Port Moresby, Darwin, Pearl Harbor or such more important targets with your CVs...

Most of all the Japanese must maintain the initiative through 43 or you will loose.. Make the Allies keep reacting to you and you'll keep him offbalance and make it harder for him to counter attack... Let him wait til he's ready and you have lost.

Xargun

Don't forget these fuel guzzling battle wagons won't be able to loiter much at all in that part of the map. It's a long way to places like Fiji or American Somoa from Rabaul or Truk. And early in the War you probably aren't going to have built up enough fuel in either place to send a replenishment TF all the way out there with enough left over to let the Yamato and Musashi have a good drink..... As Frag has told me quite often.......IT'S THE MAP, STUPID! The map is going to prevent a lot of things. Even you can organize somthing, you do it at the peril of some other operation....

(in reply to Xargun)

Post #: 51

RE: Think of all those subs I could make - 6/30/2004 11:08:30 PM

UncleBuck

Posts: 633
Joined: 10/31/2003
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: offline

Hey Zoomie, I recognize that it is an awful long way to get them to far off places, and that forward bases will be few and far between. That is why I would make up a Refueling TF to top them off before they jump off into the great unknown. Even a couple weeks of prowling in the rear could yield some real benefits.

OG, I am not saying to send the Yamato alone. I was thinking of a couple TF types for the long range commerce raider. 1) 4 dd's, 1 CL, 1 CA and the Yamato. Or 2) the same as group 1 but add a Light Carrier.

There is a great area to hide a small force like the Yamato TF and a similar Replenishment group, in SAFE JP controlled waters (for the Replenishment group). The U.S> Is most likely not going to have pushed past or even to WAKE by the time the Yamato is ready for this foray. So maybe basing the force out of Kwajelien or Ojite would work. I do not have the game but again I think this would be a worthwhile idea to get use out of these expensive ships without throwing them into situations you know they will get mauled. It will build crew experience, and may prove to be effective.

As for endurance. I believe that the battle group such as I described should have a several week cruising range if it is refueled prior to leaving friendly areas. IF it takes another week to reach the hunting grounds and spends two weeks patrolling a week back to the refueling point it should work out. Now if I just had the game or if someone that does have it could try it out we would know if it is possible.

UB

UB

(in reply to ZOOMIE1980)

Post #: 52

RE: Should I scrap the Yamato on turn one? - 6/30/2004 11:08:36 PM

Ron Saueracker

Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline

Yamato is a very big and well armed AO.

_____________________________

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to jnier)

Post #: 53

RE: Think of all those subs I could make - 6/30/2004 11:13:18 PM

ZOOMIE1980

Posts: 1284
Joined: 4/9/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: UncleBuck

Hey Zoomie, I recognize that it is an awful long way to get them to far off places, and that forward bases will be few and far between. That is why I would make up a Refueling TF to top them off before they jump off into the great unknown. Even a couple weeks of prowling in the rear could yield some real benefits.

OG, I am not saying to send the Yamato alone. I was thinking of a couple TF types for the long range commerce raider. 1) 4 dd's, 1 CL, 1 CA and the Yamato. Or 2) the same as group 1 but add a Light Carrier.

There is a great area to hide a small force like the Yamato TF and a similar Replenishment group, in SAFE JP controlled waters (for the Replenishment group). The U.S> Is most likely not going to have pushed past or even to WAKE by the time the Yamato is ready for this foray. So maybe basing the force out of Kwajelien or Ojite would work. I do not have the game but again I think this would be a worthwhile idea to get use out of these expensive ships without throwing them into situations you know they will get mauled. It will build crew experience, and may prove to be effective.

As for endurance. I believe that the battle group such as I described should have a several week cruising range if it is refueled prior to leaving friendly areas. IF it takes another week to reach the hunting grounds and spends two weeks patrolling a week back to the refueling point it should work out. Now if I just had the game or if someone that does have it could try it out we would know if it is possible.

UB

UB

Well I know I once mentioned somthing about sending a three CV TF and a supporting surface combat TF down the Australian Coast Brisbane way, or out to Somoa or such to raise some hell in Mid 1942 after the SRA was locked up, and Frag basically told me to forget about it. There's not enough fuel in all of Japan at that point to support such an operation...or something along that line.... I imagine Yamato and Musashi drink almost as much as Akagi....

(in reply to UncleBuck)

Post #: 54

RE: Should I scrap the Yamato on turn one? - 6/30/2004 11:16:45 PM

Damien Thorn

Posts: 1107
Joined: 7/24/2003
Status: offline

Wit hall this talk about scuttling ships, I want to know: what is the advantage to doing so? I'm sure you don't get any extra ships with the scrap steel. So, why do it?

(in reply to Ron Saueracker)

Post #: 55

Just let it sit - 6/30/2004 11:22:52 PM

Posts: 26
Joined: 6/3/2004
Status: offline

If you never finish it, I assume you won't lose any points for it getting sunk--and you can use the ship points for useful stuff.

(in reply to Damien Thorn)

Post #: 56

RE: Should I scrap the Yamato on turn one? - 7/1/2004 1:19:55 AM

Tiornu

Posts: 1126
Joined: 4/1/2004
Status: offline

If we ask about scrapping Yamato at the start, we need to ask the underlying question, Should Japan surrender at the start? The reduction of the Japanese battle line is a tacit admission that the American navy will win its war. Battleships control the seas, and the Pacific War was one of sea control.
Shinano was a fleet carrier. The description of her as a support ship can be deceptive. Her foreseen role was to steam close to the enemy fleet and land the planes from more distant (more vulnerable carriers) after their attacks, then fly them off for a second raid after which they would return to their home carriers. This increased the effective range of the other CVs' planes and made Shinano very much a bomb/torpedo sponge.
Graf Spee's range was somewhere near 18,000nm at 15 knots. Japan has nothing comparable.

(in reply to Xargun)

Post #: 57

RE: Should I scrap the Yamato on turn one? - 7/1/2004 1:48:28 AM

Alexander Seil

Posts: 196
Joined: 4/22/2003
Status: offline

By the time war in the Pacific began, it was already becoming clear that battleships were a thing of the past. Carriers ruled the sea in the Pacific.

(in reply to Tiornu)

Post #: 58

RE: Should I scrap the Yamato on turn one? - 7/1/2004 2:22:44 AM

Didz

Posts: 728
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wdirons

quote:

ORIGINAL: Didz
I think the question was can you scrap her, not should you scrap her.
Deciding to cut down on the size of one battleship fleet and route the resourses in another direction is perfectly valid but does the game allow it?

The title of the thread is Should I scrap the Yamato....

I agree the title is misleading but the question is quite clear.

_____________________________

Didz
Fortis balore et armis

(in reply to wdirons)

Post #: 59

RE: Should I scrap the Yamato on turn one? - 7/1/2004 12:36:37 PM

Tiornu

Posts: 1126
Joined: 4/1/2004
Status: offline

"By the time war in the Pacific began, it was already becoming clear that battleships were a thing of the past. Carriers ruled the sea in the Pacific."
I don't believe that's true. Neither did the US Pacific Fleet, as evidenced in the Dec 1945 report of the CINCPACFLT Board on Ship and Aircraft Characteristics which repeatedly describes the battleship as a vital unit. The mantra that carriers sent battleships slipping into archaism is too simplistic to be useful.

(in reply to Alexander Seil)

Post #: 60

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: Should I scrap the Yamato on turn one?