quick question...

quick question... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945

Message

SamRo -> quick question... (6/15/2004 12:45:08 PM)
Suspect already answered but will subs historically capable of flying subs be able to do so?

DoomedMantis -> RE: quick question... (6/15/2004 2:02:55 PM)
yes

tiredoftryingnames -> RE: quick question... (6/15/2004 2:22:04 PM)
What game are you testing? I have seen no flying subs launched from other subs. In fact there are no flying subs at all. Although there is a sub called Flying Fish. [:D]

Rainerle -> RE: quick question... (6/15/2004 2:23:59 PM)
Raising old question: When will sub vs. sub be included ?

tiredoftryingnames -> RE: quick question... (6/15/2004 2:25:23 PM)
When subs fly. [8\|] [:'(]

DoomedMantis -> RE: quick question... (6/15/2004 2:41:56 PM)
your in a jolly mood tonigh Tired, you get laid or something[8D]

SamRo -> RE: quick question... (6/15/2004 2:44:06 PM)
opps.... right so there are no flying sub's but subs capable of lunching aircraft will beable to do so then?

DoomedMantis -> RE: quick question... (6/15/2004 2:46:09 PM)
yes

tsimmonds -> RE: quick question... (6/15/2004 2:50:06 PM)
Wait a minute. You mean this game will have NO FLYING SUBS? That's it; I quit.

tiredoftryingnames -> RE: quick question... (6/15/2004 2:51:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DoomedMantis your in a jolly mood tonigh Tired, you get laid or something[8D] As far as I can recall I have not been passed into this world by a chicken recently.

DoomedMantis -> RE: quick question... (6/15/2004 3:17:19 PM)
oh thats good[:D]

Luskan -> RE: quick question... (6/15/2004 3:54:32 PM)
Little does Raver know I slipped a rocket propelled I-Boat into the OOB for our game (Iboat with six V2's strapped to the back). I plan to launch her from the Tokyo launch pad - if she lands in the ocean on the west coast, her crew should still be alive, so she'll ditch the rockets and become an ultra long range sub, or if she hits land (she's aimed at LA) her crew will be dead - but I'll have packed her FULL of propoganda leaflets . . . that way I win either way. I was also thinking that if Germany can lend me enough v2s, I might be able to retrofit the Nates into something useful . . .

tiredoftryingnames -> RE: quick question... (6/15/2004 4:04:06 PM)
Better hope he doesn't have 800mm ASAA (anti-sub anti-air) guns stationed at LA.

ZOOMIE1980 -> RE: quick question... (6/15/2004 4:21:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rainerle Raising old question: When will sub vs. sub be included ? That was a Cold War era thing, when us and the Soviets developed wolfpack tactics with nuclear attack subs to go after the "boomers". The sub on sub engagements, in WWII, if they occurred at all, were probably surface engagements using the deck gun.

Subchaser -> RE: quick question... (6/15/2004 4:38:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ZOOMIE1980 That was a Cold War era thing, when us and the Soviets developed wolfpack tactics with nuclear attack subs to go after the "boomers". The sub on sub engagements, in WWII, if they occurred at all, were probably surface engagements using the deck gun. These Japanese subs were destroyed by Allied submarines in Pacific 1942-45, 15% of all IJN subs losses. BTW, almost all were sunk by torpedoes I-4, I-122, I-28, I-29, I-34, I-42, I-43, I-64, I-166, I-168, I-73, I-183, I-351, I-364, I-365, I-371, I-373, RO-112, RO-113, RO-115.

ZOOMIE1980 -> RE: quick question... (6/15/2004 5:13:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Subchaser quote: ORIGINAL: ZOOMIE1980 That was a Cold War era thing, when us and the Soviets developed wolfpack tactics with nuclear attack subs to go after the "boomers". The sub on sub engagements, in WWII, if they occurred at all, were probably surface engagements using the deck gun. These Japanese subs were destroyed by Allied submarines in Pacific 1942-45, 15% of all IJN subs losses. BTW, almost all were sunk by torpedoes I-4, I-122, I-28, I-29, I-34, I-42, I-43, I-64, I-166, I-168, I-73, I-183, I-351, I-364, I-365, I-371, I-373, RO-112, RO-113, RO-115. Yea, and probably in a surface engagement much the same way a sub sank any other ship. There were no "Red Storm Rising/Hunt For Red October" sub on sub style engagements in WWII. The ASW technology simply wasn't there yet....

Radzy -> RE: quick question... (6/15/2004 5:26:43 PM)
If You take look at Sensuikan on the famous Nihon Kaigun homepage and search the fates of subs mentioned by Subchaser, you will find, that many of them were sunk by torpedo hit.

soeren -> RE: quick question... (6/15/2004 5:44:54 PM)
It was common for allied subs to hunt for axis subs, particulary the RN did it a lot ( at least in europe ). As subs spend most of their time surfaced, they are not invulnerable to an torpedo attack.

Nikademus -> RE: quick question... (6/15/2004 6:38:14 PM)
ULTRA intercepts allowed the USN subs to intercept and "lie in wait" for them. The Japanese sub would show up (often right on schedule). One torpedo is all it takes to kill a sub 99.9% of the time

kaleun -> RE: quick question... (6/15/2004 6:45:56 PM)
I remember reading about a US submarine, can't remember which, that would actually try to track the Japanese subs by the interference that their radar would cause on the US submarine's radar. Apparently very few IJN ships had radar, but most subs had it. (this must have been towards the end of the war) Unfortunately I can't remember the exact reference.

Subchaser -> RE: quick question... (6/15/2004 7:25:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ZOOMIE1980 Yea, and probably in a surface engagement much the same way a sub sank any other ship. There were no "Red Storm Rising/Hunt For Red October" sub on sub style engagements in WWII. The ASW technology simply wasn't there yet.... Sorry, but I have to post some more statistics: 46 enemy subs (20 Japanese subs and 26 German U-boats) were sunk by Allied submarines during the war. In return U-boats killed 9 Allied subs, Japanese submariners claimed 4 boats, although only one is confirmed kill. So�56 submarines were lost in sub vs sub combat during ww2, this number is not so miserable as you think. Almost all these subs were sunk by torpedoes as I said, and I don�t see anything unusual here. Subs of that era weren�t truly submarines, as it was pointed out they spent most of their time during a mission on surface and during this time there was no difference between them and surface vessels, they all were targets for submerged subs, no need for sophisticated ASW equipment here.

tiredoftryingnames -> RE: quick question... (6/15/2004 7:35:34 PM)
For this to be in the game one sub would have to be determined to be submerged hunting while the other would be sailing along on the surface. SO basically someone would get the jump on the other and treat it as a normal sub on ship combat. I can see it now. "Allied fanboys got their way, their subs are always submerged and kill my subs. How come my subs are never submerged?"

Mr.Frag -> RE: quick question... (6/15/2004 7:46:18 PM)
quote: "Allied fanboys got their way, their subs are always submerged and kill my subs. How come my subs are never submerged?" [:D] I want some borrowed subs with 88mm deck guns [;)]

tsimmonds -> RE: quick question... (6/15/2004 7:46:54 PM)
quote: ...one sub would have to be determined to be submerged hunting while the other would be sailing along on the surface... Actually, if you look into it I believe you would find that most of the killer subs were on the surface too. Probably most of these sub-on-sub kills happened at night, when subs were likely to surfaced and charging batteries, and when detection of these extremely stealthy vessels would be most difficult. Radar would be a huge advantage....

Subchaser -> RE: quick question... (6/15/2004 8:05:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tiredoftryingnames For this to be in the game one sub would have to be determined to be submerged hunting while the other would be sailing along on the surface. SO basically someone would get the jump on the other and treat it as a normal sub on ship combat. I can see it now. "Allied fanboys got their way, their subs are always submerged and kill my subs. How come my subs are never submerged?" I don�t want to say that missing sub vs sub combat is something worthy to loose sleep about, but in fact, it can be modeled quite easily. Here is one of possible way to do it - Submarines should try to intercept and attack submarine TFs that move through their hex during execution phase, chance of such interception (not attack) should be quite low. Here we can assume that submarine that moves through a hex, which is current patrol zone of the enemy submarine(s), moves on surface while enemy sub on patrol is submerged. It should always be ambush, submerged sub on patrol attacks one that moves thru her hex on surface. There were enough examples of successful �ASW� action of Allied subs without any help from ULTRA, kills by Taurus, Telemachus, Tautog, Batfish, by 3 Soviet subs etc. etc. Don�t forget that all allied subs were killed by axis subs without help of intel services of their navies.

ZOOMIE1980 -> RE: quick question... (6/15/2004 8:12:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Subchaser quote: ORIGINAL: ZOOMIE1980 Yea, and probably in a surface engagement much the same way a sub sank any other ship. There were no "Red Storm Rising/Hunt For Red October" sub on sub style engagements in WWII. The ASW technology simply wasn't there yet.... Sorry, but I have to post some more statistics: 46 enemy subs (20 Japanese subs and 26 German U-boats) were sunk by Allied submarines during the war. In return U-boats killed 9 Allied subs, Japanese submariners claimed 4 boats, although only one is confirmed kill. So�56 submarines were lost in sub vs sub combat during ww2, this number is not so miserable as you think. Almost all these subs were sunk by torpedoes as I said, and I don�t see anything unusual here. Subs of that era weren�t truly submarines, as it was pointed out they spent most of their time during a mission on surface and during this time there was no difference between them and surface vessels, they all were targets for submerged subs, no need for sophisticated ASW equipment here. Well I gathered the initial question of sub on sub combat was more pointed at fully submerged sub vs sub combat, ala Hunt For Red October where subs go at it, fully submerged using active sonar homing torps, which, of course, were non-existant in WWII. I image all those sunk subs killed by torp were hit and sunk while on the surface as any other ship was. And that kind of combat, is of course, realistic of the time.

tiredoftryingnames -> RE: quick question... (6/15/2004 8:13:13 PM)
I wasn't saying it shouldn't be in the game with my joke. I'm merely stating that it's a small part of operations and one that would for sure cause complaints when modeled because someone's sub would be given the advantage. For it to work whether one or both is on the surface someone is going to get the jump. But it's a moot point close to getting released. Maybe for a patch but that's a call I can't make.

byron13 -> RE: quick question... (6/15/2004 8:16:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tiredoftryingnames What game are you testing? I have seen no flying subs launched from other subs. In fact there are no flying subs at all. Although there is a sub called Flying Fish. [:D] Haven't been watching "Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea" recently I see. The Seaview had a flying sub. And since it was technically possible for the Japanese to have developed this during the war, I am demanding that it be put into the production cycle as of 1/1/46. If not, the game is broken.

Mr.Frag -> RE: quick question... (6/15/2004 8:22:29 PM)
Watch it when you send your subs into bases with CD guns if trying to transport troops or lay mines! [:D] while we are on the sub topic

byron13 -> RE: quick question... (6/15/2004 8:29:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag Watch it when you send your subs into bases with CD guns if trying to transport troops or lay mines! [:D] while we are on the sub topic Excuse me, sir. Are you suggesting that this is the quickest way to make a Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea? And probably one-way?

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.953125