Kamikazes (Full Version)

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



Message

WiTP_Dude -> Kamikazes (5/29/2005 4:52:46 AM)

I have some questions about Kamikazes:

1. Is their range doubled because of the one-way mission?
2. Are they more effective at short range due to more fuel being in the plane?
3. How much damage does a hit do?



Rocco -> RE: Kamikazes (5/30/2005 5:34:19 AM)

I thought you and Zeta were the only ones far enough into the game to answer that question [:D] Or was that freeboy? [&:]

Rocco



WiTP_Dude -> RE: Kamikazes (5/30/2005 9:02:35 AM)

I thought someone would know about them around here.



kaiser73 -> RE: Kamikazes (5/30/2005 12:22:08 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rocco

I thought you and Zeta were the only ones far enough into the game to answer that question [:D] Or was that freeboy? [&:]

Rocco


Rocco....you got an important name. Gonna be hard to confirm the expectations of the women [:D]



Subchaser -> RE: Kamikazes (5/30/2005 2:48:24 PM)

quote:

1. Is their range doubled because of the one-way mission?

No

quote:

2. Are they more effective at short range due to more fuel being in the plane?

No

quote:

3. How much damage does a hit do?


It depends on aircraft type, Zero fighters sometimes cannot damage anything at all, carrier rammed by a single Zero usually has 3-5 sys damage and some fires, however 3-5 Zero kamikaze hits can force carrier out of action, but that’s a pure luck, the problem is that in Kamikaze configuration they still carry two 60kg bombs instead of 250kg bomb they should carry in theory. Aircraft that carry torps are the most effective kamikaze types, a pair of Jills can easily blow up a large carrier. It seems reasonable to convert only torpedo and dive bomber groups to Kamikazes, fighters, no matter how experienced, should keep enemy CAP busy, conversion of a fighter unit with exp rating of 60 or less – is just a waste of resources.



LittleJoe -> RE: Kamikazes (5/30/2005 4:24:25 PM)


The Way i see it, Kamikazes are kinda weak in this game, as the way air combat is modeled means they will ALWAYS have to go past 50-75 percent of the cap chasing them.

When in reality, a lone plane would be able to slip through the net sometimes and score a hit unharmed, well untill it hit the ship that is [;)].

Your not really going to damage anything of great importance, with 200 plus F6F's on Cap over any Carrier taskforce, and your squadron or two of Zeros/whatever, having to dodge bullets from 150 of them.



SgtSwanson -> RE: Kamikazes (5/30/2005 7:08:23 PM)

I would attempt to use them in conjuntion with some regular air attacks if I could afford to. Try to draw off the CAP with the regular attacks. I would also put the DB's at the lowest alltitued the game will allow (if you can do that). Force the CAP to be in more places than it can be.

That's about as far as my thinking takes me.



freeboy -> RE: Kamikazes (5/31/2005 1:03:51 AM)

Good luck, by the tiome they are available the allies should be at least trying to cover the convoys and the heavies with a good deal of cap.. remember by the end of 44 the allies should be fielding massive cv cvl cve groups numbering thousands of planes.. and bases which likewise.. Aeta has scored some minor K hits.. nothing on a heavy to speak off....



Subchaser -> RE: Kamikazes (5/31/2005 1:53:20 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: freeboy
. remember by the end of 44 the allies should be fielding massive cv cvl cve groups numbering thousands of planes..


This is actually what should provoke Japanese to adopt kamikaze tactics. Employment of volunteer pilots on suicide missions was Japanese answer to Allied air and naval superiority, and probably the only possible answer in such situation. No thousands of enemy planes near Japanese home islands – no kamikazes, this is not a weapon system that was designed too late to change the course of the war, this was their new doctrine that was supposed to help to overcome Allied numerical and qualitative superiority. Kamikaze should be much more effective. Off Okinawa and PI Kamikaze inflicted 3389 fatalities, achieving a ratio of 1.78 Americans killed for each sortie. This tactic would only become more effective as USN closed on the Japanese home islands. It has been estimated that the Japanese would have been able to generate as many as 7500 kamikaze sorties off Kyushu that might have destroyed as much as a third of the invasion fleet. With current model we have in witp, kamikaze are next to useless.



freeboy -> RE: Kamikazes (5/31/2005 7:31:57 AM)

While I agree, the real kicker is the way the ai/ behind the game not ai player.. conducts the determination for what gets attacked.. so often lightly armed and escorted concoys are ignored and larger ones attacked, kami's go splat.. I am not saying they are worthless, but close in the game at least as it is now



WiTP_Dude -> RE: Kamikazes (5/31/2005 7:35:41 AM)

What is the largest attack you've seen? Would 250 Betties get some hits? 500? The only plus to the way WiTP works is that you can turn a lot of air units into Kamikazes.



freeboy -> RE: Kamikazes (6/2/2005 12:20:37 AM)

I remember one attack that Zeta lost several hundred planes but I dod not know if they where on Kami or not? sorry.. I dod not think they get any advantage in getting through cap though..
kami just do not do enough damage imo



AmiralLaurent -> RE: Kamikazes (6/2/2005 1:46:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: WiTP_Dude

I have some questions about Kamikazes:

1. Is their range doubled because of the one-way mission?



In real life, kamikazes were used at normal range. A part of kamikazes pilots returned to base when they found no targets.
And on the other hand, fuel still aboard the kamikazes after their crash was often adding to the fires and damage.



Zeta16 -> RE: Kamikazes (6/4/2005 11:41:21 PM)

Here is my take. If you can attack Tf with wiith lower CAPS with more planes the better you will do. I do agree they never seems to go for unCAPed Tf's. If I saw a carrier TF aganist freeboy I sat them down as his CAP where at times in the 200 and I knew nothing would get through. As I think Mogami has said at times you will need several hundred kami's to get one hit. I think that is what he said.



Yamato hugger -> RE: Kamikazes (6/5/2005 3:34:48 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Subchaser

quote:

ORIGINAL: freeboy
. remember by the end of 44 the allies should be fielding massive cv cvl cve groups numbering thousands of planes..


This is actually what should provoke Japanese to adopt kamikaze tactics. Employment of volunteer pilots on suicide missions was Japanese answer to Allied air and naval superiority, and probably the only possible answer in such situation. No thousands of enemy planes near Japanese home islands – no kamikazes, this is not a weapon system that was designed too late to change the course of the war, this was their new doctrine that was supposed to help to overcome Allied numerical and qualitative superiority. Kamikaze should be much more effective. Off Okinawa and PI Kamikaze inflicted 3389 fatalities, achieving a ratio of 1.78 Americans killed for each sortie. This tactic would only become more effective as USN closed on the Japanese home islands. It has been estimated that the Japanese would have been able to generate as many as 7500 kamikaze sorties off Kyushu that might have destroyed as much as a third of the invasion fleet. With current model we have in witp, kamikaze are next to useless.


All true, but look at the numbers of ships lost. Mainly picket DDs. Thats it. Basically (in game terms) pure system and fire damage, which is (seemingly) the way the game works. US Navy had 10% of its total war casulties at Okinawa (and I firmly believe this is what led to the decision to drop the bombs) but the number of sinkings was small. Kamakazies had a huge effect on morale of the sailors also.

But looking at it in pure game terms, it seems to work "historically" or close enough anyway.



eMonticello -> RE: Kamikazes (6/5/2005 5:24:44 AM)

Here are the Kamikaze and Suicide Boat stats....

http://www.usspennsylvania.com/NavalLosses.htm

Kamikaze Attacks:
CVE: 2 Sunk
DD: 15 Sunk; 8 Seriously Damaged and Scrapped.
DE: 2 Sunk
DMS: 2 Sunk
AM: 1 Sunk
PT: 1 Sunk
PC: 1 Sunk
SC: 1 Sunk
LST: 5 Sunk
LSM: 4 Sunk
LSMR: 3 Sunk
LCS(L): 1 Sunk
APD: 2 Sunk; 2 Damaged and Scrapped; 1 Damaged and Sunk as a Decoy.

Suicide Boat or Human Torpedo Attacks:
DD: 1 Seriously Damaged and Scrapped.
DE: 1 Sunk (Human Torpedo)
PC: 1 Sunk
LSM: 1 Damaged and Foundered.
LCI(G): 2 Sunk.
LCS(L): 3 Sunk.



rhondabrwn -> RE: Kamikazes (6/5/2005 9:49:17 AM)

If you are facing massive CAP, is it a workable tactic to send in level bombers at 10,000 feet coupled with Kamikazes coming in at very low level? Kind of the reverse of Midway where the American torpedo planes drew down the CAP to sea level while allowing the dive bombers a free attack.

Can the game mechanics allow this kind of tactics or does it all just get averaged in together?

Would the Allied player have to stagger their CAP at different altitudes to provide effective coverage?

Pardon my inexperience... I haven't played into 1944 yet to confront this. Dude and Zeta's AAR has me intrigued with the possibilities.



tsimmonds -> RE: Kamikazes (6/5/2005 6:42:53 PM)

rhondabrwn, I'm not sure that anyone could describe with any confidence the effects that stacking naval strikes in various altitude layers might have on the effectiveness of defensive CAP; factor in kamikazes (which are also only vaguely understood) and we're all flying blind together. Having naval strikes originate simultaneously from various LBA bases is also a considerable factor, as would be the effective use of Air HQs and leaders. Main problem is, hardly any of us have gotten as far as kamikaze season. I'm intrigued by the question but between my one PBEM and stomping the AI over and over in the Marianas (perfecting amphib technique you know[;)]), I know I don't have time. You'd be doing the board a service by trying out the '45 campaign as IJ![;)]



freeboy -> RE: Kamikazes (6/6/2005 8:19:16 PM)

fyi I movwed some carriers that where covering the beachhead, my term, near Osaka and Z clobbered one intire cve tf, probably get 4sunk or maybe 5.. .. he did lose a lot of his planes and I doubt he has much more save fighters ... I estamate he has maybe 250 of those left.

somehow he got by the cap, ok, he shot the crap out of it, and my best fighters where removed by the other carriers or doing some bombing oops!.. there I go again being overconfident and getting spanked[X(]



rhondabrwn -> RE: Kamikazes (6/8/2005 12:47:51 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

rhondabrwn, I'm not sure that anyone could describe with any confidence the effects that stacking naval strikes in various altitude layers might have on the effectiveness of defensive CAP; factor in kamikazes (which are also only vaguely understood) and we're all flying blind together. Having naval strikes originate simultaneously from various LBA bases is also a considerable factor, as would be the effective use of Air HQs and leaders. Main problem is, hardly any of us have gotten as far as kamikaze season. I'm intrigued by the question but between my one PBEM and stomping the AI over and over in the Marianas (perfecting amphib technique you know[;)]), I know I don't have time. You'd be doing the board a service by trying out the '45 campaign as IJ![;)]


Maybe I might just do that! It would be quite an experience to be a WiTP "expert" at something!

"Rhondalynn - Queen of the Kamikazes"

Has a certain ring to it, doesn't it? [:D]



Terminus -> RE: Kamikazes (6/8/2005 1:37:03 PM)

If you want somebody human to pilot the Kamikaze targets... ehm, Allied ships. I'll be happy to volunteer! [:D]



freeboy -> RE: Kamikazes (6/8/2005 5:56:00 PM)

follow up to above attack, carriers flying experinced pilots in good planes slaughter Japs raiding, one kami sneeks through for a hit on BHR netting 10 system damage, probably had 5 or 6 already, and one fire.. this is absurde.. not that I am complaining at the moment but if I was Zeta 16 I would be really upset



freeboy -> RE: Kamikazes (6/9/2005 5:51:18 PM)

Ok Yorktown just went down, did not even last the night!.. not sure how many but it did not seem like a lot of kami hits, maybe she took a torpedo hit too? oh well.. I geuss there is room to use these guys..



Capt. Harlock -> RE: Kamikazes (6/9/2005 6:13:48 PM)

quote:

Here are the Kamikaze and Suicide Boat stats....

http://www.usspennsylvania.com/NavalLosses.htm

Kamikaze Attacks:
CVE: 2 Sunk
DD: 15 Sunk; 8 Seriously Damaged and Scrapped.
DE: 2 Sunk
DMS: 2 Sunk
AM: 1 Sunk
PT: 1 Sunk
PC: 1 Sunk
SC: 1 Sunk
LST: 5 Sunk
LSM: 4 Sunk
LSMR: 3 Sunk
LCS(L): 1 Sunk
APD: 2 Sunk; 2 Damaged and Scrapped; 1 Damaged and Sunk as a Decoy.


That doesn't give the full story: a number of ships suffered severe damage and csualties from Kamikaze attacks, but did not sink. Chief among these is the Essex-class carrier USS Franklin, which was only saved by heroic damage control. My preliminary numbers show that 23 allied carriers (including at least one British) suffered Kamikaze hits.



WiTP_Dude -> RE: Kamikazes (6/9/2005 7:01:01 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Capt. Harlock

That doesn't give the full story: a number of ships suffered severe damage and csualties from Kamikaze attacks, but did not sink. Chief among these is the Essex-class carrier USS Franklin, which was only saved by heroic damage control. My preliminary numbers show that 23 allied carriers (including at least one British) suffered Kamikaze hits.


Correct, something like 300 ships were damaged IIRC. From the Japanese point a view, a ship out of action for 3-6 months at this point is almost as good as a sinking.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.828125