|
Post by garrisonchisholm on Oct 27, 2018 8:12:09 GMT -6
Isoroku Yamamoto said of battleships, “They are like elaborate religious scrolls which old people hang in their homes as a matter of faith, not reality…. In modern warfare, battleships will be as useful to Japan as a samurai sword.” Said the guy who chose the biggest religious scroll of all time to be his Flagship for the remainder of his time in the war. Early running for Post of the Year.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Oct 27, 2018 8:58:45 GMT -6
FYI Link to FTP 218 War Service Fuel Consumption - www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/ref/Fuel/index.htmlThis document is about as complete as you are ever going to find. One more issue to be considered is that the AA batteries on all the ships in the harbor were inadequate and especially the battleships that is why the Navy was heavily dependent on the Army's AA batteries. This is vital once at sea, because even though they might have air cover, it is not going to be enough.
|
|
|
Post by Airy W on Oct 27, 2018 11:21:46 GMT -6
By the time they got into the battle area the Japanese would've likely established long range torpedo bomber squadrons within range Okay, so the Japanese are diverting their incredibly threadbare logistical abilities from invading the Dutch East Indies to building airfields in the Philippines. Remember, they can only support a single division in the dutch east indies at the start of the war because they have so little shipping after accounting for Singapore and the Philippines. So you've just slowed down the tempo of their expansion by about 3 months and the battleships haven't even left harbor. A delay during that crucial opening phase could very well mean that they never push the border back too far for US submarines to operate. So instead of becoming effective in 1943 they become effective in 1942 and Japan runs out of oil that much sooner. Remember, their cargo ship building was ramping up rapidly so making them start taking losses from submarines sooner would have an outsized impact. Fleet in being matters. It might not be the most important thing but it does matter.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Oct 27, 2018 12:12:41 GMT -6
By the time they got into the battle area the Japanese would've likely established long range torpedo bomber squadrons within range Okay, so the Japanese are diverting their incredibly threadbare logistical abilities from invading the Dutch East Indies to building airfields in the Philippines. Remember, they can only support a single division in the dutch east indies at the start of the war because they have so little shipping after accounting for Singapore and the Philippines. So you've just slowed down the tempo of their expansion by about 3 months and the battleships haven't even left harbor. A delay during that crucial opening phase could very well mean that they never push the border back too far for US submarines to operate. So instead of becoming effective in 1943 they become effective in 1942 and Japan runs out of oil that much sooner. Remember, their cargo ship building was ramping up rapidly so making them start taking losses from submarines sooner would have an outsized impact. Fleet in being matters. It might not be the most important thing but it does matter. I have serious doubts that the Japanese would have given up the acquisition of the Dutch East Indies because their primary purpose for the southern operation was natural resources and the Dutch East Indies were prime on that list. Another fact is that a fleet loses ten percent of its strength for every 1000 miles it travels. That is not hearsay, it is a fact well documented. But I agree that, in some cases, just a fleet-in-being is important. So, the US would have had to move across the Pacific essentially performing the thruster action of War Plan Orange. That was cancelled for lack of logistical support in place at the beginning of the war. So, we would probably see carriers raids as we did except probably more of them.
|
|
|
Post by Airy W on Oct 28, 2018 5:55:09 GMT -6
Yes I concur that the Japanese are unlikely to make this choice. If it's down to seizing the territory in the first place and building defenses they would chose the former or they wouldn't have started the war in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by admiralhood on Dec 9, 2018 3:45:38 GMT -6
It would certainly make a great deal of sense to be able to have Taranto style attacks, and I am sure we have all thought of it, but I can't guarantee anything at this time. There a number of "signature" attacks from the WWII era, and trust me we have covered them. :] Can we assume that in RTW2, ports and harbors are no longer safe havens for ships like in RTW1?
|
|
|
Post by garrisonchisholm on Dec 9, 2018 9:05:31 GMT -6
Think rather that the harbor attack scenario would be constructed such that the fleet being attacked could not just limp 20 feet to "goal" and declare they are safe. The 'safe to harbor' aspect of the game is otherwise key to taking ships out of play, and though perhaps unrealistic, consider that to a new player such escape is essential. I think we would all agree to sacrifice realism for playability here.
|
|
|
Post by jwsmith26 on Dec 9, 2018 9:35:57 GMT -6
I'm not sure if aircraft carriers will be included in Japanese surprise attacks. I haven't run into that specific surprise attack scenario so far during testing, but the selection process for the ships used in a surprise attack seems pretty random, so I suspect it could happen. The game doesn't let you plan a surprise attack and certainly not one that takes place as far from the homeland as Hawaii, so an attack like Pearl Harbor is unlikely.
Port minefields, which were a pretty safe haven in RTW1, are not a barrier to aircraft and so offer no protection from air attack in RTW2. However, a ship that actually enters port and is then removed from the battle can no longer be attacked.
|
|
|
Post by admiralhood on Dec 13, 2018 11:08:03 GMT -6
Think rather that the harbor attack scenario would be constructed such that the fleet being attacked could not just limp 20 feet to "goal" and declare they are safe. The 'safe to harbor' aspect of the game is otherwise key to taking ships out of play, and though perhaps unrealistic, consider that to a new player such escape is essential. I think we would all agree to sacrifice realism for playability here. This is understandable. What about airfield? Will a player able to launch an airstrike on enemy airfield and destroy their planes on the ground? Not necessarily a surprise attack. Something like the Formosa Air Battle in 1944 would be great. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formosa_Air_Battle
|
|
|
Post by garrisonchisholm on Dec 13, 2018 16:12:15 GMT -6
Well, I can say that we are fully aware of the importance of catching aircraft during warming/arming, whether on ships or land, but we have yet to see the mechanism that will put this factor in play.
So, essentially, stay-tuned. :]
|
|
|
Post by rob06waves2018 on Dec 18, 2018 16:11:13 GMT -6
Just asking, will it be possible to pick where we can surprise attack and invade immediately or will the attacks be random and the invasions unconnected?
|
|
|
Post by garrisonchisholm on Dec 18, 2018 16:59:58 GMT -6
I would think, though I cannot say for sure, that the surprise attack would be against whatever harbor carries the most enemy fleet units that Japan is going to war against. As for choosing your attack, while the above would obviate a surprise attack selection, there is some early representation for a surprise invasion target for Japan which could be selected. Please do not presume this will exist in the final version (as we don't know what the cutting room floor will need to look like yet), but Japan would have some player directed options in that case.
|
|
|
Post by sittingduck on Dec 18, 2018 17:38:11 GMT -6
I would think, though I cannot say for sure, that the surprise attack would be against whatever harbor carries the most enemy fleet units that Japan is going to war against. As for choosing your attack, while the above would obviate a surprise attack selection, there is some early representation for a surprise invasion target for Japan which could be selected. Please do not presume this will exist in the final version (as we don't know what the cutting room floor will need to look like yet), but Japan would have some player directed options in that case. I would certainly hope someone sweeps that cutting room floor very carefully... some of those cuts on the floor could turn out to be jems in their own right if looked at again in the future.
|
|
|
Post by garrisonchisholm on Dec 18, 2018 17:53:24 GMT -6
Well Fredrik can't do everything on top of Everything, because we're already asking him to do everything.
|
|
|
Post by jeb94 on Dec 18, 2018 18:19:37 GMT -6
Isoroku Yamamoto said of battleships, “They are like elaborate religious scrolls which old people hang in their homes as a matter of faith, not reality…. In modern warfare, battleships will be as useful to Japan as a samurai sword.” Said the guy who chose the biggest religious scroll of all time to be his Flagship for the remainder of his time in the war. There were political reasons for this. Keep in mind that through much of 1929 Captain Isoroku Yamamoto was the commanding officer of the Akagi at a time when it was the First Carrier Division flagship under Sankichi Takahashi. When Takahashi was the Commander of the Combined Fleet, he spoke in favor of carriers over the battleships that the old-school admirals favored. This opinion was rejected by the General Staff and the Navy Ministry and as a result, he was relieved of his command and cut off from any further information on the Navy's future. Of course, with Takahashi being one of his mentors, Yamamoto payed close attention to this and knew very well the delicate political line he walked so the selection of flagship was very much a political decision.
|
|