 |
| |
|
|
The_Aussie_Lurker
|
|
Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
May 2001
time: 05:18
|
|
Dom Pedro,
I'm not sure which thread it was posted in, but the awesome Soren Johnsen mentioned, in response to someones query, that a future patch of the editor will allow players to give units MULTIPLE A.I strategies-both of which will be recognised! Given this, I'm sure that you will one day be able to give artillery units both a "bombardment" and "Offensive" AI strategy. This, combined with the above news, proves what I've always said, and that is: In spite of the whiners, the Firaxis community really do care about the fans of the genre. This game just keeps getting better all the time!
The_Aussie_Lurker
P.S: I don't won't to start a flame war but, just for the record, both the Firebombing of Dresden and The Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were war crimes, in my opinion! Also, gieven that documents have surfaced which show that the Japanese civilian government had already sought to make peace 6 months prior to the use of the Atomic bombs, it can hardly be argued that they were used to end the war! Just my $0.02c worth
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Coracle
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by The_Aussie_Lurker
Dom Pedro,
P.S: I don't won't to start a flame war but, just for the record, both the Firebombing of Dresden and The Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were war crimes, in my opinion! Also, gieven that documents have surfaced which show that the Japanese civilian government had already sought to make peace 6 months prior to the use of the Atomic bombs, it can hardly be argued that they were used to end the war! Just my $0.02c worth |
There is NO documented proof anywhere that indicates the Japanese would have surrendered WITHOUT the A-Bomb attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Those who said otherwise (without the proof) were all left-wing America-hating revisionist professors.
If YOU have proof POST IT, or POST THE LINKS.
As for "war crimes", let's talk about Australia's genocide against the aboriginal peoples, or, better yet, Japan's numerous and repeated war crimes, including decapitating the heads of Aussie flyers - or the brutal Rape of Nanking in which 400,000 Chinese were murdered in two weeks; it was so bad even the Nazis were shocked.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
The_Aussie_Lurker
|
|
Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
May 2001
time: 05:18
|
|
I stand by my comment that I DON'T want a flame war, but the truth is that Coracle has said something that I can't let stand!
You are absolutely right, Coracle. Australian settlers commited vile genocide against the Aboriginal people, and the Spanish commited genocide against the Aztecs and the American Settlers raped, murdered and raped their way across what is now the U.S.A. In WWII, the Nazi commited The Holocaust-probably the worst murder of civilians ever commited in such a short space of time! They also killed over 1,000,000 Russians in Stalingrad alone, and Stalin was resposnible for the deaths of millions of his own people. The Japanese murdered hundreds of thousands of Chinese, and killed many Prisoners of War through their barbarism.
SO what's your point? Yes, we all have blood on our hands at some point in our history, we all have pasts of which we should be ashamed. We cannot, however, let our own shame prevent us from speaking out about the crimes of others, either past, present or future!
If you were to ask me "did the people of Hiroshima DESERVE to be hit with an Atom Bomb, because of the actions of their military?" then I would have to say "NO!", no more than the Germans deserved what happened to them in Dresden! By your logic, Aussie diggers deserved to be brutalised by Japanese soldiers because of the crimes of their forebears in the settlement of Australia! Both of know, of course, that such a line is ridiculous!
On a final note, to Jaybe, I'm not entirely sure that the military government did veto that particular offer of surrender. You see, from what I've heard, the civilian government withdrew the offer when the U.S demanded that Hirohito be tried as a war criminal, which the civilian government just felt they couldn't accept! It's strange though that, when Hirohito got on the radio to announce Japan's unconditional surrender (after the 2 bombs), the military government made an unsuccessful attempt to kill him! Mostly because THEY wanted to keep on fighting!
Anyway, just another $0.02c worth.
The_Aussie_Lurker
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ninot
|
 |
Centre Bell
Nov 2001
time: 00:18
|
|
quote:
Sinking conventional subs is cake. Allied bombers broke the back of the UBoats in 1943 and 44. Conventional boats need to spend a lot of time on the surface. Once spotted the bomber can make its attack long before the sub can get deep enough to avoid the bombs in most cases. |
Um, sorry to disagree with you Notyoueither, but UBoats were not often at a disadvantage in the atlantic naval war.
Yes, there was a period of time where Allied air coverage was so expansive over the ocean that there was hardly a place for the Uboats to surface without a chance of getting seen, but by that time, the Germans had developed better technology, such as quicker aircraft detection techniques, the ability to refuel and get air below the surface of the water, and some other techniques.
Any good historian will tell you that the Uboat never was defeated in the atlantic, it just no longer had a war to fight in the end.
(oh... and i dont THINK this post is over who uselessly bombed who... i THINK it is about the patch... am I wrong?)
So, if i have to say something about the patch, i personally would like an AI that, at the bargaining table, is a little more.... firm, and an advisor that could be slightly wrong perhaps... I dunno, it just feels... wrong to be able to keep changing a gold-per-turn setting untill it is at an optimum.
Also... i dislike my advisor adivising me to be cautious with the English, because they betrayed my friends the Persians before... when in reality, it was I who nuked and conquered Persia in the end, of course, with the help of England. That just seems.... well... i dunno, is my advisor a propaganda artist or what?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
D.K
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Coracle
Actually, by sheer numbers the worst was by your countrymen in the U.K. on Dresden in February of 1945 - and it was also a totally useless and pointless atrocity. America's attacks forced Japan to make peace. |
hmmm, somehow i'd rather be under a bombing raid than an atom bomb - just my own personal preference but neither is tantalising
did anyone mention the romans yet?
or the greeks?
in fact, i challenge someone to name an empire that did not slaughter masses of innocent people - are there any successful modern countries without bloodshed in their past?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
notyoueither
|
 |
of naught
Aug 2001
time: 22:18
|
|
Oh, what the h*ll. Here we go.
Ahem.
The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki with the first Atomic weapons were no more war crimes than the bombing of any other civilian population during the war.
To begin with, the bombs were not dropped out of the blue, without provocation, warning or consideration for the consequences. The consequences of not using the bomb(s) spoke most loudly for their use.
To fully understand the use of the bombs you have to begin with the end of WWI. In that conflict, the belligerents beat themselves senseless and the issue was only decided when one side sought terms due to an inability to continue bleeding itself. The origins of WWII and the end of the second war began with the first war, or more precisely, with how the First World War came to an end.
However beat up the German Empire was in 1918 France, Britain and the British Empire were not in much better condition. Hence when the Germans began to seek peace, the Allies were quite willing to discuss terms. The result was the armistice of November 1918 and the subsequent peace treaties arrived at in a series of negotiations hammered out in Paris in 1919 and 1920. However, the first important point for the second war is that the German Army was allowed to get up out of their trenches and march home. Outside of certain border areas, Germany was never occupied. Representatives of the German nation participated in the peace negotiations, if only in a limited fashion. Even though the terms of peace were harsh for Germany, the fact remained that German representatives agreed to them. They had a choice. Germany could have rejected the Treaty of Versailles, however that would have ended the armistice and active warfare would have recommenced on the Western Front.
In Germany during the 1920s and 30s, some made a great deal out of the fact that the German Army had not been defeated in 1918. Some went so far as to say that Germany was betrayed by corrupt politicians into a humiliating peace. Some were very successful at beating on these drums. The NSDAP seems to have been the best at it. Eventually, the Nazis leveraged bitterness at the peace of Versailles along with the economic desperation of many Germans, along with other things, into forming the government.
Once the Nazis were secure in office and were able to subvert the nascent foundations of Constitutional Democracy in Germany, the beginnings of WWII were written on the wall (so to speak).
In the late 1930's the Japanese government was dominated by militarists. A 3 power pact was arrived at in 1940 and the Axis was complete. War in Europe had already begun. Hostilities between Japan and China had begun in 1937. Japan launched the war with the Allies in the Pacific in December 1941.
By January 1943 the war was not in the bag for the Allies by any means, however eventual success was anticipated by growing numbers of people. Thoughts on the end of the war began to be expressed. Roosevelt announced that nothing short of unconditional surrender would be acceptable. Why?
Many had already come to the conclusion that the war now raging around them would not have happened if Germany had been dealt with with finality in 1918. Churchill and Roosevelt were determined not to make the same mistake again. When peace returned, the aggressors would be disarmed, occupied and administered by Allied military governments. There would be no myths of undefeated armies betrayed by politicians. The conquered Axis powers were to be redeveloped and reconstituted as the victorious Allies saw fit. In short, the democracies of the West were well and truely done with totalitarian or autocratic governments presenting threats to peace and their liberty.
By mid 1945, Nazi Germany had been thoroughly defeated and occupied. Japan stood alone. Yes, the Japanese made overtures for peace, however they did not satisfy the Allied demands for unconditional surrender. Hence they were not productive. American planning for the invasion of the Japanese home islands and the final defeat of the Japanese Army and other forces were well under way. According to American estimates, based on experience with prior landings and clearing of Japanese garrisons, the Americans could expect to suffer 1,000,000 killed, missing and wounded if Operation Olympus were successfully completed. The losses to Japanese military and civilian casualties could well have amounted to 10 times that number, were the forces of the United States compelled to burn, bomb, and shell their way through the county side and every small town and major city of Japan.
The alternatives were unpleasant and in most cases completely unsatisfactory. The Allies could simply beseige Japan, however the likelihood that the Japanese Military would willingly capitulate without extreme leverage being brought to bear was next to nil. Furthermore, any lack of vigour on the part of the United States and the Allies could very well be misinterpreted in Japan after the war, just as it had been in Germany in the 1920's and 30's.
The dropping of the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were seen as last ditch efforts to force the Japanese surrender with minimal American casualties. The bombs were not used until after the Japanese government was warned of the aweful consequences of continued defiance.
There were some 300,000 killed and wounded due to the use of the bombs. Compare that to the millions of killed and wounded on both sides if the Emperor had not forced the surrender after the second bomb.
War crimes? I think revisionists in the West, and anywhere else for that matter, should get their facts straight before they come to conclusions.
As a parting thought, I will leave you with this to reflect on. Were it not for the commitment, determination and abilities of the great generation in Russia, Britain, the Commonwealth and the United States of America, none of us would be sitting here banging away at each other enjoying relative freedom. To question what those people had to go through and what they had to do in order to defeat totalitiarianism and almost inhuman ideas of society, is to be the ultimate ingrate.
Salve
[Edited for grammar]
Last edited by notyoueither on 21-03-2002 at 12:21
|
|
| |
|
|
|
notyoueither
|
|
of naught
Aug 2001
time: 22:18
|
|
Ninot.
Losses in the Atlantic 1941 to 1945.
Allied shipping losses in 000 of tons, SL
Allied construction of shipping in 000 of tons, SC
UBoat losses, UX
1941. SL 4,398. SC 1,984. UX 35
1942. SL 8,245. SC 7,182. UX 85
1943. SL 3,611. SC 14,585. UX 287
1944. SL 1,422. SC 13,349. UX 241
1945. SL 458. SC 3,834. UX 153
The Snorkel did not come until 1944. As you can see, the tide had turned before then and the prospects of the UBoat did not greatly improve based on the numbers.
Basically, once the power of the United States in its ability to produce ships and air craft was brought to bear, the outcome was determined with much further effort by the people involved.
After 1943, the UBoats largely gave up on convoys. It was then that support groups with escort carriers and land based air hunted the UBoats down. I have not looked up exact numbers of proportions of UBoats sunk by air and by surface vessels. However my recollections are that bombers were very effective against the UBoat.
Salve
|
|
| |
|
|
|
notyoueither
|
|
of naught
Aug 2001
time: 22:18
|
|
Oerdin. The RAF fire storms are orders of magnitude beyond anything the Luftwaffe ever dreamed of doing.
Yes, Coventry was a shock. The London Blitz was serious, but the city survived.
Bomber Harris had people at Oxford and Cambridge figure out how to set the very air on fire at the locus of the raid.
Hamburg in the North was the first target of the fire storm in July 1943. Temperatures reached 1000 degrees Centigrade. 40 to 50,000 dead over a period of a few days as the city burned. A quote from the head of the police in Hamburg, *amidst the howling of the fire-storm, the cries and groans of the dying, and the constant crash of bombs... children were torn away from their parents' hands by the force of the hurricane and hurled into the fire. People who thought they had escaped fell down, overcome by the devouring force of the heat... No flight of imagination will ever succeed in measuring and describing the gruesome scenes of horror in the many buried air-raid shelters.* The winds were caused by the air rushing into the locus of the inferno to feed the flames.
Very nasty. Nothing the British people ever suffered even came close.
Dresden came later. As for pointless... The Russians requested the bombing of German rail installations in and around Dresden in February 1945 to help with one of their attacks. Harris ordered a fire storm raid. The city, and its inhabitants were blotto. The exact number of dead is not clear. The area was crowded with refugees from the advancing Red Army. Some say more died in Dresden than at Hiroshima. The important rails largely survived.
I am very hesitant to second guess any of the people involved in the struggle against the Nazis. However, I have my doubts about the intentions of Harris. In fact, Churchill himself had misgivings about Dresden. In March 1945 he wrote: *The destruction of Dresden remains a serious query against the conduct of allied bombing...* He goes on to liken the raid to *acts of terror and wanton destruction.* Churchill's views were framed by the facts that Dresden was a very unmilitary target and it's bombing did not give any great aid to the Russians (among others I'm sure).
At any rate. No Britain never, ever experienced anything of the same magnitude as the fire storms of Bomber Harris. Britain suffered about 40,000 dead and 50,000 seriously wounded due to German bombing through the entire war. That is serious, no doubt, but is a far cry short of the human destruction visited on Germany and Japan from the air.
Salve
[Edited for grammar]
Last edited by notyoueither on 21-03-2002 at 12:28
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Andrew Cory
|
|
SF bay Area
Jan 2002
time: 21:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by notyoueither American planning for the invasion of the Japanese home islands and the final defeat of the Japanese Army and other forces were well under way. According to American estimates, based on experience with prior landings and clearing of Japanese garrisons, the Americans could expect to suffer 1,000,000 killed, missing and wounded if Operation Olympus were successfully completed. The losses to Japanese military and civilian casualties could well have amounted to 10 times that number, were the forces of the United States compelled to burn, bomb, and shell their way through the county side and every small town and major city of Japan.
There were some 300,000 killed and wounded due to the use of the bombs. Compare that to the millions of killed and wounded on both sides if the Emperor had not forced the surrender after the second bomb.
To question what those people had to go through and what they had to do in order to defeat totalitiarianism and almost inhuman ideas of society, is to be the ultimate ingrate.
Salve
[Edited for grammar] |
Thank you! My Grandfather was schedualed to be one of the first people off one of the first boats to invade Japan, if it had happened. This tends to bias me in favor of dropping the bombs.
He told me the story once, about when he learned what his part was to be. Aparently the CO of his Division _volunteered_ them to lead the attack. "Gentelmen, the first is the First!" The look on my grandfather's face decades latter as he recalled the horror that went around that room...
I say drop the bomb, drop 'em twice if we have them. But then, I am just a bit biased, as I said...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
player1
|
 |
Belgrade, YU
Sep 2001
time: 06:18
|
|
HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY, HEY!!!
Got your attaention?
If you want to speak about atrocities that's COMPLETLY off-topic.
Start thread there and leave here those who want to talk about rumors in Civ3.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
The_Aussie_Lurker
|
|
Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
May 2001
time: 05:18
|
|
Hi again,
I 100% agree with Player1. We've all had our little rants (including myself, which I now DEEPLY regret, as it has clearly pulled this thread even FURTHER off topic), we all now know our many, opposing, views, and clearly we are never going to come to any sort of agreement, at least, not here!!!
So, back to "reality". It'll be great to have the ability to toggle bombardment units for land/sea kill-as it will finally allow me to create what I've always WANTED-the DIVE BOMBER! Basically a fighter/bomber hybrid-fairly high bombardment strength, though not as high as a bomber! But higher attack and defense than a bomber (though, again, not as high as a fighter!) But, what makes it better than both is that I will have it flagged for both land and sea killing. So, you soften up your targets with a massed bomber run then, WHAMMO, bring in a squad of dive-bombers to finish them off! Of course, as someone else has already mentioned here, this ability will need to be balanced by the ability to flag ground and sea units with the the ability to perform air superiority missions! If this also happens, then I was considering creating a mobile AA unit which, like artillery, can be captured, but can have a chance to shoot down enemy figthers/bombers before they attack!
On another note, do you reckon that Soren will be able to get his "Double Flagging" option for AI strategy into the next Patch? I reckon this be truly cool as well. Also, judging from the last transcript I read (after 1.17f was released), Mike mentioned how, in the editor, he wanted to lump all the flags for improvements, Sm. Wonders and Great Wonders into one, "catch all" category! If this also gets into the next patch, then the Mod-Makers dream has become that much closer to reality!!(After that, all that I feel will be required is civ and city placment, a flag which makes gov-specific improvements TRULY gov-specific, the ability to make minor edits to existing flags-eg changing Manhattan Project from all civs to one civ! and an events editor for scenarios, and this game will be well-nigh perfect!!)
Anyway, sorry for the length of the post, but hopefully this is something we can ALL agree on!!
Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
D.K
|
|
hmmm, so u dont think pearl harbour had anything at all to do with the bombs in Hiroshoma and Nagasaki?
the americans were just being the preverbial 'righteous dudes' - as always
|
|
| |
|
|
|
D.K
|
|
sorry, i thought it a little rude to not reply to such a long and well constructed post.
Ill refrain from posting on this topic again, so please dont think me rude if i dont reply.
sorry for spoling this thread a bit, hope it gets back to what its supposed to be
regards
DK
|
|
| |
|
|
|
The_Aussie_Lurker
|
|
Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
May 2001
time: 05:18
|
|
Hi Notyoueither,
I think you might have misunderstood me. I wasn't talking about giving AA units an "air unit flag". I was hoping that there would be a flag added to the unit editor for such things as Anti-aircraft capability. I was just thinking of an existing civ3 term that fit. If this were to happen, then bomber defence strength(s) would have to be increased, to reflect the height at which strategic bombers would be operating, but fighter and jet fighter attack strengths would have to be increased as well-to put them on a par with the bombers, but keep them fairly susceptible to AA attack. I agree, however, that your idea would work best but, will they do it that way? I guess we'll have to wait and see!!
I would probably have the Zero and stukka as industrial-era dive bombers, then have jets like the A-10 Thunderbolt as a jet age "dive-bomber" to reflect the amount of lethal firepower this kind of plane could bring to the battlefield!
I also happen to agree that bombers should not be allowed to fit on aircraft carriers or, if they do, they should take up much more space than fighters or dive bombers!! I feel that there should be a light, non-lethal naval bomber (as you suggested), which can go on carriers instead of the large strategic bombers.
Oh well, I guess we'll just have to see what happens when the next patch comes out-fingers crossed!!
Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jezz
|
|
Aussie Lurker, I believe you are talking about the X2 defense against air units flag from Civ2. That is the key missing ingredient in Civ3. Thats why air vs sea warfare is so unbalanced, and thus they had to originally enforce the can't kill ship with plane rule.
If they do nothing else right, I pray that they insert the X2 against air flag, WHAT THE HELL GOOD IS AN AEGIS IF IT CAN'T DEFEND AGAINST CRUISE MISSILES AND BOMBERS?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
codemast01
|
|
quote:
WHAT THE HELL GOOD IS AN AEGIS IF IT CAN'T DEFEND AGAINST CRUISE MISSILES AND BOMBERS? |
Here Here !! AEGIS Crusiers are not simply faster (submarine) destoryers. Also I would again like to say that the steath fighter is a redundant (with steath bomber) and therefore not useful. Firaxis should replace this unit.
The announced rule changes are very promising. Hopefully units like the AEGIS Crusier will get the ablity to actively (thru a player command) and passively (similar to the SAM ablities where an aircraft that enters its range has a chance of being hit) bombard aircrafts and missles.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:18.
Apolyton Time is 00:18. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
21-03-2002 05:30
|