 |
|
Coracle
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tassadar5000
*Sigh* Coracle, why do you still play the game? I'm sure you've been asked this many times....
|
Why do you care? I guess I'm an eternal optimist hoping someday Firaxis will finally get it right. Maybe I'm a consumer activist demanding quality products. Take your pick.
Why don't you care about the problems that still need to be fixed?
To the topic:
Why don't you care that there is nothing that can really be done to make these units useful as no real leader in his right mind would bother building them if they cannot attack the targets for which they were designed - merchant shipping and trade?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
kring
|
 |
Wichita,KS,USA
Dec 2001
time: 23:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by khyron
Hey Coracle. If submarines were only used in actions against merchant vessels, why did the Japanese fleet under the command of Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto on 7 December 1941 deploy subs at the mouth of Pearl Harbor? The Combined Fleet was out battleship fishing that day, they weren't trying to sink tuna boats. And of course, let's not I-58. That was another Japanese submarine, famous, in fact, for her action againt U.S.S. Indianapolis in WWII. I could go on, but perhaps another day. Germany certainly did utilize its U-Boat fleet to great effect in trade interdiction. But history tells us that submarines had other uses.
Historically real enough for you now?  |
On the Japanese navy's use of subs, they viewed them as support vessels for the fleet.
Most other navies of the time used them independent of surface fleets, against shipping, whether merchant or capital ships. The Americans in the Pacific and Germans were very effective in the use of subs against Japan and the Allies, respectively.
The Indianapolis was a target of opportunity BTW. Alone and unescorted.
Also, in the Pacific, Allied subs were used as Search and Rescue for downed pilots, to land covert teams on enemy held islands.
While these were other uses, their most devastating effect was trade interdiction: the US Subs in the Pacific virtually wiped out the Japanese merchant fleet; the Germans in the Atlantic, for a long time, almost did the same to the Allied merchant fleet.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
RedBird
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by kring
Also, in the Pacific, Allied subs were used as Search and Rescue for downed pilots, to land covert teams on enemy held islands. |
I always thought, in CivII, that subs should be able to carry spies as well as cruise missiles.
And it just occurred to me that a nice new unit might be a hidden-nationality explorer. Give it no attack, but pillage flag. Kind of a cross between CivII's spy and partisans.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
khyron
|
 |
The West Coast of the East Coast of North America
May 2002
time: 05:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by kring
On the Japanese navy's use of subs, they viewed them as support vessels for the fleet. |
Immaterial, really, but true. No, they didn't have wolfpacks of their own scouring the seas. But the purpose was pretty well thought out--stick 'em in the mouth of the harbor, and if any of the capital ships try to get out in the ensuing chaos of the primary prong of the attack, use the inherent stealth of the submarine in their moment of desperation to nab them where the Zeroes, Kates, and Vals couldn't. As others have said out there, subs are useful as a fleet screen--sweep them ahead of your carrier fleet to make sure that no one is approaching to nail them--or for other reasons. I don't recommend tossing out sub after sub and letting that be your navy, but they are useful in attacks on military shipping.
quote:
The Indianapolis was a target of opportunity BTW. Alone and unescorted. |
Not disputing this either. On the other hand, the boat's skipper, Cmdr Hashimoto, didn't peer through his scope, see an American crusier, and run with his tail between his legs because he was trapped in a little sub against this proud, tall American ship. The commander used his vessel's stealthy characteristics to track and eventually send to the botton his prey.
quote:
Also, in the Pacific, Allied subs were used...to land covert teams on enemy held islands.
|
Quite true. And in Civ III, there would be definite advantages to this, especially since it can be done. Imagine an invisible "explorer" unit tucked off behind enemy lines for recon missions. It's actually not a bad idea. As a consumer of scenarios who doesn't have the patience to make them, scenario makers, get to it! 
quote:
While these were other uses, their most devastating effect was trade interdiction |
I still content that they're not lame ducks in scrapes with their surface-roaming cousins, but I grant you, submarines are indeed most famous, or perhaps infamous, for interdiction. My two examples were the only ones I had off-hand at the time (and the only two I have now. *picks the sleepies out of his eyes*  ) But give me time, and I'm sure I can come up with more.
And this is a good discussion, kring, I enjoy it. My aim in making these points is just to put Coracle in his place a little. I understand the historical realities of these things, I just can't stand him blithering endlessly here, where he doesn't like Civ3, when he could be in the Civ2 forums making himself useful concerning a game he clearly prefers. In the end, it's just a game, nothing more.
But a pretty darn good one.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Destroyer
|
 |
Hobbits Armpit
May 2002
time: 05:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by kring
On the Japanese navy's use of subs, they viewed them as support vessels for the fleet.
Most other navies of the time used them independent of surface fleets, against shipping, whether merchant or capital ships. The Americans in the Pacific and Germans were very effective in the use of subs against Japan and the Allies, respectively.
The Indianapolis was a target of opportunity BTW. Alone and unescorted.
Also, in the Pacific, Allied subs were used as Search and Rescue for downed pilots, to land covert teams on enemy held islands.
While these were other uses, their most devastating effect was trade interdiction: the US Subs in the Pacific virtually wiped out the Japanese merchant fleet; the Germans in the Atlantic, for a long time, almost did the same to the Allied merchant fleet. |
It should be noted that the American provided a huge amount of support to both Russia and the allies many year before they "joined the war" in tems of materials and munitions tanks etc.
This is probably why the Germans were quite big on subs. With a free reign across the seas, the far might have ended a little earlier.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
seano1
|
|
San Jose, CA
Mar 2002
time: 21:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by johncmcleod
Even if making a sub a privateer in the game wouldn't unbalance it, it would be unrealistic. With sonar, one can tell what country a sub was made in. Each sub has its own signature, and sonar can tell an American sub from a Russian one. |
Also a sub can’t effectively pillage a ship, real privateers didn’t just collect bounty’s. Probably the biggest reason there’s only one privateer unit is that historically privetering was dead by the time the d\sub was invented.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:21.
Apolyton Time is 00:21. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
19-07-2002 19:04
|