Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'kamikaze'.
Found 3 results
there will be no kamikazes in game. im sick of people asking. here are 3 reasons why there wont be suicide bombers in game A-they would only be for japan, which isn't really fair to the other nations wit carriers B-they were only implemented because JApan was losing the war C-they really aren't that good for this game 3 reasons why you really wouldn;t want them A-you have limited planes-once you're planes dies in battle, you cant get it back until the battle is over; in other words, a kamikaze used is a plane wasted B-they were pretty easily shot down, as they have to get very close and fly in pretty much a straght line to hit their target, in which time the aa gunners have some very good shots C-they werent that effective. they were great demoralizers and small ship killers, but they never sunk a battleship, and only a few fleet carriers (if any) were sunk that way. mostly just destroyers and escort carrers, possibly a few cruisers. and if that was wgat resulted from massic=ve waves luanched from large land bases, what could the puny force of 40 or so carrier planes do?
I honestly think that the blue wave camo for Kamikaze R is one of the prettiest destroyers in the game. I have no skin making talent at all so I was wondering if anyone could make a skin for any ships like Minekaze, Mutsuki, or even Shen Yang since it is part of the Minekaze class. I know this is asking a lot since all I've seen is someone make a perma camo mod for the Shimakaze that gives it the wave camo. I don't own a Kamikaze R and have no clue if they will sell it again so this is just me asking Cheers to anyone bothering to read
So this is something I've thought about a bit, because it's kind of tricky. It is my opinion that the Kamikaze was a horrible strategy or practice, but it's kind of difficult to really pinpoint why. It's a different strategy they went towards when their previous ones failed, and had somewhat better success, right? Now that I've thought about it a little more, I'm a little more confident in my views. One of the first recorded suicide attacks by the Japanese (that were not split-second decisions made by dying pilots, like the cases of rams of the Carrier USS Hornet or Destroyer USS Smith) was right after the Battle off Samar, where a Kamikaze attack was carried out on Taffy 3 just after their fight against Center Force, sinking the Escort Carrier USS St. Lo. After that, it saw much more frequent use during the Okinawa Campaign. Total count of losses: Japan: Roughly 3,912 Kamikaze pilots lost, combined IJN and IJAAF. US: 34 Ships lost; 368 damaged, 4,900 dead, 4,800+ wounded. (None of the ships lost were larger than an Escort Carrier. The majority of ships sunk by Kamikaze were support ships with little defensive armament.) Only about 14% of the Kamikaze forces managed to reach their targets. The intent of the Kamikaze was to turn the tide of the war, no? Clearly this did not happen, nor could it ever have. One of the major objectives was to destroy American Carriers, to which they somewhat succeeded. No fleet carriers were sunk as a result of Kamikaze attacks, though many were badly damaged, like Enterprise and Bunker Hill. At the end of the day, Japanese infrastructure was only able to produce 550,000 tons of shipping during the war, only 1/6 of what the US produced. Ship-wise, they might as well be outnumbered 6 to 1, with no way to produce more ships at a decent rate. (The US Navy launched more Carriers between 1943 and 1945 than Japan ever made, with 31 Carriers being produced (including CVL, not CVE). The IJN made 13 CV and CVL. In short, Japan stood absolutely zero chance of winning the war when the Kamikaze were implemented. They had lost control long before then, which is why I see it as a horrible waste of human life. There was no reason for them to die. They died for a leader's delusional fantasies of regaining the upper hand in a war that had been unwinnable since the loss of Guadalcanal. I think it also has to do with how I, as an American and westerner, value life. We generally value life higher than almost anything else, and strive to do all we can to preserve it as much as we can. They, at the time, did not view it the same way, and generally saw death as something gained rather than something lost, and were not so hesitant to give it away. But that's what I think. What do you think? I'm curious to see your guys' views on this. Maybe a different perspective will grant a new understanding of the subject.