Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Chain_shot

Question: Why didin't IJN CV's get kamakaze fighters?

66 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,709
[46856]
Members
1,922 posts

I mean they were real and something the US feared no matter how much they were downplayed as something that was not effective. Why didn't IJN CV's get at least 3-4 of them?

We got rockets so why not?

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,191
[HINON]
Members
14,007 posts
12 minutes ago, Chain_shot said:

I mean they were real and something the US feared no matter how much they were downplayed as something that was not effective. Why didn't IJN CV's get at least 3-4 of them?

We got rockets so why not?

Because dedicated kamikaze aircraft were land based. Also WG doesnt want to have to up the game rating.

Edited by RipNuN2
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,752
[A-D-F]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
8,763 posts
13 minutes ago, Chain_shot said:

I mean they were real and something the US feared no matter how much they were downplayed as something that was not effective. Why didn't IJN CV's get at least 3-4 of them?

We got rockets so why not?

WG wants their game to appeal to the largest audience.  Having in game suicide units that represent history, isn't the best thing for that.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,709
[46856]
Members
1,922 posts
1 minute ago, Burnsy said:

WG wants their game to appeal to the largest audience.  Having in game suicide units that represent history, isn't the best thing for that.

So they give us rockets instead? _ How weenie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,752
[A-D-F]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
8,763 posts
Just now, Chain_shot said:

So they give us rockets instead? _ How weenie.

I don't understand the connection that you are making between rockets and suicide pilots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,709
[46856]
Members
1,922 posts
1 minute ago, Burnsy said:

I don't understand the connection that you are making between rockets and suicide pilots.

Just that I think they would do about the same amount of damage and they would give ijn a flavor to their CV's. Kinda like secondaries on German CV's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,872
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
8,944 posts
15,773 battles

I don't understand why plane ramming is taboo, when I can ram my 2,000+ crewed battleship into another one in a glorious mutually destructive fireball.

 

Not bothering to generate a fairly niche set of mechanics of dubious use is a decent reason to keep the activity out of the game. Modeling aircraft as projectiles is probably a pain in the neck.

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,752
[A-D-F]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
8,763 posts
Just now, Chain_shot said:

Just that I think they would do about the same amount of damage and they would give ijn a flavor to their CV's. Kinda like secondaries on German CV's.

If you don't understand the difference between rockets, gun shells, torps and....suicidal pilots, I am not sure I can help to answer your question.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,306
[CLUMP]
Members
1,515 posts
2,180 battles

Because it's dumb and very controversial by the way didn't mention it's very controversial :fish_palm:    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,007
[ARGSY]
Members
1,892 posts
5,835 battles
Just now, Burnsy said:

If you don't understand the difference between rockets, gun shells, torps and....suicidal pilots, I am not sure I can help to answer your question.

Little Burns.....remind your audience that much of the concept of Kamikaze flights came about from terrible losses during attacks where while ordinance may have been delivered, fewer and fewer aircraft were returning anyway. So the Japanese simply thought 'Why the Fack not? Don't need to worry about an egress airspeed when you are just going to keep going!'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,709
[46856]
Members
1,922 posts
3 minutes ago, mofton said:

I don't understand why plane ramming is taboo, when I can ram my 2,000+ crewed battleship into another one in a glorious mutually destructive fireball.

 

Not bothering to generate a fairly niche set of mechanics of dubious use is a decent reason to keep the activity out of the game. Modeling aircraft as projectiles is probably a pain in the neck.

This right here nullifies any argument of controversial or not acceptable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,752
[A-D-F]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
8,763 posts
7 minutes ago, mofton said:

I don't understand why plane ramming is taboo, when I can ram my 2,000+ crewed battleship into another one in a glorious mutually destructive fireball.

 

 

Ships didn't leave port with the sole intention of killing themselves on purpose.  Kamakaze's very much climbed into their planes, know that they were already dead men.  The was no chance of survival and the clock on their life had begun running.  It was intentional certain death with not other possible outcome.

It's a very large difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,709
[46856]
Members
1,922 posts
2 minutes ago, Burnsy said:

Ships didn't leave port with the sole intention of killing themselves on purpose.  Kamakaze's very much climbed into their planes, know that they were already dead men.  The was no chance of survival and the clock on their life had begun running.  It was intentional certain death with not other possible outcome.

It's a very large difference.

It's a war tactic which was and is considered valid for some orientations and we ram in this game as well except for CV''s who are the War Gods favored children.

Edited by Chain_shot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,752
[A-D-F]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
8,763 posts
Just now, Chain_shot said:

It's a war tactic which was and is considered valid for some orientations.

I didn't say it wasn't or that it wasn't effective.

You asked why WG doesn't put it in the game.  I gave what I think is the reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,709
[46856]
Members
1,922 posts
Just now, Burnsy said:

I didn't say it wasn't or that it wasn't effective.

You asked why WG doesn't put it in the game.  I gave what I think is the reason.

yeah no thanks for input not trying to chip at you.- just think its a bit hypocritical that one of the most feared and talked about tactic used by japan has no place in this game. But we can frolic off and ram our GK's into anything we want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,752
[A-D-F]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
8,763 posts
10 minutes ago, Chain_shot said:

yeah no thanks for input not trying to chip at you.- just think its a bit hypocritical that one of the most feared and talked about tactic used by japan has no place in this game. But we can frolic off and ram our GK's into anything we want.

It has nothing to do with it's effectiveness.  It's a major moral difference between the two examples and the image that WG wants for their game to project.

The IJN did it out of absolute desperation.  It's a very....dark, thing for an otherwise somewhat lighter hearted game.

  • Cool 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,007
[ARGSY]
Members
1,892 posts
5,835 battles
25 minutes ago, Burnsy said:

Ships didn't leave port with the sole intention of killing themselves on purpose.  Kamakaze's very much climbed into their planes, know that they were already dead men.  The was no chance of survival and the clock on their life had begun running.  It was intentional certain death with not other possible outcome.

It's a very large difference.

 

18 minutes ago, Burnsy said:

It has nothing to do with it's effectiveness.  It's a major moral difference between the two examples and the image that WG wants for their game to project.

The IJN did it out of absolute desperation.  It's a very....dark, thing for an otherwise somewhat lighter hearted game.

Indeed Burns, a very dark concept that doesn't really need to be made light of in a gaming experience.

Remember many did the Sake downing, got ready then only had to turn back due weather. A brief reprieve that would have been.....disturbing.

Then there were tales of where the Kamikaze units would only select unmarried, childless men whereupon wives would kill first their children then themselves to ensure eligibility.

Nah doesn't belong in WoWs.

Edited by Sumseaman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,181 posts
1,685 battles
31 minutes ago, Chain_shot said:

Just that I think they would do about the same amount of damage

Ohhhhhhh no. Think of getting hit by a Long Lance, but instead of causing flooding it causes a fire & destroys all your AA/secondaries around the impact point. If it hits the main turrets they get permanently knocked out. If it hits the bridge or the stern it knocks out the steering. If you don't have enough armor your engine gets knocked out or your magazine detonates. And only 50% damage is repairable. That's a kamikaze.

If you want a rocket analogy: Imagine getting hit by a full attack flight of Gulfhawk FFAR's from the Langley...but all 12 rockets hit in the exact same spot, do full Penetration damage, blast radius x3,and an automatic fire. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,893
[FML]
Members
4,156 posts
16,067 battles
1 hour ago, mofton said:

don't understand why plane ramming is taboo, when I can ram my 2,000+ crewed battleship into another one in a glorious mutually destructive fireball

Took the words right out of my mouth. Ramming OK, crashing not ok? Very odd. 

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,063
[ARS]
Beta Testers
5,760 posts
6,009 battles
1 hour ago, Chain_shot said:

I mean they were real and something the US feared no matter how much they were downplayed as something that was not effective. Why didn't IJN CV's get at least 3-4 of them?

We got rockets so why not?

Kamikaze pilots were minimally trained.  They never operated off of CVs.  There is no basis for IJN CVs to use kamikazes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,893
[FML]
Members
4,156 posts
16,067 battles
1 hour ago, Burnsy said:

Ships didn't leave port with the sole intention of killing themselves on purpose.  Kamakaze's very much climbed into their planes, know that they were already dead men.  The was no chance of survival and the clock on their life had begun running.  It was intentional certain death with not other possible outcome.

It's a very large difference.

I am not sure that is true. 


Similar almost guaranteed one way trips were experienced by German u boat crews at various points but particularly late war, many commando/special forces troops particularly British operating behind German lines after the infamous Commando order, day strategic bomber crews against certain targets like Berlin, late-war IJN surface fleets including Yamato, the first waves on D-day, and pretty much anything involving Minsk, Leningrad and Stalingrad. Plus I’m sure countless other extreme risk missions that are less famous. 

Again, if the game allows battleships with thousands of crew to explode or ram, why not a plane with one crew? It seems like an illogical distinction to make. 

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 2
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,893
[FML]
Members
4,156 posts
16,067 battles
20 minutes ago, Helstrem said:

They never operated off of CVs.  There is no basis for IJN CVs to use kamikazes.

Lol, arguing historical accuracy in relation to this game.  

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,362
[PVE]
Members
7,874 posts
23,833 battles
2 hours ago, black_hull4 said:

Ohhhhhhh no. Think of getting hit by a Long Lance, but instead of causing flooding it causes a fire & destroys all your AA/secondaries around the impact point. If it hits the main turrets they get permanently knocked out. If it hits the bridge or the stern it knocks out the steering. If you don't have enough armor your engine gets knocked out or your magazine detonates. And only 50% damage is repairable. That's a kamikaze.

If you want a rocket analogy: Imagine getting hit by a full attack flight of Gulfhawk FFAR's from the Langley...but all 12 rockets hit in the exact same spot, do full Penetration damage, blast radius x3,and an automatic fire. 

Maybe in comparison to how rockets are implemented in the game...but if you sink 9 rockets into a target you're gonna get a pretty big boom out of it...pretty much comparable to a kamikazi attack...maybe spread out across the ship more...but still enough to do just as much damage to just as many vital components...& plenty of fires to go around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×