Jap ships that you will never see

[Miller]

Having played many games now and the following ships are never sent to the Jap player, namely CLs Kashii, Katori, Kashima, Oi and Kitakami.

I am not bothered about the first three as they are useless. However Oi and Kitakami have 40 torpedo tubes and radar......why are they never released from Tokyo???

[RGIJN]

not certain when or where, but I think someone in this forum once mentioned "they arrive late in the game". However, I haven´t seen them at all so far - just like you. And I´m sad about too. Even more so considering the fact that they were at Truk in mid September 1942 (historically). Would love to have these monster launchers! [:D]

[Kingfisher]

I'm playing against the Japanese AI in scenario #14, and my latest strike on the Shortlands reports hitting the CL-Oi with several bombs. This is early December '42, and yes I've sunk or sent back to Tokyo quite a number of Japanese ships so far.

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: Miller

... However Oi and Kitakami have 40 torpedo tubes and radar......why are they never released from Tokyo???

I didn't think any IJN ships had radar, so perhaps these ships aren't released til late '43. I have played IJ into July '43 and don't recall receiving any IJN ship so well-equiped.

[Kingfisher]

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

ORIGINAL: Miller

... However Oi and Kitakami have 40 torpedo tubes and radar......why are they never released from Tokyo???

I didn't think any IJN ships had radar, so perhaps these ships aren't released til late '43. I have played IJ into July '43 and don't recall receiving any IJN ship so well-equiped.

The battleships Ise and Hyuga had radars installed and tested just prior to the battle of Midway, although the latter had its set removed.

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: Kingfisher

The battleships Ise and Hyuga had radars installed and tested just prior to the battle of Midway, although the latter had its set removed.

So in UV does the Ise actually have radar?

[Kingfisher]

According to the UV ship database Ise does not have any Radar installed. That said, I did find quite a few ships equipped with radars. For instance, the destroyer Yugumo shows it being equipped with both the Type 13 and Type 21 search radars.

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: Kingfisher

... For instance, the destroyer Yugumo shows it being equipped with both the Type 13 and Type 21 search radars.

Is that historically accurate?

[tocaff]

A limited # of DDs and 2 or 3 CLs are radar fitted in UV.  It's a good idea to use these ships in CV or Surface Combat TFs.  Don't waste them on convoy duty fron Truk to Rabul or Shortlands.............[:)]

[RGIJN]

actually, I never assign warships as DDs or even CLs for convoy escort. Later in the war you´re short of these vessels anyway...[:(] I rather use DD groups with extremely aggressive commanders (there are some fancy candiates amongst the DD skippers) to hunt subs. Sometimes it works... [:D] Type 95 and type 2 depth charges are quite effective if they hit.

[Kingfisher]

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

ORIGINAL: Kingfisher

... For instance, the destroyer Yugumo shows it being equipped with both the Type 13 and Type 21 search radars.

Is that historically accurate?

Apparently so, at least according to Combined Fleet. When she received them is unknown.

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: RGIJN

... I rather use DD groups with extremely aggressive commanders (there are some fancy candiates amongst the DD skippers) to hunt subs. Sometimes it works... [:D] Type 95 and type 2 depth charges are quite effective if they hit.

Someone recommnded assigning admirals to sub-hunting TFs, but in my experience, IJN ASW left much to be desired.

[RGIJN]

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

Someone recommnded assigning admirals to sub-hunting TFs, but in my experience, IJN ASW left much to be desired.

Why it should be an ADM instead of an able skipper (mostly CPT rank)? Can you remember the story behind Joe? Sometimes my top-notch Admirals are busy commanding SC TFs elsewhere anyway...

Ralf

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: RGIJN

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

Someone recommnded assigning admirals to sub-hunting TFs, but in my experience, IJN ASW left much to be desired.

Why it should be an ADM instead of an able skipper (mostly CPT rank)? Can you remember the story behind Joe? Sometimes my top-notch Admirals are busy commanding SC TFs elsewhere anyway...

Ralf

I understand, but that's what the post claimed; I have never proved or disproved it.