Matrix Games Forums

The Kami damage might be not too far off; in WITP they just bounce off BBs, and against Cruisers don't cause much damage. I have only seen good damage results against CVEs and AKs. Even then, it takes several hits to get a sinking.

If anything, it might be a bit too light, in that one hit generally won't sink anything, but that is probably true of all the ordinance in WITP in general; the engine models more hits, but less damage per hit.

The # of hits is way off for Kamis though. I haven't heard of alot of late-war testing in AE, so not sure if anything is changed from WITP to AE.

From a damage point of view, Kamikaze's should probably be more or less equivalent to a 250 kg bomb with an added fire effect and a little less penetration.
 
The biggest problem for BBs was usually that the plane spread burning av gas over a section of the ship.  If it hit exposed AA gun tubs, the effects were not pleasant.  If it splashed over an unmanned area, the effects were pretty minor.  Cruisers were similar.
 
For CVs, it was not uncommon for them to put a hole in the decking and make it to the hanger, but again the damage was typically more related to fire than explosive effect.  A CVE had very little, if any, deck armor and the kami had a chance at penetrating deeper, plus I suspect they had less effective fire fighting equipment than a full-blown CV. 
 
DDs and smaller ships/craft, of course, took much more damage, but even many/most of those hit by kamikazes (not including okha) were not sunk outright.  Many of the total losses were scuttled because it wasn't worth the effort to tow them back for repair, or brought back to the states and eventually decommisioned/scrapped as the war was drawing to a close. 

And what about Ohkas? They shoul'd have high AP ratings. And they shouldn't be invulnerable to flak!

Don't know about higher ap ratings. Aluminum crumples pretty much the same whether it's at 300 knots or 500 knots.

Not having a heavy radial or inline engine probably makes for less armor penetration.

One of the kamikaze hits on the Intrepid (or was it the North Carolina--I'm getting my ship visits mixed up maybe) had the aircraft impact causing minimal damage, but the pilot's body was ejected from the impact and destroyed an AA mount.  Go figure that one into the game mechanics [:'(]

ORIGINAL: byron13

But it is a lot easier to drive a plane into a ship than it is to drop a bomb on ship - a lot easier than Q-Ball's tests indicate.

Really? I haven't seen too many interviews with successful or unsuccessful Kami pilots... [8|]

Maxwell Taylor Kennedy's Danger' Hour, Simon and Shuster, 2008.  This book chronicles the kamikaze attack on Bunker Hill in 1945.  It is an ok read, but it does have a lot of interesting background information about kamikaze pilots-including some interviews.

ORIGINAL: Kwik E Mart

ORIGINAL: byron13

But it is a lot easier to drive a plane into a ship than it is to drop a bomb on ship - a lot easier than Q-Ball's tests indicate.

Really? I haven't seen too many interviews with successful or unsuccessful Kami pilots... [8|]

I'm thinking we're miscommunicating here. Q-ball ran tests where a number of kamikazes attacked a few transport ships without any CAP and obviously minimal AA. No hits. That makes no sense. I could see poor pilots not being able to hit a ship with a bomb, but anyone that can take off can hit a ship by flying into it if there are no other distractions. They did pretty well on 9/11 didn't they? Consider how hard it is to throw a tennis ball into a trash can while driving by it in a car. Then consider how hard it is to simply drive the car into the trash can. I'm thinking the reason the hit rate is so low is because it is using the same or similar algorithm as hitting the ship with a bomb, which is a lower percentage proposition.

Well, lot of those Kamikaze pilots were so poorly trained that they had trouble take off and fly to target area. So I could well believe that hit rate would not be spectacular in any case.

Plus, not all of those pilots were that willing to sacrifice their lives...surprisingly large number had "engine problems" or had other reasons to abort mission.

But overall, kamikaze hit % is probably too low in vanilla WitP.

In semi-WitP terms, a kamikaze should be the ultimate "centerline" weapon.   [:)]

I have provided this page of kami information from the internet multiple times, but most everyone seemed to ignore or at least not learn from it (note the kamikaze statistics towards the bottom):

http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-042.htm

In the notes portion towards the bottom, this most revealing information is quite key:

Not included in the the totals in this section are Japanese Army planes used as Kamikazes and Escorts. In the US Strategic Bombing Survey report, there is an estimate of 2,550 Kamikaze sorties being flown from all services. This number apparently does not include Escorts. Some 475 of these Kamikazes, or 18.6 percent, were effective in securing hits or damaging near misses. It is not clear if these totals include strikes on British vessels, but I suspect that they do not.

Also, it seems the portion referring to hits on vessels, is counting the number of vessels hit, and not the number of hits; even then it is much higher than many are willing to believe I am sure.

edited - Actually I think I read footnote #3 (not included on this post) incorrectly and it does include some multiple hits on the same vessel anyway.