How about kamikazes?

[a19999577]

I know that A3R's Pacific module, Rising Sun, implemented kamikazes when Japan's strategic situation became, er, problematic...

I haven't seen this in any of the AAR, I was wondering if it was included, or if there are plans to. As far as I know, the massive kamikaze attacks launched against the US Navy as it approached the Home Isles were to be considered 'small' as compared with what they had prepared to throw against any landings in Japan itself...

[Oleg Mastruko]

No kamikazes currently in the game, but perhaps giving some free air units to Japanese, in case their empire shrinks to X provinces and US is close to Home Islands, would not be such a bad idea? That should be used to simulate their pressing of all available aircraft (old and new) into kamikaze units?

I'd support the idea...

O.

[a19999577]

Mind you, I'm not a playtester, so I might be way off.

Anyhow, I guess it might be a little late to do major modifications to the game engine in order to implement kamikazes. So, from what I have seen from the AARs, I'd suggest something like the following:

- As Oleg suggested, at a certain point in the game, close to invasion of the Japanese 'inner perimeter', Japan gets a certain amount of 'free' air units (I think something like this exists for militia units when the home territories of Japan and Germany are invaded, right?)

- When these air units sortie, they 'attack' until destroyed [not that they bomb ships repeatedly, the increased attacks simulate their added destructiveness], or run out of targets, with 'damaged' aircraft attacking at half effectiveness.

- Given that kamikazes usually flew outdated planes, maybe these units could use half the current research rating.

Cheers

[geozero]

Seems the scale of the game is too strategic to really get kamikazee to be effective. IN the overall scope of the Pacific War, they did little damage. It would be like trying to have the game simulate the German infiltrators during the Battle of the Bulge.

When each turn is 3 months, I would hardly think a few kamikazees would make any difference.

Good idea, but wrong game IMHO.

[Oleg Mastruko]

With all due respect, geozero I think your comparison is wrong by some order of magnitude. Kamikazes did sink many ships and killed hundereds, if not thousands of US sailors and soldiers. Fanaticism shown by kamikazes was among major factors in decision to drop the Bomb. Kamikazes are not a wonder weapon, but IMO were important enough just to be included in game, if that does not imply huge change in game engine (I believe it doesn't). I'd say "borderline issue" regarding the scope of the game. Nice chrome if they're added, no big deal if they're not.

In this game, giving 3-4 air units to Japanese player "free" when kamikazes are activated (as one off, non recurring event), would not make so big a difference, strategically speaking just a small nuisance to US player (assuming he is going to be very strong by then anyway).

O.

[geozero]

Oleg, this is something I vehemantly disagree with you in all due respect. As a scholar of military tactics and history I have research the facts for this Kamikaze issue. I think that you will agree with me when you see the facts before you:

The first major kamikaze attack was on Oct. 25, 1944 during the battle off Samar Island. Only one American ship was hit and sunk, the Saint Lo, an escort carrier. IN comparison, by the end of the day, there would be 36 Japanese ships sunk (306,000 Japanese tons versus 37,000 U.S. tons).

The next major Kamikaze attack came on December 15-23, 1944 during the landings at Mindoro. Only one U.S. ship was hit and damaged, the USS Nashville.

Next came the landings on Luzon during Jan. 2- 10, 1944. Here the kamikaze attacks used twin-engine bombers as well as fighters. An escort carrier (the Omnaney was badly damaged and had to be scuttled). On Jan. 5, 1945, a Kamikaze attack damaged another 2 escort carriers, 2 cruisers and 2 destroyers.

On Jan. 6, 1945 the Kamikaze reached their climax. At nightfall there would be some more damaged ships but none sunk. These were the battleships New Mexico and California, 3 cruisers, 3 destroyers and several other small auxiliary ships. Only 3 minesweepers were sunk, which are insignificant in the scope of the battle.

This was the last great action of the Kamikaze suicide tactics. While they may have sunk only 3 escort carriers and several smaller ships, and damaged ten or larger ships, this pales in comparison to the thousands of ships the U.S. Navy had alone, in addition to hundreds more of the Allied Navies.

I don’t have an exact “death toll” but I can research this easily as I have many notes on Kamikaze tactics. It was likely about 2500-5000 killed and 3500-6500 wounded or along those lines.

The U.S. Navy had superior and abundant anti-aircraft guns, fire fighting equipment, and superiority in the air by this time in the war. The amount of casualties due to Kamikaze in comparison to the millions that fought and died during WW2 is insignificant.

Those are the facts. Should these be included in a grand strategic game where turns are measured in months? I don't think so, but then again I do not know the mechanics of the game. How many planes does 1 air unit model?

EDITED: Death toll numbers. Note that these include Kamikaze ships, and mines struck at the Battle of Okinawa. Total ships sunk if you include smaller ships, minesweepers and PT boats, etc is between 35-65+/- and about 80-90 damaged. Very few ofthese were capital ships (cruisers, battleships, carriers, etc.)

[Oleg Mastruko]

Well geo we can "agree to disagree", though I wouldn't say we're disagreeing all that much. I am NOT saying kamikazes must be represented in this game, as I said I think they represent the "borderline case" - it's OK if they get to be represented somehow, but it's no big deal if they're not.

What I cannot possibly agree with is your comparison of kamikazes with "German infiltrators during the Battle of the Bulge" couple of posts above.

Quting randomly from various sources:

"One Air Force sanctioned source claims that over the course of the war kamikazes sank 34 U.S. Navy ships and damaged 368 others. The British Navy also took kamikaze losses."

Not very much in the "grand scheme" of things, but lets say akin to damaging/sinking 1-2 transport fleets in WAW.

"3,500 naval planes and an additional 1,500 army planes are hidden on Kyushu for the "final battle" and just as many for orthodox use; once suicide planes were used up, the orthodox pilots would become Kamikazes. This is a number sufficient to sink or damage 1,000 ships of an invading fleet."

Leaving aside the number of projected ships to be damaged or sunk (perhaps more realistic projection would be 200-400 ships damaged or sunk, mostly smaller craft), it (5000) IS a huge number of planes kept in reserve and pressed into service.

As for this game, those planes may be represented as separate one off, non recurring "gift" to Japanese player, or they may be omitted, making the Japanese player take care to preserve his own "kamikaze planes" made of regular air units, for the final battles. As for the game engine itself, I wouldn't change anything for those "kamikaze" units. Any JA unit that is used in 1945 vs massive US fleets would effectivelly work as "kamikaze" within the scope of this game (ie. it would most probably get killed while attacking, for little or no damage in return - realistic).

O.

[geozero]

Oleg,

I agree to disagree.[:D]

But I do think that if Kamikaze planes are to be represented in the game that INSTEAD of giving an extra 2-3 air units, is that you give Japanese air units after Winter 1944-45 a 10% effectiveness increase in "hitting" the target (not necessarily sinking). Of course ANY units using the Kamikaze tactic would be eliminated (removed from play) since they can only do this once.

BTW - I have several sources on Kamikaze losses, including Jim Dunnigan, Lt. Col. E. Bauer, Rinehart, Churchill, Halsey, etc. to name a few. One thing is certain: losses due to aerial Kamikaze attacks are unknown due to the confusion of war. But the loss figures I presented I believe are the most accurate. There are sources that claim much more, but if you delve into the facts you'll see them include mines, midget subs, and Kamikaze ships, etc.

[geozero]

Fanaticism shown by kamikazes was among major factors in decision to drop the Bomb.

Sorry to disagree on this.

The atomic bomb drop decision was both military and political. It showed the world, particularly Japan and Russia that the U.S. could and would use this weapon if threatened.

On Japan the use of the bomb was more due to the conviction that saving lives and destroying Japan was more important than an invasion and occupation of Japanese home islands.

The invsasion of Japan could have cost another million lives to America, and their Allies. But the burden to invade was the U.S., and America wanted to utterly destroy her enemy, not occupy her.

The fact that the U.S. had an atomic bomb available saved many lives. The war was won already (just Japan did not want to concede defeat). One last bang (excuse the pun) was needed to send a message. Surrender or every city would be wiped out.

[a19999577]

ORIGINAL: geozero

On Jan. 6, 1945 the Kamikaze reached their climax. At nightfall there would be some more damaged ships but none sunk. These were the battleships New Mexico and California, 3 cruisers, 3 destroyers and several other small auxiliary ships. Only 3 minesweepers were sunk, which are insignificant in the scope of the battle.

If in game terms this represents a Heavy Fleet getting damaged, then I guess they would be worth implementing.

Can any of the playtesters attempt to translate the numbers given by Geozero into game terms, to see if kamikazes are worth including?

[Joel Billings]

Nice discussion. If we had the time, a nice piece of chrome would be to "activate" Japanese air reserve when certain areas were lost. This could amount to giving the Japanese 3 Tac Bomber units (maybe around 1500 planes, although the game is very abstract about these numbers). At that time the naval attack rating of the Tac Air units could be increased by 2. Will this get into the game? Don't know, probably not, depending on how coding goes the next month or two.

[geozero]

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

Nice discussion. If we had the time, a nice piece of chrome would be to "activate" Japanese air reserve when certain areas were lost. This could amount to giving the Japanese 3 Tac Bomber units (maybe around 1500 planes, although the game is very abstract about these numbers). At that time the naval attack rating of the Tac Air units could be increased by 2. Will this get into the game? Don't know, probably not, depending on how coding goes the next month or two.

Joel,

Based on this comment I would interpret that the game's bomber unit equates to about 500 aircraft. During Okinawa, the Japanese Kamakaze strike was approx. 1900 aircraft, of which all were destroyed (either shot down or crashed into ships). That would therefore be 4 bomber units in game terms just for that battle alone.

Maybe a combination of if Japanese home islands are attacked (or if Allied forces get within a certain distance/range) AND/OR if Japanese resources get low to a certain level THEN activate Kamikaze, as this would model their "desperation" a sort of last ditch effort.

[a19999577]

And if Oleg's figures are accurate (5000 aircraft for 'heterodox' use) that would amount to 10 air units in the game... haven't played the game, but it seems like a LOT of units to not be taken into account. Plus, it's a little something extra for the WA player to munch on before beginning Operation Olympus (was that the codename for the invasion of the Japanese Home Isles?)

[Joel Billings]

The Japanese can always build planes to build up the aircraft reserve. And my proposal would increase all Tac Bombers by 2, not just those being given for free (that's the way the system works, all units upgrade when a tech upgrade happens, so it's the only way to do it). Units in the game can represent as little as 150-200 first line carrier aircraft or as many as 2000 old obsolete Russian aircraft, so take the 500 number with a grain of salt. The Japanese with their limited production can not keep up with the research (weapons improvements) available to the Western Allies, so in most games by the time Japan is threatened, you can expect their air units to be behind the times. Anyway, a minor item that if added (a big if), can be tweaked to determine the right number of air units to add.

[Oleg Mastruko]

I'd suggest adding three units - fighter, tac bomb, and "heavy" bomber, one of each type, to reflect the diverse nature of aircraft used for these missions.

O.

[geozero]

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

I'd suggest adding three units - fighter, tac bomb, and "heavy" bomber, one of each type, to reflect the diverse nature of aircraft used for these missions.

O.

If this is done drop the heavy bomber and have 2 fighters and 1 tactical. I do not think that the heavy bombers were used that much in this role, and the majority were either fighters or specialized aircraft.

[neuromancer]

ORIGINAL: geozero
Seems the scale of the game is too strategic to really get kamikazee to be effective. IN the overall scope of the Pacific War, they did little damage. It would be like trying to have the game simulate the German infiltrators during the Battle of the Bulge.

When each turn is 3 months, I would hardly think a few kamikazees would make any difference.

Good idea, but wrong game IMHO.

Dude... that is one ugly Avatar.
[:D]

Anyway, I think you are right. Any special rules would probably be pointless. The Kamikazee planes/ boats/ soldiers (they had all sorts) were not nearly as effective as some have painted them. They got some early success - probably due to the surprise factor - and so the Japanese fell in love with the concept. But after the US figured it some counter-measures, they weren't nearly as good.

What they often did was attack a random picket ship, because they tended to attack the first thing they saw, which tended to be the pickets.

I think it would probably be adequate to trigger a couple free fighter groups - as Oleg suggested - when Japan shrinks to a certain point to represent activating the Kamikazees and putting anyone (and anything) they could in the air. And while these should not be very good quality units, I don't think it would be worth the effort to make some special rules for them.

[geozero]

I'm at somewhat a disadvantage in commenting or debating these military issues without any first hand knowledge of the game. I've simply put forth some thoughts and stats based on my knowledge and resources on the subject. While it appears that the WaW system has been under beta for some time, should Matrix desire an additional tester I would gladly assist.[&o]

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: geozero
If this is done drop the heavy bomber and have 2 fighters and 1 tactical. I do not think that the heavy bombers were used that much in this role, and the majority were either fighters or specialized aircraft.

<hairsplitting mode on>

Well, not really. JA "heavy" bombers in this game are modelled somewhat after naval Betty bombers and other very long range aircraft (they have range value of 4 which in this game is enormous, and they have high torpedo attack value, representing the fact Betty could carry a torpedo).

So if "heavy" bombers represent Betty units, lets keep in mind Betties were used for kamikaze attacks. There was even special version of Betty, which could have carried Okha human-guided-rocket-bomb under its Belly, and make a stand off attack (Betty crew not being the kamikaze, just the Okha pilot)

<hairsplitting mode off>

O.

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: neuromancer
so the Japanese fell in love with the concept.

Thanks for adding some bizarre humour to the thread [:D][:D]

But after the US figured it some counter-measures, they weren't nearly as good.

But - apart from furious barrage of AA fire - there were NO really effective, kamikaze-specialised counter measures. I've read accounts of some US admirals who said that luckily for all war ended *before* any effective counter measure for kamikazes was invented. And something to the tune of paraphrasing famous Churchill quote "the only thing I was ever afraid were the subs" (insert kamikazes instead of subs).

I am sad to note that kamikaze attacks seem favorite, and nigh on unstoppable tactics of today's terrorists as well.

Of course Japan could not have won the war with them, such desperate weapons are never a war-winners, not even avert the unstoppable, the writing was on the wall... but kamikaze attacks did some real damage, and accounted for more ships than "conventional" air attacks in last year of the war. What's perhaps even more important, they shatered nerves of their opponents, reducing combat effectiveness.

But all this may *still* not be enough to warrant any special rules within the scope of this game, that much I agree with.

This game works with abstract values, and that's its beuty. Geo asked recently whether "jet aircraft" are modelled. They're not modelled as such, but any advanced aircraft in the game may be considered "jet" if that makes the player happy. If you build tank unit with attack factor 9 or 10, you're free to imagine it's Tiger. So, if Japanese player manages to research anti ship attack to 4 or 5 by '45, he can imagine it's dedicated kamikaze unit and that's it [:D]

O.