Ramblings
Posted: Sat Sep 08, 2001 2:06 am
Based on the lack of conversation these past couple of days, I'm guessing we've really kicked around all of the big issues. So I was just sitting here thinking about issues, issues that make me go "Hmmmmm . . ."
Was the Corsair really such a good fighter? Or was it just fast?
In a hypothesized surface action between the Japanese and American fleets (no carriers), the Americans would have won, right? Or would the long lance torpedoes have caused the battleship line a real problem?
Why are American carriers so much easier to sink in War in the Pacific than the Japanese? Is it a cheat built in for the computer (playing the Japanese), thinner armor, better pilots, or better weapons? Always pisses me off.
What would have happened at Pearl if they'd sent something up to investigate the radar contact that they misinterpreted as being the B-17's from the mainland?
Was the Corsair really such a good fighter? Or was it just fast?
In a hypothesized surface action between the Japanese and American fleets (no carriers), the Americans would have won, right? Or would the long lance torpedoes have caused the battleship line a real problem?
Why are American carriers so much easier to sink in War in the Pacific than the Japanese? Is it a cheat built in for the computer (playing the Japanese), thinner armor, better pilots, or better weapons? Always pisses me off.
What would have happened at Pearl if they'd sent something up to investigate the radar contact that they misinterpreted as being the B-17's from the mainland?