Sumner and Gearing Class DD's
- Thread starter Soth
- Start date
Well, Wargamers are Like that of course, its nice to think we are all playing Objectively, but I myself prefer to play historically. Fog of War is a huge part of it, but I find myself getting into little fits of Pique too. :shock: But first and foremost with Historical Wargames, I love the History and do like to posit the"What Ifs". Thats where I think the true excitement is, Wars have been won or lost on that random stroke of luck, or that random failure to accurately gauge the enemys Battle plan or intentions.Its the familiar adage"For lack of a single nail"
Soth, the Center Force had been whittled down on Oct. 23 by the attacks of the U.S. subs Darter and Dace. They sank Kurita's flagship Atago, putting him in a rather embarrassing position of swimming for his life. This may have had considerable influence later, as he was no doubt a very tired admiral and possibly stressed a bit from the experience.
The subs also sank the Maya and knocked the Takao out of the war. A pretty impressive score.
http://www.combinedfleet.com/btl_pal.htm
The next day the Musashi was sunk and the Yamato and other ships were damaged. This was the day before the Samar action.
http://www.combinedfleet.com/btl_sib.htm
The subs also sank the Maya and knocked the Takao out of the war. A pretty impressive score.
http://www.combinedfleet.com/btl_pal.htm
The next day the Musashi was sunk and the Yamato and other ships were damaged. This was the day before the Samar action.
http://www.combinedfleet.com/btl_sib.htm
Yes you can see where he would be rattled, but he still had a very powerfull force, and He also appeared to be running back to Japan.But when he turned back and ran into the Taffy escort carrier groups, things started to go better for him. Until his own mind caught up to him and he was convinced he was about to be attacked by the full force of Halseys Carriers and Battleships, that and as previously stated, the actions of the DD's and DE's escorting the Taffy's.
Yes but he'd had enough after Palawan and the Sibuyan Sea events. He was ordered to turn about and attack, since the carrier force was sacrificing themselves already for him and the Southern forces.
Historians have wondered just why his superior force would have given up the fight at Samar when it did and reading the Japanese POV does help to fill in a bit. Kurita thus saved the lives of many on both sides by pulling out when he did.
Historians have wondered just why his superior force would have given up the fight at Samar when it did and reading the Japanese POV does help to fill in a bit. Kurita thus saved the lives of many on both sides by pulling out when he did.
Yes knowing the Japanese POV does help, and the players doing the whining that its"unfair" ought to have known that going into the campaign, or dont play the Japanese. Pretty simple really, the odds at this time were overwhelmingly in favor of the U.S Navy, and the fact that Halsey did exactly what the Japanese had predicted he would do, didnt really help them. Im not saying the Japanese didnt have a chance, but the odds of the Sho plan actually working were pretty slim.
One way to "even" the scoring in a game is that when it is finished the balance is in seeing how much better you did over the historical results. Say, if everything was pretty much as it was historically but the U.S. sank the Yamato in addition, the U.S. can score decisively.
If however the Cruiser and destroyer forces can quickly brush aside the DDs and DEs that counterattacked, they should ba able to cut off the retreat of the CVEs of Taffy III and box them in. If the BBs keep together and manage to not zig-zag too much dodging torpedoes, they should be able to overrun the six escorts and wipe it out. I'd consider that a Japanese decisive win, even if they then pulled out of the action.
Thus, you'd be using the historical results as the fulcrum, scoring the players' results based off of that. I'd consider it to be a complete turnabout actually, with whoever played the USN being the whiners game after game, after game. :lol:
They'd probably see that Adm. Clifton "Ziggy" Sprague, Cmdr. Ernest E. Evans et al did about as good a job, squeezing out all of the luck and bravery that was humanly possible that could be used. To better their results would be the real challenge in gaming the action off Samar.
If however the Cruiser and destroyer forces can quickly brush aside the DDs and DEs that counterattacked, they should ba able to cut off the retreat of the CVEs of Taffy III and box them in. If the BBs keep together and manage to not zig-zag too much dodging torpedoes, they should be able to overrun the six escorts and wipe it out. I'd consider that a Japanese decisive win, even if they then pulled out of the action.
Thus, you'd be using the historical results as the fulcrum, scoring the players' results based off of that. I'd consider it to be a complete turnabout actually, with whoever played the USN being the whiners game after game, after game. :lol:
They'd probably see that Adm. Clifton "Ziggy" Sprague, Cmdr. Ernest E. Evans et al did about as good a job, squeezing out all of the luck and bravery that was humanly possible that could be used. To better their results would be the real challenge in gaming the action off Samar.
Its Not like the U.S. navy didnt have a steep learning curve throughout the early stages of the war either. The Japanese were expert nightfighters, they had better torpedo's, they're fighter pilots were experienced from fighting in china, these things added up for early war years, but Admiral Yamamoto had predicted exactly how long the empire could maintain its momentum. I think that had Yamamoto lived a while longer, the naval war might have been even more difficult for the United states. But then its almost a forgone conclusion, that Yamamoto would have been tried as a War Criminal at wars end. An Ignoble fate for a brilliant man.
It's interesting that you mentioned Adm. Yamamoto. With all of the books that are available, the historians in the West really did not get a good handle on that very historical figure. I've been so immersed by favorable characterizations of him in various media, such as the excellent film Tora Tora Tora and many history books, that only after reading Shattered Sword did I get the first inkling that he was not what I had been lead to believe.
If you haven't yet picked that one up, please do. I'd just get it in hard back edition, because it will be a major and fresh look at a topic that I thought I had little more to learn about. Let me just say that it met the definition of a "change agent" :wink:
If you haven't yet picked that one up, please do. I'd just get it in hard back edition, because it will be a major and fresh look at a topic that I thought I had little more to learn about. Let me just say that it met the definition of a "change agent" :wink:
Well, you have probably read Walter Pranges book"At Dawn we Slept" it does present Yamamoto as brilliant, but also shows him to be Quirky, Strange and a bunch of other things. Including the fact that most of the Imperial Navy believed he was taking too big a risk in the pearl harbor attack.Yamamoto was certainly not perfect or without his faults, hell I would go so far as to say He certainly falls into the same category as a lot of U.S Admirals... German Admirals......Italian Admirals.. French Admirals...British Admirals... Slightly Insane and full of Megalomania out looking to play with theyre marvelous new toys! I certainly fall into this category as an Armchair Admiral and closet military history buff. :lol:
I certainly fall into this category as an Armchair Admiral and closet military history buff. :lol:To be honest, the bulk of my reading was done many years ago. One of my treasured collections is of the entire History of United States Naval Operations in World War II by S.E. Morison, all fifteen volumes. I just reread Starship Troopers to get "reaquainted" with the original canon material and then polished off The Forever War. I'm swinging back currently into WW2 naval history with Clash of the Carriers.
Obviously it's a case of having too many interests and too little time, heh. :lol:
Obviously it's a case of having too many interests and too little time, heh. :lol:
Well, SE Morrison is a good start. But "At Dawn we slept" is the definitive work on the pearl harbor attack. Its presented from both points of view, including interviews with Minoru Genda and Mitsuo Fuchida.most of the documents cited in this book were to be destroyed by none other then the United States gvt, and Gordon Prange managed to smuggle them out of Japan and preserve them. I'd reccomend that one.
Oh, if yer Into SCI Fi naval, you might try the Honor Harrington universe by David Weber if you allready havent gotten into that. first book is"On Basilisk Station"
Oh, if yer Into SCI Fi naval, you might try the Honor Harrington universe by David Weber if you allready havent gotten into that. first book is"On Basilisk Station"
Soulmage
Mongoose
Honor Harrington is good, but tends to me more "Fighting Sail in Space" than WWII.
If you want "WWII in space" you're better off reading David Weber's collaborations with Steve White:
Insurrection
Crusade
In Death Ground
The Shiva Option
They're similar to the Honor Harrington's, with a little more focus on the Fleet actions versus the politics. Also, unlike HH, main characters get killed with regularity, so the principle character whose actions you're following changes from book to book, or even in the middle of books.
If you want "WWII in space" you're better off reading David Weber's collaborations with Steve White:
Insurrection
Crusade
In Death Ground
The Shiva Option
They're similar to the Honor Harrington's, with a little more focus on the Fleet actions versus the politics. Also, unlike HH, main characters get killed with regularity, so the principle character whose actions you're following changes from book to book, or even in the middle of books.
Yes, some believe I took my forum name from David Weber's ossasional use of the term BuShips throughout the HH series (I have them all in both paperback and hardback editions, lol) but I'd known of the naval term from my readings back in the 70's (dirt is still calling me "whipper-snapper", but I'm gaining on being 'old as dirt'). I really like the four- book "trilogy". Most here probably know that it was based upon the game of Starfire, which Weber partly wrote. I liked the series enough to also purchase "The Stars at War" reprints. It was the only way to get it in hardback, of course.
Adding a WW2 trivia question for the ones that have read the "Starfire" series, here's a test.
What strategic WW2 location name was hidden within the Arachnid's list of planetary strongpoints?
Adding a WW2 trivia question for the ones that have read the "Starfire" series, here's a test.
What strategic WW2 location name was hidden within the Arachnid's list of planetary strongpoints?
yeah, those would be the ones by a strange coinkydink! but as i say, Gamers here only wanna do Dungeons and Dragons, ive been into Battletech since 1986(robodroids then), ASL, Flames of War, VAS of course, star frontiers, the original Traveller, Car Wars etc etc
uh.. guess im older then i thought I was(Realization dawns, yer old now!)
but as i say, Gamers here only wanna do Dungeons and Dragons, ive been into Battletech since 1986(robodroids then), ASL, Flames of War, VAS of course, star frontiers, the original Traveller, Car Wars etc etcuh.. guess im older then i thought I was(Realization dawns, yer old now!)
Similar threads
