Who will you mainly play as?

[Dutch Jester]

Okay I just wanted to know who likes who's stuff better, I would love to play as the Allied Forces, because I like their planes, boats, and they also have all the Dutch ships:D

[princecaspian4]

online i would play whichever team needs more people, but i would prefer to be the allies

[Beastttt]

I loved playing the japanese when I played Clear for action(WW2 miniture rules)
I loved plaing them in Fighting Steel(computer sim)

love having lots of 24"long lance torpedoes

[a dutch alphawolf]

i think i will play mainly allied, because of the dutch ships :thumbsup:

[Neroman]

Depends on the ships they offer. The Fuso and its Ise cousin were to evil mothas. 6 dual turrets with 14" shells :D . I wish they could put in a Ise remodel which has 4 dual 14" guns and a landing pad on the back.

http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g23/neroman/ise-d.gif

But I'd probably go Allied who doesn't want an Iowa?

[princecaspian4]

can't use an Iowa, they hadn't been finished yet, the first Iowa was finished in early 1943, this game ends at the battle of midway in 1942

[Neroman]

:eek:
*criez*

that sucks
:mad2:

[princecaspian4]

ya, i would have liked to have an Iowa too, but they should keep to what was available at the time,

[Beastttt]

north caralina and South dakota class BB's while not as fast are the best BB's the USA has up until the Iowa class comes out and they are pretty damn good in their own right
all have 16"/45 9guns 3 turrets
20 5"DP guns in 10 turrets
armor is slightly less than the Iowas

N Carolina and Washington are commissioned by may 41
S Dakota and her 3 sisters are comissioned in march,april,may and august 42

[princecaspian4]

what would really be good would be a Montana class, they were never built but they were going to be the next step up from the Iowa’s, but carriers had replaced the battleship so the Montanas were never built (although today the battleship may be making a comeback, the US navy wants to build a new ship class called an arsenal ship which would have 500 vertical launch missile bays and could be run with a skeleton crew, or no crew at all and be controlled remotely, in some concept art it had the number 72, number 71 was the Montana class USS Louisiana, the last BB the us navy was going to build, so it may be classified as a new type of BB, it would be able to destroy an entire carrier battle group itself, and could do a lot of damage to ground targets with 500 cruse missiles, and it is also going to be designed as a stealth ship, it's not really relevant to this game, but it's interesting)

[Beastttt]

the conversion of the Fuso and Ise was a mistake
they carried only float planes(no planes could land on them,the deck was too short)
that type of plane is a sitting duck for even the worst fighter aircraft

as for being evil mothas they died like pigs trying to run the gaunlet at the battle of San Bernadino straits
(more that it was bad leadership trying to engage the bombardment BB's with no room to maneuver so that they could bear their 10 gun broadsides all they could bear was the fwd 2 turrets(4 guns each ship)and they went up against 6 old BB's(they where old too)who where just sitting with broadsides ready for them along with a large escorting force

Depends on the ships they offer. The Fuso and its Ise cousin were to evil mothas. 6 dual turrets with 14" shells :D . I wish they could put in a Ise remodel which has 4 dual 14" guns and a landing pad on the back.

http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g23/neroman/ise-d.gif

But I'd probably go Allied who doesn't want an Iowa?

[Neroman]

If they could effectively maneuver they'd probably fair better. 12 14" shells still hurts if they land.

NOTE: I'm used to a game where Fuso's and Ises are actually decent ships... and if high enough level can mount 16" guns... so my opinion might be slightly biased lol....

Dam video games twist everything -.-

[Cpt.sharp]

I think the Iowa might be in the game.

http://images.3dgamers.com/screenimages/games/midway/map_and_objectives.jpg

[princecaspian4]

I think the Iowa might be in the game.

http://images.3dgamers.com/screenimages/games/midway/map_and_objectives.jpg

the first Iowa class wasn't finished until early 1943 and i haven’t seen it in the war machines section,

[Dutch Jester]

it is probably just in the campaign

[MadduckUK]

right now guys id be more worried that the USS Texas (new york class) is the only named USA BB on the war machines page

[Alpha Wolfgang]

why not put the iowa in? just because it wasnt actually there... has not much to do with the "realism"... i dont recall computers or 1 person controlling everything on the battlefield... should at least put the iowa in multiplayer just for kicks... along with any other slightly untimely vehicles.

i hope theres a hellcat in the game... i love the Zero Killer.

[princecaspian4]

both the Iowa and the hellcat came in later in the war, so they probably won't be there

[Iron Sound]

How about the South Dakota, if you miss the Iowa and if it doesn't strictly fit into the timeframe?

Involved in:

The Second Battle of Guadalcanal - November14/15th 1942.

It malfunctioned apparently, but the BB Washington was able to close to within 8400 yards, undetected by the Japanese fleet, sinking the IJN BB Kirishima.

[Alpha Wolfgang]

it wont hurt online play with slightly off vehicles...

the hellcat had good service in the pacific, so i dont know why it wouldnt be in the game.

but since i guess CV's will only have >>>12<<< planes... im mostly turned off for the game... i was hoping for prolonged aerial battles, but 12 planes hardly makes a skirmish... hopefully they have many more planes or respawns of planes... couldnt carriers carry like.... 150 planes?

[princecaspian4]

but since i guess CV's will only have >>>12<<< planes... im mostly turned off for the game... i was hoping for prolonged aerial battles, but 12 planes hardly makes a skirmish... hopefully they have many more planes or respawns of planes... couldnt carriers carry like.... 150 planes?

no, not 150, they could carry about 100 (the Yorktown class could carry 90). also, by 12 planes they mean 12 planes in the air from 1 carrier (or airfield) at a time (so if you had 2 carriers or airfields you could have 24 in the air, 12 from each), but as those are shot down, you can replace them by launching whatever planes you had left in your hanger, you can run out, but you would have to have all 90 (or however many you have in the hanger) shot down

[Nemo_54]

Unfortunately, I don't think we'll be seeing any of the Guadalcanal battles included, at least in the campaign. Since its been stated that the game officially ends with the battle of Midway. Although I'm hoping we'll get some chance to duke it out night action style (multiplayer?).

By the way, it was the Fuso and Yamashiro that were sunk in the San Bernadino straits by the "Ghosts of Pearl Harbor". The hybrids Ise and Hyuga however survived essentially till the end, being sunk by US carrier aircraft while moored in Japanese ports in July 1945. Just in case there was any confusion. ;)

[Alpha Wolfgang]

100? 90? thats still a lot!

i heard that you can only have 12 planes total epr carrier... i know that u can have 12 at a time, which is perfectly fine, but thats all u got with that carrier... but if theres like, 20 or 40 more inside the carrier, then i dont know what ive been b!tching about this whole time, LOL

[princecaspian4]

100? 90? thats still a lot!

i heard that you can only have 12 planes total epr carrier... i know that u can have 12 at a time, which is perfectly fine, but thats all u got with that carrier... but if theres like, 20 or 40 more inside the carrier, then i dont know what ive been b!tching about this whole time, LOL

if you watch the tulagi walkthrough you can read how many planes are in the carrier's hanger, i will just watch it and add it up to tell you how many are in the carrier

[Alpha Wolfgang]

my screens blurry, how many did you see in the carrier? was it good large numbers?

[princecaspian4]

it was kind of hard to read, but here's what i think it said
40 wildcats
30 avenger torpedo bombers
30 dauntless dive bombers
so that actually comes out to 100 planes in a carrier

[Alpha Wolfgang]

oh well damn, thats plenty!

battles will indeed be very long and intense...

[princecaspian4]

ya, and that's only for 1 carrier, i saw videos where you had 2 carriers, and you also have land based planes

[Alpha Wolfgang]

uhuhuhuhhh:nut: ... i cant wait for this game!!!!
i cant stop watching the tulagi video!
i hope the devs pop out a massive aerial battle video! that would be tight!

[princecaspian4]

i'm surprised at how even allied and Japanese are, it's 50 50 so far, but that will be good for the game

[Beastttt]

god I hope not
each side needs it's own advantages and disadvantages otherwise whay choose a side
this not to say that the game should not be balanced why get a japanese heavy cruiser when it won't have torps or an american cruiser which has radar and better damage control
fletcher vs fubuki
fletcher has 5 single gun turrets while fubuki has 3 twin gun turrets
fubuki has 1 more gun but if it loses 1 turret it loses 1/3 of it's firepower
where as fletcher only loses 1/5
fletcher should have 2 banks of 5 torps while fubuki has 3 banks of 3 torps with reloads and the difference in the torps is great also
the fubuki's 24"long lance should be more than twice as damaging as the allied torps

i'm surprised at how even allied and Japanese are, it's 50 50 so far, but that will be good for the game

[princecaspian4]

i meant how many people were going on each side was even,

[TheMetalStorm]

I'm a sailor, And Pilot. Thats what I'll always be.

The Zero and the Kate were superior planes early in the war, And I have experience flying them in other games. As far as Firepower and effectiveness goes. The Yamato is king. Heavy Armor, Huge Guns and very few flaws.

[chip5541]

Sorry, but she was a flawed design from the get go. While massively armored and otherwise well protected, she exhibited typical Japanese damage control design principals and training. She also had a relatively deep draft and some sea keeping qualities that her crew were not fond of. In addition her fire control was far less than that of her American and British counter parts by 'wars end'.

A one on one engagement at night against say the Missouri would have been a definate defeat for the Yamamoto... would take a while for Missouri to pound her into submission, but here radar controlled fire control and better damage control features would win out over the heavyier armament of the Yamamoto.

By day I think it' boils down to which captain sailed their ship better and who's damage control coped better (edge to the US ship most likely). The Yamamot's fire rate is not quite as fast, but the actual broadside throw weight of her main guns (plus secondaries if they dared to get in 'that close') seriously outweights and out-ranges the best of the american BBs by upwards of 15%. At extended ranges both would have to rely on a tactical spotting craft given the excessive range of their main guns (especially the Japanese) and perhaps radar for 'on the horizon' engagements (edge US). It's an interesting tactical situation in daylight, the edge perhaps going to a well captained and well crewed Yamamoto (which she wasn't by war's end).

She also lacks the AAA armament to really defend her self well. Even at the end, when the Japanese tried to throw a bunch of extra light weight AAA on her it just wasn't enough... she's too big of a target and her fire control and AAA arangement simply not thought out well enough for the threat that aircraft eventually would represent in the age of the Carrier.

[TheMetalStorm]

You make some interesting points, But it took several hours and hundreds of planes to sink her. I'm far more interested in the Durability.

I'm more of a pilot, then a sailor.

[Tzmir]

according to wikipedia Yamato had a massive amount of AA guns

[chip5541]

Torpedoed by USS Skate (SS-305) in December 1943, Yamato was under repair until April 1944, during which time her anti-aircraft battery was considerably increased. She then took part in the Battle of the Philippine Sea in June and the Battle of Leyte Gulf in October. During the latter action, she was attacked several times by U.S. Navy aircraft, and fired her big guns in an engagement with U.S. escort carriers and destroyers off the island of Samar.

Yamato received comparatively light damage during the Leyte Gulf battle, and was sent home in November 1944. Fitted with additional anti-aircraft machine guns, she was based in Japan during the winter of 1944-45.


From http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/sh-fornv/japan/japsh-xz/yamato.htm shows that she was underarmed and actually refitted twice with anti-aircraft guns.

[Cpt.sharp]

If it came down to it. a one on one Yamato Vs a Iowa I think the Yamato would win. The salvo weight coming from Yamato would go though the Iowa armour. Remember the Iowa’s where armoured to protect against its own guns.

Night attack yes I think maybe the Iowa would have an advantage but still it has to not only hit the Yamato but do considerable damage. The Japanese would not go down lightly and would fight till the end.

I think the Japanese where more battle hardened then the American Battleship crews.

And a final note. Even with the long range and Radar guided guns it takes a lot of luck to hit a moving target. In-fact only one 18” shell needs to penetrate the Iowa’s armour and hit the magazine to blow the ship up. (Same goes for the Yamato but it did have more armour to protect from 16” shells)

[TheMetalStorm]

Brilliant.

Yamato was the flagship of Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto from 12 February 1942, replacing Nagato. She participated in the Midway operation in June, 1942, but took no active part in the Battle of Midway. She remained the flagship for 364 days until February 11, 1943, when the flag was transferred to her sister ship Musashi. From 29 August 1942 to 8 May 1943, she spent all of her time at Truk, being underway for only one day during this entire time. In May 1943, she returned to Kure, where the two wing 15.5 cm turrets were removed and replaced by 25 mm machine guns, and Type-22 surface search radars were added. She returned to Truk on 25 December 1943. On the way there, she was damaged by a torpedo from the submarine USS Skate, and was not fully repaired until April 1944. During these repairs, additional 12.7 cm anti-aircraft guns were installed in the place of the 15.5 cm turrets removed in May, and additional 25 mm anti-aircraft guns were added.

Source:Wikipedia

[chip5541]

yup! but the time frame we are dealing with is up to the Midway battle. Her refit doesnt happen until after the ending of this game.

[TheMetalStorm]

Yeah, Thats after the Battle Of Midway. None the less. She was still a powerfull ship, And similar to the Bismark, Will take a beating before going down. I'm sure that in the hands of an Good Sailor, She'd be more of a match for anything in this game. Thats why I might be siding with the Japanese, Their planes were much more advanced in the earlier stages of the war. If the game progressed. I'd be concrete in going with the Allies. I don't know, I'll have to see when the demo comes out.:thumbsup:

[chip5541]

you know it.

[Beastttt]

from a post I did a while back on AA capabilities
source books :Conway's All the worlds ships 1922-1946 and Siegfried Breyer BB and BC 1905-1970
I have also painted both pre and final post refit yamato 1/16000 minitures and a post refit model(can't remember the scale but it was over 3'in length

QUOTE=Beastttt;601909]for the Allies I would say the Atlanta/Oakland class Cl
with 6 or 8 twin 5" turrets(the oakland is an atlanta with 2 extra turrets amidshps 1 starboard 1 larboard and yes I used the very old turm for port about 300 yrs old) 16 1.1" aa 4x4 16 40mm 8x2

the KGV class has 4x5.25" twin turrets per side and 32 40mm cannons

Japanese have the Akitsuki class DD that have 4 twin turrets with 3.9" DP guns and 4 25 mm aa guns

the pre refit Yamato has 12 5" guns 6x2 DP 24 25mm aa 4 13.2mm aa
I used the pre refit since that is the 1 pictured in the vids
the refitted Yamato loses the 2 wing 6" triples but gets a total of 32 5"guns 16x2 and 113 25mm guns in 1944 july


these are the best AA ships I have seen sofar[/QUOTE]



Brilliant.

Yamato was the flagship of Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto from 12 February 1942, replacing Nagato. She participated in the Midway operation in June, 1942, but took no active part in the Battle of Midway. She remained the flagship for 364 days until February 11, 1943, when the flag was transferred to her sister ship Musashi. From 29 August 1942 to 8 May 1943, she spent all of her time at Truk, being underway for only one day during this entire time. In May 1943, she returned to Kure, where the two wing 15.5 cm turrets were removed and replaced by 25 mm machine guns, and Type-22 surface search radars were added. She returned to Truk on 25 December 1943. On the way there, she was damaged by a torpedo from the submarine USS Skate, and was not fully repaired until April 1944. During these repairs, additional 12.7 cm anti-aircraft guns were installed in the place of the 15.5 cm turrets removed in May, and additional 25 mm anti-aircraft guns were added.

Source:Wikipedia

[TheMetalStorm]

Yeah, She was a powerful ship. It took over 300 Something Planes to sink her, Now don't tell me thats insane. But this was in later stages of the war, Where she had AA guns...I don't think it really mattered in the end though, She took over 10 Direct Hits.

[Beastttt]

10 aerial torpedoes(they would be 18" dinky little things)
and also 23 bomb hits and near misses these would have been 500 and 1000 lb with semi AP and AP capabilities

with over 300 planse attacking over tham means a little over 10% of the attackers hit and it was 2 hrs from start of the attack to her sinking

source Siegfried Breyer BBs and BCs 1905-1970

Yeah, She was a powerful ship. It took over 300 Something Planes to sink her, Now don't tell me thats insane. But this was in later stages of the war, Where she had AA guns...I don't think it really mattered in the end though, She took over 10 Direct Hits.

[TheMetalStorm]

Thanks for clearing that up.

[chip5541]

Of course you could always watch the Yamato and the DD's take me to the cleaners :D

http://chip5541.gametrailers.com/gamepad/index.php?action=fanmovs

[Neroman]

Was it the Torpitz or the Bismarck that got sunk by a biplane lol. The guns couldn't turn slow enough to line up hehe.

[TheMetalStorm]

The Tipitz was sunk by planes...The Bismark was tracked down, and sunk by British warships.

[Beastttt]

Tirpiz was sunk in harbor by heavy bombers carrying 10 ton bombs

Bismark got her steering jammed by a really lucky aerial torpedoe that jammed her rudder
the plane was a swordfish(fabric covered biplane)these planes outer covering was like tissue vs flak but it didn't tear just a hole was done that could easily be repaired
Had the Bismark's scout planes been armed and flying they could have easily taken the swordfish out
Bismark was sunk by the combimed efforts of the British navy ships Rodney and KGV and torps from Dorsetshire

Was it the Torpitz or the Bismarck that got sunk by a biplane lol. The guns couldn't turn slow enough to line up hehe.

[generalsilverstone]

i know everyone is going on about how good the japanese are but i personally like the alllies because there cool looking and i love the planes and ships looks compared with the japanese yes i will get a whooping but its worht it and at least ill understand my crew:)

[Dutch Jester]

Yay I Love You All My Post Is Finally A Hot Topic!!!

[Alpha Wolfgang]

i prefer the allies for their aircraft, i love the b-17, p-40, F-4U corsair, p-51, the hellcat... which is dissapointing since this game doesnt have the amazing hellcat! it still has the p40! i also look forward to flying high with a few fighters comin up to get me, while my gunners just rake em up.

[princecaspian4]

i know everyone is going on about how good the japanese are but i personally like the alllies because there cool looking and i love the planes and ships looks compared with the japanese yes i will get a whooping but its worht it and at least ill understand my crew:)

not only are they cool, they won the war

[Alpha Wolfgang]

"not only are they cool, they won the war"


lol, thats probably the simplist, yet most effective thing ive heard anyone say...

[princecaspian4]

ya, a good way to recruit people to the allies side

[kwintone]

not only are they cool, they won the war

it's funny when you look at history and often find that the "underdog" comes out on top. never underestimate your enemy.

[imnotcanadian]

Allies all the way here,unless the other side needs players. York Class all the way.

[TheMetalStorm]

I'm joining the Japanese to avoid another Sal Kar Disaster.

[princecaspian4]

I'm joining the Japanese to avoid another Sal Kar Disaster.

i see you played chromehounds, something like that happening is the only thing that worriers me about this game, but it won't stop me from joining the allies, and Sal kar did win i think 2 wars, but they always had almost half what the other countries had, but i did play for them, most of the time, my clan moved around every few rounds on what we called "shopping trips" we would go to another country for 1 war, buy everything we wanted, after that war we went to the next country, bought stuff from there, and then we either moved back to sal kar, or stayed in the country we were in for a few wars

[TheMetalStorm]

I was Morskoj....

[Capt:.Cavan]

http://www.hobbyworldinc.com/378008b8.jpg[/URL]

[andy3536]

The Jap planes of the era had no armour plating and no self sealing fuel tanks. Made them very vunrable. don't know if they will be given a more even running in this one but i think i will trade agility for armour plating and fire power. That and i saw a Hawker Hurricane in the screenshots. :)

[xgamerms999]

Well, I'm told no corsairs and no Iowas, so I have to go with the Imperial Navy and the Yamoto.

[Divine_Wind]

Probably Allies. Although, I will most definitely try the Japanese side, too.

[sgt. albin]

i will join the imperial navy thanks to their aircrafts superior speed and agility and still be able to pick off some nice flying things called "us aircraft" :rolleyes: . they aslo had thier torpedos, yamamoto and some other things that was great. HAIL THE EMPEROR! :p

[LT ROBERT COLE]

I'm gana be an American because i cant disappoint Patton;) then i might switch to Japs.

[generalsilverstone]

if you think about it during the time this game takes place the alies lost a lot of naval battles to japan and this was the time of jappanese rulling the wave so i think it will be interesting to see.

on a side note im with tarakia in chromhounds and am moving to morsokj asap plus i really dont think japan will be the sal kar lookalike as they will most likley be tarakia good all round but nothing specially APART FROM THE FUSO and alies will be morskoj good in places but they suck in others

[Tensing]

Hiya guys, first post but really looking forward to this one:D

I think I'll be going Japanese, mainly for the opportunity to do some red hot aerial manoeuvering with a Zero.....

[princecaspian4]

on a side note im with tarakia in chromhounds and am moving to morsokj asap plus i really dont think japan will be the sal kar lookalike as they will most likley be tarakia good all round but nothing specially APART FROM THE FUSO and alies will be morskoj good in places but they suck in others

i hope there won't be a repeat of what happened to sal kar,
P.S. how does morskoj suck? i thought they were the best (their howitzers were amazing), i packed all my hounds with morskoj howitzers, used morskoj legs and cockpits, and they were all like land battleships, big, slow, heavily armed and armored

[Alpha Wolfgang]

allies for me... im always doing the moral thing, even in video games! (except GTA and other freeroams... i cant help but hit people with my car!!! im addicted to saints row ragdoll effects when slamming some dude with my car)

but i just cant wait to shoot some japs down!!! (nothing personal)

[Dutch Jester]

... i packed all my hounds with morskoj howitzers, used morskoj legs and cockpits, and they were all like land battleships, big, slow, heavily armed and armored

ya but the armor is weak against chemical weapons so you could use a chemical sniper bullet to take em out in 1 shot or 2

[Alpha Wolfgang]

or you can drop a moab right on top of it.... or is that overkill?

[princecaspian4]

or you can drop a moab right on top of it.... or is that overkill?

the MOAB wasn't in the game, (although it would have been cool) but i think that all the shells from cannons landing at once would be close enough, they did some nasty damage

[kwintone]

i will join the imperial navy thanks to their aircrafts superior speed and agility and still be able to pick off some nice flying things called "us aircraft" :rolleyes: . they aslo had thier torpedos, yamamoto and some other things that was great. HAIL THE EMPEROR! :p

actually, despite the superior A6M Zeros there was only a 1:1 kill ratio for US aircraft before the intorduction of the F6F, F4U and P38 which altered the kill ratio to 10:1 for the US. allied pilots employed better tactics, such as the "boom-and-zoom" of the Flying Tigers who were very successfull against Japanese aircraft in their P40s. Or the "Thach Weave" which yielded great results at the Battle of Coral Sea and the Battle of Midway, making up for the inferior US aircraft.

but i still think the Japanese aircraft had better paint schemes...:D

[princecaspian4]

but i still think the Japanese aircraft had better paint schemes...:D

a paint scheme won't save you, and actually i had read somewhere that the Japanese had inferior paint, and that this game would show that :rasp:

[Battleship Bob]

I really couldn't pick one because I would like to play both.

[kwintone]

a paint scheme won't save you, and actually i had read somewhere that the Japanese had inferior paint, and that this game would show that :rasp:

it just seems to me that "the bad guys" always have "cooler looking" stuff.
maybe that says something about me, huh...:scratch: :nut:

[Sciurida]

I voted for the allies as well, they won the war, that's not that difficult :lol:

[xgamerms999]

it just seems to me that "the bad guys" always have "cooler looking" stuff.
maybe that says something about me, huh...:scratch: :nut:

In war, "bad guys" are a thing or perspective.

[princecaspian4]

In war, "bad guys" are a thing or perspective.

ya, the winner usually isn't considered the bad guy, had the axis won the war i am sure that we would all be taught to think that the allies were evil, and Hitler wasn't that bad
P.S. just remember, not all the japanese or German soldiers were bad, they were just soldiers who unfortunately, were on the wrong side

[Kaigun]

Yeah,because everyone's afraid of the winner of the war...:rasp: :rasp:

[Capt:.Cavan]

Vice Adm. William F. 'Bull' Halsey Jr once said at midway


"Don't worry about what I would do. Your only job is to go to sea, find Yamamoto, and chew his *bottom*!"


My note, it wasnt the word bottom is was a 3 lettered word as know as a donkey :D :lmao:

Anyway i think both teams would equally take my fancy, even if the japanese is slightly the "underdog", Tactics and teamwork can kick any ships butt !

oh yes and ladies, if anyone is going to play mulitplayer, you might aswel wish i am in a good mood , yes indeed :D

[warhawk21114]

nice choices. I on the otherhand prefer to be in control of an Allied Submarine. Despite the torp. issue in the war, in the game we should have decent torpedoes and I actually plan to go after escort ships. So that makes taking out the big ships easier.

[Cyber_Quake]

I like the way you think warhawk, who actually had the better subs the allied or the japanese, i think i'm going to prefer going with whoever has the better subs:D

[victornun]

I'm going to be trying out both sides, it's been ages since I've played a strategy game, I used to be well into age of empires III and c&c yuris revenge. If I ever venture into MP I'm gonna get beasted a hell of a lot, then maybe I'll think up some strategys ^^

[warhawk21114]

I like the way you think warhawk, who actually had the better subs the allied or the japanese, i think i'm going to prefer going with whoever has the better subs:D

Thks. good to know I am not alone in this thinking, and If we meet online lets wolfpack or cordinate an ambush of the opposing fleet.:cool:

Japan had several advanced submarines in the war, ones that could launch floatplanes and such. And instead of being used to go after supply ships they tangled with warships and had poor result and mainly supplied cutoff garrisons in the war..
America had poor torpedoes early on (Long story but for another time) but fixed them later on and had a remarkable success against Japanese supply ships and the Imperial fleet. America overall was better after the torp. issue was fixed around 43 cause they used their subs to the full advantage.

[Tex Vindictive]

The Japs.
I built a model of the Yamato one time. Use to watch the old Starblazers anime from back in the day. Would like to use the Yamato to redo battles.

[princecaspian4]

Japan had several advanced submarines in the war, ones that could launch floatplanes and such.

the submarine aircraft carriers (called an SSCV) weren't very good, they were barely used,
also the French Americans and British all had SSCVs, but had abandoned them before the war because of accidents and the fact that they weren't very effective (the largest, a Japanese SSCV, could only carry a max of 3 planes, most could squeeze in 2 but only carried one)
both the British and French SSCVs were converted from attempts at making a submarine battleship (or cruiser in the case of the french), the British one had a 12 inch gun that could be fired while at periscope depth, but could only be reloaded on the surface, that sank and they converted the other subs like it to other uses (including an SSCV, and that one sank during aircraft launch tests) and the french one had two 8 inch guns and the plane was just a recon plane (it also sank)

[Stinger503]

but i still think the Japanese aircraft had better paint schemes...:D

Agree 100% the Japanese had the coolest looking planes during the war. Their sun symbol looked 100x better on their white and green aircraft than the Star (US or Russian), German Cross or British Target thing (lol). :scratch:

But as far as ships go I'm all for the allies. Except for submarines, Germany gets my vote for submarines :thumbsup:

[princecaspian4]

Agree 100% the Japanese had the coolest looking planes during the war. Their sun symbol looked 100x better on their white and green aircraft than the Star (US or Russian), German Cross or British Target thing (lol). :scratch:


no, the iron cross looks much better then Japan's big red dot :rasp:

[Stinger503]

no, the iron cross looks much better then Japan's big red dot :rasp:

No way! Germany's planes were boring gray for the most part and the cross was black. Zzzzzzz... ;)

[princecaspian4]

No way! Germany's planes were boring gray for the most part and the cross was black. Zzzzzzz... ;)

Germany's planes weren't gray, they had camo paint (much better then the plane white on a lot of Japanese planes)

[Stinger503]

Germany's planes weren't gray, they had camo paint (much better then the plane white on a lot of Japanese planes)

Japan had camo too. Can we agree the Germany had the best colours in Europe and Japan in the Pacific? Since they were allies anyway..lol :D

[princecaspian4]

Japan had camo too. Can we agree the Germany had the best colours in Europe and Japan in the Pacific? Since they were allies anyway..lol :D

sounds good,

[kwintone]

In war, "bad guys" are a thing or perspective.

hence my use of quotation marks

;)

[imnotcanadian]

ya, the winner usually isn't considered the bad guy, had the axis won the war i am sure that we would all be taught to think that the allies were evil, and Hitler wasn't that bad
P.S. just remember, not all the japanese or German soldiers were bad, they were just soldiers who unfortunately, were on the wrong side

Not always true. Do you view the North Vietnamese the good guys in the Vietnam conflict? And some might argue this.... Do you view the Iraqi resistance (Al Queda and whatnot) as the good guys? Its apparent that we aren't going to be able to win in Iraq. It will be a Vietnam repeat. Once we leave,they will take on the Iraqi Republic and overthrow their goverment...again.





*Note*

This is not to start a political debate in this thread,certian material was just used to prove a point.

[Stinger503]

I think the difference between Vietnam and World War II is that the Vietnamese simply repelled an invading force, but didn't exactly take over the united states.

[imnotcanadian]

You are wrong.

The U.S. didn't invade Vietnam. North Vietnam invaded South Vietnam. The North,who was a communist state were backed by Russia. Russia was sending over massive supplies of tanks,helocopters,planes,and a multitude of small arms to the N.V.A. (North Vietnamese Army). The United States who were on an anti communist campaing,took the Southern side and helped repel the invasion...simply because the North was communist. Now,none of the populus in America wanted us there (sound familiar) especially after we started to mount losses. After the N.V.A. was repelled each side signed an armistice which ended the war. The U.S. helped to rebuild the South's goverment into a democratic state. As soon as all U.S. troops were pulled out,the N.V.A. invaded with a suprise attack and overthrew the goverment.

Sound familiar to the current situation in the Middle East? Research more upon it...you would be amazed by the similarities they share. I've been studying them and making comparisons and it is astonishing.

[princecaspian4]

Not always true. Do you view the North Vietnamese the good guys in the Vietnam conflict? And some might argue this.... Do you view the Iraqi resistance (Al Queda and whatnot) as the good guys? Its apparent that we aren't going to be able to win in Iraq. It will be a Vietnam repeat. Once we leave,they will take on the Iraqi Republic and overthrow their goverment...again.
.

ya, the difference is that the US still exists, you weren't conquered, yes, you could say that the North Vietnamese won, but in reality the point of the Americans getting into that conflict was to protect the south Vietnamese, and yes the US failed, but the war wasn't to protect the US, and i am sure that the people of south Vietnam are being taught that the North Vietnamese are good and that the US is evil, and in Iraq, i don't view the insurgents as good guys, but if the US pulls out and the Iraqi government falls, the people of Iraq will be taught that the US was an evil invader and were forced out by the heroic insurgents, another example is the American revolution, had the revolutionaries failed, we would be taught that they were traitors, not people fighting for their freedom,
so yes it won't apply to all wars, but in most any war where one country conquers another and the conquered assimilate into the conqueror, teh conqueror will do their best to paint a picture of themselves as liberators, not conquerors, and if they control where the peopel get their information (which many countries do) the peopel may never know the other side of the story

OK my rant is over, lets get back on topic

[imnotcanadian]

Some pretty good points in there.

[Stinger503]

The US went into Vietnam because of the "Bay of Tolken" incident or set-up rather

[imnotcanadian]

That just gave them a reason to get involved.

[Bm God]

i wuld play wiht boht because this game rox

[princecaspian4]

i wuld play wiht boht because this game rox

but online you have to pick one

[m t freestyler]

i want to be one of the good guys.
in the movies they always win:rasp:

[xgamerms999]

This is an old tread ain't it? :lol:

[Dutch Jester]

yes

[Languish]

Japanese :)

[Boultby]

the japs because as soon as the aircraft carriers are released they find it hard to take out your airfields,and seeing as, with the right strategies you can walk all over the aircraft carriers.

[Spyder131]

the japs because as soon as the aircraft carriers are released they find it hard to take out your airfields,and seeing as, with the right strategies you can walk all over the aircraft carriers.

trust me in the game it will be alot diffrent.......18 aircraft will not be able to take down a carrier in one swoop

[[DF]Panzershrek]

Tirpiz was sunk in harbor by heavy bombers carrying 10 ton bombs

Bismark got her steering jammed by a really lucky aerial torpedoe that jammed her rudder
the plane was a swordfish(fabric covered biplane)these planes outer covering was like tissue vs flak but it didn't tear just a hole was done that could easily be repaired
Had the Bismark's scout planes been armed and flying they could have easily taken the swordfish out
Bismark was sunk by the combimed efforts of the British navy ships Rodney and KGV and torps from Dorsetshire


Quote:
Originally Posted by Neroman
Was it the Torpitz or the Bismarck that got sunk by a biplane lol. The guns couldn't turn slow enough to line up hehe.

Six years ago, the information you two provided would've appeared correct.

But just as recently as 2004, a counter-documentary was launched to find and analyze the Bismarcks wreckage in an attempt to shed some truth on the 2001 British Undersea report which both ignored the lack of shell and torpedo penetration that it witnessed with its own undersea cameras aswell as the few remaining survivors of the ships own testimonies and orders to scuttle the ship.

What was all discovered through an underwater expedition launched in 2004 by an American Research Team was that out of 2876 shells that were fired in the closing engagement by the Rodney, Doretshire, Norfolk and King George V, absolutely only six hits were considered effective and or made penetration which two only landed above the 'Wotan' Armour, which was 320mm (12.6") thick.

In addition to this, out of the all the Torpedos launched before the sinking of the Bismarck, the Rudder Jamming Shot is considered the only one that was ever really effective. (As according to the research expedition the hull showed no signs of penetration, with only bubbling dents showing signs the 'Wotan' design withstood the strikes.)

But what was most astounding was the survivor stories and the discovery of the real culprit behind her sinking -- the crew. After the forward control post had been hit, killing the Captain alledgedly, the survivors thought it would be his last standing order to sink it rather then have it captured.

The underwater expedition also turned up evidence that the Bottom Valves, as according to the survivor stories, were infact sabotaged and were what brought the ship down. Extensive video footage of the wreck from this video documentary also shows the hull is in excellent condition and expected to last at least 300 years.

For a source see these, and those that are listed there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_battleship_Bismarck#Sinking
http://www.pbs.org/hood/news/video.html
http://www.maritimequest.com/warship_directory/germany/pages/battleships/bismarck_page_1.htm

[Cpt.sharp]

the simple fact remains, after 15 mins KG5 and Rodney distroyed all of Bismarks guns and distroyed the bridge. in less then 30 mins Bismark was no longer a battleship capable of doing anything but stay afloat.

when it says 4 shells penetrations i think that means under the waterline. i dont think taking out all guns and the bridge would of taken just 4 shells.

[[DF]Panzershrek]

the simple fact remains, after 15 mins KG5 and Rodney distroyed all of Bismarks guns and distroyed the bridge.

Rendering the ship useless does not nessecarly sink the ship. That responsibility rested with her crew. And not all the guns were disabled, although I'm sure 'bullets' and small cannon fire were not the priority or the right option, albeit the only option if they wanted an alternative.

15 minutes you say? The battle actually took close to an hour and twenty-five minutes with the King Georve V and the Rodney opening fire at 0900, the ships crew scuttling it at 09:55 and the ship finally sinking below the surface at around 10:15-25.

Your also changing facts. That survey found no underwater penetrations of the ship's fully-armoured citadel and only four direct hit holes on it above the waterline, all of them on one side, as delivered by the Rodney's 16 inch (406 mm) guns.

Those 4 shots out of the 2876 shots that were fired from a combined four ships, were what killed the most crew, but not what sunk the ship.

And I believe they were able to penetrate because of a design flaw, as most of the Japanese and German warships suffered from.

i dont think taking out all guns and the bridge would of taken 4 shells.

Nethire do I.

Which is why 2876 shots were fired. :D With four ever really being truthfully being lethal, and by lethal I do mean lethal. Almost half of the crew, whiped out with four shots.

The guns went silent as soon as 10:00.

[hammer4172]

Either side. I want to learn the strategy of being on each side for each campaign.