Kamikaze!

Frozzy · August 19, 2002, 04:29

Hey all. I just thought I would post a poll here, saying whether a new Civ game should have an action for air planes, where you can "Kamikaze" into an enemy unit/city. This would be good if your plane couldn't make it back to an airbase before they're feul ran out.

J Bytheway · August 19, 2002, 06:44

I don't know whether it would be a good idea for all planes to be able to, but I once made a Civ2 scenario with Kamikaze bombers in, and the AI built hundreds of them! One city with two AEGIS cruisers and a SAM battery (that's x8 defense, IIRC) fended off about 40 bomber attacks in one turn (without losing any units, but both cruisers were half dead). I've never seen the AI do anything in such excess...

Solver · August 19, 2002, 07:58

Generally threads with such general ideas over civ games would be belonging here...

fittstim · August 19, 2002, 08:14

Kamikaze doesn't make sense. Soldiers don't willingly kill themselves. It takes strategy out of the game.

But since this whole issue isn't relevant to CivIII where bombers never run out of fuel (unlike CivI and CivII), I'm wondering what the point is???

P.S. Sorry if that sounds nasty. I'm just wondering if you meant this in a civII or civIII context?

zulu9812 · August 19, 2002, 08:24

You got Kamikaze pilots in WWII - that's where the term comes from: the Japanese suicide pilots.

redbull, just give planes the Cruise Missile ability and you have your kamikaze

NeoStar · August 19, 2002, 08:54

Quote:

Originally posted by fittstim
Kamikaze doesn't make sense. Soldiers don't willingly kill themselves. It takes strategy out of the game.

There must be limitation to the idea. I would see it being confined to one gov (fundamentalism - but its not there) OR mass suicides aggravating war weariness greatly.

fittstim · August 19, 2002, 09:05

Quote:

Originally posted by zulu9812
You got Kamikaze pilots in WWII - that's where the term comes from: the Japanese suicide pilots.

Really!?!?! I didn't know that

The point isn't whether a few loyal/warped pilots volunteered/were welded into the cockpit of a plane that was then loaded with explosives. The point is that the Kamikaze is not a "unit" any more than a "suicide bomber" or the opium-hazed Assassins of the Crusades era would be. They are blips on the screen. A sorry few compared to the real units of the armed forces.

Imagine having a waring strategy that was based on killing your own soldiers. What person would support such a thing? The cities would immediately rise up and rebel - switch to a more decent society.

If you want to make the point, then you should make a kamikaze unit appear randomly and rarely - much like a leader. Then you could have your wacko-kamikaze units but wouldn't be able to have a war strategy based on amassing dozens of units.

The Pioneer · August 19, 2002, 09:22

I don't see how this concept can fit into Civ 3. For a later civ game I would much prefer that Firaxis would work on the Air and Naval concept a bit more so that we can enjoy them before we go to such units like a Kamikaze, although it's an interesting idea.

Maybe if somebody would do a WWII scenario in the Pacific theater, he could then implement it!

So long...

vondrack · August 19, 2002, 09:37

Quote:

Originally posted by fittstim
Really!?!?! I didn't know that

The point isn't whether a few loyal/warped pilots volunteered/were welded into the cockpit of a plane that was then loaded with explosives. The point is that the Kamikaze is not a "unit" any more than a "suicide bomber" or the opium-hazed Assassins of the Crusades era would be. They are blips on the screen. A sorry few compared to the real units of the armed forces.

Imagine having a waring strategy that was based on killing your own soldiers. What person would support such a thing? The cities would immediately rise up and rebel - switch to a more decent society.

If you want to make the point, then you should make a kamikaze unit appear randomly and rarely - much like a leader. Then you could have your wacko-kamikaze units but wouldn't be able to have a war strategy based on amassing dozens of units.

fittstim,

the Japanese used kamikaze pilots en mass throughout the late WW2, when desperately trying to stop the US from reaching the Japanese homeland. It was not just a few of them, they were ending their lives in hundreds. Also, the Japanese cities did not appear to rise up and rebel because of that, if you mention it. Actually, becoming a kamikaze was highly esteemed in the Japanese society. It had to do much with the cultural background of the nation.

Saying "what person would..." etc. is much like saying "what person would support suicidal Palestinian bomb-attackers?". However unbelievable and unsupportable this seems to Western people, these things happen and are apparently quite ok with other nations, which have different cultural background.

Said that, I would still not support a kamikaze unit to be included, mostly because even though they were used in big numbers, they were not very effective and meant very little as far as the military importance was concerned.

BTW... although the principle of kamikaze was tied mostly to planes/pilots, it was used, to an extent, with ships, too... The Japanese battleship Yamato (one of the grandest battleships ever built) joined by several smaller vessels ended her life in a futile attempt to suicidally intercept the US fleet. Had fuel enough to make it to the place of encounter only, but not back. Sunk by American naval bombers before having a slightest chance to fire a single shot...

Thrawn05 · August 19, 2002, 10:09

It makes no difference. Airplanes and anything else that uses bombardment are still horrible. Not worth the time to build.

Thrawn05 · August 19, 2002, 10:12

Quote:

Originally posted by fittstim
But since this whole issue isn't relevant to CivIII where bombers never run out of fuel (unlike CivI and CivII), I'm wondering what the point is???

Those were the days.

I'm leaning towards having Firaxis go back to that system if they won't increase the range beyond 8 in the editor.

HazieDaVampire · August 19, 2002, 13:00

The Nazi's had suicide soldiers, people who'd lost the whole of their family in the eastern front or through bombing raids could join a unit who would do missions that success would only come if the soldiers didn't care if they lived or died!

Thrawn05 · August 19, 2002, 13:21

Quote:

Originally posted by HazieDaVampire
The Nazi's had suicide soldiers

How about replace the Samuri with the BONZI! unit.

Hagbart · August 19, 2002, 14:10

I voted no, i'm tired of WW2!

Hagbart · August 19, 2002, 14:12

BTW to Thrawn: No probs with huge maps? I have a p3-550 too and I have probs! Why?

Thrawn05 · August 19, 2002, 14:14

Quote:

Originally posted by Hagbart
BTW to Thrawn: No probs with huge maps? I have a p3-550 too and I have probs! Why?

In order to keep this threat in topic, I will PM you shortly my answer.

HazieDaVampire · August 19, 2002, 17:09

PM me too, i have a 450 and i have to wait about 1 min!

Inverse Icarus · August 19, 2002, 19:54

i'd like to see a "kamakazie" button that doubles the range of a REGULAR fighter (any aircraft), not a special unit.

In civ2 you could kamakazie your fighters all you wanted to.

Thrawn05 · August 19, 2002, 20:53

Quote:

Originally posted by UberKruX
i'd like to see a "kamakazie" button that doubles the range of a REGULAR fighter (any aircraft), not a special unit.

In civ2 you could kamakazie your fighters all you wanted to.

Or just double all the values. And degrees the interception chance by a 1/3.

Hazie: I'll work on... it's late right now and I just noticed it.

Coracle · August 19, 2002, 21:25

Japanese kamikazes were a DESPERATION measure that came late in World War Two.

Unless Civ 3 breaks down into monthly turns it really is unrealistic to have them as they lasted in fact for a very short time.

Thrawn05 · August 19, 2002, 21:28

Quote:

Originally posted by Coracle
Unless Civ 3 breaks down into monthly turns it really is unrealistic to have them as they lasted in fact for a very short time.

I would like that. Have modern age take 12 turns to do a full year. So turn A would be 1941.12, B: 1942.01, C: 1942.02, ect.

Coracle · August 19, 2002, 21:32

Quote:

Originally posted by Thrawn05

Those were the days.

I'm leaning towards having Firaxis go back to that system if they won't increase the range beyond 8 in the editor.

Yes, those Civ 2 days. How we miss them.

Bombers in Civ 3 are a pain for many reasons besides being relatively ineffective and having much too short a range.

In Civ 2 bombers could INTERDICT tiles. In otherwords, you could leave your bomber on a tile and unles it could be shot down the enemy could not move onto it. This was very useful for invasions.

Try interdicting the area around a planned invasion site now with Civ 3! You would need WAVES of bombers trying to destroy the roads and RR's, if not shot down.

That, combined with the crazy unlimited MP's on RR's, makes invasions very difficult to succeed owing to the counterattack.

Thrawn05 · August 19, 2002, 21:50

Quote:

Originally posted by Coracle

Yes, those Civ 2 days. How we miss them.

Bombers in Civ 3 are a pain for many reasons besides being relatively ineffective and having much too short a range.

In Civ 2 bombers could INTERDICT tiles. In otherwords, you could leave your bomber on a tile and unles it could be shot down the enemy could not move onto it. This was very useful for invasions.

Try interdicting the area around a planned invasion site now with Civ 3! You would need WAVES of bombers trying to destroy the roads and RR's, if not shot down.

That, combined with the crazy unlimited MP's on RR's, makes invasions very difficult to succeed owing to the counterattack.

Pretty sweet, but I must admit, I never played Civ2

. I do play Civ1 for the SNES, and I like the air combat on that.

Jets move, destroy a target, and must return within the same turn to a city or carrier, or city to carrier or vise versa.

Bombers take up to 2 turns in the air. Which means they can move I think 16 tiles, and then the turn move another 16.

That system I liked.

It's good to be the KING!

MarkG · August 20, 2002, 03:18

Quote:

Originally posted by Coracle
Yes, those Civ 2 days. How we miss them.

why dont you go back to it then?

and yes, after the continuing lack of replies to my posts, i can post my favorite part of the song that was obviously written for coracle, even if he probably wasnt born at the time

Quote:

Brave Sir Robin ran away,
Bravely ran away, away.
When danger reared its ugly head, he bravely turned his tail and fled.
Yes, brave Sir Robin turned about
And gallantly, he chickened out. Bravely taking to his feet,
He beat a very brave retreat,
Bravest of the brave, Sir Robin.

you'll find the first part in previous posts of mine

notyoueither · August 20, 2002, 03:31

You should expect a PM on the morrow.

MarkG · August 20, 2002, 03:42

morrow?

notyoueither · August 20, 2002, 03:49

On the morrow = Tomorrow.

Sorry, 'talking' with too many Brits lately, must have activated a recessive gene.

Nym · August 20, 2002, 04:54

The idea is interesting, but it should have limitations:

the plane must have enough mouvement points to reach the city,
the success rate should only be a little better than bombardement if the plane hits the city without being intercepted/destroyed by SAM or fighter.

fittstim · August 20, 2002, 05:54

Quote:

Originally posted by vondrack

fittstim,

the Japanese used kamikaze pilots en mass throughout the late WW2, when desperately trying to stop the US from reaching the Japanese homeland. It was not just a few of them, they were ending their lives in hundreds. Also, the Japanese cities did not appear to rise up and rebel because of that, if you mention it. Actually, becoming a kamikaze was highly esteemed in the Japanese society. It had to do much with the cultural background of the nation.

Were you drunk when you wrote that or are you really that confused about world history?

The Japanese did not use kamikaze plane "en masse". This is a military fact. Their claim to fame is the "TERROR" that they caused in the soldiers opposing them. Much like suicide bombers in Israel. They were, however, not as popular or common as their claim to fame would have one believe.

Saying that there were "hundreds" of them is a joke compared to the TENS OF MILLIONS of soldiers fighting in the war.

Becoming a kamikaze pilot was definitely NOT an esteemed act within the society. When the generals realized that many of the supposed "kamikaze" pilots weren't actually killing themselves but bailing out (usually too early so that the plane crashed into the ocean), they enacted a policy of welding the pilot within the canopy so that escape was not possible. The samurai/bushi mentality encouraged bravery and honor in battle. Not exactly what people think of when they hear about kamikaze (or suicide bombers).

The sad fact was that the Japanese pilots were getting shot down/killed at an unsustainable rate. The kamikaze idea was sheer desperation because they were out of skilled pilots.

Side note: There were several "kamikaze" pilots who actually survived? Strange but true fact...

notyoueither · August 20, 2002, 06:27

5 thousand men and aircraft are not an insignificant number. Especially the aircraft.

Sinking or damaging hundreds of allied (American) ships is not insignificant either.

How many kamikaze missions at Okinawa alone?

Are you drunk, or just mad that someone has an opinion different from yours?