I was referring to the whole lifeboat thing. I know it was a hot topic for a while in SHIII, and i thought it was cool at first but quickly got tired of it.

I think it would be a cool option to be able to pick up survivors (you could have a maximum number you could carry) and it would give you extra renown when you get back to port. The downfall would be that you couldn't go to silent running due to the fact that you have to guard the prisoners. Kind of a give/take situation.

It would also be neat if they had "hell ships" in the game where the survivors could be allied POWs that you could rescue for even extra renown. It might make for some interesting game play if you couldn't just run completely away if you saw that there were allied POWs. You would have to stick around (within visual range, anyway) and wait for the escorts to leave before you could rescue.

I know it's a pipe dream, but would be neat NTL....

Chuck

hhe, yeah... cool thought. btw, why would guarding the prisoners take away silent running? POWs sabotaging the craft by noise? or own crew noise? what do u mean?

Sure. Something like that. Just something so you might not want to take prisoners. Maybe an increase in breaking percentage due to sabotage? Lowered crew performance as they have to deal with the prisoners? Anything like that so that its not just easy renown....

Chuck

It would have to be a hell of a lot of renown to give up silent running for the remainder of a patrol. I would think most players would choose not to rescue survivors if it cost you the ability to survive against escorts...

Shooting at unarmed people floating in the sea is murder, even at war (one have to be really a wacko to enjoy doing this).

There is no need to do such a thing, not even for pious reasons, not while we have a chance to rescue them (which is very different from a case in which we really CANT do a damn thing to save someone from a certain death and is better to put a bullet on him rather than leaving him in pain)

Besides, in RL people in liferafts HAVE a chance of being rescued by other type of ships, or even reach the shore (Bligh and some other crewmen casted away from the HMS Bounty survived a 3600 nm travel in a small boat!), which should not be our concern.

All we want is their ships.

This is a cool idea. You could have them take up any extra crew spots you have on board...all spots full, no more prisoners!

I'd still want silent running to work, ("I said, put him in submission!")...repair times would be greatly increased while you have men guarding prisoners instead of manning their stations.

Exactly my point. You have to have some give and take. Real captains took risks to secure POWs as you didn't know what was going to happen when you got them aboard. As we don't really have any "real" danger associated with taking a prisoner, you need to have it affect something major so it's not just "free" renown.


Excellent suggestion.


Chuck

I just send a radio message so my good mate the Admiral can send some ships out to pickup the special cargo.

No POWS in my boat. My crew would just kill them. Especially after what happened to little Johnny. :roll:

In general, the "all we want is their ships" is true, but when facing a suicidal enemy that elects to fight to the death (pointlessly), every one you leave alive at large is another that you must kill later. I've read many accounts of sinking in the PTO, and I'm always amazed that so many actually survived and were picked up.

Might as well kill them while it's easy to do so, and before they can kill some of your own. Note that I don't think this applies to a non-suicidal enemy.

Think what you would do if your country was being invaded. I'm sure plenty of French sacrificed themselves for the benefit of the Allied forces.

Many of the Japanese were of the opinion that they must stop the American's reaching japan to save their families. Misguided bravery maybe, but certainly not pointless when you think of what they were fighting for. Your home. :cry:

To respond to the OP: I have successfully sunk a few life rafts with my deck gun. I don't relish in it... merely wanted to see if it was possible.

Nice one Tater,

so germans machine gunning survivors of torpedoed american and british ships = bad, evil etc.

while americans machine gunning survivors of torpedoed japanese ships = good, worthy etc.

That's war for you, even 60 years later, it would seem.

They're all evil!! Except Australians who did it..... :rotfl:

I've heard all this before in the IL-2 forums.
Than it was "should you kill the pilot while he's hanging in his chute?" Most pilots thought it dishonorable and wouldn't do it.

Others took the more practical stand "I kill him today! or he kills me tomorrow!"

I found what I thought was a middle ground, if over my territory I'd spare him in hopes he'd be captured.

Over his territory I'd kill him, knowing he'd most likely be back in the fight in a day or two. But than I'm only killing pixels ain't I! It is ironic we chose to play war games, hiding in ambush for hr's sometimes days so we can "without warning" kill as many pixels as we can. Than argue the morality of it all :oops: I've never been to war!...thank God or evolution or whatever, so I don't think I'm qualified to sit in judgment of what these men did 60 years ago...in the heat of battle!

As for American sub commanders ordering the shooting of survivors I've never seen any evidence of this. That's not to say it didn't happen, but someone claims to have seen video of it I'd like to see it...got link?