U.S.S. WAHOO - Third War Patrol

January 26th:

At 1155 sighted tops of fourth ship to the right of the cripple. Her thick masts in line had the appearance of a light cruiser's tops. Kept heading for these ships hoping that the last one sighted would attempt to pick up survivors of the transport. When the range was about 10,000 yards, however, she turned right and joined the cripple, her masts bridge structure and engines aft identifying her as a tanker. Decided to let these two ships get over the horizon while we surfaced to charge batteries and destroy the estimated twenty troop boats now in the water. These boats were of many types, scows, motor launches, cabin cruisers and nondescript varieties. At 1135 made battle surface and manned all guns. Fired 4" gun at largest scow loaded with troops. Although all troops in this boat apparently jumped in the water our fire was returned by small caliber machine guns. We then opened fire with everything we had. Then set course 085 degrees at flank speed to overtake the cripple and tanker.

Yours, Mike

"They tried to defend themselves when we opened fire on them, so now they are combatants that we can butcher like rats! Sweet!"

Come on. Even combat medics bearing the Red Cross emblem have weapons within range to defend themselves with if illegally attacked. It's still illegal to attack them, because if you leave them alone like you're supposed to, they won't harm you.

I think the... cold-blooded comments in this thread should be a very good indicator for Ubisoft that life-boats need to be ethereal (ie. that shots go right through them).

Also, again, most of the survivors massacred Major Thomas-style were in reality P.O.W.s from India. Which presents another problem - you never know if the destroyer you just sunk was a prison transport or a warship.

And I can refrain from killing this little boy and seventeen years later he may join the Army and cap mah son. I still can't shoot him, as he's a civilian. Likewise with P.O.W.s.

I am pretty sure that sub crews likely did machine gun the survivors of the wrecks in real life. You have to realize the american mentality against the enemy back then. The American Propaganda probably had something to do with it. I also know however our troops were very compassionate toward the civilans during the island fighting, especially in Okinawa. A friend of my fathers dad was a Okinawa vet who was in the US Marines.......he took most of what happened there to the grave, died recently of cancer and never talked about it his whole life but from what I hear, what the Japanese military did to their own civilians and the state they left them in was pretty bad. Women killing their own babies and then themselves and other things that scars the mind for your whole life.

Since none of us were there at the time, you can't judge the Wahoo's crew for their actions. Enemy troops who are armed and shooting at you from "lifeboats" are legit targets.
Read up on the history of the Geneva Convention, you may learn something.

Yours, Mike

A good mod will be importing a FPS with a 1903 Springfield so we can do it right.
I remember seeing a color film of a surfaced US Sub shooting the survivors. Not in life boats but in the water. One southern guy says “Look it dat one playing possum, I’ll git’em, bang!!!
They pulled out the rifles and had a good ole boy time killin dem dar forener little varmints!!!
I love these PC rules. In CoD2 there is one part where this fat Kraut says dooont shooot pleeze vee have wounded. To which the major yells hold your fire boys. So, I constantly see the killing prisoners will not be tolerated time and again, LOL like we did not shoot many guys just because we didn’t want to be bothered with prisoners. Sad reality but true for all sides.
The argument killing troop ship survivors is not without merit. Those soldiers would be picked up and put ashore at Guadalcanal and be killing our men so why is it not right to save our guys now?
Insane???? You bet. War is legalized insanity and never started by the people that kill themselves but the rulers who rarely ever do anything but order millions to their death!
This idea we must act in certain ways when we wage insanity or it is wrong makes no sense in something as basically wrong as war is.
I am not saying we should do it. I am just saying we should be willing to admit we need to be willing to do it. That willing to do what it takes to win, our side triumph, and our culture prevail etc is faced today.
Surrender or be willing to kill every last one of them.
Don’t put survivors in SH4 if we do not get the option of being murderers.
I changed the minus renown for neutral ships in SH3. Not because I wanted to get credit for being bad but when a ship is in the war zone or I can ascertain it is trading with Tommy it gets sunk as it should. I make every attempt to insure this and do not fire unless I can ID it and plot its course to be sure and for me that is part of the sim. I felt it was wrong to get minus renown when I sank ships supplying the enemy.
I would not shoot survivors unless I could ascertain they were soldiers in an area where they would be picked up and put into combat against my side. I would have to make sure that was the case or I would not do it.
That may sound offensive to some.
To those people I suggest you be prepared to convert to Islam.
I won’t be!

Wulfmann

Leave 'em to the giant sharks that patrol the Pacific. Besides, they deserve fresh tender meals! :arrgh!:

I can perfectly well read up on the incident and decide for myself whether I approve or disapprove of it.

They need to make a naval version of GTA so these people can get out their aggression.

Er?

Becaaause?

Which means you didn't learn from Morton, who shot up life-boats from a troop transport only to learn he'd been massacring POW's from India. Whoops.

Islam? [Cogs turn in head]

...

[...Smacks forehead] Oooh, so you're one of those people. That'd explain it.

Guys, come on.

I think where this thread is going is actually a perfect indicator of how it'll turn out in the game - if it generates this much controversy, then you know Ubi will not let you. I'm already seeing that red 'x' when you try to aim at a survivor; you know it :88)

Now, what gets my curious is this screenshot:

http://img124.imageshack.us/img124/5305/scr4kz6.jpg

Notice the lifeboats, but no survivors in them...

From reading this thread I REALLY do believe some of you are COLD hearted and even though it's just a Simulation you WILL try & kill survivors in lifeboats, well so be it. Your Sim will end very abruptly I'm sure :smug: and you can just start all over again from scatch. Hopefully any saves before this will be deleted and I think this will happen. You don't really think UBI would LET you wantinly kill survivors in the Sim and let the public ( many more than just us SH players ) start champing the bit at them do you ?

This way if you shoot them YOU pay the penalty. :up: So go right ahead and shoot the lifeboats and we'll be reading your dismays about not being able to play a through career.

This may not be the way UBI has it set up but I surely hope so.:arrgh!:

This thread should be locked and deleted before the Ubi guys see it and take the life boats out for good.

I'm sure there is a similar thread on the UBI boards. In fact, this thread is starting to sound like one of the UBI threads; one of the reasons I don't go there anymore.

They'll probably give us a Public Service Announcement after each patrol. Or they'll give us a pre-game start movie with a sexy submarine veteran in uniform telling us to "please do all our massacring in the game", Need for Speed-style.

http://home.no.net/leandres/brumdisney40.gif"And remember, children, winners don't shoot up life-boats!"

They've probably just not been implemented yet.

Not that I could see. They do, however, have at least one user with a "DEMAND NARWAHL CLASS BOATS!" signature. Looks like we ruined the day for him:rotfl:.

i will only gun them down if they are soldiers
otherwise
naa

Because SH4 is a sim.
You see a game is not based on reality but a simulation simulates. If we are suppose to simulate we are suppose to simulate the decision possibilities a real US captain had to face.
If they put survivors in SH4, particularly soldiers who are heading to attack our brothers we should have the option to fight the war with the same options the real men had.
We should try and experience how it would feel to have to make those decisions even if it is not real because it says something to each of us.
I t would also be interesting to then later get reports that Jap soldiers picked up from a sunk troopship massacred a marine hospital and then you get to ask what relevance sanity has in insanity
Then we can compare how all this feels on the forum and get just a taste of what after thoughts some of these men had in real life insanity of war situations
Of course some here may think the UN should dictate how we decide before we get to decide but some still live outside of the herd and want to see for themselves!

In SH3 I can sink neutrals but I am very strict to make sure they are supplying England. If I sink a neutral outside the war zone and it is found to be such I do two things. If I ascertain at the time of sinking I return to port and fire at nothing else and do not except any medals. I use all gained renown to buy things back and forth to use it up to return to start renown..
This eliminates any gain from the whole patrol as punishment. I am very strict on myself.
In SH4 if we have the option of destroying life boats I will only do it to ones from troop ships and maintain a strict policy for that.
The; I want UBI to sanitize it so we have to be civil in war can be had by your own choice or are those that demand this saying they can’t resist murder if they have the chance?
I will kill the combatants not the survivors. Sorry for those who don’t know the difference.

Wulfmann

Agreed 100%.

Again, agreed 100%. But then again, I think for the most part it's not so much cold-bloodedness but maturity level with many of these comments.