Cap'n where do I begin?
Quote:
|
Any Captain worth his salt wouldn’t put up with an inaccurate Recognition Manual. If he found the “book” wrong he’d rewrite the thing because his life and the crew’s life depended on accurate decisions. When he returned to port, you can bet your front tooth his findings were made known to the proper authorities.
|
You hit the nail on the head there! They did. Admiral Lockwood requested that the Japanese rent us their vessels for accurate measurements so we could sink them properly. He relayed your policeman story and said that his captains refused to shoot any more torpedoes without accurate information. The Japanese replied that it sounded like the captains were on the right track.:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:
Seriously, as a captain you would only know your torpedoes were missing. You would have no way of knowing if the masthead measurement in your recognition book were a meter off. Actually as an American sub captain in WWII, you wouldn't know what a meter was if it bit you. The reality of the situation was that the captains blamed themselves for their non-production and resigned in large numbers. Those who stuck it out found ways to hit targets in spite of the torpedo problems and inaccurate ONI information.
Quote:
|
I’m not surprised that RR and others feel that SCAF gives a player an unrealistic advantage. After all the idea behind it was to correct the inaccuracy of the stock range finding results when a manual Stadimeter reading was made. If you read the “Discussion” section of the SCAF thread you will have an idea what I found true within the game and what I did to correct this inaccuracy.
|
You took Japanese ships out of the war zone to a carefully measured range and under perfect controlled conditions, measured the mast heights of each ship in the game. Some of them were grossly out of line. In that you are 100% correct.
To claim historical accuracy for the SCAF mod you have the burden of proving that the US military did exactly that with every Japanese ship. It did not happen. Our ONI ship recognition manuals were based on information released by the Japanese, reports of spies, overheard conversations (if any), rumor and conjecture. The Japanese knew what info was oficially released, so they took steps to ensure the information was no longer valid. Much of the information we collected was just plain wrong.
In our spoiled rotten society we are used to making a fuss and throwing a temper tantrum to demand what we want no matter how unreasonable or impossible that is. And our societies are so rich that for the most part we get what we demand. In World War II they realized that they were living under strict limitations and it was their personal responsibility to overcome any obstacles in their way with their own resources. They for the most part accepted that the information they got was the best they were going to get. They then found ways not to have to rely on the faulty data or just accepted the resulting misses as a cost of doing business, as O'Kane did when his radar broke. He didn't just run back to port because he had a boo-boo.
The captains who took their lumps and kept slugging are the ones we read about and admire today. The ones who wouldn't put up with the bad torpedoes or "
wouldn’t put up with an inaccurate Recognition Manual" are the ones deservedly lost in the dustbin of history. Life ain't fair. Tough toenails!
I don't have a problem with SCAF itself at all! Capn Scurvy did long research to correct every ship in the manual so it measured correctly, making your shooting as accurate as it can be. If you miss, you made a mistake.
I have a problem with it being in Real Fleet Boat, a mod which uses historical reality as its yardstick. If SCAF were plugged into TMO I'd be praising it. In Real Fleet Boat it belongs right next to the dilythium crystals and photon torpedoes.