![]() |
SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997 |
![]() |
#10 | ||
The Old Man
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 1,658
Downloads: 14
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
Anybody ever play the game Pacific War? Convoys were crucial in the game. Say a 6,000 ton maru is carrying "150 units" of supplies to a distant Japanese garrison. If it gets sunk, the supplies fail to arrive, and the forces at the merchant's destination can no longer hold out as long. If I sink a troop transport, all of the AFVs and artillery pieces are lost, and the game calculates how many troops are killed depending on how long it takes the ship to sink. If you sink an aircraft carrier, Japenese offensive operations are curtailed in that area due to loss of air cover. If you sink a destroyer, it will makes everyone's job easier in the long run. And so on. Tankers are crucial, sink enough of them and the Japanese war machine grinds to a halt. With a random computer-controlled campaign, you wouldn't fight the same war over and over. Midway might not happen, Bataan might not fall, the Japenese might capture North Australia, and so on. A basic submarine AI on both sides could implemented (the AI commander would send them strategic locations to support current operations). I know many are clamoring for sub AI, but at the very least, the player should run into their own side every now and then (with a chance of friendly fire in poor weather!), and be presented with a weekly report of enemy sinkings, and SIGINT reports of axis operations. Why I find such things interesting is because the US submarine force succeded where the German failed: it almost strangled the Japanese empire. Perhaps not as fascinating as the Atlantic, but more interesting on a "nuts-and-bolts" strategic level, where every major sinking hurts Japan in the end. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|