![]() |
SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997 |
|
View Poll Results: What do I Sink? | |||
Take down the Yamato's and skip the Fuso's |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
38 | 40.86% |
Knock Off the Fuso's, there easy |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
4 | 4.30% |
One Battleship, One Heavy Cruiser please and hold the depth charges |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
5 | 5.38% |
Go for the light stuff, CL's and DD's It isn't how big, it's how many |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
2 | 2.15% |
Tankers! Then they all have to out oars and row for home! |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
25 | 26.88% |
Whatever you can take a shot at and hope for the best |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
19 | 20.43% |
Voters: 93. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
![]() |
#14 |
Ace of the Deep
![]() Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Bolton, UK
Posts: 1,236
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
Strategically the tankers are a more important target. As BBs were superceded by CVs they no longer represent a worthwhile investment in time/resources trying to sink them, they can easily be bye-passed. Certainly they are a potent weapon in a surface action, but the CV battles were the ones that had real effect on the war. For example, if USN had sunk 4 BBs at midway it would have been a major loss for the IJN but it would not have won the battle for the US.
Tankers were in short supply and as Japan had no natural oil supplies, the loss of the tanker fleet would fataly cripple the Japanese war effort. If there was a CV though that would automatically be the priority, damage it at all costs! ![]()
__________________
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|