Unique Doctrine Units

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Zaktty wrote:

      Yes, but Kamikazes didn't actually contribute that much to Japan's success.
      Do you know the weapon called “ 回天 ” which was both a human torpedo and a suicide weapon?
      At the time of World War II, If we look just at fuel, torpedoes had a long range.
      But anybody could not be used as a means of sniping targets that could navigate on their own from beyond visual range.
      Because there was no way to provide terminal guidance.
      回天 presented a way to use human life as an option for this task.
      If implementing this in a call of war, wouldn't it be appropriate to have a range of around 20, unit type : submarine, and special skill : missile?

    • Issue is that once the US learned to counter them, it didn’t really do much. Honestly it would not affect a war more than say, flying bombs do. Furthermore, Japan only used them out of desperation, China was not breaking and full industry of the United States, 10 times more than their own, was bearing down on them, much of their capacity crushed. It was basically implemented at a point where Japan was already crushed in a war they didn’t have much chance in anyway, but especially by 1944 both Japan AND Germany’s (during Overlord and Bagration) fates were sealed.

      Technically no country would realistically have its soldiers commit practical suicide unless they were that desperate, and if they were in the same position as Japan it wouldn’t really help them much either. Suicide torpedoes, boats and planes sound cool and all, but they aren’t practical and not even Japan really wanted to use them.

      CarKing the 6th of the Abrahamic Caliphate

    • I interpreted this as a thread to discuss tricky units that help highlight the character of each doctrine, rather than general-purpose weapons that are useful in many situations.
      In fact, I feel like a unit that has a high gambling quality and gives the illusion that it is a weak unit depending on the opponent is in line with the purpose of the thread.
      Also, personally speaking, I would be happy if something called Decoy ( tentative name ) was added to the special skill.
      In fact, at the sole discretion of the japanese submarine captain, 回天 was sometimes used to self-destruct after launch in order to make enemy seem defeat of a mother ship.

      Carking the 6th wrote:

      Issue is that once the US learned to counter them, it didn’t really do much. Honestly it would not affect a war more than say, flying bombs do. Furthermore, Japan only used them out of desperation, China was not breaking and full industry of the United States, 10 times more than their own, was bearing down on them, much of their capacity crushed. It was basically implemented at a point where Japan was already crushed in a war they didn’t have much chance in anyway, but especially by 1944 both Japan AND Germany’s (during Overlord and Bagration) fates were sealed.

      Technically no country would realistically have its soldiers commit practical suicide unless they were that desperate, and if they were in the same position as Japan it wouldn’t really help them much either. Suicide torpedoes, boats and planes sound cool and all, but they aren’t practical and not even Japan really wanted to use them.

    • Issue is I think the idea of this game, being that of strategy, is on too large a scale to incorporate specific and rather minor units such as these. Apart from the strange detour with recent Flame and Amphibious tanks, most units are larger general battalions that a country would likely use, such as armored battalions and infantry. Highly specialized small scale special things such as flamethrowers, sappers, and snipers are just not going to make up whole battalions used on a strategic scale. Doctrine specific units didn’t really exist in our timeline as any major breakthroughs that gave one side a huge advantage would be quickly replicated by the other side. Doctrine specific units aren’t likely to make sense for that reason. While certain countries may use things to greater effect, everyone will always use anything that can help them gain an advantage.

      CarKing the 6th of the Abrahamic Caliphate

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Carking the 6th ().

    • pod_than wrote:

      I interpreted this as a thread to discuss tricky units that help highlight the character of each doctrine, rather than general-purpose weapons that are useful in many situations.
      In fact, I feel like a unit that has a high gambling quality and gives the illusion that it is a weak unit depending on the opponent is in line with the purpose of the thread.
      Also, personally speaking, I would be happy if something called Decoy ( tentative name ) was added to the special skill.
      In fact, at the sole discretion of the japanese submarine captain, 回天 was sometimes used to self-destruct after launch in order to make enemy seem defeat of a mother ship.

      Carking the 6th wrote:

      Issue is that once the US learned to counter them, it didn’t really do much. Honestly it would not affect a war more than say, flying bombs do. Furthermore, Japan only used them out of desperation, China was not breaking and full industry of the United States, 10 times more than their own, was bearing down on them, much of their capacity crushed. It was basically implemented at a point where Japan was already crushed in a war they didn’t have much chance in anyway, but especially by 1944 both Japan AND Germany’s (during Overlord and Bagration) fates were sealed.

      Technically no country would realistically have its soldiers commit practical suicide unless they were that desperate, and if they were in the same position as Japan it wouldn’t really help them much either. Suicide torpedoes, boats and planes sound cool and all, but they aren’t practical and not even Japan really wanted to use them.

      I think that doctrine units should be special gimmicky stuff. They would do really specific stuff. The carrier submarine would be interesting because of stealth.

    • Carking the 6th wrote:

      Issue is I think the idea of this game, being that of strategy, is on too large a scale to incorporate specific and rather minor units such as these. Apart from the strange detour with recent Flame and Amphibious tanks, most units are larger general battalions that a country would likely use, such as armored battalions and infantry. Highly specialized small scale special things such as flamethrowers, sappers, and snipers are just not going to make up whole battalions used on a strategic scale. Doctrine specific units didn’t really exist in our timeline as any major breakthroughs that gave one side a huge advantage would be quickly replicated by the other side. Doctrine specific units aren’t likely to make sense for that reason. While certain countries may use things to greater effect, everyone will always use anything that can help them gain an advantage.
      I agree.
      Therefore, one idea would be to position it as a unit card on the same level as a flamethrower tank.

    • Carking the 6th wrote:

      Issue is that once the US learned to counter them, it didn’t really do much. Honestly it would not affect a war more than say, flying bombs do. Furthermore, Japan only used them out of desperation, China was not breaking and full industry of the United States, 10 times more than their own, was bearing down on them, much of their capacity crushed. It was basically implemented at a point where Japan was already crushed in a war they didn’t have much chance in anyway, but especially by 1944 both Japan AND Germany’s (during Overlord and Bagration) fates were sealed.

      Technically no country would realistically have its soldiers commit practical suicide unless they were that desperate, and if they were in the same position as Japan it wouldn’t really help them much either. Suicide torpedoes, boats and planes sound cool and all, but they aren’t practical and not even Japan really wanted to use them.
      By the way, I think that 回天 “ would not affect a war more than say, flying bombs do” was more because it had already been strategically defeated than because of its performance as a weapon.
      It's an extreme idea, but no matter how powerful that was, it can't fight if that is surrounded by 100 destroyers.
      On the other hand, if a 回天-carrying イ五二型潜水艦 ( I-52 submarine ) and USS Underhill, DE-682 were to engage in a 100 vs 100 battle as The context of the Lanchester's laws, which one do everyone think would survive and how many?

      The post was edited 1 time, last by pod_than ().

    • pod_than wrote:

      Carking the 6th wrote:

      Issue is that once the US learned to counter them, it didn’t really do much. Honestly it would not affect a war more than say, flying bombs do. Furthermore, Japan only used them out of desperation, China was not breaking and full industry of the United States, 10 times more than their own, was bearing down on them, much of their capacity crushed. It was basically implemented at a point where Japan was already crushed in a war they didn’t have much chance in anyway, but especially by 1944 both Japan AND Germany’s (during Overlord and Bagration) fates were sealed.

      Technically no country would realistically have its soldiers commit practical suicide unless they were that desperate, and if they were in the same position as Japan it wouldn’t really help them much either. Suicide torpedoes, boats and planes sound cool and all, but they aren’t practical and not even Japan really wanted to use them.
      By the way, I think that 回天 “ would not affect a war more than say, flying bombs do” was more because it had already been strategically defeated than because of its performance as a weapon.It's an extreme idea, but no matter how powerful you are, you can't fight if you're surrounded by 100 destroyers.
      On the other hand, if a 回天-carrying イ五二型潜水艦 ( I-52 submarine ) and USS Underhill, DE-682 were to engage in a 100 vs 100 battle as The context of the Lanchester's laws, which one do everyone think would survive and how many?
      An interesting proposition

      CarKing the 6th of the Abrahamic Caliphate