5 ms·

But, would that tactic really have worked or was it just exploiting some less-tested close-battle rules that didn't actually represent reality? As in, those tin

But, would that tactic really have worked or was it just exploiting some less-tested close-battle rules that didn't actually represent reality? As in, those tiny torpedo-boats are incredibly flimsy and a CIWS fires a lot of bullets. When they wrote the rules did they just arbitrarily assign a carrier a certain number of attacks per round? Because four attacks doing d100 damage aren't like one-hundred attacks doing d4 damage... If a real carrier group would have survived the attack then they should change the rules.

throwanem 10y ago
It doesn't matter how many holes a CIWS can put into a torpedo boat. Once the cruise missiles are in the air, destroying their launch platforms counts for nothing. And it was the cruise missile attack that ruined the carrier strike group as an effective fighting force.
- EdHominem 10y ago
  There were a few phases of the battle. There was also a wave of suicide attacks by small boats, and that's what I was referring to. The cruise-missiles seem slightly more reasonable for overwhelming defenses. The closing speed makes the difference. Which is also complicated for the little boats on the probably rough open seas where they'd encounter the carrier group. Carrier groups travel in miles-wide formations. Even if your first warning was your support-ships getting hit you'd still have minutes to react to the incoming threats. Time to get multiple aircraft up, set the guns to the right mode for targeting ships, etc. It sounds like its the result of arbitrary rules letting you to attack someone by moving into their hex, etc. I don't think you'd get this result with a real-world battle exercise, where soldiers had to drive the boats tens of miles off-coast in radio silence for a coordinated attack on a hyper-aware enemy.

5 ms·

But, would that tactic really have worked or was it just exploiting some less-tested close-battle rules that didn't actually represent reality? As in, those tin

by EdHominem 10y ago

throwanem 10y ago
It doesn't matter how many holes a CIWS can put into a torpedo boat. Once the cruise missiles are in the air, destroying their launch platforms counts for nothing. And it was the cruise missile attack that ruined the carrier strike group as an effective fighting force.
- EdHominem 10y ago
  There were a few phases of the battle. There was also a wave of suicide attacks by small boats, and that's what I was referring to. The cruise-missiles seem slightly more reasonable for overwhelming defenses. The closing speed makes the difference. Which is also complicated for the little boats on the probably rough open seas where they'd encounter the carrier group. Carrier groups travel in miles-wide formations. Even if your first warning was your support-ships getting hit you'd still have minutes to react to the incoming threats. Time to get multiple aircraft up, set the guns to the right mode for targeting ships, etc. It sounds like its the result of arbitrary rules letting you to attack someone by moving into their hex, etc. I don't think you'd get this result with a real-world battle exercise, where soldiers had to drive the boats tens of miles off-coast in radio silence for a coordinated attack on a hyper-aware enemy.