Unique Doctrine Units

Especially the sprites, why is China in Japanese uniforms and why are all soldiers in an independent Congo White Americans?

Donk2.0 wrote:

jiggabop wrote:

im all ears, as long as the America can use the CIA as a special unit

How would that work? Please elaborate.

GeneralTanke wrote:

Donk2.0 wrote:

jiggabop wrote:

im all ears, as long as the America can use the CIA as a special unit

How would that work? Please elaborate.

Regime change

Forced inactivity

Tbf CIA did not exist at this time… And… if a 10 stack of nukes on a capital can’t make someone inactive I’m not sure Mr.We couldn’t kill Castro after 600 tries could.

Zaktty wrote:

Yes, but Kamikazes didn't actually contribute that much to Japan's success.

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.

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.

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.

Did carrier submarines exist in real life, though? I don’t want this game to go super wacky, we already have Iron Order for that.

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.

Therefore, one idea would be to position it as a unit card on the same level as a flamethrower tank.

I don’t understand what you mean… you want to implement more unit cards?

Kamikaze dogs for Comintern? (the Soviet Union used them in WW2 but they went under the wrong tanks)

The British army was technologically less advanced than the US. Maybe but the air force and navy were far more advanced than the Yanks.

Man they nearly used a Lanc to drop the atomic bomb.

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.

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?

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?