• Registered: 2005-03-28
  • Posts: 379

Topic: Kamikazes?

Sumethin else to ponder.

I know collision rules aren't in place for IS.  And I don't know if I WANT capital ships ramming each other.  But I was thinking that with a lot of FACs, you've lost any use for them once their ordinance is expended.

I've also been thinking of what these guys could possibly be thinking if their parent vessel is blown to hell.  There are no "life pods" in this setting.  Without a FAC platform to pick them up, these crews will eventually die from a lack of oxygen.

Could there be a way to incorporate Kamikaze attacks into the game?  IE -- i'm going down/i got nowhere to go/i'm taking you with me.

A successful attack sees you inflict damage on an enemy ship.  But maybe, in return, they gain half the FAC's normal VP value?

Just brainstorming.....................

  • Registered: 2005-05-11
  • Posts: 20

Re: Kamikazes?

This is a more gentlemanly time - wouldn't the crews of stricken FACs be picked up by their vanquishers ? There are plenty of examples in WW1 and 2 of ships stopping to pick up the survivors of sunken enemy ships. The idea of kamikaze attacks doesn't fit in the timeframe for me. Leaving the crews to freeze / suffocate 'just isn't cricket'

  • Registered: 2005-03-28
  • Posts: 379

Re: Kamikazes?

You got a point.  But this is a new theater, with new rules, and little equipment with which to affect a rescue. 

A wet navy dreadnought going down in calm seas might see hundreds of her crew hit the water and be rescued by a noble adversary.  It happened at the Battle of the Falklands, where I think the British were able to save nearly 200 Germans. 

But a hull breach is far different.  Where are those guys going to go?  A Bantam, when it dies in IS, has to take all of her crew with her.  It's not like the Spiridoff is going to be able to pull up alongside and pick up bobbing Cavoriate life pods.  Seems to me the fighting's going to be even more desperate in such conditions.

So I dunno if I see a FAC crew that's seen any hope of reaching its parent ship shrugging, breaking open a bottle of liquor, and waiting to fall asleep.

  • From: Denver, CO
  • Registered: 2005-03-27
  • Posts: 3,578

Re: Kamikazes?

brigadetony wrote:

This is a more gentlemanly time - wouldn't the crews of stricken FACs be picked up by their vanquishers ? There are plenty of examples in WW1 and 2 of ships stopping to pick up the survivors of sunken enemy ships. The idea of kamikaze attacks doesn't fit in the timeframe for me. Leaving the crews to freeze / suffocate 'just isn't cricket'

I agree. But the biggest problem with kamikazes (IMHO) is not from the setting -- as Matt has demonstrated, we could easily explain why the rules are different for ether crews -- but rather with the game mechanics themselves. Obviously, players are going to want to perform suicide runs MUCH more often than would be the case in "reality", even in desperate straits.

Probable (even inevitable) death is a different animal for most people than immediate and certain death -- i.e., under what conditions can we expect that a "reasonable" pilot/crew would be willing to commit suicide in a last-ditch effort to do what would be, after all, a minimal amount of damage?

The reason kamikazes resonate so much with Western culture is that the idea is so -alien- to us -- to throw away one's life, not to save others, or in the heat of battle, but as a deliberate, pre-meditated act of honor, sacrifice, devotion, or faith.

We as players are more than willing to commit our pieces of lead to certain doom -- except in the most cut-throat of games, we're going to get them back, after all. smile

But how to model the idea that it should take a LOT to convince a FAC crew to perform a suicide run? A "morale" roll?

I'm not dismissing the idea, just saying I'm not willing to allow kamikaze attacks whenever the mood strikes a player.

Daniel Kast
Majestic Twelve Games
cricket@mj12games.com

mj12games's Website

  • Registered: 2005-03-28
  • Posts: 379

Re: Kamikazes?

My .02 would be the starting point would be the death of the FAC's parent ship.

Most scenarios are only going to see one FAC platform per side. TMW's battle involving the Celestial Queen is the notable exception.

So it would be relatively painless to know when an FAC's carrier is dead, and the attack craft's hope of rescue gone with it.

I think it's very much within the western mindset of "all hope is gone, might as well make a good show of it."  I mean, the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau (Damn I have trouble spelling that) kept flying their frigging flags when it was obvious they were going to sink -- on fire, listing, surrounded, etc.....

But rather than cluttering the game with morale rolls, you could simply state that IF the FAC goes kamikaze, the controlling player is going to lose a certain % of the craft's VP value.  A 9 pt Harpune, for example, would award the other side 5 VP (9/2 rounded up) if it deliberately crashes into an opposing hull.  I don't know how much damage it would do, but regardless, that action better be worth it, because if you don't end up inflicting any structural damage, you're not balancing out that VP loss.

I think that automatic penalty goes a ways towards balancing the crew's suicide with western sensabilties.  Even when all hope is lost, there's a consequence for the controlling player.

  • From: Denver, CO
  • Registered: 2005-03-27
  • Posts: 3,578

Re: Kamikazes?

themattcurtis wrote:

But rather than cluttering the game with morale rolls, you could simply state that IF the FAC goes kamikaze, the controlling player is going to lose a certain % of the craft's VP value.  A 9 pt Harpune, for example, would award the other side 5 VP (9/2 rounded up) if it deliberately crashes into an opposing hull.  I don't know how much damage it would do, but regardless, that action better be worth it, because if you don't end up inflicting any structural damage, you're not balancing out that VP loss.

This seems a good starting point.

Now the tough question -- how much damage does a FAC inflict?

Daniel Kast
Majestic Twelve Games
cricket@mj12games.com

mj12games's Website

  • Registered: 2005-03-28
  • Posts: 379

Re: Kamikazes?

OK --

Someone's bound to shoot this one down. But....

Use its momentum and weapons payload.

Say an FAC that's carrying nothing more than a Light Gun and/or MGs has a base damage value of X1.

Carrying torps?  Take the damage value of one of those things under its fuselage and use that as the base damage value (ie X2, X3 or X4).

Either way, momentum should add to it.  If my FAC has a momentum of 14" when it collides with your ship, and it's carrying a X3 torpedo, then it should inflict at least 3 damage rolls on a successful hit.  Probably more.

The to-hit roll could be a D2 + half the target's armor value.  That way, you're less likely to hurt a BB than a light cruiser.

  • Registered: 2022-11-15
  • Posts: 1,286

Re: Kamikazes?

Damage from collisions would be a combination of mass times speed.

Hull size one = d8 base damage dice.  Speed 1-2 be x1, speed 3-4 be x2, speed 5-6 be x3, speed 7-8 be x4, speed 9-10 would be d10 x1 and progress upwards.  If carrying torpedoes or what, just add in their damage individually but tie the to hit roll with the success of the ram, since it's actually being piloted on the FAC.

I have to agree ramming would be a "last resort, in your face, there's noone gonna save my rear" type of action.  If any friendly ships are around or survive then it's pretty unlikely the FAC crew will want to ram.  Even if no friendly ship is left on the board, should one have escaped, the FAC may try to pursue in hopes of rescue. 

Just thinking out loud... :oops: