Re: [OFFICIAL] Missile Ideas

Mikko Kurki-Suonio writes:
@:) 
@:) In any case, one must not discount the American superiority in
@:) numbers nor the very favourable strategic position.

  Especially the latter.  The Japanese really screwed that one up and
basically walked into a trap.

@:) That's the "Battle off Samar" I mentioned earlier. The small force
@:) had about 20 CVEs and their about 500 planes. I'd say those planes
@:) had something to do with Kurita's decision to withdraw.

  I'm not so sure... I don't recall that they even launched any
planes.  What I am sure they did was lay down a lot of smoke and duck
in and out of it.  I think Kurita assumed, by the way they were
fighting, that he'd found the (Nimitz's?) task force and he withdrew
to organize his fleet.	I will definitely have to look it up now.

@:) To reach some sort of a conclusion: DDs are much more a
@:) "strategic" than a "tactical" ship. Which value do we want the
@:) points cost to reflect?

  It might be possible to have a seperate points system for battle
value and economic cost (or strategic value) but I don't know how to
work this into a ship construction system.

@:) Does anyone else think mines are underpowered, especially wrt
@:) missiles?

  I guess I do, since I've never even considered dropping a mine.

-joachim