The Banzai

[Herr Straße Laufer]

Why get rid of it...it's optional. Nobody is forced to use it.

Ah, good point Rod.
Though, it is not an option. It is there for players to use and could be "abused"? :eek1:

By removing it the developers could take away one of those annoying personal ROE situations? Like truck and transports use, not all players think the same about what they can do in the game if allowed to do it by the game system? :chin:

If it is "artificial" and swings the game into gamey-ness, for those who appreciate "historical realness" it should be removed?

Some of us are simply stating opinion, as per the original post in the thread.

Scud wanted to know if there was a way to prepare for it or what the players thought of it. :smoke:



HSL

[Jason Petho]

Alternatively... make a point of trying to kill the Japanese leaders.

No leader, no banzai.

Jason Petho

[Scud]

OK, thanks for the input. My opponent replied that I should use it, I'm going to need it. Oh joy.

So does not using it sway stock scenarios that were made with the assumption that it would be utilized?

Dave

[K K Rossokolski]

Ed said
"Ah, good point Rod.
Though, it is not an option. It is there for players to use and could be "abused"? Eek1"

I am not quite sure what you mean, Ed. You don't have to use it, therefore it's optional.

Lot of talk over the years about ROE vide such matters blocking with trucks, assaults with 1/2Ts etc. Even so-called improper use of tanks for shoot and scoot, if you can believe that.
On this line of argument, the tanks, trucks and 1/2Ts could be "abused", could they not? And give rise to "annoying personal ROE situations".
Perhaps we should abolish tanks and trucks.

I think JP has the right idea..blow the commanders away.

[Herr Straße Laufer]

OK, thanks for the input. My opponent replied that I should use it, I'm going to need it. Oh joy.

So does not using it sway stock scenarios that were made with the assumption that it would be utilized?

Dave

Dave, I do not think that stock scenarios were made with Banzai in mind. Rising Sun seemed to be the redheaded stepchild of Talonsoft.

Banzai will effect the scenario. Especially when done by a player who is skilled at using it.



HSL

---

Ed said
"Ah, good point Rod.
Though, it is not an option. It is there for players to use and could be "abused"? Eek1"

I am not quite sure what you mean, Ed. You don't have to use it, therefore it's optional.

Lot of talk over the years about ROE vide such matters blocking with trucks, assaults with 1/2Ts etc. Even so-called improper use of tanks for shoot and scoot, if you can believe that.
On this line of argument, the tanks, trucks and 1/2Ts could be "abused", could they not? And give rise to "annoying personal ROE situations".
Perhaps we should abolish tanks and trucks.

I think JP has the right idea..blow the commanders away.

Hopefully you are not looking for bad in things that are said? :chin:

I won't get into a semantic discussion. That would be counter productive?

So, your answer to trucks and ht transports are to throw out the baby with the bathwater? Or, were you simply making a sarcastic comment to garner a response? Some fish do not always bite the bait? ;)

And, there is a difference between an allowable option and one done using the "honor system" or personal ROE's?



HSL

[Glint]

Ed said
"Ah, good point Rod.
Though, it is not an option. It is there for players to use and could be "abused"? Eek1"

I am not quite sure what you mean, Ed. You don't have to use it, therefore it's optional.

Lot of talk over the years about ROE vide such matters blocking with trucks, assaults with 1/2Ts etc. Even so-called improper use of tanks for shoot and scoot, if you can believe that.
On this line of argument, the tanks, trucks and 1/2Ts could be "abused", could they not? And give rise to "annoying personal ROE situations".
Perhaps we should abolish tanks and trucks.

I think JP has the right idea..blow the commanders away.

Quite agree with you Rod, an 'option' gives just that, a choice for players who wish to play 'historical', 'hypothetical' or whatever. Those who play for fun are catered for as well? Why remove an option that caters for all the market just to satisfy those who only want 'historical?
As for 'EA', recently played a game as the Japs against American marines with EA on and the Americans won! Maybe I'm a lousy player but it was fun and tho' a tough battle for the US, shows EA doesn't mean calamity all the time. Another option I believe, why remove the option?

[Hawk Kriegsman]

All I can say about this topis is:

:grin2:

oh and :kill:

Thanx!

Hawk

[Scaz]

A lot of good points made here.

From what I've read, probably the best way to reflect the "Banzai" charge would be to make it "involuntary" (Japanese units check for it and "go berzerk" like in ASL), so that it can't be used as a "tactic" by the Japanese player. Also, after a unit is done "banzai-ing" it should be destroyed. May seem harsh, but I think it would better reflect the kamikazee-like nature of a banzai attack.

Just my 2 cents

[Scud]

Well, good points or no, I just tried it and nuthin'. :angry: Of course, I attacked an undisrupted 3 SP Sherman. Probably should have disrupted it first, but haven't been able to with the barrages of angry curse words I've thrown at it. So, caution to the wind... and that was what the banzaii was for, right?

So now I have my boys resting in the cool, cool shade (of more tanks). ~sigh

Dave

[Mr. Guberman]

Scud,

you see?...the "Banzai attack" was no special attack for the Japanese. The "Banzai Attack" was a suicide charge. Your assaults against the Shermans might have been unsusessful...but they in, no way, represented "Banzai" charges. Assault the sh** out of them, if it might work...Hope you win...keep assaulting...

cheers
Curt