From: Land o' Lakes, FL
My issue with folks always using Kiska as the "example" for un-opposed landings and (IMO high) number of casualties)
1. The US was still working out the bugs during invasion of Kiska . The US got much better at at as the war progroessed. It's like comparing a farm league to the Pennant race, and saying you're going to base the game on the farm league. It's the same level of stupidity that bases all bombardments in WtiP on a single shoot at Guadalcanal.
2. The casualties at Kiska were not just guys drowing in the surf as they disembarked and friendly fire. But they were as many because of booby-traps and disease, which if anything should NOT be included in the unloading casualites from the WitP engine.
3. In 1944 and 1945, the Allies were making successful landings with the same units, against garrisons (albeit depleted) with a turn-around of less than 30 days. Try doing THAT with the WitP engine and only 20+ prep points...
A breakdown of casualties from Wiki (so not a stellar reference, but it's a start). How many of these should be included in the disablements that would have created from teh WitP engine?
Allied casualties during the August invasion nevertheless numbered close to 200, all from friendly fire, booby traps set out by the Japanese to inflict damage on the invading allied forces, or disease. There were seventeen Americans and four Canadians killed from either friendly fire or booby traps, fifty more were wounded as a result of friendly fire or booby traps, and an additional 130 men came down with trench foot. The destroyer USS Abner Read hit a mine, resulting in 87 casualties.[
< Message edited by Feinder -- 4/6/2008 2:18:09 AM >
"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me