Page 5 of 5

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 12:55 am
by Rising_Sun_Warrior
I like the idea of returning a BB to port and paying a fee to get it repaired. I always wondered why a damaged BB would suddenly plug up the holes and keep going. Now I'm glad there is going to be a reason behind it.

Can I raise a question? In keeping with the original title of the thread, namely AIRCRAFT CARRIERS and Battleships, I have a question as to how these units are actually going to fight each other. A battleship should easily blow away a CV if the two are in the same seazone. But by the same token a CV, or rather it's planes, should easily cripple a BB. Big guns were in their waning years in WWII. Ironically, they were also in their prime. But the truth is a BB is a sitting duck against aircraft. Just look at Leyte Gulf, the mighty Musashi was sunk by aircraft. Are the BB attack and defense values going to be modified for anti-aircraft? I may have missed this answer but I just wanted to ask anyway.

ALSO, why exactly is an aircraft carrier now a 2-hit unit? The carrier, by its very nature, is an extremely unsafe vessel. It's a heavyweight fighter with a glass jaw. If anything hits it, shell, bomb, torpedo, etc, then its already in a world of hurt. A 2-hit carrier needs to be a unit introduced after about 1943, and ONLY for US and UK. The Russians and Germans didn't have carrier fleets and the Japanese, while improving their designs, usually produced veritable tinder-boxes with flight decks. By having a 2-hit unit available only to the Allies it adds alot more realism.

I have got to learn to be more concise. Add learn to stop commenting on threads that are really old. Oh well! Just adding some input! :D

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 2:25 am
by Imperious leader
ALSO, why exactly is an aircraft carrier now a 2-hit unit? The carrier, by its very nature, is an extremely unsafe vessel. It's a heavyweight fighter with a glass jaw. If anything hits it, shell, bomb, torpedo, etc, then its already in a world of hurt. A 2-hit carrier needs to be a unit introduced after about 1943, and ONLY for US and UK. The Russians and Germans didn't have carrier fleets and the Japanese, while improving their designs, usually produced veritable tinder-boxes with flight decks. By having a 2-hit unit available only to the Allies it adds alot more realism.

I have got to learn to be more concise. Add learn to stop commenting on threads that are really old. Oh well! Just adding some input! Very Happy
I wish i had you a year ago when we tried to get this thing moving along... but as you stated its an old thread..

The 2 hit Carrier is a function of:

1) carriers are very expensive considering they really do nothing on their own. Its a game balancing issue to address its cost.

2) A carrier is really 4-6 carriers and they were built on cruiser hulls. They have a similiar propensity to float as a cruiser and that unit was a 2 hit item as well.

3) The idea solves to catagory of "the 5 minute ships" which is a vulgar way to express the relative cannon fodder nature of destroyers, transports, and subs which take one hit. Battleships, carriers, and cruisers take 2 hits. So in this way people will buy more capital ships rather than one hit wonders. The more you spend the more you get was the idea. people would buy lots of destroyers and other fodder, so now we got more value to the other side. That side being a navy of quality over quantity.

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 1:44 pm
by Rising_Sun_Warrior
I wish I had been here sooner too, but I was young and computerless. Thanks for clearing up the carrier question for me. Next question might be torpedo planes. There should be a modifier for carrier planes against ships. The carrier planes are built specifically for the job and the pilots would be better trained too, surely this should result in a better modifier for carrier planes than ground based planes attacking ships.