Author Topic: Battleships? (Read 3205 times)

Raptor · « **on:** March 09, 2004, 02:52:10 PM »

Why are their no battleships in Aces High? We have cruisers, destroyers and carriers... but no battleships?

Jester · « **Reply #1 on:** March 09, 2004, 11:26:20 PM »

I image because at this point there really isn't a need for them. Ship to ship engagements are pretty limited in number as the big focus is on A2A combat.

I would like to see more ships in AH. Would like to see more AI fleets such as convoys and ships in ports to use as targets.

Would also like to see more player controled features for the ships we have, like 5" guns and torpedoes on the destroyers. (We have them alread on the CV & PT respectfully, why not the DD's?).

I imagine you will see a submarine before you see any Battleships but you never know.

!

BenDover · « **Reply #2 on:** March 10, 2004, 02:16:31 AM »

I just want bigger explosions on the CAs big guns.

Ecliptik · « **Reply #3 on:** March 10, 2004, 08:41:59 AM »

I'd just like some explosion effects that are actually 3D and not cheesy looking sprites.

Rasker · « **Reply #4 on:** March 10, 2004, 09:09:46 AM »

The shock wave produced by the larger bombs is pretty good; if we got a battleship for shore bombardment, those main battery shells could produce such a shock wave as well.

I had heard rumors that one or more of the maps had non-carrier task groups formed around battleships, but perhaps I'm confusing this with Airwarrior3 or MV.

Sakai · « **Reply #5 on:** March 10, 2004, 09:15:24 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Rasker
The shock wave produced by the larger bombs is pretty good; if we got a battleship for shore bombardment, those main battery shells could produce such a shock wave as well.

I had heard rumors that one or more of the maps had non-carrier task groups formed around battleships, but perhaps I'm confusing this with Airwarrior3 or MV.

In CT maps often have CA task forces with 2-3 cruisers and escorting DEs.

Sakai

Rasker · « **Reply #6 on:** March 10, 2004, 09:29:42 AM »

If I'm in a cruiser turret bombarding the shore, and none of the other cruiser turrets is occupied, I'd like those turrets slaved to mine and fire at same target, as the 20mm and machine guns do on the PT's. Perhaps the 5 inch secondaries also, if the turret bears and the target's in range.

Engine · « **Reply #7 on:** March 10, 2004, 09:36:35 AM »

Now THAT makes good sense.

loser · « **Reply #8 on:** March 10, 2004, 06:56:49 PM »

Agreed rasker.

Hap · « **Reply #9 on:** March 12, 2004, 07:09:16 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Jester
the big focus is on A2A combat.

Except with the above line, I agree with Jester.

Check out the 1st sentence from the helpfile: "Capturing territory through the use of air, land and sea power is the objective of Aces High."

Hence, furballers' complaints. HTC has designed the game around 1 idea. Can one fly, hunt cons, and never give a whit about winning the war? Certainly. Do some? Yes. Do most? I think not, else bases would not exchange hands as they do; and resets would not exist.

But back to the battleship idea....given the supremacy of airpower over sea power in ww2, Jester's notion that battlewagons simply aren't needed is correct. However, I'd like 'em anyway just for the fun of nailing bases from some 30 miles out (roughly double the range of our 8" guns on cruiser).

to make them viable (along with subs) ai sea resupply per his suggestion of convoys would have to be introduced. I think it would be great fun if those additions were adopted. Nonetheless, the game is great fun as it stands.

Gloves · « **Reply #10 on:** March 12, 2004, 08:49:31 AM »

Seems like the cruisers big guns only fire AP rounds. If this is so, it would be cool to have HE rounds for shore bombardment.

Glove

BenDover · « **Reply #11 on:** March 12, 2004, 09:45:04 AM »

they are HE, other wise that near miss on an ack gun wouldn't kill it.

simshell · « **Reply #12 on:** March 12, 2004, 01:06:56 PM »

no we need battle ships that you can spawn for a 150 gv perks and it would spawn like the PT boats far away from the fight it would have to cruise in

i think the abilty to spawn ships from PT spawn points would be better then SUB's

the rules for it would be simple

it can not spawn from cv's
it can not spawn right next to the base the spawn point would be out in the sea

not sure about the perks make it higher or lower i dont care but its got to me high

simshell · « **Reply #13 on:** March 12, 2004, 01:08:55 PM »

o yea i would rather like the spawn ship to be a cruiser not a battle ship

maybe you could make the cruiser 150 gv perks and the battle ship 300 perks

Raptor · « **Reply #14 on:** March 12, 2004, 09:01:56 PM »

If you could spawn a battleship I would imagine it would spawn from a port. Not too many people would be patient enough to sit in the ship for a few hours waiting for it to reach its destination. I think it would be nice to have coordinates on the clipboard. So if there was a gv war or something, a gv could give someone in a battleship coordinates for more precise artilary. Of course this would mean if your in a gv you need to make sure not to give the battleship your own coordinates, and estimate the coordinates of enemy.

I imagine it would be difficult to defend yourself in a battleship because it is such a large target. I think it would be more reasonable to let battleships roam as a task group (no carrier or destroyers with it), and let destroyers be manned and perked. This way if submarines were brought into Aces High then the destroyers could go out and drop depth charges.