Author Topic: Are CVs too soft?? (Read 2094 times)

mars01 · « **on:** August 25, 2004, 10:34:48 AM »

A question for the community...

What do you think about the CV toughness, not Ack but the amount of bombs need to kill one.

It seems to me that CVs don't last that long and are very easy to kill.

airbumba · « **Reply #1 on:** August 25, 2004, 10:49:24 AM »

I agree. But maybe instead of just having a sunk or floating cv, maybe make it harder to sink, but have planes disabled before that, like a FH at a base, comming back up after a given time period, if CV survives.

MOSQ · « **Reply #2 on:** August 25, 2004, 10:54:16 AM »

I think their "hardness" is fine.

Wolf14 · « **Reply #3 on:** August 25, 2004, 11:18:46 AM »

seems kinda soft to me

mojo55 · « **Reply #4 on:** August 25, 2004, 11:25:09 AM »

Halo · « **Reply #5 on:** August 25, 2004, 11:36:27 AM »

From what I've read about WWII aircraft carriers, most were so thin-skinned and volatile (full of fuel and bombs) that it didn't take much to put them out of action, and sinking often followed. One or two bombs on flight deck and the airfield was out of action.

mars01 · « **Reply #6 on:** August 25, 2004, 11:51:14 AM »

Quote

From what I've read about WWII aircraft carriers, most were so thin-skinned and volatile (full of fuel and bombs) that it didn't take much to put them out of action, and sinking often followed. One or two bombs on flight deck and the airfield was out of action.

Yeah, but we have to make some changes for playability. Also they had a lot more ships in the convoy and were better protected always had a cap patrol etc.

From a playability standpoint are CVs to soft.

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #7 on:** August 25, 2004, 11:57:05 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by mars01
Yeah, but we have to make some changes for playability. Also they had a lot more ships in the convoy and were better protected always had a cap patrol etc.

From a playability standpoint are CVs to soft.

I agree ... either add an armored flight deck or at least double the number of supporting ships in the task force. It should be a hailstorm of AAA to get at a CV.

SlapShot · « **Reply #8 on:** August 25, 2004, 12:11:28 PM »

... and no way should a 110 or any cannon plane be able to sink a CV with guns.

I believe that a CV is just another "object", that requires a total amount of ord/units to destroy it.

Planes should be able to destroy the gun emplacements, but the ammo/ord that takes out the gun emplacement should not be added to the total ord/units it takes to sink a CV. I am not completely sure if that truely is the case, but it appears to be.

LtPillur · « **Reply #9 on:** August 25, 2004, 12:13:11 PM »

A friend of my dads was stationed on a carrier during WW2. He always claimed they were very easy to sink. One or 2 torpedos, a couple of heavys from above. He also said fires were common and then everything focused on saving the ship. He's long gone now and I don't know how much of this was truth or beer speaking. But he always made them seem like flimsy floating boxes with planes on them.

From a game standpoint it would be nice to have them a bit tougher. Or at least have the planes "focus on saving the ship" for a bit, instead of upping immediatley while the CV sank. Has to be a way to keep one well placed bomb from sinking a CV right out. But that seemed how it was in real life.
Peace
Pillur

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #10 on:** August 25, 2004, 12:17:41 PM »

I think it's the way they're so easy to sink that's a problem. Ju-88's or Avengers with torpedos ... yup. A flight of B17's with 1000 pounders ... yup. A Me110 with cannons ... nope!

Kev367th · « **Reply #11 on:** August 25, 2004, 12:36:23 PM »

The idea behind being able to strip the CV of defenses was a good one. Didn't take people long to realise a 110 can strafe it and kill gun emplacements etc.
Maybe it should only be able to be damaged by rockets and bombs.
Don't know if this is possible though.

Jackal1 · « **Reply #12 on:** August 25, 2004, 12:38:49 PM »

CVs are fine. It`s the operators that sometimes need a check-up.

mars01 · « **Reply #13 on:** August 25, 2004, 12:39:42 PM »

I personally don't know how hard it was to actuall sink a carrier, but we can look at one instance, the York Town.

Look at the beating it took in the Coral Sea and it was still operational for Midway.
http://history.acusd.edu/gen/WW2Timeline/coral.html

Quote

The carrier Yorktown was lightly damage. She had taken a great number of hits, but was salvageable. Her six months of repair work would be completed in three days at Pearl Harbor. She would fight in the Battle of Midway.

Unfortunately she didn't fare so well at Midway.

Furious · « **Reply #14 on:** August 25, 2004, 12:54:40 PM »

Comparing the ease of sinking an actual WWII carrier to ours is useless.

How many kamikaze pilots irl got to respawn and suicide into the CV 5 minutes later?

there needs to be a ton more small caliber, close in AI ack, imo.