AP bombs

[Grits]

Is there any way to give ships an "armor" rating like GV's and make a SAP ship killer bomb for the CV based bombers? This would allow you to give the CV based dive bombers a special AP bomb (they all had them) that will make them more useful in the arena, and reduce level bomber attacks. Just like with HE shells against a GV, the HE bombs carried by the level bombers COULD eventually take down a CA or CV, but it would have to be a lot of them and a DIRECT hit. If the SBD, Val, Kate, and TBM were the only ones to carry the ship killer AP bomb, but make only 1-3 hits from one of those take down a CV it would make things a bit more realistic.

The USN had both 1000lb AP and SAP bombs, and the IJN had 800kg AP bombs.

[Grits]

OK, maybe not....

[simshell]

my vote


what about the Stuka tho is there a AP Nuke for it:D

[hawker238]

I love the idea.

[Grits]

Doh! I totally forgot about the Ju87, yeah I'm pretty sure it could carry an AP ship killer too.

[Furball]

give the lanc the tallboy bomb....

[dedalos]

Don't we have diving LANCs already?

[Cobra412]

The thing I dislike about CVs is most weren't sunk by the enemy.  It's about how much damage could be inflicted that would eventually disable them from continuing to fight.  If you put a few well placed AP 500 or 1000lbs bombs in the center areas of the deck their ability to keep launching aircraft would be gone.  

I think this is how the CV damage modeling should be now.  You take enough of a risk now to hit these things and it's pretty much guaranteed that you'll do very little damage.  It's also almost guaranteed your going to die in the process.  The dying part isn't an issue it's the little damage inflicted that is.      

By making the cvs more vunerable like this you'd have to beef up the AAA at closer ranges and make them so that the AI concentrates attacks on the biggest threat(s) to the CV.  At the same time though a well thought out attack and one or two well placed bombs will knock the CV out.  This means players will have to get better at higher altitude releases because of the CVs new gun accuracy.  In the end though it will make the defense of a CV more critical and it will get peoples higher alt bombing accuracy to go up.  That will in turn help people when taking bases too.  Now they can release from 5 to 8k above the target and still hit what they intended to.

[DaddyAck]

That is a good Idea, I like to fly anti carrier operations, but as it is they take forever to sink, are surrounded by a huge furball, and are almost unsinkable.

[tikky]

AP bombs is a very good idea

btw has anyone seen the movie "Pearl Harbor"? Notice that a japanese bomb (prolly an AP) dropped by kate (on to Arisona) did not explode on contact, instead it peirced throught metal section (armor?)

[Cobra412]

Tikky those were AP bombs with a delayed fuse system.  There are bombs with delayed fuses up to like 6 hours.  What looks like a dud then all of a sudden it detonates once the enemy has push forward and virtually surrounded an area.

[LePaul]

Originally posted by DaddyAck
That is a good Idea, I like to fly anti carrier operations, but as it is they take forever to sink, are surrounded by a huge furball, and are almost unsinkable.

Try a Lanc, 17,000ft and take the loadout with the 500 pounders and 1 4000 pounder.  I've used that loadout many times to take out both the carrier and destroyer in one pass.  AND...sometimes if you are lucky, you find a mission upping from the deck!  

[Grits]

Well, my original reason was to stop level bomber attacks on the fleets. To give you an example of how rediculous our level buff attacks are on MOVING fleets, look up how many missions it took the RAF to sink the Tirpitz while it was SITTING STILL at anchour in a fjord in Norway.

I could be wrong, but I dont know of any level bomber (not TBM's or Kates I'm talking about heavy buffs) actually sinking a capitol ship while it was underway.

[Furball]

Originally posted by Grits
look up how many missions it took the RAF to sink the Tirpitz while it was SITTING STILL at anchour in a fjord in Norway.

pretty hard to sink something when its obscured by smoke screens and bad weather every time you go to hit it, and even when you do hit it your bombs are too weak against its armoured hull.

HMS Prince of Wales (35,000 ton battleship) was sunk by a combination of high level bombers and torpedo's

After finding no targets, the British ships were returning to Singapore when, late in the morning of 10 December, they were attacked by a strong force of Japanese high-level bombers and torpedo planes. With no friendly planes to protect them, both heavy ships were hit several times. Repulse sank at about 1230. Prince of Wales capsized and followed her to the bottom less than an hour later. The first capital ships to be sunk by air attack while operating on the high seas, their loss further shocked a naval world already stunned by the events at Pearl Harbor only a few days earlier.
 

[Oleg]

Originally posted by Furball
HMS @ (35,000 ton battleship) was sunk by a combination of high level bombers and torpedo's

I've read "Prince of Wales" was badly damaged by multiple torpedo hits, completely lost speed and manoeuvrability before it was hit with bombs.

imho, ships must be damaged only by direct bomb hit, not by dropped somewhere around.