Author Topic: Why not resupply for cv's?  (Read 1083 times)

Offline Pongo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6701
Why not resupply for cv's?
« Reply #15 on: April 04, 2005, 10:40:16 AM »
CVs are repairable at sea.
they repair constantly to keep full speed and full flight opps right up to the last 50 cal round that sinks em. They are far more resiliant then any real carrier ever made and must have 1000s of full time crew members just doing damage control.

Offline Killjoy2

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 421
      • http://www.nortonfamily.net
Why not resupply for cv's?
« Reply #16 on: April 04, 2005, 11:49:56 AM »
I just thought it might improve the game play to be able to repair the CV.

It would be easy to coad.

I would also support a wider range of damage to the CV ie. decks, fie control etc. but this would require more extensive coad.

To me its a game play issue.

Offline Pongo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6701
Why not resupply for cv's?
« Reply #17 on: April 04, 2005, 01:03:33 PM »
So the first bomb through the deck ends flight operations?

Offline Cobra412

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1393
Why not resupply for cv's?
« Reply #18 on: April 04, 2005, 07:24:30 PM »
And repairs take time they just don't magically fix themselves. No ones saying they are out of commision indefinately. Putting well placed 1000 pound bombs on the carrier deck will do more than just scratch the surface. 500 pound bombs did considerable damage to cv decks by blasting 10 foot wide holes. Imagine 2 1000 pound bombs hitting the deck. Certain areas of the deck should be considered critical especially for armor piercing bombs.

Offline Pongo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6701
Why not resupply for cv's?
« Reply #19 on: April 04, 2005, 09:21:22 PM »
Yes your absolutly correct. Allmost certainly the first 1000 lb armour piercing bomb to hit the deck would cease flight operations. The first torpedo to hit the ship would nock 10-20 knots off the speed of the ship as it had to counter sink to remain level and able to operate aircraft.
The first fire on the ship would stop flight operations imediatly until it was put out.

To say that these kinds of damage and thier consequences on the ship and the remidies that repair could make would be easy to code is increadable.
Could some flavour be added? sure by limiting the speed of the ship maybe or making it list when a torp hits it.

As a repair mechanic I say linking it to the number of surviving ships in the task force makes more sense from a game design stand point.

Have each DD contribute 100 pounds HE repair equivilent per minute, the CA contribute 200 and have a supply ship in the formation that contributes 500. If a ship is damaged its repair goes to its self first.  
You could let someone spawn a Supply ship from a port and drive it to join the fleet and contribute its repair ability, maybe even sorti a destroyer to replace loses.

Maybe even the little ship convoys on an automated intercept course with the fleet and when they meet they totaly repair the fleet

Offline Cobra412

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1393
Why not resupply for cv's?
« Reply #20 on: April 04, 2005, 10:45:02 PM »
Pongo my only issue with the battle groups is how they are used. Because the damage modeling isn't as critical as it should be they  use that to their advantage. Direct hits to the carrier deck would place the flight deck inoperable during the repair period. With this it would allow the base under attack a chance to get things somewhat under control before the next wave comes in.

It wouldn't completely kill the fight but it wouldn't be the quake style game play that comes with carriers 2 k off shore. Especially at bases where aircaft are the bases only line of defense since there are no shore batteries or any pt spawn points.

Offline damnname

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 95
Why not resupply for cv's?
« Reply #21 on: April 05, 2005, 03:05:31 AM »
Look we can send my boys out in a canoe. They need a CV repair badge for the boy scouts.

Offline Killjoy2

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 421
      • http://www.nortonfamily.net
Why not resupply for cv's?
« Reply #22 on: April 05, 2005, 01:44:19 PM »
Pongo, when I refer to easy coading, its in relation to rebuilds we see at the bases.  You drop the goods and the place magically rebuilds.  

Of course if we ad the battle damage graphics, it would take a lot more.

I like the idea of resupply from the destroyers.  It puts them into the battle.

Offline Pongo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6701
Why not resupply for cv's?
« Reply #23 on: April 05, 2005, 05:48:57 PM »
Cobra, talk through a typical scenario in the MA if the CV can be crippled so easily.
Think it right through. I know its not realistic and so does Pyro. But think of the game play implications if you get what you want.

Offline mars01

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4148
Why not resupply for cv's?
« Reply #24 on: April 06, 2005, 12:31:14 AM »
Quote
But think of the game play implications if you get what you want.


Exactly, carriers are hardly a threat any more.  They go down faster than most chicks doing a porno scene.  

Real life and gameplay compliment each other very little, especially with carriers.

Oz has really made this obvious.  IT seems every time a carrier get close to the enemy it is sunk in minutes.  There is hardly any game play to be had with them.  Now you want to disable flight ops with one thousand pounder.  Cmon.

Maybe if it took say 24,000 lbs to sink her and 20 to damage the deck.  Then maybe it would be worth it.

Offline Cobra412

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1393
Why not resupply for cv's?
« Reply #25 on: April 06, 2005, 02:04:58 AM »
So your saying it should take 20 1000 pound bombs to damage a cv deck? As you would say "Cmon". Why not have rail guns if you don't care for the slightest bit of realism. What your saying is not only light years away from realistic but totally absurd.

Oz is a good setup when it comes to defending against the fleets and it's probably why you don't like it. You don't like it because you don't have the ability to park it right offshore and furball all night. I saw the comments on 200 the other night complaining about "fun police" sinking the carrier and ruining your precious furball. Sucks when you actually have shore batteries on a field to defend it doesn't it.

Unlike the majority of our maps atleast Oz has shore batteries on the majority of the fields. Not only does it have them but they are properly setup to defend against the gamey arsed players who wanna bring the cv group up to the point of being beached. Don't want it sunk then don't  beach the dmn thing. Don't want a 1000 pounder to slow down your ops tempo then defend it and use it as it should be used. I forgot though easier is better for everyone. If it's easier for you to get a long lasting furball right offshore of a base with the extremely low probabilty that your cv won't get sunk or damaged anytime soon then your all for it.

Do that same thing on a map where you don't have shore batteries and the cv group can overwhelm the base easily. People can sit in the guns on the cv and pop planes right after they spawn on the runways. I keep forgetting though this is the types of scenarios you prefer.

Offline GreenCloud

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1365
Why not resupply for cv's?
« Reply #26 on: April 06, 2005, 02:29:24 AM »
ying-yang u bches..we cant hav eeverything real life



btw i hate flying more then 5 miles for a kill

Offline mars01

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4148
Why not resupply for cv's?
« Reply #27 on: April 06, 2005, 08:40:53 AM »
20000 lbs hahahaha, Don't swallow that hook all the way buddy, I won't be able to get it out and will have to gut you lolh.

Bottom line Cobra, is a CV hasn't overwhelmed a base in months.  So making it harder for people to use them for the measly time they stay alive is not an option.  Right now as they stand carriers are nothing more than a strat target for bombers and as ineffective as refineries and ammo cities etc.  So giving us a way to repair CVs is a start in the right direction.

BTW I understand your fear that CVs could become some unstoppable force if they are not balanced correctly.  Right now they are out of balance and too easy to kill.  I also think fields are much too easy to kill as well and am for making fields much harder and harder to horde and capture.

I also think they should make it so you can't park a CV on shore and do what you described.  I am for everything that stops the things that stop people from figthing.

To me this game is about the fighting, not hiding in numbers, not hiding at alt, not trying to figure out ways to stop the fights etc..
« Last Edit: April 06, 2005, 08:50:34 AM by mars01 »