Buffs vs. CVs need to be nerfed

[Brooke]

Originally posted by Hornet33
I'd like to know just how armored do you guys think a WWII class CV was??

I just looked up what the US WWII carriers took to sink.  Here's what I found.

US Aircraft-carrier Hardness

Source:  Wikipedia

Ship sunk, damage taken, lbs explosive

Lexington (CV-2), 2 torpedoes and 3 bombs, 3503 lbs
Yorktown (CV-5), 1 bomb, 551 lbs
Wasp (CV-7), 2 sub torpedoes, 1786 lbs
Hornet (CV-8), 3 torpedoes and 5 bombs, 5530 lbs

This assumes a bomb hit is 551 lbs (usual size for the D3A), a torp hit is 925 lbs (assuming largest-warhead type 91 for B5N), and a sub torp hit is 893 lbs (assuming type 95 torpedo).

Average lbs taken to sink is thus 2843 lbs.

Carriers that weren't sunk, where ";" is used to denote separate attacks, in between which there is perhaps some or total repair.

Saratoga (CV-3), 6 bombs
Enterprise (CV-6), 3 bombs; 2 bombs; kamikaze
Essex (CV-9), kamikaze
Yorktown (CV-10), bomb
Intrepid (CV-11), torpedo; kamikaze; kamikaze
Franklin (CV-13), Kamikaze; bomb; kamikaze

[Brooke]

I recently read Ship of Ghosts: The Story of the USS Houston, FDR's Legendary Lost Cruiser, and the Epic Saga of Her Survivors, by Hornfischer.  It talks in some detail about the Houston avoiding level bombing attacks by IJAF bombers.  The captain was apparently very good at it, and what he'd do, in addition to erratic maneuvers in general, is wait for the bombers to drop and then go into a hard evasive.  He would watch the bombers with binoculars to see the bombs start to drop.  He could also speed up and slow down, and turn quite sharply by full rudder and by going into full reverse on the inside screws.

If people were able to do this in AH, we'd have a lot more success avoiding level bombs.

However, even with just turning the CV's only when the bombers are very close (i.e., starting the turn when they are dropping as opposed to being in a steady, predictable turn as they approach), I think we'd see it being drastically harder to hit a ship with level bombers.

Add a little wind into the game, and we'd have an environment that makes it much harder to hit CV's with level bombing.

Of course, half the time, our CV's are unmanned and unmaneuvering when bombers come in.  This isn't the fault of bombers being too powerful, though.

[blkmgc]

[Kweassa]

Theoretically, what would happen if several (2~3) 1000lbs general purpose bombs fell at close proximity of a CV in real life? Would the impact underwater be enough to cause hull breach?

[BaDkaRmA158Th]

Would bombs even blow up,when/after entering the water?

[Kweassa]

Weren't they mechanically fused?

 Come to think of it, how did they fuse anti-shipping bombs anyway? Set to blow up at certain altitudes? Or blow up upon impact?

[Spikes]

Originally posted by frosty
Bruv, I agree that if the CV is not capped, it's gonna get hit and deservedly so.  
 

Who is going to fly around in a p51 all day waiting for a B24 run that will never happen?

[blkmgc]

Originally posted by spikes
Who is going to fly around in a p51 all day waiting for a B24 run that will never happen?

So they should nerf our rides because of this? Some reasoning process there. By that logic, you could find a reason to nerf just about any ride in the game.

As a side note. A squadie and I sat in PT boats near a CV a while back and effortlessly picked off bombers attacking the CV . I think we shot down something like 8-10 formations untill they gave up. The CV was minimally dammaged.

[Tilt]

Originally posted by E25280
but what they probably saw was the destroyers attempting to form a smoke screen.  

Hmmm player manned smoke screen from destroyers?

operated from the destroyer gguns............

Effect on FR would probably be the same as smoking buildings.........

[Brooke]

Yep, bombs hitting next to a ship in the water would explode and would at times buckle the hull enough to allow water in.

In pictures and video from WWII bombing attacks, you can often see bombs missing and causing large columns of water upon exploding next to the ship in the water.

In AH, bombs explode when hitting the water and have a damage radius, like on land, so it approximates the effect, I would think.

[moot]

Task groups need more flak power against bombers.

[Grits]

Originally posted by FALCONWING
CVs are kind of silly imho...what major air to air battle ever occurred off a cv?

[/B]

Coral Sea, Midway, Eastern Solomans, Santa Cruz Is, Philippine Sea, Leyte Gulf

and what CV ever captured a land target???

Guadalcanal, Tarawa, Saipan, Guam, Tinian, Peleliu, Iwo Jima, Okinawa

[xREAPERx]

Originally posted by Grits


Coral Sea, Midway, Eastern Solomans, Santa Cruz Is, Philippine Sea, Leyte Gulf



Guadalcanal, Tarawa, Saipan, Guam, Tinian, Peleliu, Iwo Jima, Okinawa [/B]

                                                                                                                                      thank you

[moot]

Decisive conflicts are more favored by lots of potential power than little.
E.g.  putting everyone in biplanes will scale down the effective returns of effort put into improving one's dogfighting.

No nerfing will help the MA be (more) fun.. more power to the weaker part is the better balancing solution.

[Tango]

Originally posted by FALCONWING
CVs are kind of silly imho...what major air to air battle ever occurred off a cv?  

Originally posted by Grits


Coral Sea, Midway, Eastern Solomans, Santa Cruz Is, Philippine Sea, Leyte Gulf



Guadalcanal, Tarawa, Saipan, Guam, Tinian, Peleliu, Iwo Jima, Okinawa [/B]

Now now Grits. Everybody knows that those were sea battles and there weren't any planes involved.