Author Topic: Naval vessels...  (Read 894 times)

Offline OdinGrunherze

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 153
Naval vessels...
« Reply #15 on: June 14, 2007, 09:08:05 AM »
I've tried "Destroyer Command", it's lame and stupid, beyond words...

I have finally settled on "Great Naval Battles" Volumes 1-4"... Complicated, but the good games always are...

Thanks

OG

Offline Movie

  • Parolee
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 374
Naval vessels...
« Reply #16 on: June 14, 2007, 04:20:30 PM »
how about phase cannons and aft torpedos maximum yield...also the cv's can go warp 5

Offline KD303

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 201
Naval vessels...
« Reply #17 on: June 15, 2007, 07:55:34 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Movie
how about phase cannons and aft torpedos maximum yield...also the cv's can go warp 5


er...right...that's real original sarcasm. Your point being?

Offline Shuckins

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3412
Naval vessels...
« Reply #18 on: June 15, 2007, 08:16:59 AM »
The task forces are too weak.  I'm really tired of seeing glide-bombing Forts, Libs, and Lancs bulling through the totally inadequate ack and sinking a cv that some players have spent a great deal of time moving into position.  Or doing the same from high altitude, something that was never done in real life.

The fights that develop around a properly handled cv task force can be monumental and extremely satisfying to all involved.....until the cv is sunk by some dweeb who has reupped 10 times in order to sink it.

To preserve the fun, how about adding some Atlanta class anti-aircraft cruisers and more destroyers to the task force?  At least this would make low-level glide bombing risky enough to ensure the cv survives a bit longer to allow those that like furballing and such more time to enjoy that type of game play.

Or combine three task forces to accomplish the same thing.  In WWII cv task forces tended to operate in large carrier groups.

How about toughening up the 8-inch gun cruiser so that it can't be sunk by 88mm fire from Tigers. That's something that would be extremely hard to do in real life.

A few battleships for old-fashioned surface battles would be a welcome change as well:  Scharnhorst, Gneisenau, Bismark, Missouri, etc.

Regards, Shuckins
« Last Edit: June 15, 2007, 08:19:00 AM by Shuckins »

Offline Movie

  • Parolee
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 374
Naval vessels...
« Reply #19 on: June 15, 2007, 01:42:18 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Shuckins
The task forces are too weak.  I'm really tired of seeing glide-bombing Forts, Libs, and Lancs bulling through the totally inadequate ack and sinking a cv that some players have spent a great deal of time moving into position.  Or doing the same from high altitude, something that was never done in real life.

The fights that develop around a properly handled cv task force can be monumental and extremely satisfying to all involved.....until the cv is sunk by some dweeb who has reupped 10 times in order to sink it.

To preserve the fun, how about adding some Atlanta class anti-aircraft cruisers and more destroyers to the task force?  At least this would make low-level glide bombing risky enough to ensure the cv survives a bit longer to allow those that like furballing and such more time to enjoy that type of game play.

Or combine three task forces to accomplish the same thing.  In WWII cv task forces tended to operate in large carrier groups.

How about toughening up the 8-inch gun cruiser so that it can't be sunk by 88mm fire from Tigers. That's something that would be extremely hard to do in real life.

A few battleships for old-fashioned surface battles would be a welcome change as well:  Scharnhorst, Gneisenau, Bismark, Missouri, etc.

Regards, Shuckins


thats my point....