Upgrade fleet defense

[Leayme]

I would like to see the task force upgraded to reflect the actual AA/AAA defenses of the various classes as historically represented.

As it is a fighter can fly right thru the AA/AAA almost at will and drop his bombs then you have the heavy bombers, I find it frustrating to finally get a fleet into position (that is a problem in of itself) only to have a group of bombers or several sink it and to add insult to injury they auger the planes or ditch immediately after.

Make them as well armed as they were in life and then you are going to have to really work at it to sink the Task force and no low slow group of bombers is going to dive in and sink them, they will be shredded before they arrive.

Increase the number of  guns that can be manned on the cruiser and carrier, to at least give the fleet a fighting chance.

I think doing so will open a whole new theatre of operation and actually make a Task Force a unit to be reckoned with, not a 5 minute annoyance as it is now.

[C(Sea)Bass]

The fleets do have the historically accurate types of weapons on them at this point. In fact the ack was made more accurate a few patches ago. the problem is that people are rarely willing to use proper CV tactics. A few planes are need to fly high-cap at 15000 feet to protect from heavies. At least all of the 5" guns should be manned, although if the 40mm and 20mm guns are manned as well it helps alot. One person should take command of the CV and stay on it. Either in a manned gun or in the tower to make course corrections and turn when bombers are spotted. This person should be someone with experience who knows which angle to turn the CV depending on which way the threat is comming from.
In general more people need to read the section on "carrier tactics" in the help section of the site. It will explain many things and can help your CV's last for many base captures.

[Leayme]

The number of guns on the fleet come no where near the historical, yes the guns there are fairly accurately modeled but not the numbers and it is volume of accurate fire that shoots down planes.


This is the historical weapons disposition of the ships modeled here:


Baltimore Class Cruiser

9 8"/55 caliber 3 triple mounts
12 5"/38 DP 6 twin turrets
48 40mm Bofors 12 Quad Mounts
26 20 mm 14 Twin Mounts
Plus various numbers of 50 cal M2's on pintle mounts (subject to source)

Essex Class Carrier

12 5"/38 DP 4 x 2 turret 4 x 1 single mounts
68 40 mm 17 Quad mounts
70 20 mm Single mounts
Plus various numbers of 50 cals

Destroyer Escort 4

3 3"/50 single mounts (x 4 ships 12)
1 2 x 40 mm dual mount (x4 ships 4 = 8)
8 20 mm single mounts (x4 ships 32)

Fly into that kind of firepower with a slow medium or heavy bomber and you are going to need a whole lot of luck.

[trigger2]

Originally posted by Leayme
The number of guns on the fleet come no where near the historical, yes the guns there are fairly accurately modeled but not the numbers and it is volume of accurate fire that shoots down planes.

they really can't model accuracy in it though, because, it wasn't computers shooting, you have to throw in the human error into it which is almost impossible to do.
i think theyre fine as they are.
plus, gotta remember, THEY SPAWN.

[Leayme]

Computers are manning the majority of the guns now and there is error built in otherwise no plane would make it thru to bomb the carrier.

In WW2 aircraft would not indulge in the tactics used currently to deal with the task force.

It was shown on numerous occasions that medium/heavy bombers were pretty much useless against a task force, because the AA/AAA defenses were too effective against such large aircraft, if they hit from lower altitudes.

Combined with the maneuverability of the ships, it was a waste of crew and ordinance and equipment to try.

You had to go in and hit them with torpedo and dive bombers, get thru the fighter screens and brave a fearsome storm of AA/AAA fire to do it.

Watch WW2 footage of attacks on battle groups in the Pacific campaign and now invision a slow lumbering group of bombers coming in at less then 20,000 feet.

It doesn't matter that they spawn, I have seen it and so has everyone else where the fleet respawns and seconds or minutes later a group of bombers is there to smack em, auger or ditch only to come back later and do it all over.

[EagleDNY]

Take a look at this thread:
Updated DD's

A DD update along those lines would pretty much take care of it.

EagleDNY
$.02

[Latrobe]

Originally posted by C(Sea)Bass
At least all of the 5" guns should be manned, although if the 40mm and 20mm guns are manned as well it helps alot.

That's what I do. if the 5"ers are filled I take a 40mm. Got 7 kills in one one time, and one of those kills was from 3.0K out! One hit from a 40mm on ANYTHING and it'll blow up.

[TUXC]

Originally posted by Leayme
The number of guns on the fleet come no where near the historical, yes the guns there are fairly accurately modeled but not the numbers and it is volume of accurate fire that shoots down planes.

The number of 5" and 8" guns is correct. CV has 12x5", cruiser has 12x5", and each DE has 2x5". The number of 40mms may be off, but those are going to be useless against anything more than 2k away anyways as they do not have airburst shells like the 5". The flak bursts you're used to seeing in WWII footage and pics are from the 5" guns, not the 40mm. Also real task forces in the war had multiple CVs escorted by multiple battleships each with 20x5" which greatly added to the AA barrage over the fleet.

In real life no level bomber ever scored a single hit on a CV underway. However, I don't think any level bombers were ever hit by AA from a fleet either provided they were at a reasonable altitude. The reason bombers are so effective in the game at killing fleets is because they have an EZ mode bombsight and no wind, giving them incredible accuracy and precision. Like someone said earlier, get a CAP at 15k if you don't want buffs sinking your CV. As it is it takes a lot more ord than it did historically to take out a carrier and takes lots of hits from a shore battery to kill one (maybe too many?).

So I agree that it is too easy to take out carriers from bombers, but the solution to that is not to beef up AA or carrier toughness. The way to stop it (barring wind being added to MA or a bombsight that requires more skill than the current one) is to put some fighters up high to take out the bombers and to have as many 5" guns manned as possible.

In real life many carriers were lost to aerial torpedos, dive bombing, and kamikaze attacks, so it was possible to get through the defensive AA fire.

[SAS_KID]

don't forget in WW2 we didn't park a Carrier group 1 mile off the shore...

[Tiger]

Up the amount of AA positions on teh CV group... but make them all mannable, no Autos.  Let's see how you like that.

I feel the AAA defense is suitable as is.  You've just got to get fighters in the air to pick off the buffs.  

When's the last time you attempted a torpedoe run on a CV?  How well did that work out for you?  Exactly...

[PhatHat]

Originally posted by C(Sea)Bass
The fleets do have the historically accurate types of weapons on them at this point. In fact the ack was made more accurate a few patches ago. the problem is that people are rarely willing to use proper CV tactics. A few planes are need to fly high-cap at 15000 feet to protect from heavies. At least all of the 5" guns should be manned, although if the 40mm and 20mm guns are manned as well it helps alot. One person should take command of the CV and stay on it. Either in a manned gun or in the tower to make course corrections and turn when bombers are spotted. This person should be someone with experience who knows which angle to turn the CV depending on which way the threat is comming from.
In general more people need to read the section on "carrier tactics" in the help section of the site. It will explain many things and can help your CV's last for many base captures.

I agree with on the fighters. It's been a while sense I was shot down bombing a carrier, but with a handful of F4's in the air, a b24 or lanc can't get close enough to drop under 10K. But, with the DAR system, if you patrol around the Carrier, then the location of the carrier is easier to determine. I personally would like the DAR eliminated as this encourages furballs and discourages stratigic sneak attacks.

[titanic3]

Originally posted by PhatHat
I agree with on the fighters. It's been a while sense I was shot down bombing a carrier, but with a handful of F4's in the air, a b24 or lanc can't get close enough to drop under 10K. But, with the DAR system, if you patrol around the Carrier, then the location of the carrier is easier to determine. I personally would like the DAR eliminated as this encourages furballs and discourages stratigic sneak attacks.

without radar, AH would be chaos, ppl be shooting at their own base, wasting fuel and time. this isn't real life where you know what flights are good and friendly during briefing. map changes, you can't memorize the map. again, bombing up high against towns or factories, the auto ack won't be shootign at you, so you don't know if its friendly or not.

and furballs are fun! we want furballs, except for those nasty 163s and 262s that just swoop down and kill everythign in their paths..

[PhatHat]

Originally posted by titanic3
without radar, AH would be chaos, ppl be shooting at their own base, wasting fuel and time. this isn't real life where you know what flights are good and friendly during briefing. map changes, you can't memorize the map. again, bombing up high against towns or factories, the auto ack won't be shootign at you, so you don't know if its friendly or not.

and furballs are fun! we want furballs, except for those nasty 163s and 262s that just swoop down and kill everythign in their paths..

I don't want to eliminate maps, or radar or chat or the little labels over enemy aircraft. I just want to get rid of the bar over each grid block that tells how many aircraft are flying there. It gives your carrier position away, if you run a defensive patrol around it. It also gives away your High altitude bombing missions.

[Sabre]

I would add direct helm and speed control to the fleet, to make it easier and quicker to take evasive action.  It should be a hanger choice, and would only be active when a person was actually sitting at the helm.  As soon as a person leaves the helm, the TG goes back to following any current waypoints.  This would not replace the current TG command system; it would simply allow someone who wants to commit the time to take the wheel and engine throttles.  Regarding engine speeds, there would only be a couple of choices to select from.  With no one at the helm, the standard fleet speed would be 24 knots (i.e. this is the speed it would always be at when traveling waypoint to waypoint).  The helmsman would be able to select from the following speed settings using the ships telegraph handles: Ahead Slow = 12 knots (good for trolling off shore and bombarding things, but awful if you want to get a heavy fighter or attack plane into the air); Ahead Standard = 24 knots; Ahead Flank = current normal speed of the TG (around 32 knots, I think).

See a strike inbound? Click Hanger, click "Helm", hit "H" to spawn at the helmsman's station on the bridge.  This station could have a radar repeater, a compass, the engine telegraph, and a ship's wheel.

[E2hawkeye]

pond hopping is a problem  thats been around a while
 i feel that if bishop be bishop if knight  be knight and any switches should be atleast48 hr delay or not at all    2 often the cv is the target of pond hoppers