Fleet ?s/suggestions

[whels1]

HT,

as it is  right now the only thing really a target in the fleet is the CV its self. can u make the other ships in the fleet represent
things that are at bases. example:
make 1 Destroyer  be a ammo detroyer, if killed u cant get bombs or torps from CV group(ie like ammo bunkers field), 2 more could be fuel destroyers, kill 1 they get only 50% fuel, kill both they get 25% available. 4th Destroyer could be the troop destroyer, kill it and u wont be able to use LST to capture base (when u finish making 1).

if not using the current ships, then maybe add some cargo/tankers for the above to the fleet?


any way that when u hit Cruise/Carrier with eggs with each hit, manable guns/AI Ack gets
killed off till ship is sunk?

if the above added, make ships harder to kill, since they have to spawn back at port
and travel 1 sector an hour.

ship being hit sounds would be nice while ur in a gun position or in tower of Carrier.

Shake the ship when 8" guns fire, especially
if more then 1 turret of 8" being fired at 1
time.


i think the ships speed is correct but what is missing is wind. as is its almost
impossible to take a 100% full armed plane off the deck even with wep n flaps. when u leave the end of the deck u hit the water when u drop off.  in RL not only did the Carrier fo 40 knots but also the planes got
the benifit of heading into the wind which would have been 10 to 30 knots more? maybe.

remember we get a full length run of deck in AH, and is barely enough, in RL they got maybe half a deck and made it off realitively
easy, soo we missing some air speed some where.

thnks

Whels

[Yello1]

I like the idea of more ship targets (see my posts elsewhere for independent Cargo ships and other fleet elements).  It does seem silly (though historical) that the CV is the only thing worth bombing.  But making the DD etc be bunkers etc in effect is not going to change things.  If you can nail the DD you can nail the CV, pretty much.  You could accomplish what you seek though in two ways -spread the ships out more, a DD was often on the fringe and not well covered by flak. Not sure but I think this formation is too close historically.  Next make a second fleet group some distance from the main group, this could be your train and troop ships.  They could be bunkers, would have lighter flak cover and be targets that would act like field elements. Also this could be the source of your LST (which really ought to be an LCM by the way LST was not a boat like a PT but a full fledged ship that crossed oceans). Finally I very much like the idea of making guns on ships capable of being knocked out.  By the way does strafing of these ships have any effect? It should - 50 cals sank destroyers and merchant men.

[Yello1]

Oh on the wind thing, CV speed in WWII was like 30-33 knots not 40. But yes that wind would be all added into airspeed on take off and so would whatever wind there was which they would have to sail into to launch (you could add wind and direction of ship into this).  Definitely awfully tough to get off a CV loaded and it shouldnt be that bad.

[capt. apathy]

i agree yello1,
imo convoy is to tight.  i would think the destroyers should be far enough out to intercept a submarine b4 it could get close enough to get a torp off at the prime targs.
  i would think you should have to be well inside the destroyers to hit the cruiser or carrier with a torp.
  it seems much closer than that

[strk]

How about if the size of the fleet were doubled or evn tripled - with a wider destroyer escort and 2 or 3 flattops instead of just one?  
That would give the CV group a little more staying power. Whe a or 2 CVs taken out it could limit the number of fighters that could take off from the CV.  

strk (idea man)

[Yello1]

I like the multiple CV idea alot, at least in the Ocean Campaign you could make one of the CV groups a large one.  You could make one CV be a CVA with bombers and fighters and say two others that are CVEs with just fighters for instance.  As for the distance, if the CV grouped up in anti aircraft screen they were not as spread out as they would be in normal formation, where you are guarding against subs. But still the distance was wide, several thousand feet separation. Havent measured this set up but seems little too tight.  Ack is just too nasty as a result, even over the DDs on the fringe. PArt of the problem is the formation is too small, should be one or two BBs and then screenof CAs with circle of DDs. Course that would be nastier still, but makes a formation with a fringe. There is a reason that in a CV CV battle DDs and CAs got hit after all.