« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Author Topic: Japanese Carriers  (Read 1482 times)

Offline SgtPappy

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1174
Re: Japanese Carriers
« Reply #15 on: June 16, 2010, 11:20:25 PM »
Since we all currently have US flattops for everyone, I don't think it would be a problem if there were IJN flattops for say knights and British flattops for the rooks, while the bishops retain the US ships.
Logged
I am a Spitdweeb

"Oh I have slipped the surly bonds of earth... Put out my hand and touched the face of God." -J.G. Magee Jr.

Offline bravoa8

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1571
Re: Japanese Carriers
« Reply #16 on: June 16, 2010, 11:29:20 PM »
Quote from: SgtPappy on June 16, 2010, 11:20:25 PM
Since we all currently have US flattops for everyone, I don't think it would be a problem if there were IJN flattops for say knights and British flattops for the rooks, while the bishops retain the US ships.
Sounds great. :aok
Logged

Offline FiLtH

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6448
Re: Japanese Carriers
« Reply #17 on: June 17, 2010, 12:04:49 AM »
  That would be cool too.


   WHat I was thinking for the MA was if it was a hassle to make them all different as far as damage etc, then just have them all the same, BUT...make them all adjustable SEPARATELY, so that when events happen you can tailor the damage control, AA strength of the fleet etc. 

   But it would be cool to have some difference between them in the MA. May add a little something.
Logged

~AoM~

Offline lulu

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1068
Re: Japanese Carriers
« Reply #18 on: June 17, 2010, 12:50:31 AM »
Can USAF planes take-off from a japanese cvs?

 :salute
Logged
mobilis in mobile

Offline AirFlyer

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1210
Re: Japanese Carriers
« Reply #19 on: June 17, 2010, 02:08:44 AM »
Essex Class CV Dimensions
872ft x 93ft x 23ft

Shokaku Class CV Dimensions
844ft x 85ft x 29ft

A bit smaller but I don't think it would cause any problems.

P.S. Come to think of it is our carrier an Essex or a Yorktown? That might actually be smaller then the Shokaku.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2010, 02:16:04 AM by AirFlyer »
Logged
Tours: Airflyer to 69 - 77 | Dustin57 92 - 100 | Spinnich 100 - ?
"You'll always get exactly what you deserve." Neil

Offline Greebo

  • Skinner Team
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7075
Re: Japanese Carriers
« Reply #20 on: June 17, 2010, 04:40:31 AM »
Our carrier is an improved Essex class, specifically the USS Randolph. The main improvement was a longer hull which made the overall length 888 feet.

I'd like to see British and Japanese carrier groups too. I'm not sure whether the extra 3D shapes and textures would increase the terrain file sizes or resources too much for MA use though.

I'd think it more likely we could see them in custom event terrains. I wonder if this is something HTC could farm out to players. There's a few guys who are pretty good with 3D modelling software. Perhaps players could make the 3D ship models to HTC specs and then they work them into the game (gun positions, arrestor wires etc.) Terrain builders could then add these ships to their terrains as necessary.
Logged

Offline shreck

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 893
Re: Japanese Carriers
« Reply #21 on: June 17, 2010, 09:57:36 AM »
The Yamato and Musashi must be added for those desperate "fleet duels"  :aok They would be quite effective till they ran out of oil  :rofl :rofl   :bolt:

Not CVs but adding the ":rock lobbers" would be fun also
« Last Edit: June 17, 2010, 10:00:57 AM by shreck »
Logged

Offline AirFlyer

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1210
Re: Japanese Carriers
« Reply #22 on: June 17, 2010, 10:52:17 AM »
If we got a Yamamoto(sp) class battleship I think we would need an Iowa class to equal it, right now our task groups only have cruisers.
Logged
Tours: Airflyer to 69 - 77 | Dustin57 92 - 100 | Spinnich 100 - ?
"You'll always get exactly what you deserve." Neil

Offline Bino

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5938
Re: Japanese Carriers
« Reply #23 on: June 17, 2010, 03:39:24 PM »
Quote from: Karnak on June 16, 2010, 05:48:51 PM
Japanese fleet carriers were just as tough as American fleet carriers
...

Not according to "Shattered Sword" by Parshall & Tully.  Damage control systems and procedures were neither as redundant nor as effective as in the USN.  The book also goes into very specific detail to show that the AA artillery on IJN CVs in 1942 was simply not capable of dealing with a dive-bomber attack.  And, perhaps worst of all, aviation fuel storage tanks were integral to, not isolated from the hull.  :O
Logged


"The plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data'." - Randy Pausch

PC Specs

Offline E25280

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3475
      • http://125thspartanforums.com
Re: Japanese Carriers
« Reply #24 on: June 17, 2010, 06:13:08 PM »
Quote from: AirFlyer on June 17, 2010, 10:52:17 AM
If we got a Yamamoto(sp) class battleship
The battleship class is Yamato.

The Japanese admiral in charge of the Combined Fleet at the start of WWII was Isoroku Yamamoto.
Logged
Brauno in a past life, followed by LTARget
SWtarget in current incarnation
Captain and Communications Officer~125th Spartans

"Proudly drawing fire so that my brothers may pass unharmed."

Offline Rino

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8495
Re: Japanese Carriers
« Reply #25 on: June 17, 2010, 06:14:58 PM »
     No matter how you spell it, neither of them made it to the end of the war  :D
Logged
80th FS Headhunters
PHAN
Proud veteran of the Cola Wars

Offline AirFlyer

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1210
Re: Japanese Carriers
« Reply #26 on: June 17, 2010, 10:00:25 PM »
Quote from: E25280 on June 17, 2010, 06:13:08 PM
The battleship class is Yamato.

The Japanese admiral in charge of the Combined Fleet at the start of WWII was Isoroku Yamamoto.

The (sp) meant I wasn't sure if I spelt it right, I always thought it was named after him though, go figure.
Logged
Tours: Airflyer to 69 - 77 | Dustin57 92 - 100 | Spinnich 100 - ?
"You'll always get exactly what you deserve." Neil

Offline KingRat

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 27
Re: Japanese Carriers
« Reply #27 on: June 18, 2010, 12:16:20 AM »
I think the maps might be too small for battleship guns...if you can shell a field now with 8" cruiser guns from 25-30k out you'd be hitting fields from 2 sectors with 14" guns (or the 18" I think the Yamato and sister ship carried).  People would shell fields from port as soon as the battleship spawned.  In my opinion the cv groups are fine as far as capabilities and defensive firepower, but it would be nice to have CVs of other countries just for the looks.   
Logged

Offline LLogann

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4947
      • Candidz.com
Re: Japanese Carriers
« Reply #28 on: June 18, 2010, 01:10:56 AM »



































Gutless sweethearts, that have no honor.  
« Last Edit: June 18, 2010, 02:21:17 AM by LLogann »
Logged
See Rule #4
Now I only pay because of my friends.

Offline GreenEagle43

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 310
      • http://www.dickweedhbg.com
Re: Japanese Carriers
« Reply #29 on: June 18, 2010, 02:34:40 PM »
not a bad idea. we could change skin's like we do for the planes. and that way they could have a jap.brit,American,German,and Russian fleets. hmm. did the Russians have a fleet back then ? and then hitec could put some color full skins on the ships with flags hanging from them.
 :aok I'm in sounds good hitec....
Logged
Recruiting Officer GrnEagle  DHBG
Dedicated to Bish Country. 16 YEARS of BOMBER SERVICE

AN Aces High BOMBER SQUADRON. www.dickweedhbg.com
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up
« previous next »