Ports

[Rondar]

I would wish for 4 vehicle hangars like any other vbase.  After all, this does mean control of a task force also, or can get control of it fairly easily.  Or else harden it from ords similar to hq if a single hangar.

Ports are just too easy to keep down right now.

[Tracerfi]

+1 

[bustr]

How were ports for deep water vessels setup in WW2?

[Rondar]

Bustr I dont have any idea.  I just wish for a port to be a little harder to take than one plane bombing hangar and de acking and another plane or m3 to get base.

[Hazard69]

More than VHs I think our Ports need a little more ack and flak. Ports were precious with great strategic value and were pretty heavily defended. I think if the guns on the docked vessels in our ports were made active, it would add greatly to the ports defense.

Also I believe the PT boats (at ports at least) should not be linked to the VH, but should be associated with a seperate hardended structure (like a sub-pen for e.g.) to make taking a port a little harder.

[9thAFE]

I like the idea of having more targets at a port. It does seem a little fast to try and knock everything down if you have a semi organized attack on it.  +1

[100Coogn]

What about adding spawn points from surrounding VH, leading directly to the port?

Coogan

[Slade]

+1

[matt]

-1 

[Tinkles]

-1  

      



I would like to have more targets at a port.  I agree it is way too easy.  Considering even if the ships at the port can't shoot, there should be at least 1 PT hanger, where the PT boats spawn right next to the port (similar distance to where the tugboat/ "riverboat barge" is located).   Because all you need to disable a port now is... one plane.  Should at least require two.   

Seriously though, more than 1 VH and guns.  1 VH and 1 PT Hanger would be nice.  To have the port's ships shoot a little (maybe 1-2 guns per) would be a nice touch.  For you  out there, not hard to disable those guns.  So shh.


+1 

 

[The Fugitive]

With a horde ANY base is easy to take     

[SEraider]

I always felt 2 was adequate.

[Tank-Ace]

Personally, I think a few ligher, but still armored gun emplacments would help out a lot. Say, if there were '88s, 105's, 120mm's, or whatever they used in concrete block houses, that would be a big help.

CV couldn't draw too close, LVT's could get on base, and the gun is too small with too restricted an arc of fire for much. But they coudn't strafe them down in a reasonable ammount of time either.

[crazyivan]

Well with uno attacker it can be a challenge, but most avoid that idea by sending an attacker for AA on the field. For a short time we did have 2vhs at a port. It seemed to hold off the flock of angry seaguls a few minutes longer.

Posted in another thread I would like to land/refuel on docked cv at port also.

[Ack-Ack]

Bustr I dont have any idea.  I just wish for a port to be a little harder to take than one plane bombing hangar and de acking and another plane or m3 to get base.

The ports should be built like the German naval bases at Saint-Nazaire, La Rochelle and Lorient.  These bases were nearly imprevious to attack and the Germans held out in these bases until the German surrender in May of 1945.  These bases were built so well that today they still exist because demolitioning them would cost too much.

ack-ack