Author Topic: time once again for the toughen the CV "discussion"  (Read 1176 times)

Offline Fariz

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1087
      • http://9giap.warriormage.com
time once again for the toughen the CV "discussion"
« Reply #15 on: October 09, 2002, 11:01:44 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Turbot


It is easy to kill CV and land, if anyone cared to learn to play the game.


And can you open me this secret? Film it and send to me please, will apreciate the lesson from someone, who knows the game better :)

Offline Turbot

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1122
time once again for the toughen the CV "discussion"
« Reply #16 on: October 09, 2002, 11:11:46 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Fariz


And can you open me this secret? Film it and send to me please, will apreciate the lesson from someone, who knows the game better :)


Will do it tonight, if you seriously wanted it.  (Edit to add I wont have 30 friends with me either :) )

Offline Urchin

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5517
time once again for the toughen the CV "discussion"
« Reply #17 on: October 09, 2002, 11:12:09 AM »
I've killed the CV and landed before, it was a couple versions ago though.  

I agree 1,000,000% with Lazs.  To often I find a really nice fight developing between an enemy CV and a friendly base, and it'll get interrupted by one guy that keeps upping a suicide P38 until he gets through.  It is plain aggravating, just like people porking the fuel at the enemy base.  

I know this may sound stupid or whatever, but for me, the fight IS the only reason I'm there.  The fight is not a means to an end (i.e. taking a base) it IS the end.  

However, I don't see what point upping the durability of the carrier would have.. the suicide dweebs would just have to die a few more times to knock it out.

Offline Virage

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1097
time once again for the toughen the CV "discussion"
« Reply #18 on: October 09, 2002, 11:15:35 AM »
or take 30 seconds away from ur furballing and take out the ordnances at the base 5 miles away from the carrier.
JG11

Vater

Offline Lizard3

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1563
time once again for the toughen the CV "discussion"
« Reply #19 on: October 09, 2002, 11:17:07 AM »
Actually, historically, they were relatively easy to sink. A couple thousand pounders could if not sink them, put them out of commision for months...when you could find them. Here lies the problem. They are real easy to find.

Maybe the problem is that if they are the vehicle to launch LVT's, and they have to get close to shore to do it, maybe thats not what they should be doing.

How about seperate the invasion/bombardment fleet from the carrier groups. I know I'd like to drive a tank down a ramp onto the beach.

A little off the subject, but this morning on tv I saw landing craft crammed full of artillery blasting away like mad otw to the beach.

I'm sure HTC's already thought of things like this, and we'll get there someday.

Offline RafBader

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 41
time once again for the toughen the CV "discussion"
« Reply #20 on: October 09, 2002, 11:30:15 AM »
Just make the only way to destroy the cv is to torp it or kill it with anouther cv. Voila ! problem solved everyone happy.

 RafBader CO:RRR

Offline Apache

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1419
time once again for the toughen the CV "discussion"
« Reply #21 on: October 09, 2002, 11:32:56 AM »
Once again, the ancient one has started a well thought out and reasonable discussion. I too, think the CV's too easy to sink.

Case in point. Twice last night, as dozens of folks were enjoying themselves in naval air warfare simulation, some numbnuts' (thats plural) suicides the CV with Typhoons and Peee51's. Once the opposing CV, once ours.

Take out the ordinance at the close fields? What you are forgetting is that not only will these suiciders come from close in, they'll fly for freakin' ever just to suicide a CV.

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8801
time once again for the toughen the CV "discussion"
« Reply #22 on: October 09, 2002, 11:49:15 AM »
I completely agree with Lazs.

Facts:

No American or Japanese CV was ever sunk by land-based aircraft.
No American or Japanese CV was ever damaged by heavy bombers
With few exceptions, AP and SAP bombs where not available to land-based fighter units.
AP and SAP bombs were commonly carried by naval bombers, but only on rare occasions by fighters.
HE bombs were generally ineffective against warships with even minimal armor protection. Using delay-action fuzed, HE bombs proved highly ineffective due to the light-weight bomb case rupturing before the delayed fuze detonated the charge.

To reduce the level of suicide jabos, there are five things that can be done.
1) Reduce the effectiveness of HE bombs to just 25% of their current value against ships. This will require 32k of HE ord to sink the CV (although 8k of AP or SAP will still do the job).
2) AP/SAP bombs will only be available to naval bomber aircraft. This makes naval aircraft the more effective type for killing ships.
3) All bomb fusing set at 2k altitude minimum for attacking ships and structures. No more flying straight into the ship or hanger, releasing the bombs at the last second. If you release below 2k, bombs will not detonate.
4) No perk points will be awarded for bombing ships or structures unless sortie is landed.
5) Introduce CVE TGs to supplement the CV groups. Aircraft restrictions shall allow for only FM-2/F4F and TBM aircraft to be available on CVEs.

The net result is that the most effective anti-warship aircraft will be dive-bombers and torpedo bombers, as God intended. :D It will also require jabo pilots to develop minimal bombing skills.

Implementing this or a similar solution will allow Carrier Task Groups to assume their proper role without being destroyed in a manner utterly opposed to historical reality. As it stands now, CVs are generally a non-factor due to the ease with which they can be sunk.

My regards,

Widewing
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.

Offline Ripsnort

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 27260
time once again for the toughen the CV "discussion"
« Reply #23 on: October 09, 2002, 11:49:19 AM »
Hell, just make them indestructible.

Offline Tumor

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4294
      • Wait For It
time once again for the toughen the CV "discussion"
« Reply #24 on: October 09, 2002, 12:19:30 PM »
Remove the suicide idiots and the problem is solved.  The CV can still be sunk fairly easily by those who actually TRY to learn how to do it and survive, but they really wouldn't be a problem.  No idea how you can curb the suicide dorks without making the CV way too tough.
"Dogfighting is useless"  :Erich Hartmann

Offline popeye

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3704
time once again for the toughen the CV "discussion"
« Reply #25 on: October 09, 2002, 12:23:31 PM »
I like Widewing's ideas of adding AP bombs for naval aircraft, and hardening the ships to HE.

Also, add a couple of troop transports to the fleet.  The strat players could just sink them to disable troops, then safely ignore the fleet.

Wouldn't hurt to add a couple more gun batteries to shoreline bases to defend against vultching fleets.
KONG

Where is Major Kong?!?

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8801
time once again for the toughen the CV "discussion"
« Reply #26 on: October 09, 2002, 12:32:00 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Hell, just make them indestructible.


Rip may be on to something here….

Suppose CVs are indestructible, however, they can be rendered “out of service” once their damaged minimum has been met. Then, say it takes 30 minutes to “come back up” but if their port is captured they never come back up. By “come back up”, I mean not able to launch (but still recover) aircraft, nor spawn LVTs or PTs. Their 5” guns cannot fire, but 40mm and 20mm tripleA
is still functioning. Speed is reduced to 50%.  A similar rule set should apply to the heavy cruiser as well.

This means that as long as the port is retained, CV down time will never exceed 30 minutes, and they do not have respawn at the port. This will eliminate travel time, keeping the CVs in the fight.

Thoughts?

My regards,

Widewing
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.

Offline Fariz

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1087
      • http://9giap.warriormage.com
time once again for the toughen the CV "discussion"
« Reply #27 on: October 09, 2002, 01:05:23 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Turbot


Will do it tonight, if you seriously wanted it.  (Edit to add I wont have 30 friends with me either :) )


Explaining will be enough. I still puzzled how attack on 8000lb tough carries which protected with fighters, tons of acks and flak, some of them manned, can be taken easier or more profitable than attack on town which has 50 buildings; 8 acks which can be destroyed, and has a total more perks than the whole fleet. Probably AH has some bug you exploits?

Offline Turbot

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1122
time once again for the toughen the CV "discussion"
« Reply #28 on: October 09, 2002, 01:09:10 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Fariz


Explaining will be enough. I still puzzled how attack on 8000lb tough carries which protected with fighters, tons of acks and flak, some of them manned, can be taken easier or more profitable than attack on town which has 50 buildings; 8 acks which can be destroyed, and has a total more perks than the whole fleet. Probably AH has some bug you exploits?


I did not correctly understand your question.  I thought you were saying people had to suicide to kill a CV.

Offline Turbot

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1122
time once again for the toughen the CV "discussion"
« Reply #29 on: October 09, 2002, 01:10:51 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Tumor
Remove the suicide idiots and the problem is solved.  The CV can still be sunk fairly easily by those who actually TRY to learn how to do it and survive, but they really wouldn't be a problem.  No idea how you can curb the suicide dorks without making the CV way too tough.



I feel this is the true problem.