Author Topic: Squadron owned Carriers...........  (Read 1817 times)

Offline CMC Airboss

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 705
      • http://www.cutthroats.com
Squadron owned Carriers...........
« Reply #45 on: June 06, 2003, 02:02:38 PM »
Throwing in an idea for Carrier perk point implementation -

Generate perk points from the points earned during planned/joined missions.   Earned CV perkies dump into an account that can be "spent" by the C.O. or their designees.

MiG

Offline Modas

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 922
      • http://www.cutthroats.com
Squadron owned Carriers...........
« Reply #46 on: June 06, 2003, 02:11:27 PM »
Thats a good idea too.

Now get back to work building airplanes..... :D

Offline Soulyss

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6559
      • Aces High Events
Squadron owned Carriers...........
« Reply #47 on: June 06, 2003, 03:38:49 PM »
Since I have a ton of perkies and I never really spend them I think I'd just buy the cv take it out into the deep water and spend the night writing annoying messages with the waypoints to all my countrymen.  :)
80th FS "Headhunters"
I blame mir.

Offline bigsky

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 964
Squadron owned Carriers...........
« Reply #48 on: June 06, 2003, 10:06:08 PM »
well thats kinda what i was thinking of soulyss...but seriously how would you divide up the squad perks? could one member of the squad just use all of his own perks and "buy" a CV for the squad? this idea, which i like, needs some kind of squad perk point pool. maybe like mentioned, based on squad operations, ect. i think as far as ports go these could be spawned out of existing ports avalible to that side. im all for these squad cv groups to be controlled only by the squad members still based on AH overal rank because if you cant sort it out within the squad then the old rank system should be the default or would it be the primary stock(perk) holder in the CV group? this is a good idea but if it were to degenerate into a vulgar display of perk points by some individules then i would probably be against it. PUNT:D
"I am moist like bacon"

Offline AKcurly

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1509
Squadron owned Carriers...........
« Reply #49 on: June 07, 2003, 12:32:30 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
curly.... I think that is about the dead end that this idea would come to.

More cv's would just mean more dweeby suicide guys getting better (more practice) at sinking em...  Without making it more difficult to sink cv's they would just be a waste.

How bout if the CV can't be sunk untill all the escorts are sunk?
lazs


Lazs, I always level bomb (at 10k) CVs with a B17.  I put 9k on the projected ship path and 9k on where I guess they might turn.  I never die from CV ack - never.  Occasionally, I'll loose one buff to a 5incher. I almost never miss the CV.  So yup, you have to do something to keep the CV alive.

There's a really simple way to keep level bombing buffs from killing CVs -- fighter cap.  There's a really simple way to keep suicide dweebs from killing the CVs - keep the 5 inch guns manned.  Lazs, have you ever manned a 5 inch gun?  Man, it's impossible to miss the target at 3k or less.  There is absolutely no reason a suicide dweeb should be permitted to kill a CV.

And, if you have a REALLY good CV driver, I can't sink it with a B17 - I have to go get a lancaster and fly perpendicular to the ship path.  That gives me 4 9k drops and 1 6k drop -- 1 on the projected path, 4 on guesses.  But, if I'm in a lancaster, I'm really vulnerable -- only 10k and fairly weak guns.

It's an interesting problem (sinking the CV) and some guys (me, mullah, others) enjoy solving it. :)

Why not station 2 fighters as cap?  Why not keep the 5 inch guns manned?  You can easily keep the buffs away.

curly

Offline BNM

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 559
      • http://www.christian3x3.com/
Squadron owned Carriers...........
« Reply #50 on: June 07, 2003, 06:10:02 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by AKcurly
Why not station 2 fighters as cap?  Why not keep the 5 inch guns manned?  You can easily keep the buffs away.

curly


Let me get this one for ya Lazs, because it's no fun climbing to 10k and flying around in circles waiting on fluffy... :D

Offline AKcurly

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1509
Squadron owned Carriers...........
« Reply #51 on: June 07, 2003, 07:27:24 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by BNM
Let me get this one for ya Lazs, because it's no fun climbing to 10k and flying around in circles waiting on fluffy... :D


Well, generally it's foolish to expect all of a cake to be icing. :)

A CV is a legitmate target.  Guys who enjoy buffs will attack defended targets.

If someone complains about the buff attack, that's like flying in a furball and complaining about cherry picking.

When one airfield attacks a second airfield, almost always, there are a few guys who hang around high and attempt to protect the airfield resources.  After all, if a/f A is attacking a/f B and someone kills the fuel/troops at A, yep, the attack dies.  Why should CVs be different?

If you guys want to furball near CVs, then you're going to have to protect them.

Hey, here's an idea. :)  I'll bet you can find guys who like to man 5-inch guns and guys who like to fly cap over CVs (instead of furball.)  

When you have a good furball going near a CV, why not put out a request?

Capped CVs with good CV drivers and manned 5 inch guns cannot be sunk unless the 8 inch guns from an enemy cruiser get it.

curly

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Squadron owned Carriers...........
« Reply #52 on: June 07, 2003, 08:11:16 AM »
curly.. do you know how many cv's were sunk in WWII by heavy bombers?   Hint.. less than one.

Thank you bnm... how gratifiying that someone get's it.   curly, I guess that's the point.. the people who like sinking CV's are of a certain mindset that makes it impossible for them to know what is fun for the action set.  

When someone says "well all ya gotta do is faorce a couple of players to circle around doing nothing while they wait for fluffy so that the rest of you can have fun..."   well that won't work on several levels not the least of which is... how the hell do you get people to do such a boring thing?  And if I could get people to do that they sure as hell don't belong in the squad..  and speaking of that..

hazed... you are talking about these cv's being "extra cv's" right?  like... one for every squad that can (LOL) afford em?   And, if one of the goals is to encourage larger squads then it is a really bad idea.. A lot of the gangbanging started when a couple of massive squads of newbies came over here.
lazs

Offline AKcurly

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1509
Squadron owned Carriers...........
« Reply #53 on: June 07, 2003, 09:39:02 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
curly.. do you know how many cv's were sunk in WWII by heavy bombers?   Hint.. less than one.
lazs


Lazs .. do you know how many low altiitude furballs (many planes under 1000 feet) existed in WW2?  Hint .. less than one.

curly

Offline AKcurly

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1509
Squadron owned Carriers...........
« Reply #54 on: June 07, 2003, 10:10:06 AM »
Originally posted by lazs2
curly.. do you know how many cv's were sunk in WWII by heavy bombers?   Hint.. less than one.

Lazs, I googled your above assertion and clearly you've been smoking what grandpa shoveled from the chicken house.

There so many ships sunk by bombers, it's not even challenging to look for them.  Now, it is true I didn't find mention of a CV sunk.  Hmmm, wonder why that's so?  Do you think maybe they were CAPPED?  Stop and think about it --  Battleships HMS Repulse and Prince of Wales were sunk by level bombers.  Do you think maybe lack of aircover had anything to do with that?  Don't you imagine battleships were more heavily armored than CVs?  BTW, you were the guy who injected realism into this discussion ... see above statement.  And, I really want to know about those massive 1k and below furballs too!


Thank you bnm... how gratifiying that someone get's it.   curly, I guess that's the point.. the people who like sinking CV's are of a certain mindset that makes it impossible for them to know what is fun for the action set.


Certainly the two groups have difficulty understanding the opposing point of view.  However, your statement was incomplete.  You should have added the furball group are of a mindset that makes it impossible for them to know what is fun for the real action set.


When someone says "well all ya gotta do is faorce a couple of players to circle around doing nothing while they wait for fluffy so that the rest of you can have fun..."   well that won't work on several levels not the least of which is... how the hell do you get people to do such a boring thing?  And if I could get people to do that they sure as hell don't belong in the squad..  and speaking of that..


I don't like being patronised.  So as my gift to you, I promise the following:  Just for you, I will scan the map looking for dar bars away from the coast.  If I see any, I'll go make sure the homeland is secure by sinking your farging CV.

one for every squad that can (LOL) afford em?   And, if one of the goals is to encourage larger squads then it is a really bad idea.. A lot of the gangbanging started when a couple of massive squads of newbies came over here.
lazs


Well Lazs, I guess it's just too bad the rest of us "less intelligent" types can't see our way to participate in Aces High the way you think we should.  Furballs have all the appeal of starting my lawnmower, turning it upside down and seeing how many times I can touch a spinning blade w/o losing a finger.

curly

Offline AKIron

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13294
Squadron owned Carriers...........
« Reply #55 on: June 07, 2003, 10:33:17 AM »
lol...see what ya did Lazs, you done and went and got Curly riled. ;)
Here we put salt on Margaritas, not sidewalks.

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Squadron owned Carriers...........
« Reply #56 on: June 07, 2003, 07:37:25 PM »
Ok curly... so we agree that no cv's were sunk by heavy bombers.. great.   Low alt furballs?  well... yes.. plenty of low alt fights.. some in the med and africa could be called low alt furballs... some in the pacific were fields so close to one another that planes couldn't get to 10k.

I agree that the sky accountants and the furballers will never understand what is fun for the other guy..  I think I allmost allways advocate choice... problem is... the strat guys depend on ruining stuff for people who may never see em or want to bother with em.  No one that furs get's any real fun out of killing lumbering strat players... much less hovering around waiting for em and trying not to dose off.

"sinking my cv"??  I don't have a cv.  If one is sunk that is the source of a good fight it is not just me that you are ruining the fight for... it is the 2 dozen or so guys that were having a good time.   We will just wander off and see if we can find something else that looks like a good fight... stopping yu is farthest down on the list of "fun things to do".

Well certainly us lawnmower jousters are not on the same plain as you baseball and paint watchers (oil based drys way slower check it out) but we do amuse ourselves.... give us the choice...or, more accurately.. don't take away the choice to find a fight and we will be happy...  in our short bus kinda way.   Heck... when there is a good fur we don't care what you do... HTC will notify us if you heroes "win the war"  while we were off having a good time.
lazs

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Squadron owned Carriers...........
« Reply #57 on: June 07, 2003, 07:39:40 PM »
soo... where was i?   Oh, yeah...

 hazed.. are these cv's that you want, are they extra cv's or is this just some other anal strat thing to add to the gangbanging and timidity in the arena?

lazs
Public Relations Officer for the BK's

Offline AKcurly

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1509
Squadron owned Carriers...........
« Reply #58 on: June 07, 2003, 08:00:28 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
Ok curly... so we agree that no cv's were sunk by heavy bombers.. great.   Low alt furballs?  well... yes.. plenty of low alt fights.. some in the med and africa could be called low alt furballs... some in the pacific were fields so close to one another that planes couldn't get to 10k.


Not so fast there, friend. :)  No CVs were sunk because they had a protective CAP.  Battleships, which were much tougher to sink than CVs, were sunk by level bombers.  Fairly simple conclusion ...

Concerning the low alt furball of the type you find in Aces High -- dozens of planes at 1k or less AGL?  Name one ... just one.

curly

Offline Glasses

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1811
Squadron owned Carriers...........
« Reply #59 on: June 07, 2003, 08:22:25 PM »
I want to use my perks to Clone Kurt Tank Please. :D