We need more CV's...

[Apache]

...per TG or better yet, hardened CV's.

This suicide crap is stupid. There is debate here about the "realism" of the radar but yet some of these "realists" kamikaze a CV without any intention of surviveing the sortie. How does it go? Cake and something?

Oh yeah, I know. Cap the CV. I have no interest in chasing a vertically diving aircraft at 500 mph into my own CV and dieing along with him. That would kinda counter my argument would it?

My solution? Harden the CV's. Currently we can resupply/rebuild fields and cities and such. Now it would be a little silly to fly a C47 out to the CV so how about this?
Once the CV takes damage, the CV goes into auto repair, simulating fire & damage control. Allow the damage to reduce flight ops, i.e., reduce fuel load or ord load or delay fighter takeoff by xx seconds or any combination of these.
Also, as the CV takes more damage, disrupt CV manuverability. Disable rudder function for example, thus not allowing the CV to be turned left or right or not at all as the damage becomes more severe. Even slow the TG down due to damage?

All of this occurs in a time frame weighted by damage inflicted versus damage repaired. Inflict enough damage and the CV is destroyed. Allow the CV to repair and the CV is fully functional.

In other words, the CV must take a continous barrage during this time frame to counter the damage control.

If you don't get back in time after your first suicide, you gotta do it all over again ...and again ...and again.

[Am0n]

Oh yea Apache we do need more CVS. I really think it would rock.


But a few things i want to add here about "suicide bombers". i have sunk many, many CVs in my hellcat. Several times i have had to drop my ORD with 1 wing or other serious damage that you cannot physicly pull up from. More times than not, this is the case. But i always sink the ship.

theres a few things that could be at fault. The instant replane feature. And the frailness of the CVs. No one really cares if they die killing something all they have to do is rewpawn take off again, im not asking to have some other system here just pointing out why its like that (this applies to a lot of other problems IMO in the MA).

They could also bea lil tougher, in one dive i release 2 x 1000 lbs bombs and 6 rockets and the ship goes "boommm"


Increasing the ammount of ships in the group could help tremendously.

<<Edited for addition>>

Maybe if there was a delay in which the CV sunk after the boogey hits it, and if the perp dies in the next 30 seconds the ship retains the damage but does not sink. So it will just take a few hits from another boogey to take it down, if in fact he lives.

Just an idea, i dont fully back it though simply because suicide bombing played a huge role in WWI and WWII warfare.

[ 11-30-2001: Message edited by: Am0n ]

[Ripsnort]

I'd like to see CV'require about 1/2 as much as an HQ, say 10,000 lbs.  and have its rebuild time internally(after bomb hits) to 30 min.  ie: you must put 10,000 lbs on it within 30 min. to destroy it.  

I've had many a great furballs with enemy both off land and on CV only to be ruined by a suicide bomber.  

Also, if the suicide bomber that sinks CV dies, they should get 0 points, or better yet, dock them -5 perkies for dying!

[R4M]

Problem is the same as for Buffs, solution is the same as for buffs.

The defensive fire is so extremely overpowered that the damage model is tuned for low values.

Give a CV some serious hardness but tune its ack to decent levels and give the human ack gunners no range icon to do their magic hitting  .

 Then I'm sure that the kamikaze stuff would die forever.

[straffo]

I would like the TG to use Pepper Shell so no more ack umbrella effect ...  

[Pepe]

I disagree. I don't think Ack is overpowered. I do think high alt Flak is far away what it should be, but not close light ack. If you dive against 6 boats in close formation, you should expect to die fast.

As for the Kamikaze thing, It's all about CAP. We have a long range radar that, providing there is a CAP force airborne, gives plenty of time to intercept. If you let any plane to get near enough your CV, there is a fair chance (and I think that was the case IRL) that this CV is sunk or very badly damaged. Since we do not model deck damage, nor individual ack positions' damage, It is well modelled (IMHO) as it is.

Another completely different issue is the 10+k level bombing. Midway battle showed clearly that this was an impossible thing to achieve, except for an immensely lucky drop + negligent man at the helm. But I do not want to give the Buff horse another kick. It's dead  

Cheers,

Pepe

[Ripsnort]

I've sunk many CV's and lived, simply by releasing at a higher altitude.  It takes practice, like anything difficult should.  These suiciders are just going right in at the cv, dropping at 500 feet above them and augering in.

[Apache]

Thats right rip. They are going in at max velocity. Doesn't matter to them about wing shearing or any damage to their aircraft. You simply can't CAP that, not more than 1 anyway. Last night was a good example. I got 2 of em but the third dove straight into the CV from WAY up. Down she went.

[skernsk]

I like the idea of the CV taking bomb damage and closing flight ops for 10-20 mins while it rebuilds.  If hit by 10,000lbs it goes under any less the CV takes damage to fuel, ord or hanger.

I think that the only thing that should sink a CV immediately is torpedo damage...

I wouldn't want multiple CV's in a fleet, but perhaps rather than 1 fleet per port we could have 2 seperate CV fleets.

[R4M]

That's quite a brilliant idea, Skernsk. I like it  

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by skernsk:
I like the idea of the CV taking bomb damage and closing flight ops for 10-20 mins while it rebuilds.  If hit by 10,000lbs it goes under any less the CV takes damage to fuel, ord or hanger.

I think that the only thing that should sink a CV immediately is torpedo damage...

Well, CV's still operated when struck by bombs, their flight decks were quite large, so I would say it would be dependant on where the bomb stuck...crater-type holes in the deck, or, the golden BB thru an elevator deck that would not allow further aircraft to launch until repaired.  That would require the agressor to either use skill, or have cooperation from others to disable flight.

Good idea with alittle refinement Skersk.

[K West]

I agree 100% that the damage model for the fleets needs revision. But what does this have to do with the people who call for a revised radar model?

 Westy

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by O'Westy:
I agree 100% that the damage model for the fleets needs revision. But what does this have to do with the people who call for a revised radar model?

 Westy

Come again?

[skernsk]

Originally posted by Ripsnort:


Well, CV's still operated when struck by bombs, their flight decks were quite large, so I would say it would be dependant on where the bomb stuck...
Good idea with alittle refinement Skersk.

I'm not sure that the code can be written to know WHERE the bomb hit the CV, but the code can be done in this way:


2k -- fuel and ammo to 50%
4K -- fuel and ammo to 25%
6K -- flight ops shut down
8k -- flight ops and PT's shut down
10K - fleet sunk

This way the killing of a CV needs to be done with teamwork and 1 kamakzee can't destoy the fleet.  BUT Mr.Kamakazee still has the ability to do some damage to the fleet as it did in real life.

[Apache]

Originally posted by O'Westy:
I agree 100% that the damage model for the fleets needs revision. But what does this have to do with the people who call for a revised radar model?

 Westy

It means don't use the "realism" argument about radar, then suicide a CV. This is not to imply that all those who argue the radar thing does this, but you know who you are that do.