Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: 1HAMMER1 on June 24, 2007, 02:08:21 PM
-
I know this is "Aces High" and the primary objective of the game is WWII flight simulation but we have a detailed section of ground vehicles in which several members play exclusivly. I would like to see some work done with the sea going aspects of the game. Maybe add Battleships to island oriented maps and upgrade the current Naval graphics. I know subs have been requested but that would require a whole new plane of terrain mapping and game integration. Battleships could be done with existing setup and some program work. Up till Midway, battleships were the main focus of Naval Surface Warfare and could be used in game for everything from shelling towns and fields, defense and offense of Carrier Strike Groups and bases, to forming up for epic sea battles. Just a Sailors wish for the wishlist.
~Doc
-
It would be slick to post battle ship formations near shore bases, particularly where there are no shore batteries. It would add to the naval aspect for those inclined.
Also, it would mean you need to take out the battle ship to safely attack...nice tactical move.
-
Yeah, I think there could be a ton of options with the addition of battleships. They could moderate it by only allowing 4-5 ships per map per country or make a new port for the map which deploys Battleships. You lose the port, you lose your BB's. It could open the door for some intense Naval battles, give a new job to the PT boats, and could really accentuate the "Classic Battle" scenarios like Pearl Harbor, Iwo Jima, and others. You could park one off your priority fields near sea to defend against Amphibious assualts and they would make an interesting Dive Bomber target.
I was surprised to see AC's, DD's, and CC's but no BB's when I first started playing. The addition of a nice 18" battery would put a whole new spin on sea-to-shore seiges also. Maybe even nerf the BB's with weak Anti-Aircraft defense so they rely on working with the Carrier groups or airfields as well.
With as long as AHII has been around, I am sure they have pitched the idea and for whatever reason don't find it practical but it sure would make me feel better about the $15.00/mo. and would add an authentic platform to bring in new members and give the old ones something new to play with. I am sure if Hi Tech don't do it, someone else will.
~Doc
-
make the Yamato or the Bismarck lol
-
Ooooh! Make destroyers free from port, (player controlled, one person), they would travel to NME base. So, it would be like:
Destroyer: 0 Perks
Cruiser: 30 perks
Heavy Cruiser: 75 perks
Battleship: 125 perks
Destroyer would have 1 8 inch main gun, 1 barrel, 2 20mm anti-PT/aircraft guns
(2000lb to kill)
Cruiser would have more armor, 2 8 inch guns, 2 barrels each, 2 40mm Anti-PT/aircraft and 2 20mm anti PT/aircraft
(4000lb to kill)
Heavy cruiser would have much stronger armor, 2 8 inch guns, 3 barrels each, 1 manned puffy-ack, 2 40mm anti PT/aircraft
(6000lb to kill)
Battleship would be like the ones we have now.
(8000lb to kill)
You could switch to position to position like a bomber, it would have its seperate perk 'piggybank'. I took alot of time to write this, I would like to see it in-game
:)
-
Originally posted by Pannono
make the Yamato or the Bismarck lol
Ya's, lolz, both were teh suck!1!!! err teh sunk!111
-
Originally posted by DiabloTX
err teh sunk!111
BAHAHAHAHAHAH:aok
-
Originally posted by Pannono
make the Yamato or the Bismarck lol
Yeah didn't the Bismarck g down in it's first engagement or something?
~Doc
-
Originally posted by 1HAMMER1
Yeah didn't the Bismarck g down in it's first engagement or something?
~Doc
yeah because the crew was stupid
the yamato went on a suicide mission and was sunk
The Bismarck was heavily armed with eight 380 mm (15 inch) guns.
The Yamato carried the largest naval artillery ever fitted to any warship, nine 460 mm (18.1 inch) guns. Yamato sunk by US aircraft in the final days of the war during the suicide Operation Ten-Go.
-
We need the Mighty MO.
-
Originally posted by 1HAMMER1
Yeah didn't the Bismarck g down in it's first engagement or something?
~Doc
Originally posted by Pannono
yeah because the crew was stupid
the yamato went on a suicide mission and was sunk
The Bismarck was heavily armed with eight 380 mm (15 inch) guns.
The Yamato carried the largest naval artillery ever fitted to any warship, nine 460 mm (18.1 inch) guns. Yamato sunk by US aircraft in the final days of the war during the suicide Operation Ten-Go.
Ermm, no. Bismarck PWNT teh Hood in it's first engagement. The crew wasn't stupid, certainly not the captain, Lutjen's was teh n00b.
And the Yamato, while having large guns, had teh suck in terms of shells.
If you want a proper BB get an Iowa-class.
-
Originally posted by Pannono
yeah because the crew was stupid
the yamato went on a suicide mission and was sunk
The Bismarck was heavily armed with eight 380 mm (15 inch) guns.
The Yamato carried the largest naval artillery ever fitted to any warship, nine 460 mm (18.1 inch) guns. Yamato sunk by US aircraft in the final days of the war during the suicide Operation Ten-Go.
the Yamato had big guns, but had sucky sights and barely any radar, had the Japs gave the Yama better sights and radar, it would've Pwn everything. except for an all out attack bythe Allies:D
-
This would be most interesting. Integrate this feature with the requests to take individual ships out of the current Task Group formation and we could have a winner.:aok
-
Originally posted by titanic3
the Yamato had big guns, but had sucky sights and barely any radar, had the Japs gave the Yama better sights and radar, it would've Pwn everything. except for an all out attack bythe Allies:D
Not true. The shells designed for Yamato were vastly inferior to the US 16"/50 Mk. 7. Iowa would have given the Yamato's a helluva fight even on equal terms.
Biggest does not always equal baddest.
-
man the yamato did not suck it was a masterpiece of naval warfare and so was the bismarck, the thing is as always goo always triumphs over evil so to say so it was doomed when japan joined axis and when the us navy brought their Cv borne Aircraft.
-
no..no..no.
Evil will always triumph over good, because good.....is dumb.
RTR
-
Originally posted by DiabloTX
Ermm, no. Bismarck PWNT teh Hood in it's first engagement. The crew wasn't stupid, certainly not the captain, Lutjen's was teh n00b.
And the Yamato, while having large guns, had teh suck in terms of shells.
If you want a proper BB get an Iowa-class.
yeah it did own the hood but swordfish torp planes owned it lol
they could have killed the hood and prince of wales if they had fired sooner. any1 see the dogfights episode of this? lutjens held his fire and lindemann came up and said "i will not have my ship shot out from under my ass"
yamato was ownage, they just made it too big of a target and sent it on a suicide mission where it was supposed to be sunk
we need the USS Missouri
-
Originally posted by Alpha202
man the yamato did not suck it was a masterpiece of naval warfare and so was the bismarck, the thing is as always goo always triumphs over evil so to say so it was doomed when japan joined axis and when the us navy brought their Cv borne Aircraft.
No one said it 'sucked', just said it's not as good as you think it is.
By the way, periods (.) are your friend. Use them...please.
-
He's just testing his mileage without a fuel stop. Who knows, he may invent the next hybrid. Although I've already consumed three tank fulls of periods.
-
Originally posted by KTM520guy
We need the Mighty MO.
Im looking at the Mo from my bedroom window right now. And my girlfriends mum works there. GREAT ship, but it never saw action. Entered the war too late. They signed the treaty on it, but it didnt take place in any real naval action.
-
Originally posted by Serenity
Im looking at the Mo from my bedroom window right now. And my girlfriends mum works there. GREAT ship, but it never saw action. Entered the war too late. They signed the treaty on it, but it didnt take place in any real naval action.
It saw plenty of action late in the war just no suface engagements. Too bad the Japs were *****-footing around with the Yamato's otherwise it would have been interesting seeing them get PWNT by the Iowa's.
-
Originally posted by DiabloTX
It saw plenty of action late in the war just no suface engagements. Too bad the Japs were *****-footing around with the Yamato's otherwise it would have been interesting seeing them get PWNT by the Iowa's.
Exactly. No surface engagements means no BB 63 :D
-
The Bismarck was an excellent battleship, but lacked a good radar and did not have air or surface support so it was badly used. If it had faced any one of the british battleships in a 1v1 the outcome may not have been the same as it was.
Same goes for the Yamato.. airpower finished her too.
-
Precisely.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
The Bismarck was an excellent battleship, but lacked a good radar and did not have air or surface support so it was badly used. If it had faced any one of the british battleships in a 1v1 the outcome may not have been the same as it was.
Same goes for the Yamato.. airpower finished her too.
If the Bismarck was so good the explain why a new ship with a green crew from the PoW managed, with one shell mind you, to slow the Bismarck and significantly shorten her range AND how, with one torpedo mind you, a biplane managed to end the hunt and bring the end of this 'excellent' battleship. Bismarck was strong, robust, well built. She was not, however, all that exceptional.
The Yamato was the Japanese version of that. Large, powerful, robust, but sorely lacking in updated firecontrol, a thorough anti-aircraft suite, and was used pessimistically given her extreme cost. At least the German's sent the Bismarck out and actually got some use out of her.
The Iowa's own all.
-
Originally posted by Serenity
Exactly. No surface engagements means no BB 63 :D
How do you figure? Just because the Japs didn't want to come out and play doesn't mean there was no BB-63. Hell, she even took a kamikaze hit.
-
Battleships would be cool. :aok
-
Originally posted by DiabloTX
If the Bismarck was so good the explain why a new ship with a green crew from the PoW managed, with one shell mind you, to slow the Bismarck and significantly shorten her range AND how, with one torpedo mind you, a biplane managed to end the hunt and bring the end of this 'excellent' battleship. Bismarck was strong, robust, well built. She was not, however, all that exceptional.
The Yamato was the Japanese version of that. Large, powerful, robust, but sorely lacking in updated firecontrol, a thorough anti-aircraft suite, and was used pessimistically given her extreme cost. At least the German's sent the Bismarck out and actually got some use out of her.
The Iowa's own all.
Luck. Had they hit any other place the history would have been different. Just look at how much crap the Tirpiz took without going down.
Just like it was luck that one shell hit the magazine of Hood.
Bismarck and Tirpiz were both excellent battleships.
-
Originally posted by DiabloTX
How do you figure? Just because the Japs didn't want to come out and play doesn't mean there was no BB-63. Hell, she even took a kamikaze hit.
I dont believe it should be added (Not 63 SPECIFICALLY) Because the anti-air action it saw was still limited comparitively. If you go down to the vessel in fact, tour guides, displays, and historical films on the ship itself make a point of mentioning that the "Mighty Mo was commisioned too late to take part in any real combat actions, rather proving itself post-war in the gulf conflicts".
-
Luck eh? Twice in just a few days? I'm not buying it. The Tirpitz was a hard target to hit, many many missions to finally do her in and look what they used to finally sink it. No ship could have survived that. LIke I said, they were built extraordinarily tough but with inherently exposed design flaws.
The Bismarck's were good ships, awesome optical fire control but fatally flawed. The German's were STILL designing their captial ships with a screw through the keel greatly weakening the stern.
As for the luck of the hit on the Hood, RN's experience with battlecruisers at Jutland in WWI dispelled the 'luck' hit, too many met the same fate. It wasn't luck, it's called a design flaw.
-
Originally posted by Serenity
I dont believe it should be added (Not 63 SPECIFICALLY) Because the anti-air action it saw was still limited comparitively. If you go down to the vessel in fact, tour guides, displays, and historical films on the ship itself make a point of mentioning that the "Mighty Mo was commisioned too late to take part in any real combat actions, rather proving itself post-war in the gulf conflicts".
Again, none of the Iowa's saw any surface engagements but that wasn't due to them being commissioned too late but by the IJN's refusal to sortie any BB's against American BB's. Hell, the New Jersy and the Iowa both could have faced the Yamato at Leyte Gulf had Halsey not taken the northern bait.
Commissioning of Iowa's:
Iowa Commissioned: 22 February 1943
New Jersey Commissioned: 23 May 1943
Missouri Commissioned: 11 June 1944
Wisconsin Commissioned: 16 April 1944
So as you can see the Iowa's weren't too late to see some action, they just didn't due to situational constraints and one admiral's bad decision. As far as I am concerned I am fully satisfied given HTC's time in combat dictum that the Iowa's are within this scope.
-
Yes a design flaw, but the HIT was still a lucky one
-
Originally posted by DiabloTX
...AND how, with one torpedo mind you, a biplane managed to end the hunt and bring the end of this 'excellent' battleship....
The Yamato was the Japanese version of that. Large, powerful, robust, but sorely lacking in updated firecontrol, a thorough anti-aircraft suite...
Bismarck got hit in the rudder by a torp and it jammed it so it could only turn back to the brits.
do u really think the yamato lacked in AA defense? look at this
HIJMS YAMATO SECONDARY ARMAMENT
6 × 15.5 cm [155mm] (6.1 inch) (2×3)
24 × 12.7 cm [127mm] {5 inch} (12×2)
162 × 25 mm AA (52 x 3, 6×1)
4 × 13 mm AA (2×2)
(n turrets with n guns each) [# of turrets x # of guns on each]
compare that to the USS Iowa
USS IOWA (BB-61) SECONDARY ARMAMENT
20 5 in (127 mm) 38 cal. Mark 12 guns
80 40 mm 56 cal. anti-aircraft guns (Yamato has 162 25mm and 6 155mm, Iowa has 80 40mm)
49 20 mm 70 cal. anti-aircraft guns
-
Originally posted by Pannono
Bismarck got hit in the rudder by a torp and it jammed it so it could only turn back to the brits.
do u really think the yamato lacked in AA defense? look at this
HIJMS YAMATO SECONDARY ARMAMENT
6 × 15.5 cm [155mm] (6.1 inch) (2×3)
24 × 12.7 cm [127mm] {5 inch} (12×2)
162 × 25 mm AA (52 x 3, 6×1)
4 × 13 mm AA (2×2)
(n turrets with n guns each) [# of turrets x # of guns on each]
compare that to the USS Iowa
USS IOWA (BB-61) SECONDARY ARMAMENT
20 5 in (127 mm) 38 cal. Mark 12 guns
80 40 mm 56 cal. anti-aircraft guns (Yamato has 162 25mm and 6 155mm, Iowa has 80 40mm)
49 20 mm 70 cal. anti-aircraft guns
Yes I know what happened to the Bismarck. It still doesn't change the fact that, in essence, the Bismarck was crippled by 1 14" shell and 1 torpedo. Hardly the stuff of 'excellent battleship' criteria.
As for the AA suit yes, the Yamato's was insuffecient until LATE in the war and even then it's AA coordination was woefully lacking. You can't just go by number of guns, you have to look at the entire suit; gun type, numbers and coordination of gunfire. The 6" secondaries of the Yamato's were hardly AA capable and the 5" guns of the Iowa's were dual purpose, surface and anti-aircraft. But, if you want a more detail analysis of the secondary armaments of the main BB's of WWII you should look at this: Assessment of secondary armament of WWII BB's. (http://www.combinedfleet.com/b_second.htm)
-
it wasnt crippled, it could have continued its mission while leaking oil
what if they did not try to turn to evade torp
what if they launched their planes
what if they fired at Hood and Prince of Wales sooner
so many "what ifs"
if Bismarck wasnt hit by Prince of Wales, brits might have lost Battle of Britain because it would be sittin out there rapin the supply convoys
-
I suppose to divert this topic we can all agree that the only reason the Bismark sunk was because the crew scuttled the ship.
-
Hijacked topic?
-
Originally posted by WMDnow
Battleship would be like the ones we have now.
(8000lb to kill)
We have cruisers, not BB's in game.
Oh lawdy lawd, please let summer be over soon. Im tired of these summer squeakers being retarded. (Apr+ registered)
-
Originally posted by Serenity
Exactly. No surface engagements means no BB 63 :D
Using your logic there should be no aircraft in AH2..no surface
engagements. You rarely see two aircraft taxiing toward each other in
mortal combat :rolleyes: :D
-
Originally posted by Denholm
I suppose to divert this topic we can all agree that the only reason the Bismark sunk was because the crew scuttled the ship.
Whether or not Bismarck was scuttled isn't relevant. She was a burned-out hulk, dead in the water and doomed... As to whether Brit torpedoes sank her or if it was a scuttling charge, she was already destroyed.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Originally posted by Pannono
it wasnt crippled, it could have continued its mission while leaking oil
The loss of the forward fuel bunker and the flooding of 2,000 tons of water into her fo'c'sle limited her speed to 20 knots to conserve fuel and a huge fuel oil slick trailing behind her pointing directly at her giving her position away...and she wasn't crippled. Rrrrrrrriiiiiiiiiiggggggghhhh hhhhht.
There are no 'what if's' when a single 14" shell hit forces you to port for repairs and in that return to port a single torpedo seals your doom.
-
Originally posted by Meatwad
We have cruisers, not BB's in game.
Oh lawdy lawd, please let summer be over soon. Im tired of these summer squeakers being retarded. (Apr+ registered)
How the hell am I supposed to know that? I have been playing AH for 6 months, stfu.
-
Originally posted by WMDnow
How the hell am I supposed to know that? I have been playing AH for 6 months, stfu.
LOLZ, yeah meatwad STFU n00b!1!!1!!!eleventyone!1!!!!!
-
:rofl
I need to start throwing my catches on the shore to rot instead of releasing them back into the wild. They seem to be reproducing too quickly
-
Originally posted by DiabloTX
The loss of the forward fuel bunker and the flooding of 2,000 tons of water into her fo'c'sle limited her speed to 20 knots to conserve fuel and a huge fuel oil slick trailing behind her pointing directly at her giving her position away...and she wasn't crippled. Rrrrrrrriiiiiiiiiiggggggghhhh hhhhht.
There are no 'what if's' when a single 14" shell hit forces you to port for repairs and in that return to port a single torpedo seals your doom.
They could have still sat out there rapin the transports waitin for a repair ship
FYI, it was hit by 3 shells, and the torp hit the UNARMORED rudder, which jammed it 12.5 degrees. If they hadn't tried to turn to evade it, they might have got within range of Luftwaffe air support in France before the Brits got within range. The torps weren't even scratching the paint on the main armor.
-
I suggested this back in January, and I'm sure I'm not the first one to suggest something like this. Granted it will probably never be implemented, we cant get some of the current aggrivations addressed (maps etc).
http://forums.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=197547
-
Originally posted by Pannono
They could have still sat out there rapin the transports waitin for a repair ship
FYI, it was hit by 3 shells, and the torp hit the UNARMORED rudder, which jammed it 12.5 degrees. If they hadn't tried to turn to evade it, they might have got within range of Luftwaffe air support in France before the Brits got within range. The torps weren't even scratching the paint on the main armor.
A REPAIR ship? Where do you dream this stuff up? Name me ONE Kriegsmarine rapair ship. The RN knew the general vacinity of the Bismarck and could have easily re-routed the convoys around it.
As again, I know what happened to the Bismarck, 3 hits - 2 superficial and 1 mission-ending 'lucky' shot. Funny how any hits are 'lucky' when it's a critical hit. Battleships were designed for 2 things: taking hits and delivering them. As for the torpedo, as has been stated before, there are no 'what if's' when a single conventional weapon of modest delivery can affectively render useless an expensive and vital military asset. Torpedoes weren't a new invention at that time. However, air delivery of the torpedo was and Bismarck's lack of an affective AA suit shows how vulnerable she was. Her rudders should have been better placed and better protected. Also, had she a 4-screw design vs. the 3-screw design she would have been able to better steer via engines with the rudder damage. However, since she was designed with 3-screws, a VERY questionable design choice, her fate was sealed.
-
they still could have launched their planes to kill the swordfish, they could have fired on hood sooner, i could go on and on about what they could have done
-
Are you saing that the hit on the hood magazine and the hit on bismarcks rudder were well aimed intentional hits and not lucky diablo?
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
Are you saing that the hit on the hood magazine and the hit on bismarcks rudder were well aimed intentional hits and not lucky diablo?
Nilsen, for the most part, yes I do, especially the hit on the Hood. Remember the Bismarck straddled the Hood very early in the encounter. Battleships are DESIGNED to be tough, even battlecruisers though not to the extent BB's are. A hit was inevitable. A hit to the magazine, either 15" or smaller shell storage, was a forgone conclusion, Jutland showed this. The RN just never took the time to bring Hood back in for it's armor improvements that was planned for it. It was no more a lucky hit than what the PoW did to the Bismarck. Fire Control had advanced mightly between the world wars. A hit was a given, it was up to the naval designers to cope with this inevitability. Unfortunately for the Hood, that was 20 years too late.
A BB's broadside was designed to be like a stupendously large shotgun blast; at least you hope one shell hits from the broadside but the more the better. If you want to talk about luck, you might want to look up the Warspite's record of the longest hit from a BB to a target at sea. Remember that was an aimed shot as well, very little luck played a part in it.
Also remember the rear gunner of the swordfish that dropped the torpedo was the one that the rear gunner actually told the pilot when to release by hanging over the side and visually aiming. Was it lucky? To a great extent yes it was. Was it aimed and calculated? Yes, to some extent it was as well. Who's to say they weren't aiming for the rudders, or that the rear gunner was thinking the same thing. I think some luck and some skill played a part in this.
But the bottom line is this: One 14" shell crippled the Bismarck in terms of mission completion. The lack of a concentrated AA suit finished her. Not one, zero, nil, none, nada of the swordfish were shot down during all of the attacks, at least none that I know of. She was a grand ship, a mighty ship, but not without her glaring achilles heel(s) much like the Hood.
-
Originally posted by Pannono
they still could have launched their planes to kill the swordfish, they could have fired on hood sooner, i could go on and on about what they could have done
Give me a break. What were the Arado's to do? Maneuver in FRONT of the swordfish and hope the rear gunner had a clean shot? Ever launched a seaplane from a ship lateral to it's movement while the ship is at flank speed? Not going to happen.
As for firing on the Hood sooner what would have that accomplished? A quicker death? By keeping the Hood at long distance the Bismarck exploited the Hood's main armor defeciency: plunging fire.
Go ahead with the what ifs...they're pointless in the face of history and it's facts.
-
Originally posted by DiabloTX
The lack of a concentrated AA suit finished her. Not one, zero, nil, none, nada of the swordfish were shot down during all of the attacks, at least none that I know of. She was a grand ship, a mighty ship, but not without her glaring achilles heel(s) much like the Hood.
If I remember correctly, the swordfish were flying below the firing horizon of the Bismarcks' AA guns. Though Its possible that my mind is making things up...
Not that I dont disagree with you. The Bismark had a fatal flaw in its rudder. But, it was also human error. It was not refueled along with the Prinz Eugen, and was thus forced below full speed in its retreat back to France. If it could have gotten within range of Luftwaffe aircraft faster, it may have been saved...
Then again, if it hadnt hit the Hood's magazines, it may have been sunk in the North Atlantic.
-
Originally posted by DiabloTX
Give me a break. What were the Arado's to do? Maneuver in FRONT of the swordfish and hope the rear gunner had a clean shot? Ever launched a seaplane from a ship lateral to it's movement while the ship is at flank speed? Not going to happen.
As for firing on the Hood sooner what would have that accomplished? A quicker death? By keeping the Hood at long distance the Bismarck exploited the Hood's main armor defeciency: plunging fire.
Go ahead with the what ifs...they're pointless in the face of history and it's facts.
if they fired sooner, they might have sunk hood before they were hit
Arado Ar 196
1 × 7.92 mm (0.31 in) MG 15 machine gun
1 × 7.92 mm (0.31 in) MG 17 machine gun
2 × 20 mm MG FF cannons
2 × 50 kg (110 lb) bombs
would have ripped swordfish apart
-
Originally posted by Pannono
if they fired sooner, they might have sunk hood before they were hit
Arado Ar 196
1 × 7.92 mm (0.31 in) MG 15 machine gun
1 × 7.92 mm (0.31 in) MG 17 machine gun
2 × 20 mm MG FF cannons
2 × 50 kg (110 lb) bombs
would have ripped swordfish apart
Regardless if when the Hood was sunk the PoW would still have pressed her attack, in fact that's exactly what she did. You can't say, nor can I, if things would have been any different. Why do you proceed with 'what if's'? It doesn't change what actually happened. You can come up with as many as you want, it will not change ANYTHING.
Well, let's do this. What if the PoW was actually the KG5? What if Hood was really the Rodney or Nelson?
The Arado's wouldn't have been launched if you would have bothered to read my reply. The swordfish attacked far too quickly for the Bismarck to ready for air ops.
But keep dreaming. Facts are facts. The Bismarck was done in by design flaws.
-
BTW Pannono, those 20mm's of the Arado's would have been next to useless against the fabric covered swordfish. Just ask the Emil driver's from their experience's with hurricane's during the Battle of Britain.
-
ok next time i see one ill ask
the brits lost contact with the bismarck, then 24 hrs later a PBY spotted it. u think they would have readied the planes
-
Readied the planes for what exactly? Sounds like you think you're smarter than professional sailors. Oh wait, you are, my bad. Carry on.
-
readied the planes for launch u idiot
-
Originally posted by Pannono
readied the planes for launch u idiot
Now who's being the idiot. You obviously don't know jack about naval operations. Go back to your ghey "I wanna helicopter" thread and stay out of this one.
-
the heli saw service in WWII so we should get it
-
Originally posted by Pannono
SQUEAK
just cause it saw use don't mean we are going to get it.
this thread is about battle ships anyway... not the helicopter :furious
;)
-
Originally posted by DiabloTX
[BGo back to your ghey "I wanna helicopter" thread and stay out of this one. [/B]
idiot
diablo brought up the helo
-
Originally posted by Pannono
:cry :cry :cry
-
respect your elders kid
-
The Iowa class battleships would make the most sense.......
Maybe making diffrent sorts of fleets could solve the problem.....
Ex: 3 Destroyers, 2 Cruisers and a Battleship (30% chance) or say 1 CV, 3 destroyers and 2 cruisers (60% chance) or maybe 1 Battleship, 1 cv, 3 Destroyers and a Heavy Crusier (10% chance).
All i gotta say..........:)
-
Originally posted by 1HAMMER1
I know this is "Aces High" and the primary objective of the game is WWII flight simulation but we have a detailed section of ground vehicles in which several members play exclusivly.
Up till Midway, battleships were the main focus of Naval Surface Warfare and could be used in game for everything from shelling towns and fields, defense and offense of Carrier Strike Groups and bases, to forming up for epic sea battles. Just a Sailors wish for the wishlist.
~Doc
100% agreed =)
-
Originally posted by Pannono
idiot
diablo brought up the helo
Here ya go. This will make you feel better
(http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o109/AHmeatwad/ritalin_o.jpg)
-
yeah battleships