Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: zoozoo on November 09, 2007, 06:51:54 PM
-
How bout submarines? People find that they suck with both planes and gv`s. Maybe something new for them to master =/. With all this open water just for one cv it seems like a waste to me. Enough getting killed by a plane with ords in your gv. Cv`s wont be only targeted by bombers now and submarines can help sink them. and also 2 submarines added to a CV fleet for protection. Thets take this to the next level. This is the future of AH2 boys....:aok
-
How bout submarines? People find that they suck with both planes and gv`s. Maybe something new for them to try =/. With all this open water just for one cv it seems like a waste to me. Enough getting killed by a plane with ords for your your gv. Cv`s wont be only targeted by bombers now and submarines can help sink them. and also 2 submarines added to a CV fleet for protection. Thets take this to the next level. This is the future of AH2 boys.... :aok
-
No,No, No, and No. No submariens because you would have to have 3D featurs under the water also, so NO.
-
Nice double post.
-
Originally posted by Bosco123
No,No, No, and No. No submariens because you would have to have 3D featurs under the water also, so NO.
Too bad that HiTech doesn't share your opinion. BTW- you ever get that P-51 over 350mph yet?
ack-ack
-
Sweet, another matched set of duplicate threads.
-
Originally posted by SpikesX
Nice double post.
:aok
-
Originally posted by Ack-Ack
Too bad that HiTech doesn't share your opinion. BTW- you ever get that P-51 over 350mph yet?
ack-ack
LOL:aok :aok
-
Anybody think these will be closed?
donkey
-
NOOOO NOOOO! ZOOZOO FOUND THE BB FORUMS! DAM IT:furious
-
IN
-
Just a reminder kids
(http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/ee225/AWMac/Squeak.jpg)
-
HTC has mentioned adding Submarines in the future
....until then, THE BEST Submarine Sim on the Planet is Ubisoft's "Silent Hunter Wolves of the Pacific" ....be sure to patch it though ...the out of the box version is buggy
-
make sure to ask Zoo about the 17 kills he got in frame one of DGS.
-
lol
-
.....And i though i was the dumbest person on the BBS. :confused:
-
Originally posted by Wes14
.....And i though i was the dumbest person on the BBS. :confused:
You have been replaced until the current dumbest person gets PNG'ed. :D
This PNG will be taking place within the next 2 weeks.
-
Originally posted by SpikesX
You have been replaced until the current dumbest person gets PNG'ed. :D
This PNG will be taking place within the next 2 weeks.
i dunno spikes.. another mook might jump in and take that spot as soon as this one is gone. :D
-
Originally posted by zoozoo
How bout submarines? People find that they suck with both planes and gv`s. Maybe something new for them to try =/. With all this open water just for one cv it seems like a waste to me. Enough getting killed by a plane with ords for your your gv. Cv`s wont be only targeted by bombers now and submarines can help sink them. and also 2 submarines added to a CV fleet for protection. Thets take this to the next level. This is the future of AH2 boys.... :aok
Can anyone name a CV in WW-ll that was sunk by a submarine? One that wasnt abandoned first?
Also in the war that AH is based on submarines, and I call them boats, were nonentities as far as CVBG defenders are concerned. They didn't have the speed, the detection technologies, or the weapons to deal with other submarines.
Its true the Japanese used subs as scouts for their battle groups. And did so rather stupidly because had they used them to raid maritime commerce they might have actually had an impact on the war. The truth is WW-ll subs were not very effective against capitol ships. They were at their best, as defined by Yank and German boats, when used against merchant ships in efforts to strangle a maritime dependant enemy. Further every nation basically ended the war with the same types of boats they started with, with some minor improvements. Truth is air power emerged as the King of WW-ll naval operations. Not boats.
Yes there were the German Elektro-boats but they were basically a novelty and had no impact on the war. Nor to the best of knowledge did they ever sink anything.
So if AH were to model submarines they would have to do so under WW-ll limitations. Which means they would be very small threats against CVBGs and no threat against each other.
It was air power that truly threatened capitol ships in WW-ll. Not submarines. The only way to make submarines effective in AH, and worth spending time in, would be to model them as non-realistic boats that never existed in the actual war. And in my opinion that would cheapen the game and be disrespectful to the men and woman who sacrificed in WW-ll.
-
Originally posted by WMLute
make sure to ask Zoo about the 17 kills he got in frame one of DGS.
Lol.. checked the logs, thought you were serious for a moment... he upped an LVT and an Il2 :rofl How were they even enabled?
-
"Can anyone name a CV in WW-ll that was sunk by a submarine? One that wasnt abandoned first?"
http://www.uboat.net/men/aces/warships.htm
-
A japanese sub shot up CV-16 during the war and reported her sunk...:p
Then they claimed she was sunk again by airplanes... Then some torpedo planes tried to sink it again... and they once again said she was sunk.
Then some Kamikaze's tried and reported her sunk... how I don't know but they did.
Must have been lag.:D
-
shinano
http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/sh-fornv/japan/japsh-s/shinano.htm
-
Ok I forgot about the Brit CVs sunk in the early war, most of them in the Med. I still stand by my staement that WW-ll submarines were a far bigger threat to merchant shipping then they were to capitol ships. Anyway I wasnt making a definitive statement, more like asking a question.
-
Originally posted by hitech 8-10-2004
Subs are somthing Ive always wanted to put in the game. My father is a WWII submariner. USS Carbanaro
Basicly how they would work, is simalar to how convoys and gunners work. You wouldn't just be able to launch a sub then have to drive it for hours to it's destination. What would happen is a subs way points would be set. They would drive themslefs to where you wanted. Once on some one could take control of one of the subs.
Other things also need to be written for subs to be implemented namly sonar for surface ships and depth charges.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
Can anyone name a CV in WW-ll that was sunk by a submarine? One that wasnt abandoned first?
Also in the war that AH is based on submarines, and I call them boats, were nonentities as far as CVBG defenders are concerned. They didn't have the speed, the detection technologies, or the weapons to deal with other submarines.
Its true the Japanese used subs as scouts for their battle groups. And did so rather stupidly because had they used them to raid maritime commerce they might have actually had an impact on the war. The truth is WW-ll subs were not very effective against capitol ships. They were at their best, as defined by Yank and German boats, when used against merchant ships in efforts to strangle a maritime dependant enemy. Further every nation basically ended the war with the same types of boats they started with, with some minor improvements. Truth is air power emerged as the King of WW-ll naval operations. Not boats.
Yes there were the German Elektro-boats but they were basically a novelty and had no impact on the war. Nor to the best of knowledge did they ever sink anything.
So if AH were to model submarines they would have to do so under WW-ll limitations. Which means they would be very small threats against CVBGs and no threat against each other.
It was air power that truly threatened capitol ships in WW-ll. Not submarines. The only way to make submarines effective in AH, and worth spending time in, would be to model them as non-realistic boats that never existed in the actual war. And in my opinion that would cheapen the game and be disrespectful to the men and woman who sacrificed in WW-ll.
USS Wasp, before she ever launched a plane in battle in the Pacific. Saratoga was put out of action by a sub, Hornet was torpedoed by a sub I believe. Yorktown was finished off by a Sub.
That being said, this is Aces High not Aces of the Deep :)
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
USS Wasp, before she ever launched a plane in battle in the Pacific. Saratoga was put out of action by a sub, Hornet was torpedoed by a sub I believe. Yorktown was finished off by a Sub.
That being said, this is Aces High not Aces of the Deep :)
I forgot about Wasp. But if I remember right our own ships put her down. But technically your correct. There were several Hornets in WW-ll and If I remember right the first one was sunk by aircraft delivered torpedoes. Yorktown, of course, doesn't count cause she was abandoned. Saratoga did suffer fairly minor damage from a boat launched torpedo. She wasnt out for long tho.
Im assuming any U-boat would be modeled German cause they are the ones who really wrote the book. So maybe a type VllC cause they were used the most. It had a surfaced speed of about 18 knots and a submerged speed of about 8 knots. You'd need a week to get the thing anywheres. The CVBGs probably wheel around at 30 knots. And then you'd have to remodel their escorts to hunt subs.
The CVBGs are terrific additions to the game. The subs?? I think a waste of time. Thanks to all for refreshing my memories some.
-
There was Ark Royal, sunk by U-81 in the Med.
Edit - There was also the IJN Shinano, sunk by Archerfish in 1945 while undertaking sea trials.
-
One possibly side effect I'd like to see is water you can sink in.
your plane goes in the drink, it sinks and you got seconds to bail or you die.
-
Originally posted by Murdr
Originally posted by hitech 8-10-2004
Subs are somthing Ive always wanted to put in the game. My father is a WWII submariner. USS Carbanaro
Basicly how they would work, is simalar to how convoys and gunners work. You wouldn't just be able to launch a sub then have to drive it for hours to it's destination. What would happen is a subs way points would be set. They would drive themslefs to where you wanted. Once on some one could take control of one of the subs.
Other things also need to be written for subs to be implemented namly sonar for surface ships and depth charges.
HiTech
(http://www.usscarbonero.com/337-442r.jpg)
(http://www.usscarbonero.com/crew453r.jpg)
ack-ack
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
I forgot about Wasp. But if I remember right our own ships put her down. But technically your correct. There were several Hornets in WW-ll and If I remember right the first one was sunk by aircraft delivered torpedoes. Yorktown, of course, doesn't count cause she was abandoned. Saratoga did suffer fairly minor damage from a boat launched torpedo. She wasnt out for long tho.
Im assuming any U-boat would be modeled German cause they are the ones who really wrote the book. So maybe a type VllC cause they were used the most. It had a surfaced speed of about 18 knots and a submerged speed of about 8 knots. You'd need a week to get the thing anywheres. The CVBGs probably wheel around at 30 knots. And then you'd have to remodel their escorts to hunt subs.
The CVBGs are terrific additions to the game. The subs?? I think a waste of time. Thanks to all for refreshing my memories some.
Saratoga was torpedoed twice by Japanese Submarines. First in January 42 and then again in August 42. It put her out of action both times at critical points in the Pacific war.
I was incorrect on Hornet. The same time the Wasp was torpedoed, a second Japanese sub had fired a spread at the Hornet but missed. Wasp was a gutted wreck when it was finished off by a US Destroyer. The Torpedos that missed Hornet hit the USS North Carolina and a US Destroyer.
Yorktown was in the process of being towed and was still believed salvagable when the I-168 fired it's torpedo's into her, sealing Yorktown's fate. Yorktown was not abandoned when it was hit by the Sub.
-
submarines.....great .....then you can get ho'd by shamu....
-
It is true that the actual number of CV’s and other capital ships sunk during WWII by submersibles is small compared losses to aircraft (not counting escorts, which actually suffered quite significant losses). However, the threat of submarine attacks made a huge impact on the operational doctrine for CV and surface battle groups. They were almost never risked in littoral waters, for instance, and seldom operated at night for fear of submarines seeing the deck lighting. It also forced surface combatants to zig-zag constantly, except when launching and recovering aircraft, thereby slowing their strategic speed and mobility.
The fact is, submarines in AH would radically impact carrier operations in the game. Remember that in AH, CVBGs usually steam in close to shore, both to shorten flight times and to allow shore bombardment and amphibious operations. Submarines would have an easy time against an enemy CV fleet that is trolling back and forth off an enemy base (ducks in a barrel, so to speak). The aircraft carrier’s greatest real world asset is its strategic mobility, something neither appreciated nor even applicable in a make-believe world where targets magically rebuilt after 15 to 30 minutes. What it would change in AH is how long a CV could hope to survive once it was committed to assaulting a base. The moment it is spotted off shore, enemy subs would begin to converge like teenagers at a Golden Corral buffet. Indeed, subs would spell the end of amphibious ops in AH in the absence of a massive collaborative effort by players (and how likely is that?).
Another problem for CVBGs is that they currently spawn in a predictable location. Upon spawning, they would then have to run a gauntlet of waiting subs before reaching the relative safety of the open oceans.
In fact, a number of things in AH would have to change to avoid completely unbalancing the game by adding subs. In addition to the obvious need to develop player-controlled ASW assets, sensors, and weapons, fleet spawning would have to be made much more random. Likewise, players would have to maintain continuous control of the helm (and given the ability to take direct control of both helm and speed, versus the current waypoint navigation system) while in close proximity to enemy subs. Finally, specialized fleets would need to become standard in the MAs. There would need to be at least two types of TGs, the CVBG and the AABG, or Amphibious Assault Battle Group. The former would not have either PTs or LVTs enabled, while the latter would of course have not aircraft, since they would not have a CV in attendance. Alternately, you could replace the fleet CV in the AABG with a smaller, slower CVE (escort carrier). The CVE would only have lighter aircraft available, such as the FM2, Seafire, A6M, Dauntless, Kate, and Val. The CVE’s slower speed and shorter flight decks would make operating a heavy fighter nearly impossible anyway.
So you see, it doesn’t matter how many CVs were sunk by subs in real life. It only matters what affect they would have in the artificial environment of AH. I say, “Bring ‘em on!”
-
Whatever the losses of capitol ships to submarines you cant forget to take into account the losses of submarines to capitol ships and they aircraft they operated. It was far in excess to whatever losses the submarines inflicted on warships. Heres the losses of German U-boats during the war. http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/SubLosses/SS_losses-german.html Compare it to the puny list of allied warships sunk by the U-boats.
I still insist I was right in that submarines were "mainly" a threat to merchant shipping.
I agree in AH the boats would be a far bigger threat then they were in real life. But let me ask this? In the game the subs would have to spawn from naval bases right? And then have to traverse long distances on the surface while basically un-piloted right?
So if spotted by aircraft they would be dead meat correct? I dont know Ive never driven a naval ship but its not like anyone is going to sit in one for hours while droning along at 17 knots.
-
Originally posted by Hoffman
A japanese sub shot up CV-16 during the war and reported her sunk...:p
Then they claimed she was sunk again by airplanes... Then some torpedo planes tried to sink it again... and they once again said she was sunk.
Then some Kamikaze's tried and reported her sunk... how I don't know but they did.
Must have been lag.:D
If some Kamikazee reported her sunk... he didn't do his job very well.
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
Whatever the losses of capitol ships to submarines you cant forget to take into account the losses of submarines to capitol ships and they aircraft they operated. It was far in excess to whatever losses the submarines inflicted on warships. Heres the losses of German U-boats during the war. http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/SubLosses/SS_losses-german.html Compare it to the puny list of allied warships sunk by the U-boats.
I still insist I was right in that submarines were "mainly" a threat to merchant shipping.
I agree in AH the boats would be a far bigger threat then they were in real life. But let me ask this? In the game the subs would have to spawn from naval bases right? And then have to traverse long distances on the surface while basically un-piloted right?
So if spotted by aircraft they would be dead meat correct? I dont know Ive never driven a naval ship but its not like anyone is going to sit in one for hours while droning along at 17 knots.
I agree that the biggest impact of subs was their interdiction of the sea lines of communication (SLOC). As for their implementation, I discussed this with HiTech a couple years ago, when he first talked about adding subs. The impression I got was that what would move on the map is a wolfpack of sorts, rather than a single sub. The wolfpack would be navigated in the same manner as a fleet, using waypoints. Once it got near the action, players would spawn an individual Uboat from the pack to drive and fight. He gave no indication of how the wolfpack would travel (on the surface, submerged, or both), nor how it would be attacked. It is safe to assume that it would be vulnerable to attack and distruction (the way the CV is in the CVBG), causing the pack to respawn back at port. Remember however that it would likely be very hard to find out on the open ocean, as there would not be people up-ing aircraft to give the enemy a radar track.
If it were me designing it, I would have it travels nominally on the surface at say 15 knots. When an a/c or PT gets within a certain range, the pack begins to dive, which would take a good couple minutes to do. During that brief window of vulnerability, the pack could be bombed and destroyed. So long as the enemy a/c or PT stays within a certain range, the pack remains submerged and travels at 5 knots. This would allow a way to delay the pack, even if you had insufficient ordnance to kill it.
Alternately, you could represent the sub spawn group as a submarine tender(s) escorted by DEs that would always travel on the surface at 12 to 18 knots. These would be easier to spot from a distance (bigger siluette), but harder to take down because of the ack.
-
Hitech's vision of the sub concept sounds pretty good. Putting a waypoint and zooming to where everyone starts pinpointing where a cv is, would work.
Or just hanging out near a port, to pork a cv.
We'd have to have sub hunter planes circling cv's. And then the pt boats could start dropping depth charges.
-
We didn't forget about the Indianapolis right?
donkey
-
Originally posted by Sabre
...The moment it is spotted off shore, enemy subs would begin to converge like teenagers at a Golden Corral buffet. Indeed, subs would spell the end of amphibious ops in AH in the absence of a massive collaborative effort by players (and how likely is that?)....
Maybe if we perked the subs in the 100-150 point range, we could control the number of subs spawned. As with any of the features of Aces, a good balance of fun, risk, and feasibility can probably be worked out.
-
Originally posted by WMLute
make sure to ask Zoo about the 17 kills he got in frame one of DGS.
Yeah or ask him about the 7 kills he got in the last FSO in which we let him fly in our squad.
-
Originally posted by TOMCAT21
submarines.....great .....then you can get ho'd by shamu....
I was leaning more towards bomb-carrying dolphins.