Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: jimson on December 06, 2013, 01:08:28 PM
-
I wish for a working version of this:
(http://i287.photobucket.com/albums/ll149/jimsom88/akagiss1_zps609b55c0.jpg) (http://s287.photobucket.com/user/jimsom88/media/akagiss1_zps609b55c0.jpg.html)
(http://i287.photobucket.com/albums/ll149/jimsom88/akagiSS_zps0c3e0c80.jpg) (http://s287.photobucket.com/user/jimsom88/media/akagiSS_zps0c3e0c80.jpg.html)
(http://i287.photobucket.com/albums/ll149/jimsom88/ahss40_zpsdf92610e.jpg) (http://s287.photobucket.com/user/jimsom88/media/ahss40_zpsdf92610e.jpg.html)
-
It would be fun to have different kinds of carrier groups represented. Similar to what we have now in the larger maps, some of the groups have the CV, a cruiser, and 4 destroyers. Some have no cruiser, some have fewer destroyers, some have just the CV only.
That would be a good place to have naval groups with NO cv, and just cruisers and destroyers. Use them for support and bring in the ground based aircraft. Also, having Japan, Britian, and US carriers represented would be nice. Ditto for the cruisers and destroyers. :aok
-
Taking off from a britt CV might be very tough.
-
Ark Royal
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/df/HMS_Ark_Royal_h85716.jpg)
-
(http://withfriendship.com/images/d/15638/Japanese-battleship-Yamato-picture.jpg)
(http://latimesphoto.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/fa_619_iowamissouri52_970.jpg)
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/00/Japanese_aircraft_carrier_shokaku_1941.jpg/800px-Japanese_aircraft_carrier_shokaku_1941.jpg)
-
to easy to sink, japan did not have proxie fuse AAA :D
-
to easy to sink, japan did not have proxie fuse AAA :D
Yeah but it's purrty.
And, the proxie fused AAA isn't as important outside the MA.
-
Rather than CV's having #'s, historical names would be superior.
-
:salute how about germen's only aircraft carrier?
-
Incomplete and in dry dock
-
Would love to see RN and IJN CVs. Of course, they're not equivalent in several ways, most notably the lack of twin 5" turrets, armored deck for RN flattops, etc, I'd still love to see this. Heck, it would be cool if the type rotated each time it respawned (though as with most things players could game this). The one we have represented the high-point of CV development in the war, but I'd love to see some of the earlier ones, too. I was always found of the Lexington and Saratogo. Originally laid down as battlecruisers, both was converted into the Navy's first fleet aircraft carriers during construction, to comply with the Washington Naval Treaty of 1922. As such, they were fast and rugged, though initially somewhat weak in the air defense department. However, that was steadily upgraded through the war. In 1942, for example, in late May, her armament consisted of 16 five-inch guns, nine quadruple 1.1-inch gun mounts and 32 Oerlikon 20-millimeter (0.79 in) guns. After the ship was damaged in August 1942, her 1.1-inch gun mounts were replaced by an equal number of quadruple Bofors 40 mm mounts while she was under repair at Pearl Harbor. Her light anti-aircraft armament was also increased to 52 Oerlikon guns at the same time. In January 1944 a number of her 20 mm guns were replaced by more Bofors guns, many of which were in the positions formerly occupied by the ship's boats in the sides of the hull. Saratoga mounted 23 quadruple and two twin 40 mm mountings as well as 16 Oerlikon guns when she completed her refit The Saratoga was one of only three USN CVs that were in service from the beginning to the end of WWII, the Enterprise and Ranger being the other two. She became a dedicated training ship after the war, and in mid-1946, the ship was a target for nuclear weapon tests during Operation Crossroads. She survived the first test with little damage, but was sunk by the second test.
BTW, I'd also love to see Enterprise in AH, as it saw more action and participated in more battles than any other CV in history.
-
An IJN CV would be fine, even for the MA if it's TG had two CA with it and the same hardness as our current CV.
-
My preferred method would be to have Ports/CVs added in threes for each side, on US, on Japanese and one UK. For balance purposes perhaps make the UK carrier much tougher to reflect its armored deck and give the Japanese group a BB (Nagato or Yamato) ahead of the carrier and a Takao CA behind the carrier.
-
My preferred method would be to have Ports/CVs added in threes for each side, on US, on Japanese and one UK. For balance purposes perhaps make the UK carrier much tougher to reflect its armored deck and give the Japanese group a BB (Nagato or Yamato) ahead of the carrier and a Takao CA behind the carrier.
It's a thought (and not to bad a one). It may even be a start, if it sparked more ship to ship interest, for adding a BB type of fleet for each AH national ship set (sans the USSR). That would constitute three types of CV task forces (sorry Germany, Italy and Russia) and the Iowa, King George V, Bismark and Littorio (Russian battleships were antiquated WWI left-overs) added to the Yamato for five types of BB task forces. :cool: (Who will bravely man the Littorio against the Yamato?).
-
I lovers it!!!! BBs should be in the game and all guns should be mannable the DDs have 3 extra 5"s that could be used for killing town and other task groups~ +1 for each of the BBs and the IJN RN CVS maybe even the smaller escort carriers?
In the TGs with BBs have an escort carrier with 2 CCs and 6DDs
TGs with CV 1CC 8DDs
BB TGs would be great for field suppression and GV landings (M4s M3s M8s Jeeps ect...)
CV TGs for aerial assaults. :)
-
+1