Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: lazs2 on October 09, 2002, 08:40:29 AM
-
Ok.. haven't hashed this one over in a while but... with all the new guys and with the old guys getting in touch with their feminine side and getting oh so much more timid...
We need to toughen up the CV's.. They are often times the site of the only good fite in the entire arena but...
their life expectancy is extremely short. Some "helpful" attention starved twit will destroy either the CV. And proudly announce his "accomplishment" to The dozens of guys that were merrilly furballing away there.... the furballers will mill around for another 10-20 minutes fighting over the one or two planes still up or, in desperation, shoot at a Pt boat or two. Pitiful.
Most times, so far as I can see... the CV is of no threat to the "strat". It is no threat to anything except the other CV or the field it is near. It is so slow that it is easy to keep track of and if it ever does become a threat... well.... maybe more than a suiced p47 or p38 should be needed to take it out.
I don't think that adding a CV and a few escorts to each group and/or making the CV's at least twice as tough would be out of the question. I can't really see how that would affect the gameplay of the (cough) "strat" guys but it would increase the fun of a number of players.
lazs
-
Awwwwe...someone took Lazs ball away again.
-
This is an incredibly pissant discussion.
-
exactly rip.. I don't mind that so much as I mind the EASE of which they did it.
lazs
-
Lasz,
have you tried UnrealTournament? Might be exactly what you are looking for!
Litjan, 9./JG54 "Gruenherz"
-
I think CV is too tough, and that is unfair. For example, spit I pilots has less chances to kill it with their .303s, than tiffie pilot with 2000lb and 4 hispanos. So, to make fleet political correct, make it 10lb, so anyone can kill it.
-
janov... have you looked into some of the board games they have for WWII? maybe everquest might be more your style?
lazs
-
I'm not sure exactly how this has happened and to be completely honest, it scares me somewhat, but..........I agree with Lazs regarding this point.
When my squad can decide to load heavy and make one pass on the CV, sinking it, that's kinda easy.
I believe that not only would we enjoy more of a challenge, but the furball guys would benefit as well.
Forget about that cross country putz.....you've got serious work to be done here!!!
:)
-
Simple. Only award ship kill to a pilot that lands safely.
-
Originally posted by Turbot
Simple. Only award ship kill to a pilot that lands safely.
people don't kill cv's for the points. there's much more to be earned killing the low carrier planes who are trying to jabo the base.
-
Originally posted by Shane
people don't kill cv's for the points. there's much more to be earned killing the low carrier planes who are trying to jabo the base.
Perhaps true for you, but otherwise this runs contrary to what those (usually suicide) pilots say on channel one. Typical reply "I get major points for killing CV's" or some such.
-
Originally posted by Turbot
Simple. Only award ship kill to a pilot that lands safely.
Simple? It will not stop cv's from being suicide attacked. Because people who jabo cv do not care about scores anyway, or they would take attacker and bomb enemy factories surrounded with friendly fields with a minimum risk for their belowed scores. :)
-
Wasn't the CV just softened in 1.09 from 13K to 8K needed to sink it?
-
Originally posted by Fariz
Simple? It will not stop cv's from being suicide attacked. Because people who jabo cv do not care about scores anyway, or they would take attacker and bomb enemy factories surrounded with friendly fields with a minimum risk for their belowed scores. :)
It is easy to kill CV and land, if anyone cared to learn to play the game.
-
Originally posted by Mickey1992
Wasn't the CV just softened in 1.09 from 13K to 8K needed to sink it?
Actually I think it was toughened from 6K to 8K.
I agree that the CV must be toughened also, but not for the Lazs reasons. Increasing the toughness of the CV should probably be directly linked to the increasing amount of players in the MA. It is very easy now to kill the CV with the amount of available JABO pilots in the air, in combination with bomber groups.
1 bomber group (3 plane box) should be able to sink the CV all by itself with a perfect hit and all ordinance on the CV. I don't fly buffs, so what is the maximum amount of ordinance that a bomber group can carry ? That should be the amount of tonnage it should take to sink the CV.
-
Originally posted by Turbot
It is easy to kill CV and land, if anyone cared to learn to play the game.
And can you open me this secret? Film it and send to me please, will apreciate the lesson from someone, who knows the game better :)
-
Originally posted by Fariz
And can you open me this secret? Film it and send to me please, will apreciate the lesson from someone, who knows the game better :)
Will do it tonight, if you seriously wanted it. (Edit to add I wont have 30 friends with me either :) )
-
I've killed the CV and landed before, it was a couple versions ago though.
I agree 1,000,000% with Lazs. To often I find a really nice fight developing between an enemy CV and a friendly base, and it'll get interrupted by one guy that keeps upping a suicide P38 until he gets through. It is plain aggravating, just like people porking the fuel at the enemy base.
I know this may sound stupid or whatever, but for me, the fight IS the only reason I'm there. The fight is not a means to an end (i.e. taking a base) it IS the end.
However, I don't see what point upping the durability of the carrier would have.. the suicide dweebs would just have to die a few more times to knock it out.
-
or take 30 seconds away from ur furballing and take out the ordnances at the base 5 miles away from the carrier.
-
Actually, historically, they were relatively easy to sink. A couple thousand pounders could if not sink them, put them out of commision for months...when you could find them. Here lies the problem. They are real easy to find.
Maybe the problem is that if they are the vehicle to launch LVT's, and they have to get close to shore to do it, maybe thats not what they should be doing.
How about seperate the invasion/bombardment fleet from the carrier groups. I know I'd like to drive a tank down a ramp onto the beach.
A little off the subject, but this morning on tv I saw landing craft crammed full of artillery blasting away like mad otw to the beach.
I'm sure HTC's already thought of things like this, and we'll get there someday.
-
Just make the only way to destroy the cv is to torp it or kill it with anouther cv. Voila ! problem solved everyone happy.
RafBader CO:RRR
-
Once again, the ancient one has started a well thought out and reasonable discussion. I too, think the CV's too easy to sink.
Case in point. Twice last night, as dozens of folks were enjoying themselves in naval air warfare simulation, some numbnuts' (thats plural) suicides the CV with Typhoons and Peee51's. Once the opposing CV, once ours.
Take out the ordinance at the close fields? What you are forgetting is that not only will these suiciders come from close in, they'll fly for freakin' ever just to suicide a CV.
-
I completely agree with Lazs.
Facts:
No American or Japanese CV was ever sunk by land-based aircraft.
No American or Japanese CV was ever damaged by heavy bombers
With few exceptions, AP and SAP bombs where not available to land-based fighter units.
AP and SAP bombs were commonly carried by naval bombers, but only on rare occasions by fighters.
HE bombs were generally ineffective against warships with even minimal armor protection. Using delay-action fuzed, HE bombs proved highly ineffective due to the light-weight bomb case rupturing before the delayed fuze detonated the charge.
To reduce the level of suicide jabos, there are five things that can be done.
1) Reduce the effectiveness of HE bombs to just 25% of their current value against ships. This will require 32k of HE ord to sink the CV (although 8k of AP or SAP will still do the job).
2) AP/SAP bombs will only be available to naval bomber aircraft. This makes naval aircraft the more effective type for killing ships.
3) All bomb fusing set at 2k altitude minimum for attacking ships and structures. No more flying straight into the ship or hanger, releasing the bombs at the last second. If you release below 2k, bombs will not detonate.
4) No perk points will be awarded for bombing ships or structures unless sortie is landed.
5) Introduce CVE TGs to supplement the CV groups. Aircraft restrictions shall allow for only FM-2/F4F and TBM aircraft to be available on CVEs.
The net result is that the most effective anti-warship aircraft will be dive-bombers and torpedo bombers, as God intended. :D It will also require jabo pilots to develop minimal bombing skills.
Implementing this or a similar solution will allow Carrier Task Groups to assume their proper role without being destroyed in a manner utterly opposed to historical reality. As it stands now, CVs are generally a non-factor due to the ease with which they can be sunk.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Hell, just make them indestructible.
-
Remove the suicide idiots and the problem is solved. The CV can still be sunk fairly easily by those who actually TRY to learn how to do it and survive, but they really wouldn't be a problem. No idea how you can curb the suicide dorks without making the CV way too tough.
-
I like Widewing's ideas of adding AP bombs for naval aircraft, and hardening the ships to HE.
Also, add a couple of troop transports to the fleet. The strat players could just sink them to disable troops, then safely ignore the fleet.
Wouldn't hurt to add a couple more gun batteries to shoreline bases to defend against vultching fleets.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Hell, just make them indestructible.
Rip may be on to something here….
Suppose CVs are indestructible, however, they can be rendered “out of service” once their damaged minimum has been met. Then, say it takes 30 minutes to “come back up” but if their port is captured they never come back up. By “come back up”, I mean not able to launch (but still recover) aircraft, nor spawn LVTs or PTs. Their 5” guns cannot fire, but 40mm and 20mm tripleA
is still functioning. Speed is reduced to 50%. A similar rule set should apply to the heavy cruiser as well.
This means that as long as the port is retained, CV down time will never exceed 30 minutes, and they do not have respawn at the port. This will eliminate travel time, keeping the CVs in the fight.
Thoughts?
My regards,
Widewing
-
Originally posted by Turbot
Will do it tonight, if you seriously wanted it. (Edit to add I wont have 30 friends with me either :) )
Explaining will be enough. I still puzzled how attack on 8000lb tough carries which protected with fighters, tons of acks and flak, some of them manned, can be taken easier or more profitable than attack on town which has 50 buildings; 8 acks which can be destroyed, and has a total more perks than the whole fleet. Probably AH has some bug you exploits?
-
Originally posted by Fariz
Explaining will be enough. I still puzzled how attack on 8000lb tough carries which protected with fighters, tons of acks and flak, some of them manned, can be taken easier or more profitable than attack on town which has 50 buildings; 8 acks which can be destroyed, and has a total more perks than the whole fleet. Probably AH has some bug you exploits?
I did not correctly understand your question. I thought you were saying people had to suicide to kill a CV.
-
Originally posted by Tumor
Remove the suicide idiots and the problem is solved. The CV can still be sunk fairly easily by those who actually TRY to learn how to do it and survive, but they really wouldn't be a problem. No idea how you can curb the suicide dorks without making the CV way too tough.
I feel this is the true problem.
-
Originally posted by Apache
Case in point. Twice last night, as dozens of folks were enjoying themselves in naval air warfare simulation, some numbnuts' (thats plural) suicides the CV with Typhoons and Peee51's. Once the opposing CV, once ours.
And what makes you think that your fun in furballing is worth more, than their fun in sinking the fleet? Not all people wants same thing from this game, and not all people think exactly as you do. Make one step out of your personality, and try to understand this. In my understanding AH shall strive for finding a ballance to be apropriate for many people who has a different vision of what game is like, and what it shall be like.
I think that 8000lb is a fine figure for a fleet. It gives quite long furballs, and also do not make cv a super weapon from a strat perspective.
-
Originally posted by Turbot
I did not correctly understand your question. I thought you were saying people had to suicide to kill a CV.
Ok, I got it. Still, if you know the way to sink a fleet easily and alone with a small risk, let me know please. I found it is a very hard task for even a very expirienced attacker or bomber pilot.
Torpedo attacks works bad if you are not in a big group, or if you not go to close to fleet and thus risking to be shot by acks. Even then fleet can avoid them, because torpedo are not fast. They are very hard to aim also. Topredo boats and planes are a game of luck mostly, with a very low percentage of kills to the % of deployed torpedo.
Bombers could effectively kill fleets from big alt before, but with new aims they are not effective unless you are low enough to be a target for acks.
Only way for a jabo to get his load on cv without much risk is to get alt, dive and drop bombs from a 5-7k, where then he has a chance to avoid acks without much risk. Problem that fleet rebuilds itself, so you get eggs, climb to 10k, dive bomb, go to field, and there you need some time to climb again. Usually in time you get enough blow to ship it rebuilds itself and it starts again. And any pilot who man flak at cv can get you any moment when you dive.
The way I get fleet is small mission of 10 tiffies with 1 or 2 cover planes. You get them at about 10-12k, then chop throttle, and divebomb in pack (so acks are firing not at a single aircraft and chances to survive are higher) then drop eggs at 7-4k, and go away. Usually if pilots are expirienced loss ratio is very low, 0-2 from 12, if unexpirienced pilots and manned flaks it can be as high as 50-70%. I personally always instruct pilots that mission is not suicide, and instruct them how to stay alive.
Again, for a sigle plane killing cv which is not softened already and staying alive is very hard. If you know the way to make it easy let me know.
-
Originally posted by Fariz
Where I said that? All thread is here, show me pls.
It was just a language problem (I am assuming English is not your first language). Don't worry about it. My confusion was from your reply ("can you open me this secret?").
-
Originally posted by Turbot
It was just a language problem (I am assuming English is not your first language). Don't worry about it. My confusion was from your reply ("can you open me this secret?").
It is not, even not a second. Wish I knew it ok, but I am a very bad learner when it comes to languages. :(
-
perk the CV.
ok , whoever sunk lazs CV last night and ruined a good furball and caused this thread, confess.
just wondering lazs , when your in a good furball do you ever land or do you" fly til you die", other furballers can answer also.
44MAG
-
theres no bug fariz its easy as ah hell.
I the Scenario Hostile Shores my flight was assigned to divebomb the enemy cv in 190f8s.
I went off line practiced until I could do it. Then did over and over in the main. 90% without dieing. The last time I sank a cv was with kirin, orel and a few other guys in the AK map. We all upped flew to the cv dropped our bombs sunk it and rtb'd. Guess what no one got killed. Did we cheat, exploit a bug, just get lucky??? Nope.
You may believe its tough but it aint. After watching those typh raids of yours, where it takes 5 augers to kill 1 ack I can understand why you think that. :)
The only thing that will stop suicide dweebs is making the cv undestructable.
-
44 mag.. surviving is not the end all to be all to me. I do survive a lot and I will ditch or land in order to rob someone of a kill if I am damaged (which is most of the time). I have been knwn to auger if a long way from home and out of ammo and have taken no damage.
You can go to the "pilot score" page and type in my name or any other of us notorious furballers to see just how we fly.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Fariz
Bombers could effectively kill fleets from big alt before, but with new aims they are not effective unless you are low enough to be a target for acks.
It is harder to learn, and more of a trouble to do, but bombers are indeed still very effective.
Originally posted by Fariz Only way for a jabo to get his load on cv without much risk is to get alt, dive and drop bombs from a 5-7k, where then he has a chance to avoid acks without much risk.[/b]
This is true. When I was new in Aces High (but experienced from Warbirds) I sunk my first CV in this way.
-
Originally posted by Wotan
theres no bug fariz its easy as ah hell.
I the Scenario Hostile Shores my flight was assigned to divebomb the enemy cv in 190f8s.
I went off line practiced until I could do it. Then did over and over in the main. 90% without dieing. The last time I sank a cv was with kirin, orel and a few other guys in the AK map. We all upped flew to the cv dropped our bombs sunk it and rtb'd. Guess what no one got killed. Did we cheat, exploit a bug, just get lucky??? Nope.
You may believe its tough but it aint. After watching those typh raids of yours, where it takes 5 augers to kill 1 ack I can understand why you think that. :)
The only thing that will stop suicide dweebs is making the cv undestructable.
Look same thread where I explain how we do it usually. You will see not much difference from what you explain.
That "suicide Fariz raids" is a myth. First of all I deack fields alone and easily, in couple path. If stats were available you would see that there are very few people who has more acks killed during tour. Second, I plan my raids the way, that same people get 2 or 3 fields often with refueling. It will never be possible if they suicided on first field. And last, who you sink will join the missions, if they died or were ordered to suicide? People are not crazy, in most part then want action, to get result and to land it so every one can see it. And loses to acks are very low, and normally comes to the unexpirienced pilots.
Sometime I make a raid which are suicidal though, or which I know that death rate will be very high. It is not happen any often, may be 1 time for 20 or 30 missions, because normally you do not need to put it all on risk by dieing. Plane which stay alive and get their targets are more worthy than planes which get their target but die.
Unfortunatly I have no stats available for my missions. I think that kill/loss ration is 3:1 to my mission favour, though it is something hard to check. Normally kills comes from vulch, though getting low level planes with energy advantage is not hard either. I know exactly that my mission success rate is over 85%.
I still do not understand where that suicide talks are comming from. I think, one of a main reasons is a defenders frustration, which has no way to opose the organized raid, and prefer to explain it by a dweebiness of attackers than by their better organization or something. Nothing new, you get insults more often, than . Second is probably raids of newbies, who gather other newbies, and all die in acks.
Anyway, I do not play for strat for a quite long time, and made total of 5-7 missions for the last month. So I find it very funny that people keep jumping on me on channel 1 every time when bishops mission strike anything, blaming in every sort of dweebiness :)
-
Fariz--
Keep in mind that when one or two guys sink a carrier, they're often depriving 20 or 30 people of their fun. It's a numbers thing.
Of course, the carriers wouldn't be becessary if the bases in the rest of the arena were closer (distant bases promotes timid flying), but that's a different issue :)
J_A_B
-
Originally posted by Fariz
And can you open me this secret? Film it and send to me please, will apreciate the lesson from someone, who knows the game better :)
Will do Fariz
-
Fariz, JAB said it better than I. Although I can see where the implication may lay, my intent wasn't to state my fun was more important than others. Simply stating my position.
-
I'm not certain here but maybe there are some history buffs out there that can help...
How many pounds of bombs dropped directly on the deck of an aircraft carrier did it NORMALLY take to kill the thing? Somehow I recall stories of single pilots getting confirmations of kills on boats for dropping one or two light bombs on them.
If eight thousand pounds isn't enough to sink a carrier then I have no problem upping the requirement, but somehow I think it sounds like a lot of overkill. I prefer the option of adding a couple carriers to the fleet, it may not be historicly accurate but, given the interests of the MA, it will be more fun. Plus if carriers respawned so long as another carrier was afloat then it would take trully historical mass raids to kill the boats.
-
J_A_B:
20-30 furballers and no one can be bothered to defend their CV?
-
Originally posted by J_A_B
Fariz--
Keep in mind that when one or two guys sink a carrier, they're often depriving 20 or 30 people of their fun. It's a numbers thing.
Of course, the carriers wouldn't be becessary if the bases in the rest of the arena were closer (distant bases promotes timid flying), but that's a different issue :)
J_A_B
Will be interesting to have a vote on this. How many people who fight at field attacked by carrier are there for a furball, and how many defend field as a strat value, and thus happy that fleet gone? What you say 30:1 is not true for sure. If it was that many furballers, then captures would never happen. Thing is around 7:3 to the action/score people favour over strat players in my expirience, though it is something which can be checked by vote. After vote will finish, we can get back to it.
-
preon... as widewing stated... no land based bomber ever killed a CV. If realism is what we want then we need to make it so that land based bombers can't kill CV's
Again, i bow to widewing on this.. he has some good ideas. I would merely toughen em up to get semi realistic results... he would use realistic methods to get realistic results.
and apache... certainly your fun is no more (or less) important than others but I think we can all agree that my fun is the most important thing in AH.
What a happy happy place it would be if everyone started every sortie thinking "what can I do this sortie to make things pleasant for lazs"
lazs
-
7:3 sounds about right Fariz.
I'm not overly concerned with the CV issue anyhow. I feel that the general design of the AH MA is the problem, not CV toughness. SO I guess I really have little to add on this issue :)
J_A_B
-
IIRC the Brits, if they didn't lose them, had them (CV's) pounded by land based bombers in the Med. Any history buffs care to comment on supply runs to Malta?
As far as damage resistance is concerned, I know there was a marked difference between the US CV's-teak deck & greater AC capacity and the Brit CV's-armored flight deck and much smaller AC capacity.
Just my US $.02
-
Originally posted by lazs2
preon... as widewing stated... no land based bomber ever killed a CV. If realism is what we want then we need to make it so that land based bombers can't kill CV's
Again, i bow to widewing on this.. he has some good ideas. I would merely toughen em up to get semi realistic results... he would use realistic methods to get realistic results.
and apache... certainly your fun is no more (or less) important than others but I think we can all agree that my fun is the most important thing in AH.
What a happy happy place it would be if everyone started every sortie thinking "what can I do this sortie to make things pleasant for lazs"
lazs
Quite right lazs. In the official BK handbook, the page for proper DVB protocol was stuck to the lazs etiquette page. Darn pictures.
-
""""... no land based bomber ever killed a CV""""
true, but did land based bombers ever attack CV's and other ships......yes
could a land based bomber sink a CV.......yes
battle ships could be sunk by bombers, england lost 2 BB's in the pacific from bombers and torps.the IJN and USN lost many ships to airplanes.
lazs , we all know what your agenda is , you just want to furball, ( thats fine with me) but don't try to drag in some historical reasons why CV's should not be sunk.
just because it "never happened"does not mean it could not happen.
44MAG
-
THE SIMPLE ANSWER IS TO MAKE IT IMPREGNABLE TO BOMBS BUT VULNERABLE TO TORPEDOES.
if they want to suicide make them do it in TBMS and JU88s :D
-
I know this may sound stupid or whatever, but for me, the fight IS the only reason I'm there. The fight is not a means to an end (i.e. taking a base) it IS the end.
I'll add something to that. A CV fight is different from every other fight in the arena. They're rare, sometimes go a week without having the great pleasure of indulging.
CV fights for the most part are devoid of the usual MA planes. You don't see La7's, or 51's or Spit IX's or 190's....
Those that venture into this fight to "cherry pick" make a few attempts get down into it and get killed.
You see blue planes, LOTS of blue planes with a sprinkle of Zero's and Seafires. Early and mid-war planes.
Ever notice that when a CV is near a base, the planes taking off to meet the enemy are BLUE PLANES TOO ??????????
Why IS that ?? Isn't that strange ????
Us blue plane jockeys are just looking for the opportunity to strap it up and have at it. squeakkittys, Hogs, FM2's, Zero's and F4F's, have a fight and have a blast.
Leave the "pickers" and vulchers to play somewhere else. Ya gotta fight to come here :)
Urchin said it best. We're there for the fight.
Unfortunatly a couple of pilots can send it all down the drain. I KILLED THE CV !!! I SAVED THE WORLD !!! Wanna weigh my balls ??
THAT is unfortunate.
A CV fight is nirvana for us blue plane lovers. There is NOTHING better. Get in the thick of it, kill with abandon, land'um and wipe the goo off your windscreen and do it again..
Flying the edge....
All in one itty bitty part of the map that appears on occasion.
Please don't save us from the big bad CV. Us blue guys have the situation well in hand. ( on both sides )
But if perchance, you want a fight for a change of pace, you'll know where to find one.
We are very accomodating
Your consideration in this matter is greatly appreciated.
-
i guess the only way to solve the different ideas of game play is to have a "fighter town " arena, 2 or 3 bases close to each other , the bases can't be captured or damaged, the furballers can up , fight, die , win, reup all night long without the strat guys ruining their fun, how about it hitec , can we find a little arena for the furballers?
44MAG
-
44MAG, score pages are a wonderful thing when you want to check up on someone.
Try it. Very informative.
You'll find out when when someones blowin smoke, and when they're not.
;)
-
CV's were easy to sink, as was posted. Lizard made a good point in that a seperate fleet with no CV's should do the amphibious part. They have that in the slot map. The problem is keeping the CV out of sight. What makes that difficult is people start manning the cruiser guns and the enemy sees them shooting, it gives the position of the CV away. I think they should toughen the cruiser if anything.
-
Originally posted by poopster
I'll add something to that. A CV fight is different from every other fight in the arena. They're rare, sometimes go a week without having the great pleasure of indulging.
Poop, you would have loved the brawl we had tonight. Our CV haunted the Bish for 4 hours and was still going strong when I logged. About 10 Rooks and an equal number of Bish were having a ball. Well, the Rooks were anyway. :D
I started out with a CHog, but found the opposition were generally noobs. So, after clubbing 7 of them I felt bad taking advantage of their inexperience. So, I grabbed my trusty SBD and flew it as a fighter for the balance of the evening. Chasing down formations of Ju 88s, furballing with Spits and Mustangs. Great fun! Even found time to drop a few 1,000 pounders on the base too. Finally, I had to quit as it was very late. But Gawd, it was as good as these things get!
Once again, the SBD lived up to its nickname of "Slow But Deadly". I lost two of them, but a rediculous number of Bish were splashed. Try the SBD as a fighter, you'll be amazed at how good it is, and how easy it is to fly and fight with it. It's a furballin' monster!
My regards,
Widewing
-
I agree that something should be done with the CV's, but I not sure what. Sometimes when I don't particular want to fly or have some others things that I am doing, I jump on a CV and "ride" with it for awhile in a 5". I have seen numerous times that 1 or 2 guys will fly for 20-30 mins just to do suicide runs. Like last night, the CV I was on was heading away from any enemy bases. Heck, the closest one was about a 30 min flight, then came in a P47 jabo for his suicide run. It got to the point that I could leave the computer and time it to come back in 28 mins when he was around 10k out.
For someone who takes the time, there are a few "alleys" to approach from that cuts off firing angles for manned ack guns. But I do see it alot, the CV is nowhere near anything, a extremely long flight from nearest enemy base and one will still keep coming and suicide over and over till CV dead.
To do it when enemy CV is offshore and it needs to be taken out to help curb the massive attacking plane onslaught, that I can understand. But the other?. People that are into stats/scores, suicide runs don't pay off, especially since most of the time it won't even get recorded because the hit effect takes place after they have died. Those that just want something to do? I guess it's their "dime", but to fly forever just to ram?
Don't particularly understand the thought train there, but then again I don't have too. But it does happen way more than some think.
-
44mag.. I would not really care for the seperation of community that a fightertown would bring. I see nothing wrong with toughening up the cv's or making a bigger group or any of widewings suggestions. It doesn't seem to bother you that no aircraft opperations at any base ever were stopped when their carport was bombed but.... we have that concession for gameplay... fighters are out of action when a (LOL) building is blown up! And now you want to quibble about how maybe it was possible (even tho it never happened) that a land based bomber should be able to take out cv's? Heck... if we have the choice... make it realistic results.
if the cvs were tougher or the rebuild time short then.... a lone suicide bomber would get his bomb in and have to re up... the cv would rebuild by the time he got back and he would have to do it all over again with the same non result. If a dedicated group wanted to kill the CV they would still be able to.
lazs
-
Lazs said:
"preon... as widewing stated... no land based bomber ever killed a CV. "
Well, never "killed" but certainly damaged them,...
(e) A group of 16 United States Army "Flying Fortresses" carried out high-level bombing attacks, scoring 3 hits on enemy carriers. One carrier was left
smoking heavily.
Source:
http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq81-11.htm
(http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/images/f000001/f075712.jpg)
-
rip.... no carrier was sunk. The hits were not even verified. If all the hits claimed were real then.... we certainly need to toughen up the carriers. I also believe that this was the last time that heavy bombers even attempted to attack CV's.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
I also believe that this was the last time that heavy bombers even attempted to attack CV's.
lazs
Actually, they didn't have many opportunities to hit CV's since we generally kept B29's and B17's out of reach of enemy CV infested areas. Midway was an exception since the enemy came to us.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
The hits were not even verified. lazs
Lazs, 4 of the pilots "Verified" hits. Why do you think they reported them smoking?
-
Originally posted by lazs2
preon... as widewing stated... no land based bomber ever killed a CV. If realism is what we want then we need to make it so that land based bombers can't kill CV's
lazs
I'm not trying to say that bombers can and should kill CVs. I do remember watching a thing on the history channel where the US tried attacking Japaneese boats with high alt B-17s. The Japs just started swimming in circles and not a single bomb hit... ever.
In the MA, I imagine the same would happen as it did then but you have to keep in mind that there are people that are getting better with their simulated planes than WWII pilots ever DREAMED of being. In which case it should be possible for a bomber to hit a CV that isn't trying to dodge it. You can't discount a thing in the MA just because it never happened (else the 262 would NEVER be able to shoot down a spit-I)
what I WAS trying to say was that if a couple of bombs managed to find thier way on the deck of a carrier (be it from jabo or bomber) then those bombs should do damage. If the worry is that there isn't a balanced amount of naval combat, why not just put more boats in the water? Imagine the islands map with a port on every piece of land.
-
none of em sank rip. Obviously... they couldn't all have put all those bombs they claimed into the carrier now could they?
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
none of em sank rip. Obviously... they couldn't all have put all those bombs they claimed into the carrier now could they?
lazs
Agree, but you said "none hit" above. Just clarifying it for you. Back out gently now, so it doesn't look like you lost an arguement over historical facts. ;)
-
I thought I read somewhere that the only ship the B-17s managed to actually HIT was a destroyer that had stopped dead in the water to pick up survivors from some other ship (that some other aircraft may have sunk, I can't remember). Supposedly the Captain was told that there were B-17s overhead and he responded with something like "They haven't managed to hit anything yet, have they?" Then his destroyer got blown apart lol. The captain actually survived.
-
Keep in mind that when one or two guys sink a carrier, they're often depriving 20 or 30 people of their fun. It's a numbers thing.
By sinking a CV, you're "depriving 20 or 30 people of their fun" -- and freeing a bunch of your countrymates of the necessity to defend a field against capture, so they can furball or attack somewhere else.
It's a tradeoff. You may be honked off because someone took your CV away from you, preventing you from furballing or attacking from it, but the people you are furballing against or attacking may be just as interested in getting rid of you, and taking out your launch point is the most effective way to do it.
-
Originally posted by llyr69
J_A_B:
20-30 furballers and no one can be bothered to defend their CV?
This is a valid point.
I've killed CV's by divebombing,and I've killed them many times in a Lancaster,and I was never higher than 12k in the buff or fighter when starting my attack.
I can count on less than one hand how many times there has been a cap to greet me.I was shot down(this is in Lancasters)by the cap exactly ONCE.
The actual gripe here,imho,is some people want to "Make the CV harder to sink so we can endlessly vulch bases for longer periods of time."
-
As far as CV damage goes...
Make the damage an individual levies on a CV last for a shorter period of time... say 10 minutes. Take the respawning/returning aspect out of it.
Perhaps its also time to un-neuter the ACK. I've not seen so many spend so much time in there unharmed in some time. I cannot remember the last time I've seen flak do any damage to something. Hell.. bombers can fly straight in and over a CV group still.
Other than that... defend the CV or shut up. They are strategic elements of the game and should be treated as such. If it happens to support a furball along the way then so be it... but that should not be their expected use and it should not be the primary consideration when calculating damage-to-sink.
AKDejaVu
-
Originally posted by Widewing
Poop, you would have loved the brawl we had tonight. Our CV haunted the Bish for 4 hours and was still going strong when I logged. About 10 Rooks and an equal number of Bish were having a ball. Well, the Rooks were anyway. :D
A quick follow up to the original post.
One of the SBDs that I lost was to a Spitfire. This was a very interesting fight, in that under normal circumstances the Spit would have been splashed without undue trauma.
I was headed back to the CV for landing with 6 kills in the bank (3 Ju 88s, P-51D, P-38L and a Ki-67) I had taken off with just 25% fuel (plenty for this situation). However, I extended the sortie to chase down a damaged Ki-67, which took me nearly a half sector from the ship. Arriving in the immediate area of the TG, I discovered CPR having a tough time with a Spitfire. A quick check of my vitals indicated about 5% fuel and 38 rounds of .50 cal remaining. Well, I figured I would see if I could drive the Spit off of CPR’s Corsair. So, I headed straight for them. As the range dropped to about 800 yards, I see that the F4U is smoking and the Spit is right behind. I took a long-range snapshot from about 700 yards out and see a few hit strikes on the Spitfire. He ignores the hits and shoots off CPR’s wing. With that, he breaks up to the right and I follow. My guns are empty now, but the safest place to be is behind the Spitfire. Around and around we go. I watch the Spit’s nose drop and he dives to gain some separation. I follow, forcing him to maneuver vertically as the SBD easily turns inside the Supermarine. I had numerous opportunities for shots, but no ammo to shoot. A glance at my fuel indicator shows the needle hovering a hair above zero. I need to disengage immediately or find myself flying a 7,000 lb glider. With that the Spit executes a hard climbing break to the left. This is probably my only chance, so I break right, drop the nose and run for the TG, about 5 miles away. My hope is to get under the ack umbrella, cut the engine and fly a deadstick approach until short final, where I’ll restart for the landing. But, there’s not enough gas and the engine quits. Things are desperate now. I push the nose down a bit and engage auto-angle to keep my speed loss to a minimum. With that set, I jump into the rear cockpit and man the twin .30s. The Spit is closing quickly now, and I open fire at 700 yards, scoring solid hits, causing the Spitfire to smoke. However, my SBD is taking hits too. Finally, the wing lets go and I bail out.
I believe that the Spitfire likely had to ditch when his engine quit from lack of coolant. The pilot of the Spitfire, well known in the MA as a very good stick, was damn lucky I had no ammo or he would have not survived the first break turn. As it was, I exacted revenge twice (once with 5” gun) before I logged for the night.
What the reader should understand is that in terms of dogfighting ability, the SBD shines as a first-rate brawler. Indeed, it can make an average pilot like myself look good. However, it is essential that anyone flying the SBD as fighter have solid gunnery skills. There’s not much firepower available, and not a whole lot of ammo to begin with. Therefore, it is not the aircraft for those who tend to “pray and spray” out of habit. It will reward you with empty magazines and little to show for your trouble. With care and good marksmanship, you can even vulch successfully with the Dauntless (killed a pair of P-47s a few days ago, but they suck up a lot of ammo).
Typical of any aircraft, the three magic factors leading to success are Speed, Altitude and Stealth. However, when flying the SBD an additional factor applies; Vision. Always fly the SBD in the F3 mode. Don’t jump into the cockpit until you are ready to go to guns. Take advantage of the presumed second set of Mk.I eyeballs belonging to the gunner. I sometimes shoot from F3 mode, and do all of my dive-bombing runs from this observation point.
Finally, if you want to fly Jabo missions, there are better aircraft than the SBD. If you want to fly bomber missions, there are much better aircraft. Likewise, there are many very capable fighters available. So why fly the SBD? It’s the challenge of it. So, if you enjoy a challenge, give the SBD a go. If nothing else, you will have a lot of fun. And gentlemen, fun is the ultimate goal.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Agree, but you said "none hit" above. Just clarifying it for you. Back out gently now, so it doesn't look like you lost an arguement over historical facts. ;)
Rip, no carriers were damaged by the B-17s, none. The USAAF claims were soundly disproved, even before the war was over. All four Japanese carriers where undamaged and fully operational at the time the first Navy TBDs arrived. Moreover, the B-17 attack did more harm than good. It forced the Japanese fleet to maneuver, and it ended up 50 miles distant from where it was expected to be encountered by the U.S. Navy aircraft. In fact, some squadrons never found it. If not for the intuition and good fortune of Wade McClusky, the American dive-bombers would have missed the Japanese formation by 30 miles. This would have meant that none of the four fleet carriers would have been damaged or sunk by Spruance's first wave. That very well could have spelled disaster for American forces.
My regards,
Widewing
-
uhhh rip.... I don't believe I said "none hit"... I said none verified and I meant that. I also said none sunk and I meant that.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
uhhh rip.... I don't believe I said "none hit"... I said none verified and I meant that. I also said none sunk and I meant that.
lazs
This is confirmed by reading this: Battle of Midway (http://www.history.navy.mil/download/ww2-18.pdf)
My regards,
Widewing
-
I already pointed him to one account of Midway, it seems Lazs cannot lose a BBS arguement, so he just continually banters on about nothing he knows about. ;)
-
One other thing I'd like to point out that is a crack in your foundation, Lazs...B17's never trained to hit moving ships insofar as I know of...we, otoh, practice it continually. That is to say that they did not have the opportunity to become proficient at hitting a moving target as we do online. Therefore, regardless if it happened then or not does not necessarily dictate what we do today online. ;)
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
One other thing I'd like to point out that is a crack in your foundation, Lazs...B17's never trained to hit moving ships insofar as I know of...we, otoh, practice it continually. That is to say that they did not have the opportunity to become proficient at hitting a moving target as we do online. Therefore, regardless if it happened then or not does not necessarily dictate what we do today online. ;)
That's my point exactly. You've gotta take into account the skill factor. If a guy in a bomber is so damn good that he can plug a carrier from 20k, then by all means he should be allowed to do so.
Complaining otherwise would be like me whining that this fighter jock badass just sprayed me with heat seeking .50s from 1.2k away. That would NEVER happen in WWII, but damn if he's just that good.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
One other thing I'd like to point out that is a crack in your foundation, Lazs...B17's never trained to hit moving ships insofar as I know of...we, otoh, practice it continually. That is to say that they did not have the opportunity to become proficient at hitting a moving target as we do online. Therefore, regardless if it happened then or not does not necessarily dictate what we do today online. ;)
Back in the late 1930s, the USAAC was responsible for coastal defense. Bomber crews did train to hit moving ships, at least at that time. On May 12, 1938, two YB-17s flew 800 miles out to sea off of Long Island to intercept the Italian liner Rex. None other than Curtiss LeMay was the navigator. As late as 1944, B-17s were training for and carrying out anti-shipping strikes in the SWPA theater (5th Air Force). With greater practice, they achieved a measure of success, but mostly against merchant shipping rather than well defended warships.
(http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/bombers/b2-14a1.jpg)
My regards,
Widewing
-
sure... I can lose a BB argument rip but... I don't like to do it as much as you do.
as to us being "better than the real pilots"... I suppose that is true to some extent. we get a lot more trigger time and.... we don't have that pesky ol "risk our lives" thing going on but....
gameplay or realism.. have it either way or both... it would simply be more realistic and at the same time make for much better gameplay if the CV's lived longer. Several "realistic" ways to do so have been mentioned/suggested.
realistic methods causing realistic results and good gameplay.... seems win win to me. I haven't seen one arguement that makes sense for leaving the CV's so vulnerable.
also... if there were some hot spots around the CV's most of the time I bet it would increase player base and HTC income. Most "strat" "realism" historical" guys are not at all interested in the latter tho from what I have seen of their suggestions in the past.
lazs
-
They look alittle low for Norden calibration Widewing ;)
-
Originally posted by lazs2
as to us being "better than the real pilots"... I suppose that is true to some extent. we get a lot more trigger time and.... we don't have that pesky ol "risk our lives" thing going on but....
lazs
Thanks for compromising some lazs.
I agree that the best furballs occur when CVs manage to creep close to a base. Ever since I graduated from the Raptors, I've spent 98% of my time in them and I cherish the ones where CVs are involved.
It's true that with 3 or 4 good pilots you WILL kill a CV in one sortie provided nobody has established a high cap (rarely ever happens). But they should be allowed to kill that CV.
As far as gameplay is concerned, whats wrong with the idea of putting more fleets in the water, or perhaps require that both the CV and battleship are destroyed before a fleet will disappear?
All I see is the possibility that when fleets are made ultra hard, all it will do is discourage those who want to sink the boat and survive. It will be a skill lost to the game and then every attack on a CV will be a suicide. ...then again, maybe I'm just sentimental.
-
preon... i don't know about "comprimise"... I simply feel that you are correct and am stating it. I have in the past stated the same views... that we have infinitely more gunnery practice (to explain some of our longer range shots). same goes for bombing.
now... I also see no problem (and have stated as such) in having thre cv groups be much larger... the "skill" of the bombers could still be tested without completely stopping all action.
To make different types of ordinance for land and sea based planes (as widewing notes) would also go a long way in allowing cv operations to continue for a reasonable length of time without penalizing "skill".
regardless... The CV's are a fun part of the game for a lot of guys and they are being taken out of the game much to easily. I simply want them to be less vulnerable to complete uslesness.
lazs
-
I cherish the ones where CVs are involved
They are the best in the arena.
The main thing is CV operations are fun. Fun is the aim of the game. If tweaking is necessary well, give it go.
Widewings suggestion was a good one. Rebuild times to make multiple suicide jabo less potent is another..
All things that make the "game" more enjoyable are worth a try.
Not impossible to take out with coordinated attacks, yet tough enough to last more than ten minutes in a fight zone.
A happy medium in settings just has to be found.