Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: eskimo2 on December 03, 2002, 06:53:42 PM
-
Hitech,
I don’t think that you, or anyone for that matter, have shown EXACTLY what the problem is with “suicide bombing”. This thread is NOT intended to suggest that there is not a problem. But I do not think that you have made it clear what kind of actions you do not want to see in AH, and what kind of actions you would rather see. Right now folks are assuming that their vision of the problem matches yours, I’m not sure that this is the case.
So if you want players to make helpful, outside-the-box suggestions, please explain more clearly how the status quo does not match your vision of how AH should be:
Who is causing the problem here?
Jabos, multi-engined bombers, or both?
Some BB posters have assumed that you are talking about jabos, and others have assumed you are talking about bombers. Which (or both) do you see as the problem?
What targets are you concerned about?
CVs? Bases? Other targets? Discussions so far have focused on either.
What activities would you rather see instead of suicide bombing?
Why is suicide bombing a problem?
Are you concerned with it being an unrealistic activity?
Is it hurting the players’ overall attitudes in the MA?
Are you bothered by a lack of skill being displayed?
Is it distasteful (Kamikaze)?
Is it too gamey?
Does it somehow lead to players quitting AH?
Was it less of a problem in the past? [B/]
When did suicide bombing become a problem? Or has it just gotten worse?
Once again, I am not challenging Hitech’s assertion that there is a problem, only that it hasn’t been made clear whether we are talking about apples or oranges (or bananas or kiwis for that matter). [B/]
eskimo
-
May be the fact that CV's are so easly killed by people doing this that some players actualy keep captured CV's out of play to avoid lossing them as soon as their discovered by the enemy.
Curently playes kill themselfs in droves( at least what seams like a large precentage), to foster CV sinkage, base capture, and whatever. The funny thing is it has always been this way, it aint my cup of tea but then again if their having fun why not unless of course in so doing their runing it for a lot of us in the process.
-
Originally posted by brady
May be the fact that CV's are so easly killed by people doing this that some players actualy keep captured CV's out of play to avoid lossing them as soon as their discovered by the enemy.
Curently playes kill themselfs in droves( at least what seams like a large precentage), to foster CV sinkage, base capture, and whatever. The funny thing is it has always been this way, it aint my cup of tea but then again if their having fun why not unless of course in so doing their runing it for a lot of us in the process.
CV's are hardly easy to sink, as long as they're being attended to. A lone CV forgotten about is an easy kill. A CV with both 5" guns manned is a fortress. Bomber formations trying to suicide into a manned 5" gun are nothing more than three easy kills. (Though it would be nice if newbies who cant even hit with a 5" would stick to the quad-40s)
People don't suicide buffs into CV's because they're easy to kill. They do it becuase a CV is -hard- to kill. Suiciding a buff happens to make it easier.
CV AI ack should be beefed way up, and the damage required to sink it reduced. Kill most planes before they can get close enough to drop a bomb, don't count on making it take more ordnance to deal with something being too easy to kill.
The hardened nature of many of our targets promote suicide bombing. The best way to sink a CV is to suicide into it, and try again, because it takes so much damn ordnance to kill it. If it only took one or two solid(But significantly harder) drops to sink, it would be worth trying to survive.
-
Dweebs. Dweebs who suicide bomb... over, and over, and over. Be it on CV's or Bases. Heck I've even seen calls for "suicide jabo mission up!!"
...friggin retards.
-
corect me if im wrong but didnt japan use these tactics to sink u.s. ships.if AH is a ww 2 sim then cuicide cv runs should be eceptable. why the fuss. :rolleyes:
-
Ok cobia28 if you want reality then when you do the suicide run you are dead. Don't come back...
-
Originally posted by Innominate
CV's are hardly easy to sink, as long as they're being attended to. A lone CV forgotten about is an easy kill. A CV with both 5" guns manned is a fortress. Bomber formations trying to suicide into a manned 5" gun are nothing more than three easy kills. (Though it would be nice if newbies who cant even hit with a 5" would stick to the quad-40s)
People don't suicide buffs into CV's because they're easy to kill. They do it becuase a CV is -hard- to kill. Suiciding a buff happens to make it easier.
CV AI ack should be beefed way up, and the damage required to sink it reduced. Kill most planes before they can get close enough to drop a bomb, don't count on making it take more ordnance to deal with something being too easy to kill.
The hardened nature of many of our targets promote suicide bombing. The best way to sink a CV is to suicide into it, and try again, because it takes so much damn ordnance to kill it. If it only took one or two solid(But significantly harder) drops to sink, it would be worth trying to survive.
I'm sorry, but there isn't a hint of logic in this argument. If CVs become much easier to kill, then the suicide dweebs know they can sink it in one or two sorties, rather than 8 or 10. So, how is that going to discourage them at all? After all, they only die once or twice instead of 8 or 10 times.
As to the CV being a fortress - hardly. We only have two manned 5" turrets. Actual carriers had four 5" dual turrets, with four more individual 5" guns. Add to that 72 40mm and 52 20mm guns for close range. Baltimore class cruisers (which is what we have) had six 5" turrets, They also had 22 40mm, with 28 20mm Orlikon mounts as well. Indeed, the volume of triple A put up by our TGs is a small fraction of what was actually available. Even the destroyers are well under-modeled. We are also limited to 6k of visual range. By 1943, radar ranging triple A was deadly out to 15,000 yards and sight optics made visual shooting practical out that far, albeit with less accuracy.
I suggest that we have limits as follows:
32k of HE to sink CV
16k of SAP to sink CV
8k of AP to sink CV
So, a combination including 4k of AP, 4k of SAP and 8k of HE would do it.
Or, add the correct number of defensive guns. If you think CVs are a fortress now, multiply the number of manned guns by a factor of 4, and we will have something close to realism, and the suicide dweebs will quit in frustration.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Originally posted by Widewing
I'm sorry, but there isn't a hint of logic in this argument. If CVs become much easier to kill, then the suicide dweebs know they can sink it in one or two sorties, rather than 8 or 10. So, how is that going to discourage them at all? After all, they only die once or twice instead of 8 or 10 times.
I suggest that we have limits as follows:
32k of HE to sink CV
16k of SAP to sink CV
8k of AP to sink CV
So, a combination including 4k of AP, 4k of SAP and 8k of HE would do it.
Or, add the correct number of defensive guns. If you think CVs are a fortress now, multiply the number of manned guns by a factor of 4, and we will have something close to realism, and the suicide dweebs will quit in frustration.
The point of suiciding into the CV is so that you can take off and do it again ASAP. There is no need to suicide when a single strike getting through the ack can do it. And it's not exactly a suicide attack if you never get as far as the actuall attack.
The CV's SHOULD have the correct number of defensive guns. The challenge of killing a CV should be getting the bombs ONTO the ship, not simply trucking eight 1000lbs out to the CV. The ships should take a realistic amount of ordnance. Perhaps a bit higher, maybe 3000-4000lbs, half of that if you use AP bombs or torpedos. AP bombs could be restricted to planes like the SBD, Val, TBM. The AP bombs would give the maritime attack planes a reason to be used against ships.
Basicly, CV's take a lot of damage to help make up for thier overly weak ack(and to a lesser extent the lack of CAP) It should be fixed, they shouldn't take all that much damage, but should have a lethal ack cloud.
-
Originally posted by cobia38
corect me if im wrong but didnt japan use these tactics to sink u.s. ships.if AH is a ww 2 sim then cuicide cv runs should be eceptable. why the fuss. :rolleyes:
Right... You bet, the Japanese started the suicide bombing thing in during Pearl Harbor. Yep... they all just slammed those planes right into all those ships. Only a few made it back to thier CV's and were immediately castrated for cowardice of course. Then they carried on doing it in every single CV battle that took place. And wouldn't you know it?... every single Allied ship that was targeted was destroyed too. Oh ya... just read about it. They were known to suicide bomb in all the battles... every one from beginning to end. :rolleyes:
-
Tumor, you know not of what you speak, and the Japanese were not the only one's that mounted suicide attacks. Granted the Japanese did train pilots for just that purpose while no other nationality did, the US Navy mounted a massive inadvertant suicide attack during the battle of Midway. Torpedo squadron 8 had only one survivor......Ens George Gay of Texas, unless you count in the other half of that squadron that trainied together in Fla and went to the Midway Island defence force, in which only two of that half survived thier attack during Midway. Bombing Squadron 8 (both from the USS Yorktown) was competely wiped out, with nothing to show for it, not one hit. The attacked without fighter cover and the ones that did survive the Japanese CAP were shot down by ack gunners aboard the carriers and support vessels.
I have tried many times in the game to get hits on a CV, mostly with a SBD because its fun. If I am lucky I don't get clobbered by ack before I drop my bombs, but that is usually because I am the only one up there, or at best there is a couple of squaddies with me. Guess what, if we get shot down, we grab fresh planes and try again. If this is suicide bombing then so be it. I cannot see where trying to survive by not hitting a CV is better than letting the planes roll off the flight deck and keep pounding the base you are trying to defend. In a perfect world, the Knights, Rooks and Bish would be able to send in a force of about 12-15 SBD's for a dive bomb attack and the same number of TBM's for a torpedo attack, as well as 20 or so fighters to escort them. As any of us who have played the game any amount of time knows this rarely happens. What do you expect is going to happen, usually 3 or 4 guys will keep hitting a CV till it is dead, and the threat is taken away. Consider this, might not the 3 or 4 suicide monekys that instantly spawn back in to hit the CV be the same as several planes in a squadron comming in using a piecemeal attack? Granted not a very sound tactic, but it beats getting vulched and having all of your base resources porked so you cannot fight back. Is it annoying to have some guys dive bomb with a Lancaster formation and kill the CV in one fell swoop....you betcha, but on the other hand it is annoyuing to have your fuel porked in a 3 base radious, and getting vulched everytime you try and take off from the field you are trying to defend.
The point is, there will always be people that will exploit the game, be it Aces High, Counter Strike, Diablo II or whatever. There is really no amount of software or game features to stop it. The people that want to play that way will find a way to exploit the game......they always do. Before I got into online gaming, I played tabletop miniture games, and it was the same old song and dance. In fact I had a special shirt I wore to con's that said "If I let you win can I go home early."
I am sure that you can fly a plane better than I can, and no doubt you have played AH longer than I have, so dont take this as a flame. I would rather see Hitech spend time on new updates than trying to stop a few "gamey" players from doing what they are going to do anyway. I see the logic on both sides of the argument, but I have also seen several other people out there concerned about the ligit players trying to sink a CV not getting anywhere for their efforts. If a CV has fully manned guns and cap, very few planes will get through, and the ones who do are likely to get hit while on a bombing run, either diving or level becase they are most vunerable then, as for if they take any action to avoid fire, they will miss their target. So for their bombs to do no damage after all that, would be a bad idea, at least I think so anyway.
One possible sloution for the dive bombing LANCS and 17's would be to not allow bombs to drop out of the bomb bay after the nose has dropped past a certain angle, I know nothing of programming, so I have no clue as to how hard that would be to impliment, but it is an idea, might be a bad one I don't know. :confused:
Conn
-
Looks like Eskimo has been participating in "Analytic Problem Solving" course.
I still prefer BFVL method: brute force,violence and luck :)
-
Originally posted by Conagher [/b]
Tumor, you know not of what you speak, and the Japanese were not the only one's that mounted suicide attacks. Granted the Japanese did train pilots for just that purpose while no other nationality did, the US Navy mounted a massive inadvertant suicide attack during the battle of Midway.
Exactly.... we aren't talking about end result here, we are talking "intent" at launch time.
Torpedo squadron 8 had only one survivor......Ens George Gay of Texas, unless you count in the other half of that squadron that trainied together in Fla and went to the Midway Island defence force, in which only two of that half survived thier attack during Midway. Bombing Squadron 8 (both from the USS Yorktown) was competely wiped out, with nothing to show for it, not one hit. The attacked without fighter cover and the ones that did survive the Japanese CAP were shot down by ack gunners aboard the carriers and support vessels.
...and? Did they intend to die when they took off?
I have tried many times in the game to get hits on a CV, mostly with a SBD because its fun. If I am lucky I don't get clobbered by ack before I drop my bombs
So learn how to survive... Point 1) Drop from HIGHER alt. Practice.. LEARN how to do it.
but that is usually because I am the only one up there, or at best there is a couple of squaddies with me. Guess what, if we get shot down, we grab fresh planes and try again. If this is suicide bombing then so be it.
It's not suicide bombing. It's poor tactics. It becomes suicide bombing when you know whats going to happen and are too lazy to learn a better way. Just sayin.
I cannot see where trying to survive by not hitting a CV is better than letting the planes roll off the flight deck and keep pounding the base you are trying to defend.
Easy to say that in defense of your point, however... the point is to survive and HIT the CV. It all comes down to not having a reason to stay alive. The "screw it I can just re-up" attitude is what leads to the "abuse" that is suicide bombing.
In a perfect world, the Knights, Rooks and Bish would be able to send in a force of about 12-15 SBD's for a dive bomb attack and the same number of TBM's for a torpedo attack, as well as 20 or so fighters to escort them. As any of us who have played the game any amount of time knows this rarely happens. What do you expect is going to happen, usually 3 or 4 guys will keep hitting a CV till it is dead, and the threat is taken away.
Of course this is not a perfect world. Thats no excuse. CV's can be sunk, with a little patience and thought. It's just not that hard. (ref "screw it" attitude above).
Consider this, might not the 3 or 4 suicide monekys that instantly spawn back in to hit the CV be the same as several planes in a squadron comming in using a piecemeal attack?
At least the latter would be acceptable, don't you think?
Granted not a very sound tactic, but it beats getting vulched and having all of your base resources porked so you cannot fight back.
So you back up and use a safe launch point! No.. I do not believe suicide bombing is an acceptable alternative. Again.. back to the "screw it" attitude. The options are "nearly" always available. Laziness and impatience prevents using them.
Is it annoying to have some guys dive bomb with a Lancaster formation and kill the CV in one fell swoop....you betcha, but on the other hand it is annoyuing to have your fuel porked in a 3 base radious, and getting vulched everytime you try and take off from the field you are trying to defend.
War is hell.
The point is, there will always be people that will exploit the game, be it Aces High, Counter Strike, Diablo II or whatever. There is really no amount of software or game features to stop it. The people that want to play that way will find a way to exploit the game......they always do.
Yes.. and "usually" measures are taken to put these "types" in thier place... as it should be, and hopefully as it WILL be.
I am sure that you can fly a plane better than I can
You know not of what you speak lol :D
I would rather see Hitech spend time on new updates than trying to stop a few "gamey" players from doing what they are going to do anyway.
Me too sorta.. however I'm willing to gamble that HiTech has already done the ground work. And... anything HTC does to improve the game and decrease the gamey is a good thing. And btw... "Few" IMHO is not an accurate description of those who will "do it anyway".
I see the logic on both sides of the argument, but I have also seen several other people out there concerned about the ligit players trying to sink a CV not getting anywhere for their efforts.
The legit players who get nowhere for there efforts IMHO have yet to learn the simple task of achieving thier goal. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. Never should you game the game to achieve the win.
If a CV has fully manned guns and cap, very few planes will get through, and the ones who do are likely to get hit while on a bombing run, either diving or level becase they are most vunerable then, as for if they take any action to avoid fire, they will miss their target. So for their bombs to do no damage after all that, would be a bad idea, at least I think so anyway.
As a gameplay "concession"... oh well (IMO). I'd be losing some bombs too.. but not always, not even most of the time.
One possible sloution for the dive bombing LANCS and 17's would be to not allow bombs to drop out of the bomb bay after the nose has dropped past a certain angle
So as a game the gamer... I simply learn to toss the bombs. It's amazing some folks spend more time figureing out the "lamer way" when the "ethical way" (ya I know.. ethics in AH, what a joke, just lookin for a good term) would be that much easier.
I know nothing of programming, so I have no clue as to how hard that would be to impliment, but it is an idea, might be a bad one I don't know. :confused:
Any idea that would prevent the suicide bomber is ok for the MA. IMO the only place this "tactic" should be encouraged or even accepted, would be a scenario or the mission theater, and only then when deemed necessary to continue the "plan" so to speak. Suicide Jabo/Buff missions does nothing more than add to the "Quake with wings" look AH has been known to lean to.
-
The problem with the suicide Jabos is not their existance but the fact that they can just up and be back at suiciding within 10 seconds after each death.
-Amboss
-
There was a Japanese suicide torpedo found outside Perl Harbour. A Jap sub droped off several (3 I think) of these manned torps at the mouth of the harbour.
Therefore Japan did train and start using suicide tactics since Dec 1941. I saw it on TV. It must be true.
-
suicide jabo on a CV is a legit tactic as long as the CV launches more planes than it was actually designed to carry
Both side have the ability to re up with a new life instantly
its a game(y)
-
Originally posted by Oedipus
They were mini subs. They were NOT suicide subs.
Where do you people find or make this stuff up?
Oed
http://www.combinedfleet.com/kaiten.htm
-
All these replies, but he was asking the question of hitech eh?
-
Originally posted by Turbot
All these replies, but he was asking the question of hitech eh?
As usual, they engage fingers while leaving brain in park. Nice try, Eskimo, but the agendas of the wordy must be served.
-
The pilots of the mini subs were not expected to return according to the TV program. The program speculated on what a Japanese soldier would do when they expected to be captured. Maybe that answers your question.
-
Originally posted by Widewing
.
As to the CV being a fortress - hardly. We only have two manned 5" turrets. Actual carriers had four 5" dual turrets, with four more individual 5" guns. Add to that 72 40mm and 52 20mm guns for close range. Baltimore class cruisers (which is what we have) had six 5" turrets, They also had 22 40mm, with 28 20mm Orlikon mounts as well. Indeed, the volume of triple A put up by our TGs is a small fraction of what was actually available. Even the destroyers are well under-modeled. We are also limited to 6k of visual range. By 1943, radar ranging triple A was deadly out to 15,000 yards and sight optics made visual shooting practical out that far, albeit with less accuracy.
I tend to agree. Even opening up the existing 5" and 40mm that are now currently on the cruiser and carrier. Take a close look and you will see 4 dual 5" and 4 40mm on the carrier. Even the cruiser has 2 1/2 times more gunnery for air defense than allowable to man. All these should be opened up for manning. And if not enough people man them, than AI takes over as usual on the ones not manned.
At least that would give it way more survivability chances seeing how manned ack is more accurate than the AI. Seeing how they are already in place, I don't know much about programming, but I don't think it would be to hard to incorporate.
-
Originally posted by cobia38
corect me if im wrong but didnt japan use these tactics to sink u.s. ships.if AH is a ww 2 sim then cuicide cv runs should be eceptable. why the fuss. :rolleyes:
Kamakazi attacks never sank a FLEET CV , i dont think.
they did sink several light CVs.
we have a Fleet CV.
whels
-
Amtrakster:
I suggest readins an excellent book on the subject called "At Dawn we Slept".
It seems to be THE reference for the attack on Pearl harbor.
In this book, they refer to the Mini-Sub attack, in detail. So much so as to give their tender subs, crews, missions, and locations. The Japanese mentality at the time was simple. Do evrey thing you can to hit your target, and try to survive. They went with little fear of death, but they were in no way suicidal. Many expressed great relief in their personal diaries for surviving the raid, and being able to see their families again.
At the pre-flight briefing, the commander of the mission (his name escapes me) was asked what he would do if his plane was disabled. He said he would crash into a target instead of being captured. He stressed that he would not ask any of his pilots to do the same.
As for the Mini-sub, the only one of the four we know about that could be classified suicidal would be the 3rd launch, which left it's mothership with a faulty gyro. That crew was pretty sure they would not return, but wanted to hit their targets anyway.
So, in summation, I am of the opinion from what I've read that the mentality of the IJN was not one of suicide, but of acceptance of a High-Risk mission.
Sorry for the HiJack
-
If you want Cv's toughened up,and more "realistic" ack,that's fine...just be sure to model damage to the cv as well.
It shouldn't just suddenly sink after a certain amount of ordnance hits it.You would think that 2,4k of eggs would do some damage that would actually impair it's operations.Maybe reduce fuel and ordnance thats available,the amount or how fast planes can take off,and maybe the ability to kill the acks-5"guns-cruiser cannons also.
It just seems that some wish to make it a nearly impregnable fortress that never actually suffers damage until it is sunk.
Just my .02
-
Thanks Muck I've been looking for some reading material. If I find it hopfully I'll be able to forget about the crap I see on TV.
-
One way to cut down on sucide attacks is to have a 10-15 min death penalty at the base the person launched from. In short, you can not take off from the base you took off from but can leave from another. This helps out on gaining dominance over a capped base too.
-
The issue isn't if suicide attacks are unrealistic or if the mini-subs were on a suicide mission, it's that a kamikazi was a one shot deal.
Suicide jabos against either a carrier or field, using either a fighter or bomber, is easier to accomplish if the player rides the plane all the way to the target. Releasing at an altitude and speed from which you can recover is just too hard for some. So the easy way out is used... affective but darn irritating.
I've spent many hours gunning CV groups and have seen both dweebs and accomplished players attack. The dweebs can usually be killed but keep coming back until they ankle-bite the carrier to death. Some of the accomplished players leave me no real opportunity to kill them. Clue time... there are ways to attack a carrier and survive that are very hard to defend against... but require a bit of learning.
Defending a base is near impossible when something like twenty players get together to do suicidal attacks on it, followed by an endless stream of suicidal P51s until the base is useless.
I've suggested a life regen time penalty for suicide bombers (forced realism) as have others here. Another suggested a suicide bomber not be given bombs for an hour after. My squad leader suggested placing manable 88s at each field (and move the map room back to the airfield). I think all these would be affective in reducing the suicidal gaming of AH, or provide a way to defend against it.
The purpose of the game is to have fun. Some of the tactics used is not fun, except for the mindless hamsters doing it... and then I wonder how much fun that really is.
How about the kill shooter and proximity kills? Both are a pain in the butt, but together they are intolerable >=o|
-
Originally posted by Blindman
suicide jabo on a CV is a legit tactic as long as the CV launches more planes than it was actually designed to carry
Both side have the ability to re up with a new life instantly
its a game(y)
Not a chance. The nearby bases that also have the ability to launch just as many and MORE airframes totally offsets this concept. Yes... this is a game. Unfortunately it's becoming a gamey game rather than a simulation game.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
http://www.combinedfleet.com/kaiten.htm
Slightly out of context Rip:
"By late 1944[/size][/color], the war situation had deteriorated for Japan to the point where extraordinary measures were seen as offering the only way out of an increasingly grim military predicament."
-
Originally posted by AtmkRstr
The pilots of the mini subs were not expected to return according to the TV program. The program speculated on what a Japanese soldier would do when they expected to be captured. Maybe that answers your question.
However they at least one was trying to escape (I saw the program too).
-
Rooster...
If you really want the book, e-mail me your address,and I'll send it to you when I'm done. I should finish it this week (700 Page book)
jpizzo127@yahoo.com
-
Is Hitech going to answer or what?
-
Originally posted by Turbot
All these replies, but he was asking the question of hitech eh?
Certainly I was hoping that Hitech would respond, but really a thread like this is just another means to help players sort through ideas so that the best ideas will surface.
I still do not think that anyone has clearly defined the problem. What's the problem with players who choose to jabo themselves to death? Everyday we see newbies fly into furballs and die over and over, no one thinks of restricting this kind of flying.
Is it the fact that suicide bombers are intent on attacking fixed base and ship targets as opposed to player controlled targets? It's really not that they are so willing to die, we all did that, or still do that. This game would truly suck if everyone flew like their R/L life depended on it.
Why do we care what other players are doing? Do they make bad targets for us to kill?
Why would it be better if more players survived bombing attacks?
Honestly, I don't like it either, but I can't clearly explain why?
Time for Sabre to chime in, he explains stuff so very well!
eskimo
-
Gosh Tumor, I sure am glad you took time to explain all that to me, I think I can become a real assest to the AH community.
-
Originally posted by Sox62
If you want Cv's toughened up,and more "realistic" ack,that's fine...just be sure to model damage to the cv as well.
It shouldn't just suddenly sink after a certain amount of ordnance hits it.You would think that 2,4k of eggs would do some damage that would actually impair it's operations.Maybe reduce fuel and ordnance thats available,the amount or how fast planes can take off,and maybe the ability to kill the acks-5"guns-cruiser cannons also.
It just seems that some wish to make it a nearly impregnable fortress that never actually suffers damage until it is sunk.
Just my .02
I agree. I may be wrong, and probably am, but I remember once being told that by killing off the destroyers it acts like the fuel and ammo bunkers do on a land base. Ammo would be back down to basic loadout and fuel is degraded down in quarters according to the escort ship sunk. Does anyone know if this is the case?
-
I've never seen it.And as far as unlimited planes spawning from the base being attacked,as Tumor suggested,simply isn't true.
The CV planes can egg the FH's.They can deack and also kill the shore batteries.The base planes do NOT have this option-the CV is in no way impaired until it is sunk.
The real complaint about suicide jabos ruining the fun is this-it spoils the unlimited vulch fest the cv has going.
Add manned acks-toughen the CV-that's fine-but give the attackers the same ability to cripple the CV that the CV does when it attacks a base,that's all I'm stating.
-
All this focus on CVs...
Is that really the problem?
eskimo
-
Originally posted by Sox62
I've never seen it.And as far as unlimited planes spawning from the base being attacked,as Tumor suggested,simply isn't true.
The CV planes can egg the FH's.They can deack and also kill the shore batteries.The base planes do NOT have this option-the CV is in no way impaired until it is sunk.
The real complaint about suicide jabos ruining the fun is this-it spoils the unlimited vulch fest the cv has going.
Add manned acks-toughen the CV-that's fine-but give the attackers the same ability to cripple the CV that the CV does when it attacks a base,that's all I'm stating.
C'mon... the nearby base(s) have more than ample opportunity to launch whatever is needed to destroy a CV. Those same bases have the same if not more of an offensive opportunity than the CV. A single aircraft can easily bring down the Cruiser... 2 can kill the Carrier. Why is it you think CV's never last? Vulchfest? Gimme a break man.
-
Originally posted by eskimo2
All this focus on CVs...
Is that really the problem?
eskimo
Course not... it's suicide dweebs.
-
As I can tell..damn nearly ALL cv attacks are suicide..whether intentioned or not...Iv;e been blown outta the sky at 15 k before I even roll over into dive