Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: lazs2 on June 10, 2003, 08:11:53 AM
-
Other threads about CV's... everyone seems to like em and everyone seems to think they are too vulnerable to silly, simplistic tactics. the rankest newbie can kill one pretty easy..
lots of ideas on toughening em up or adding ack but.... how bout if it were set that they actual CV could not be sunk until all the escort vessels were sunk?
the (cough) chess players of the sky could still attack CV's and do their part and earn the admiration and gratitude of their country and the rest of us could.... have fun. everyone wins.
lazs
-
Mwahahahahahahahahahahaha
System: Ship sunk
MwahahahahahAHAHAHAHAHA
-
Sounds like a good idea untill you consider the fact that the cv would have to have some kind of magical invulnerability untill the rest of the ships are destroyed . I'm opposed to magical abilities being introduced into AH .
In most cases CV's are sunk because the captain is missusing it as an assault vessel instead of a floating base . I don't think I've ever seen a CV sunk in the MA when it wasn't being used offensively .
When I say misused my basis of comparison is how they are deployed during war in real life .
-
Maybe it is too difficult to make the CV survive until all the escorts are destroyed.
Why not double the antiaircraft guns on each ship but make them vulnerable to damage i.e. exactly like a base - -such that when you hit them they go down for a specified period of time then regenerate...
Just a thought anyway
-
the cv would have to have some kind of magical invulnerability ..
So what.
Speaking of magic, in that same task group PT boats instantly spawn on demand. In fact Insta-spawning happens all over the map and destroyed rebuildings suddenly reapear.
Maybe somebody would like it be better just to have the CV respawn with the task group while ships remain. I don't really see much difference and either system would make for better game play.
Hooligan
-
Vehicles "spawn" in real life, the manufacture, transportation and transit in the game is implicit for obvious reasons, as is the reconstruction of towns and buildings . That doesn't compare to making ships invulnerable to bullets, bombs and torpedos .
It would be nice if the damage model of ships was more elaborate .
-
And the one I like the most is keeping the CV group out of harm's way. The best way I can think of to do that is to change the way LVTs spawn, or perhaps add a separate assault group that can be separated from the CV group and moved inshore for a base assault.
Lassie, you have a point about it being too easy to sink a CV. The damage model is simplistic, and could be made better. On the other hand, it's really hard to survive a bomb run with a Jabo, going in against the ack, even if you bomb good (and you do, by the way...). Level bombers are easy to avoid. The other week, I controlled a CV for TWO HOURS within 25 miles of the enemy field and didn't lose it, then some guy with more score took it and lost it in 15 minutes. The attackers didn't change tactics, but the CV driver did.
If you really think we need to change the CV hardness, why not do the following:
1. make the 5" guns on the dds mannable.
2. add many, many more 20mm and 40 mm to the CV and heavy cruiser, some mannable, some robo.
The only CV I ever sunk I did with "down the throat" torpedos from a PT boat. Tell me how easy THAT is.
HT, bring the submarine to AH!!! I would prefer a GATO class, thank you.
And yes, lassie, you're still a jerk.
-
magical invulnerability? well... I guess but aren't the control towers magicaly invulnerable? I mean, big deal.. people just stop trying to kill the control tower.. they would do the same with the cv... in a very short time people would simply not try to sink the CV until the rest of the fleet was down. I can't see anything too weird about that in a game where pt's and gv's pop up shooting from thin air.
hubert... does "lassie" mean me? Do you think it will catch on? What does it mean when an imbecile calls you a jerk? How embarassed are you gonna feel when someday you realize that everything you ever said that dissagreed with anything I ever said was.... wrong. My advice? slow down a little and save a little future embarassment. or not.
lazs
Public Relations Officer for the BK's
-
Not a bad solution imo.I could suspend reality a little and accept you have to sink all ships in the fleet before you can sink the carrier.I dont 'LIKE' the fact it would be a bit gamey but in order to stop these suicidal tactics being rewarded I'd agree to it.
BUT....
I had an idea which at least might help the CV last longer than it does now.
Its a very simple but i think effective answer to the problem of weakness and it isnt too far from reality.
You make it so only bombs which hit the ship cause damage.If it splashes into the water nearby , instead of causing damage by proximity,like it does now, it instead causes no damage to the CV.
For any other ship or LVT etc the near miss would cause the normal damage we have now.Only the carrier is impervious to near misses.
Simply put if you hit the water near the carrrier you wont damage it.
This would mean that a heavy bomber formation suicide dweeb, due to the width of the formation will only hit the carrier (if he aims good) with 1 aircrafts set of the bombs, the others although very close wont effect the ship making a formation suicide dive a bit pointless.
FURTHER: we could even set it up so that only a bomb dropped at a near vertical angle AND only if that bomb has enough speed (or altitude/distance travelled) before it strikes does it cause the correct type of damage to actually 'sink' a ship. If it is dropped at too shallow an angle it causes damage but doesnt sink it.
what do you think?
This wont stop sinkings but it would certainly make sinking them harder.True it is a little unrealistic as near misses did harm ships but for the sake of a better game I dont think its too much to accept for players.is it?
-
Maybe a concession between gaminess and spawning would be to not lose task force until entire fleet is sunk.
Now if you sink a cruiser and not the cv it will respawn. Why not make it so as long as there are still ships afloat, ALL ships will eventually respawn.
...also add an LST or some type of landing ship from which LVT's and PT's can spawn. Kill it and no more LVT's or PT's.
F.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
Other threads about CV's... everyone seems to like em and everyone seems to think they are too vulnerable to silly, simplistic tactics. the rankest newbie can kill one pretty easy..
lots of ideas on toughening em up or adding ack but.... how bout if it were set that they actual CV could not be sunk until all the escort vessels were sunk?
the (cough) chess players of the sky could still attack CV's and do their part and earn the admiration and gratitude of their country and the rest of us could.... have fun. everyone wins.
lazs
Tsk, tsk Lazs, you always assume the way you play Aces High is cool and everyone else is a fool.
I don't hear Hitech asking my opinon, but no way on the escort vessels.
Face it Lazs, CVs are in the game to facilitate base capture. CVs are not here to provide you with a platform for furballing.
You have zero interest in any strategic part of the sim. That's cool, your $15. But, why in the world should Hitech pork his game so that a small fraction of the AH population can engage in self-fellation?
curly
-
curly... you will admit that the cv's are sunk way too easily now.. it is bad history and more importantly.. bad gameplay.
I don't think that the groups would be that tough to kill if they were hit by dedicated (cough) strat steamrollers or strat gangbangers.
The beauty is that IF thCV's had no strategic value.. the fields they were near were pretty useless, then no one would bother to try to sink em.. the furballers would have fun... the strat guys could go back to their ledgers and the suicide guys would be frustrated... win win.
I don't know what HT thinks of my ideas or if he even reads em. I bet he is beggining to think that steamrollering and gangbanging bases... the new strat... is pretty much, as you say, auto fellatio tho.
lazs
Public Relations Officer for the BK's
-
tw9... looking at your stats it is clear that you don't have any idea what a furball is.... reading you telling us that we need to coircle around doing nothing waiting to kill some skilless fluffy or suicide 38 such as yourself...well.. that proves it.
lazs
-
Yes, I mean you. At least "lassie" is a word. WTF is 'lazs2" supposed to sound like? Is it in the dictionary?? You are still a jerk. A putz. A nincompoop. And a jerk. If you had half a brain, you'd be two times better off than you are now.
I am truly tired of reading your acid comments and oh-so-clever insults of anybody that disagrees with your position. Your absolute certainty that the game was invented just for your sole personal gratification is the attitude of a 10 year old. You belittle other people. You are a hypocrite. You don't argue substance, you go for cheap shots and snide comments about the person, not the subject.
These are all traits I find disgusting. They are traits I commonly associate with a jerk. Please send a full-face picture I can use as a dart board. Do you get the point that I don't like you? I think you should get a job as a lab rat.
Did I mention that I think you're a jerk? :p
-
tw9 played 0 hours this tour. Stats aren't near as important as genitals but they are important indicators.
lazs
-
gee hubert... weren't you the one that gave the lecture on not insulting people from the safety of the internet? weren't you the "libertarian" that wanted to tell everyone what to say and not say?
besides... you fight like a girl and nobody likes you.
lazs
-
tw.. if you need perkies I can sell you about 11,000.. might be able to get squadmates to sell you another 100,000 or so.
you could ruin my fun by sinking cv's (gawd knows it's easy enough) but wouldn't it be more fun to just hunt me down like the dog that I am? My squaddies would appreciate the latter.
And thank you for sparing me your personal problems/reasons for 'quitting".
lazs
Public Relations Officer for the BK's
-
Originally posted by lassie
gee hubert... weren't you the one that gave the lecture on not insulting people from the safety of the internet? weren't you the "libertarian" that wanted to tell everyone what to say and not say?
besides... you fight like a girl and nobody likes you.
lazs
Gave the lecture. You didn't pay any attention. Decided to change tactics. Fighting fire with fire. Not telling you what to say, just telling you that you're a jerk for saying it. That doesn't violate your rights. Idiotic allusion to lack of Libertarian principles dismissed.
No, no, it's not "fight like a girl", it's "mud wrestle with girls". At least I like girls. My dog likes me.
You're still a jerk.
-
mw.. it's lazs.. just as it allways has been.. the lazs2 thing is when the BB coughed a long time ago and My lack of puter savy made me pick another handle... when it coughs again I will no doubt be lazs3 but will allways sign...
hubert.. WTG on getting your dog to like you (it wouldn't be a male collie would it?). Oh... and the fighting fire with fire thing... maybe you should give that some more thought.
lazs
-
You brought up a good point about controll towers being invulnerable, they need to fix that .
-
I don't know... what would be the point of making the towers blow up? most don't even know or care if they do.
As for the CV's... they take bombs now and don't sink... how would it look unrealistic if they didn't sink till the rest of the fleet did? It would just look like the bombs that hit did insignificant damage.... didn't hit vulnerable areas or... there wasn't enough tonnage on target. I think people would adjust to it seamlessly.
lazs
-
And why would that be better? I mean... I don't care so lonmg as the CV's are a little tougher to sink or there are a lot more of em but..
I am stunned by this reversal of your position.... Didn't you say that things were fine as they were and that the real problem was the lack of players willing to circle around the cv doing nothing but wait for the skilless fluff or suicide jabo?
lazs
-
I think people would adjust to it seamlessly.
I don't think Hitech would . He's bothered by things like magic shacks that you can taxi through without damage, etc.
CV's don't take bombs without taking damage, and thats good, and right . You're proposing making the damage model worse and wrong for gamey purposes .
CV's get sunk because people do stupid things with them, not because the damage model is too logical . I know I've blown my share of ships out of the water with coastal artillery because somebody was stupid enough to offer their CG up on a silver platter .
-
Originally posted by lassie
hubert.. WTG on getting your dog to like you (it wouldn't be a male collie would it?). Oh... and the fighting fire with fire thing... maybe you should give that some more thought.
lazs
No, it (they actually) are yorkies. Why, are you attracted to male collies for some reason?
I would give the "fire with fire" thing some more thought, but I don't take advice from jerks.
You're still a jerk.
-
tw said "Its not the cv's fault or the games fault.. Its the lack of defense thats to blame.."
this would tend to indicate to anyone that you felt that the cv model was fine and that the gameplay was fine and that the fault rested SOLEY on the players themselves who refused to circle around doing nothing in order to stop fluffy or suicide jabos...
To me... your current position that advocates fixing the wqay that cv's are sunk is indeed a stunning reversal.
hubert... internet tough guy doesn't suit you.. it comes off like "petulant moron" when yu do it... nothing wrong with that if that is the effect you want tho... oh... lassie was a male collie. just so you know.
lazs
-
I have to side with TW9.
CV damage doesn't need to be hardened. The historically-correct defense of a CV is also the approriate defense in AH.
Fly multi-altitude CAP [Carrier Air Patrol ;)] at proper intercept distance and your CV is less likely to be sunk. Don't fly a CAP after placing the CV in harms way against a numerically superior enemy and you lose your CV.
Sometimes you just have to do the grunt work. It comes with the territory - just like running supplies.
-
Originally posted by fullback
I have to side with TW9.
CV damage doesn't need to be hardened. The historically-correct defense of a CV is also the approriate defense in AH.
Fly multi-altitude CAP [Carrier Air Patrol ;)] at proper intercept distance and your CV is less likely to be sunk. Don't fly a CAP after placing the CV in harms way against a numerically superior enemy and you lose your CV.
Sometimes you just have to do the grunt work. It comes with the territory - just like running supplies.
You are correct, Sir. BUT...
I still would like to see a more advanced damage model on the ships. Hull damage, gun damage, etc. culminating in a sinking when enough hull damage accumulates. It would be good to know what the status of the ride is, too.
Another idea is repair. Real CVs have huge repair crews that fix what gets broke, if they have time. Of course, too much damage in too little time overwhelmed their efforts.
We need better control of the Task Group and of individual ships. I would love to crank one of those Fletchers up and go torpedo somebody.
I used to play a sim called Great Naval Battles that modeled all these things. Lassie would hate it, since it could take HOURS to get a kill. I had a good time, though.
Lassie, you need to get that cough looked at. And, by the way, you're still a jerk.
-
How about we give the CV's a damage model? You know, bombs can destroy the flight deck but not destroy the carrier. The Carriers should also have damage modelling for turrets, fuel, ordinance, and barracks like currentsl bases. That way by slamming a carrier you can reduce it's effectiveness, not sink it outright.
You can sign up as fix crew, and every minute there it helps reduce the downtime by 5 minutes.
That way the carrier doesn't sink, but it is made in-operable by attacks.
IRL - carriers were VERY hard to sink. It took a combination of bombs, fires, and torpedo's to sink the Yorktown over a period of DAYS.
-
you are correct hubert.. taking hours to get a kill would not go over very well with me in a game. I doubt that it would with anyone here.
What you are not keeping in mind is that this is a 24/7 /365 day game that people come on at any point in time. Any long term goals are not seen by the majority and are not even important to a lot of us.
I believe that the trend has been going away from air combat and that it would be nice if we could offer some choice for those of us who like to fight other players.
and yes... i am a jerk but it is kinda rude (and unimaginative) of you to point it out every post.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Mister Fork
How about we give the CV's a damage model? You know, bombs can destroy the flight deck but not destroy the carrier. The Carriers should also have damage modelling for turrets, fuel, ordinance, and barracks like currentsl bases. That way by slamming a carrier you can reduce it's effectiveness, not sink it outright.
You can sign up as fix crew, and every minute there it helps reduce the downtime by 5 minutes.
That way the carrier doesn't sink, but it is made in-operable by attacks.
IRL - carriers were VERY hard to sink. It took a combination of bombs, fires, and torpedo's to sink the Yorktown over a period of DAYS.
You're right, but Lexington went down in a few hours, as did Wasp. Hornet was sunk on the same day as the attack by her own destroyers. All were sunk by torpedos, bomb hits not withstanding.
It just shows that a more advanced model is needed. Navy guys say that you don't sink ships by making holes that let in air, but by making holes that let in water. Hull damage should be the only thing that sinks the CV, and aerial bombs don't do that very well. They blow up on the hangar deck, and start fires.
BTW, I used to work with a guy who was a survivor of BOTH the Lex and the Yorktown. After Lexington sunk, the survivors went back to Pearl Harbor. Volunteers were requested to make up the losses in Yorktown's engineering department. He thought lightning could never strike twice...
He was one of the last people off Yorktown after it was torpedoed by the sub. Had some interesting stories.
-
This is tough love, lassie. I'm trying to help you.
And you're still a jerk. A jerk with a short attention span.
-
Originally posted by TW9
This has already been implemented... the 8000lbs of ord has to be put on cv within 5 or 10mins i forget... Its the same for hangers too i believe..
I did not know that. That is a good thing. And gives the "soft CV' whiners less ammunition.
And yes, Lassie, you are STILL a jerk.
I should probably put that in my signature block.
-
Originally posted by rshubert
This is tough love, lassie. I'm trying to help you.
And you're still a jerk. A jerk with a short attention span.
Could you please explain to me how you got all this sand in your vagina?
-
yep... as it is every target takes damage till it breaks.. it is not uncommon to see the CV take direct hits that show no damage whatsoever. This could simply be adjusted as many have advocated. I think gameplay would be better if the escorts had to be sunk first. I am not adverse to anything that would keep the cv's in play longer tho.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
yep... as it is every target takes damage till it breaks.. it is not uncommon to see the CV take direct hits that show no damage whatsoever. This could simply be adjusted as many have advocated. I think gameplay would be better if the escorts had to be sunk first. I am not adverse to anything that would keep the cv's in play longer tho.
lazs
Then use your (assumedly) incredibly low ranking to take over the CV and get it out of harm's way. What??? You say your ranking is only in the mid-1700's?? What's up with that?
If you had a balanced score, you could control the CV. Put it anywhere your little heart desires. Furball all day and all night.
Or you could go to the DA.
And, you're still a jerk.
-
Originally posted by Furious
Could you please explain to me how you got all this sand in you vagina?
It's not sand in my vagina, it's dogsh*t on my shoe. (note the clever allusion to lassie)
And, lassie is still a jerk. No improvement today. I think we'll need to come up with a "lassie jerk report" to keep track of it. Some kind of scoring system would be required.
-
tough guy... I have no interest in driving the cv... talk about boring. besides... I got no problem with the way the guys who are driving it are doing... it is the vulnerability that ois the issue here... try to pay attention.
lazs
-
Originally posted by fullback
I have to side with TW9.
CV damage doesn't need to be hardened. The historically-correct defense of a CV is also the approriate defense in AH.
Fly multi-altitude CAP [Carrier Air Patrol ;)] at proper intercept distance and your CV is less likely to be sunk. Don't fly a CAP after placing the CV in harms way against a numerically superior enemy and you lose your CV.
Sometimes you just have to do the grunt work. It comes with the territory - just like running supplies.
This argument makes no sense in the MA. In order to get people to fly a tedious cap over the cv or field or other strat target, you would have to assign them that tedious misson when they logged on. Then in order to make the game any fun the other country would have to have an assigned misson to sink/capture/destroy said target. (oh, wait! won't that be the new mission arena!)
People in the MA want action, whatever that means to them. And since no one is going to send you to Levenworth for 15 to 20 for not caping a field, they are going to go where they want.
This is not a WWII sim, It is a flight combat sim. That's why the overwhelming majority are here. They want to blow stuff up, doesn't matter if its fighters, buildings, ships,or tanks.
The point of this and almost every other thread like it is That the effort to destroy cvs, fuel, etc. is disproportionatley easy compared to the effect it has on game play.
Scott
-
Originally posted by Scott
This argument makes no sense in the MA. In order to get people to fly a tedious cap over the cv or field or other strat target, you would have to assign them that tedious misson when they logged on. Then in order to make the game any fun the other country would have to have an assigned misson to sink/capture/destroy said target. (oh, wait! won't that be the new mission arena!)
People in the MA want action, whatever that means to them. And since no one is going to send you to Levenworth for 15 to 20 for not caping a field, they are going to go where they want.
This is not a WWII sim, It is a flight combat sim. That's why the overwhelming majority are here. They want to blow stuff up, doesn't matter if its fighters, buildings, ships,or tanks.
The point of this and almost every other thread like it is That the effort to destroy cvs, fuel, etc. is disproportionatley easy compared to the effect it has on game play.
Scott
I also cap fields. And hunt for sneaky goons. And sneak around in goons. And I up bombers for half-hour rides. And drive tanks.
I have a ball. Don't mess my fun up. I don't disagree that it is too easy to kill a CV, but there is a point that you need to see, here. If you don't use the CV in a stupid way, it lives a lot longer. You should be railing against the fools who sit in the turrets trying to shoot at Cod knows what from 30 miles out. You should be convincing your teammates to defend the CV before it moves into harm's way. You know, plan. Think ahead. Play smart. Play to win the game, not the next move.
And, lassie is still a jerk.
-
Originally posted by lassie
tough guy... I have no interest in driving the cv... talk about boring. besides... I got no problem with the way the guys who are driving it are doing... it is the vulnerability that ois the issue here... try to pay attention.
lazs
Okay lassie, try to follow me here...I'll type slow 'cause I know you have trouble reading fast...
The fediddleing carrier would not get so many attackers if it were (1)defended properly and (2) positioned properly. If the guy driving the carrier did more than just have it run back and forth 5 miles off the coast, TANKS (fer crissake) couldn't damage it. CV drivers need to use their heads, but they usually don't.
When I am involved in a CV vs. base fight on the base side, it never ceases to amaze me how many different times I can get up and attack the CV. Heck, when I take an A-20, I have to circle out to get to a reasonable altitude. THAT CV SHOULDN'T BE THERE. It doesn't need to be there. The problem is TACTICS, not hardness.
BTW, the same type problem exists in base defense. YOU CAN'T DEFEND YOUR STRAT FROM THE BASE. It has to be done AWAY from the base, to get the enemy to drop their ord or die.
How do you predict what the enemy will do, so you can go get 'em? Lots of ways. Dar. GVs sneaking around near their bases. Some use spies, but not me. Estimates of what their intentions are from past experience and projection of current operations. In one word, intelligence.
OOPS. That may be the whole issue, with you. That may be why you are limited to a thumb candy view of the game.
And, you are STILL a jerk.
-
tough guy... you could still do all those things... closer fields, manable quad fifties... perked bombs... none of those things would prevent you from doing any of the talentless things that you enjoy... you could still get a load of laundry done between kills is that is what blows air up your skirt... we are not trying to take that away from you..
we simply want your effect on our game to equal the amount of skill and effort you put into it (flying for hours is not skill and effort). and... we simply want some places where it is easier to get into the action for our few hours up.
lazs
-
Originally posted by rshubert
I also cap fields. And hunt for sneaky goons. And sneak around in goons. And I up bombers for half-hour rides. And drive tanks.
I have a ball. Don't mess my fun up. I don't disagree that it is too easy to kill a CV, but there is a point that you need to see, here. If you don't use the CV in a stupid way, it lives a lot longer. You should be railing against the fools who sit in the turrets trying to shoot at Cod knows what from 30 miles out. You should be convincing your teammates to defend the CV before it moves into harm's way. You know, plan. Think ahead. Play smart. Play to win the game, not the next move.
And, lassie is still a jerk.
I don't see your point, I'm not trying to mess your fun up, I don't really understand how making targets more challenging will do that.
I'll cap a field if it needs it. I love that people fly bombers (they are sooo fun to shoot), Tanks I don't care about but knock yourself out.
CVs in the game are not commanded by career officers with proven competence but rather by whoever has rank and the desire, please note no competence for command required. So of course the cvs will be used stupidly. There have been enough flame wars on this board about how XXXX stole the CV and killed it, to demonstrate that there are not enough competent admirals to go around. Also realistic carrier ops would be a bore.
You want to take bases and plan ahead, great! That will lead to some interesting fights, IF fuel isn't the first thing destroyed. (what is the use of base capture if all facilities are destroyed. You put yourself immediately into the previous defenders predicament, no fuel, vehicals, fighters, bomber, or radar...)
I'll look for those fights and defend or, tag along on the attack to do some air to air, but that's about all the stratigic thinking I want to do.
Win the war? Endgame in the MA is one of the least fun times for me, either as victor, vanquished, or second place. 20 perk points, got plenty, don't use em much, don't care. All a reset means to me now is that I'll get booted out of the arena and then come back to the same map.
So when it comes right down to it you, I, and lazs all agree about toughening up the CV!
Scott
-
Weird thing is you can dive sraight in and survive long enough to drop ordanance , but circling the CV group from a relatively save distance and 1 ping will send ya back the tower.