CV vs Level Bombers

[NCLawman]

There was full manual calibration in the MA and we saw the results. Wind, bomb dispersion and things that make level bombing less effective lead to only one thing - dive bombing lancasters/B17s. Unless some mechanism that prevents heavy bombers from dive bombing (bomb release from F6 view, restriction on dive angle for release, etc.) is installed, this will happen again.

Out of all of these posts, this one is the best idea I have read so far.  But that is just my opinion, and we all know about opinions......     

[LLogann]

Did somebody already say...... "NO THEY DIDN'T!" ?

They sent waves of 17's against the 4 cv's at Midway.......nuthin

[hitech]

Can anyone give me an actual WWII statistic on the effectiveness of level bombers vs CV's??  I can't seem to recall a single CV lost to level bombers, yet in AH the SOP to take down the carrier is to launch a set of Lancs, B-17s, B-24's, etc etc.

Fist this is a classic hidden attempt at wanting the game to be changed to fit the OP playing style. The reason it is classic is because it is an attempt to use a "Realism" argument to justify a change.  The problem with the basic argument is that it is a very selective form of realism. I.E. level bombing was not very effective. But the OP does not begin to analyze why they were less effective in real life, but immediately wants the bombers role limited.

The answer is obvious to most people why they were less effective.

1. Low and level bombing a task group made for easy pickings by gunners, and does also in the game.
2. High and level bombing , all a boat would have to do is turn, and a bomber would miss.

So what is different in the game than real life?
The most important factor is the Maneuvering.

Now here is where the selective realism comes in, the OP does not even consider the possibilities of 1, forcing someone to be on the bridge at all times.This is an example of a post exactly as the OP makes.

I think all boats should be maned at all times, or should automatically be sunk, because real boats always had a crew at the helm.

The only option I could see would be to make the CV auto maneuver.  But this also has a large draw back, manly of the CV turning more often during take offs.
2 do to the way CV's work, it would create more of a discrepancy of how all people would see the CV differently.

What do I think the real answer is?

1. Don't change a thing. You already have the option of manning the CV to keep it from being sunk if you desire.
2. I may consider is changing CV Puffy ack to be more accurate at low level bombers , and shoot below 3k for buffs only.

HiTech

[Oleg]

What do I think the real answer is?

1. Don't change a thing. You already have the option of manning the CV to keep it from being sunk if you desire.
2. I may consider is changing CV Puffy ack to be more accurate at low level bombers , and shoot below 3k for buffs only.

Some changes in manning CV would be nice, i believe. First, force CV commander to stay at CV (tower or gun) all the time he at command. Second, give him ability to turn CV with joystick, like PT boat.

Making bombers high priority target for puffy acks wouldnt hurt as well.

[CAP1]

Some changes in manning CV would be nice, i believe. First, force CV commander to stay at CV (tower or gun) all the time he at command. Second, give him ability to turn CV with joystick, like PT boat.

Making bombers high priority target for puffy acks wouldnt hurt as well.

now THESE are excellent ideas.

[whels]

Maybe 2 types of turn HT. 1 is normal course turning. the 2nd is hard evasive turn <very hard turn> to avoid
bomber drops.  have 2 buttons  while in the CV tower maybe. ER (Evasice Right) EL (Evasive Left), would turn
the ship hard in that direction for few secs and then return the fleet on the regular WP course.

[CAP1]

Maybe 2 types of turn HT. 1 is normal course turning. the 2nd is hard evasive turn <very hard turn> to avoid
bomber drops.  have 2 buttons  while in the CV tower maybe. ER (Evasice Right) EL (Evasive Left), would turn
the ship hard in that direction for few secs and then return the fleet on the regular WP course.

but keep it as mentioned earlier.....someone in the tower, and it has to be manually activated......

[LLogann]

Whels and oleg are both on to something!!!

but keep it as mentioned earlier.....someone in the tower, and it has to be manually activated......

[save]

Hitech . while you at it . decrease effectiviness of puffy acks by range from CV. HAppens often you get waisted bwr (beyond visual range ) even if u turn
Puffy acks effectiviness even at long range is the most annoying feature of the game IMHO.

<S>

[LLogann]

That sounds like a video card problem.  You can always see the cv before the puffy ack starts.

Hitech . while you at it . decrease effectiviness of puffy acks by range from CV. HAppens often you get waisted bwr (beyond visual range ) even if u turn
Puffy acks effectiviness even at long range is the most annoying feature of the game IMHO.

<S>

[Shuffler]

Woot wtg HT...... you spelled OP right. 

[999000]

Hitech, Would you ever consider adding more CV's to a task force?? (might be part of the answer for low level bombers) ...... Another factor could be to stop a task force you would need to sink all the CV's ...the catch being a single  sunk CV could respawn with in the task force in 15 mins as long as any  one CV was still up in that particulair task force.
999000 <S> love the game Hitech

[CAP1]

Hitech, Would you ever consider adding more CV's to a task force?? (might be part of the answer for low level bombers) ...... Another factor could be to stop a task force you would need to sink all the CV's ...the catch being a single  sunk CV could respawn with in the task force in 15 mins as long as any  one CV was still up in that particulair task force.
999000 <S> love the game Hitech

actually, this is another decent idea. we don't necessarily need more carriers in a single group......but what you said about sinking everything to stop the group. THAT is a good idea. possibly, if the carrier is sunk, the flag, and command could be transferred to one of the cruisers.

 the rest of the group can still do damage if there;s a battle going on, or the commander could retreat to safety, until a new carrier could join them(the re-spawn)

[DREDger]

What do I think the real answer is?

1. Don't change a thing. You already have the option of manning the CV to keep it from being sunk if you desire.
2. I may consider is changing CV Puffy ack to be more accurate at low level bombers , and shoot below 3k for buffs only.

HiTech

Moving the cv doesn't work against an experienced bomber pilot at 8k altitude.  Not to brag, but I'll kill the cv every time at that alt regardless if they move it or not.  I just keep my eye on the cruiser to see the direction it is going to turn, then lead the CV from there.  I set salvo at 4 and delay at 0.19, end of story.

The manned ack can be a great factor if someone knows how to use the guns.  A very few however, can pick of bombers at 6 to 8 k.  At that low an altitude, the ships movements can't overcome the time of bombs to fall.  It is an achillies heal of this game.

It would be great if the TA had more options for 5" training.  For example, that little cursor that shows you where to fire or where bombs fall in TA. 

In other words, have a TA area dedicated to mannable 5", with bombers at varous altitutes passing over a ship.  Once people got proficient at the 5", this problem would go away.  Bombers would be forced to higher altitudes, then the ships movement could make a difference.

FANTASTIC idea about the 3k puffy ack against bombers only.  Please for the love of god do this, and stop this low level bombing with complete IMPUNITY.

Some of the other ideas were good, like the joystick moving of CV.  Right now there is a substantial delay in CV movement.

Anyway, that aside, fun game HiTech.

Dredger

ps.  It was fun flying with you in the RV8 after Con 2006, though I felt a bit jipped by the wx that day.  You got a parachute for your passengers yet?

[DREDger]

2. I may consider is changing CV Puffy ack to be more accurate at low level bombers , and shoot below 3k for buffs only.

HiTech

One caveat, bombers loaded with torps and below 500 feet shouldn't get the same treatment as those doing suicide level bombing...just a thought.  Upping torp bombers for a cv is impossible enough already, shouldn'd be 'penalized' like those just lazy for gaining alt.