Author Topic: Realistic Carriers  (Read 1063 times)

Offline fbEagle

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 584
Realistic Carriers
« on: November 11, 2009, 05:28:47 PM »
I think the CV's should be more realistic. Like the real ones. Like a torpedo riping a 15foot hole in the side of the hull and stopping the carrier dead in the water. It would make it much more interestinig.
<Insert witty remark here>

Offline Nemisis

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4086
      • Fightin 49'ers
Re: Realistic Carriers
« Reply #1 on: November 11, 2009, 05:49:07 PM »
Same probelm as my idea of a 4000lb bomb falling from 14k punching a hole through the flight deck.
All man needs to be happy is a home, his wife, and a place in the world

Col. 49Nem, Armor commander of the 49th

Offline Soulyss

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6558
      • Aces High Events
Re: Realistic Carriers
« Reply #2 on: November 11, 2009, 05:52:47 PM »
That would have the same effect as dropping the hangar hardness at the airfields to next to nothing. Which also wouldn't make for a very fun arena. :)
80th FS "Headhunters"
I blame mir.

Offline lyric1

  • Skinner Team
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10633
Re: Realistic Carriers
« Reply #3 on: November 11, 2009, 06:47:06 PM »
I think the CV's should be more realistic. Like the real ones. Like a torpedo riping a 15foot hole in the side of the hull and stopping the carrier dead in the water. It would make it much more interestinig.
First off all you have got to do is get close enough with something to do it with.

Offline curry1

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2321
Re: Realistic Carriers
« Reply #4 on: November 11, 2009, 07:48:56 PM »
I would be happy if the elevator was up.
Curry1-Since Tour 101

Offline allaire

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1239
Re: Realistic Carriers
« Reply #5 on: November 11, 2009, 08:45:44 PM »
You and everyone else that has been killed by it.
"I drank what?" -Socrates

Offline Ghosth

  • AH Training Corps (retired)
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8497
      • http://332nd.org
Re: Realistic Carriers
« Reply #6 on: November 12, 2009, 06:36:06 AM »
You know how many carriers died in WWII to a single torpedo?

None of the big ones that I can recall.

Injured, yes, slowed, perhaps, jammed the rudder, yes. Sunk, no.

Offline allaire

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1239
Re: Realistic Carriers
« Reply #7 on: November 12, 2009, 07:13:11 AM »
IIRC the small jeep carriers were the only ones that were worried about 1 torpedo.
"I drank what?" -Socrates

Offline bravoa8

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1571
Re: Realistic Carriers
« Reply #8 on: November 12, 2009, 08:24:44 AM »
Yeah we certainly need better damage model for cvs.

Offline Yossarian

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2516
Re: Realistic Carriers
« Reply #9 on: November 12, 2009, 09:55:23 AM »
IIRC the small jeep carriers were the only ones that were worried about 1 torpedo.

The Fuso was sunk by one or two torpedoes.
Afk for a year or so.  The name of a gun turret in game.  Falanx, huh? :banana:
Apparently I'm in the 20th FG 'Loco Busters', or so the legend goes.
O o
/Ż________________________
| IMMA FIRIN' MAH 75MM!!!
\_ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ

Offline Rich46yo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7358
Re: Realistic Carriers
« Reply #10 on: November 12, 2009, 10:02:58 AM »
The more graphics detail means the more little bytes that have to fit thru the garden hose in microseconds. The more little bytes of data for your puter and memory card to digest, interpret, and put on your screen.

There is a limit to how many bytes you want to send, how much detail you want, and for how many people with what kind of computers. Judging from the painful upgrade we just had, across the board, and with the accompanying snivelry, the staff no doubt has to always make judgments as to what kind of detail, and for when, is important enough to write code for. Because theres theres only so much that will fit thru the garden hose.

I for onr could care less about gaping holes in a CV and realistic damage. I care a lot more about the flight related, flight combat related, issues.
"flying the aircraft of the Red Star"

Offline 5PointOh

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2842
Re: Realistic Carriers
« Reply #11 on: November 12, 2009, 11:30:26 AM »
I myself would like to see progressive damage to the CV other than guns or radar, perhaps reduced speed, engine failure, rudder damage, or slight leans to the L or R sides.
Coprhead
Wings of Terror
Mossie Student Driver

Offline Simba

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 725
Re: Realistic Carriers
« Reply #12 on: November 12, 2009, 01:32:10 PM »
"You know how many carriers died in WWII to a single torpedo?"

H.M.S. Ark Royal was hit by only one U-boat torpedo and sank several hours later, mainly due to poor design and damage control; when her main engines shut down, no auxiliary power was available to pump or counter-flood.

 :frown:
Simba
No.6 Squadron vRFC/RAF

Offline AWwrgwy

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5478
Re: Realistic Carriers
« Reply #13 on: November 12, 2009, 02:31:14 PM »
You know how many carriers died in WWII to a single torpedo?


Along the same vein:

You know how many carriers were operated 7,000 yards off the beach in WWII?

 :rofl


wrongway
71 (Eagle) Squadron
"THAT"S PAINT!!"

"If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through."
- General Sir Anthony Cecil Hogmanay

Offline lyric1

  • Skinner Team
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10633
Re: Realistic Carriers
« Reply #14 on: November 12, 2009, 05:38:22 PM »
Along the same vein:

You know how many carriers were operated 7,000 yards off the beach in WWII?

 :rofl


wrongway
Some of them get a lot closer than that.