Sinking Carrier should not reset the Fleet to port

[Becinhu]

A single set of b26s with 500 lbers makes a reef out of a cv every time on a good drop.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Zener]

Same can be said for every heavy bomber.

Sometimes it's better NOT to go for a sink right away, such as when you have other teammates inbound in bombers of their own.  In those cases I will sometimes drop my salvo and make a run with lesser objectives, such as to damage it and drop its radar and to force a turn if someone is driving the CV.  If there's little or no cap, I can turn and come back with the lethal drop just about the time the others are in their bombsight from the other direction.  One of us is going to have time to react to a turn and sink it.

I like using 88s for that job.  Save the 500lb bombs on the wing for the second run, drop plenty of those smaller bombs in the bomb bay in salvos on the first pass and one of them is going to create a candle no matter how it turns.  Assuming of course you make the correct approach.

Undamaged BBs require a different strategy than CVs. 

[Becinhu]

At 8000 ft that cv has to be turned almost perfectly


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Arlo]

Good reason to add:



Which would create a reason to add:

[Lusche]

At 8000 ft that cv has to be turned almost perfectly

Unless I am the one bombing it, then about any turn will do   

[Becinhu]

Unless I am the one bombing it, then about any turn will do   

I would figure its more the result of the lack of hands. How does a snail push the bomb release anyway....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rebel28]

The main point I was trying to make in the original post was just sinking the Carrier should not reset the entire fleet.

The Carrier group as it is assembled here consists of:

1 Essex class carrier
1 Baltimore class Heavy cruiser
4 Destroyers

The Essex class carrier and the Baltimore class cruiser are, both, capital ships.

The sinking of just one should only reduce the effectiveness of the fleet not put it out of action. Which returning it to its home port is what it does currently.

[EagleDNY]

Not a bad idea to have to sink BOTH the CV and the Cruiser to get a reset.   Still gives you the opportunity to run with half the fleet and wait for one ship to respawn if sunk, or press the attack knowing they have to get the other one to reset you.  Would want to play with the respawn time on the CV and Cruiser though. 

[Devil 505]

The sinking of just one should only reduce the effectiveness of the fleet not put it out of action. Which returning it to its home port is what it does currently.

I like this.

Could be made even better if you attach the LVT and PT boats to the cruiser. That way one can sink the cruiser and prevent a base take while allowing the fight to continue.

[Arlo]

CV unsinkable until all other ships in TF sunk. CV still can be damaged all along, though.

[EagleDNY]

CV unsinkable until all other ships in TF sunk. CV still can be damaged all along, though.

Way too gamey this way. 

[The Fugitive]

A town has to be 80% down before it goes WF. Set a number of ships that have to go down in 30 minutes to make the capture. One capital ship and 3 others in 30 minutes, 1 capitol ship and 2 others in 15 minutes.

[Arlo]

Way too gamey this way.

Nothing else suggested is 'gamey', at all? We play in an MA which is massively adjusted for the sake of game play. In the challenge of balancing realism and game play we have shorter distances, faster fuel burn rate, magic spawn points and rapid repair. We also have dive-bombing bomber formations, ships that move at a constant forward speed, kill-shooter and every plane model in the game on every side of the game.

One more 'gamey' suggestion that'll keep the CV in the fight .... is 'way too' gamey?