PDA

View Full Version : Carriers need weapons



lpjd
20th Feb 2007, 01:23
My friends and I were playing against another group the other day. We were VERY evenly matched as the groups went through every plane. All that was left were 3v3 carriers, but with only AA guns we could do no damage save blowing up each others AA guns. There appeared to be no hull damage taken. Did I miss something?

BlackLotus
20th Feb 2007, 21:07
My friends and I were playing against another group the other day. We were VERY evenly matched as the groups went through every plane. All that was left were 3v3 carriers, but with only AA guns we could do no damage save blowing up each others AA guns. There appeared to be no hull damage taken. Did I miss something?

At this point quit the game, game's over... Carriers don't have deck guns, and the damage done from AA guns is so minimal that it would take a year to sink one with it... If you're all out of planes, and you only have carriers left... there's nothing more you can do.

Otherwise, only your planes can do the job.

antiSniper07
20th Feb 2007, 22:11
At this point quit the game, game's over

Ya Think? :rasp:

NimitsTexan
21st Feb 2007, 03:58
Interestingly IRL, the Lexington and Akagi were both equipped with 8" guns in case they had to take on enemy destroyers or cruisers . .

ModerateN
21st Feb 2007, 06:15
yea, there should be something done with it. But don't equip only one or two carriers with shipsweapons, every carrier should be able to defend it self against other ships..

Samsonov
21st Feb 2007, 11:57
At this point quit the game, game's over...

I certainly hope I will never play you in MP **** :mad:

whoopy91
21st Feb 2007, 14:19
shgut up about these history things, its al about balance It wouldnt be very balanched if you can just attack with the carrier

lpjd
21st Feb 2007, 14:41
Why wouldn't it be balanced? How smart would it be to drive your carriers against other ships? They'd be torn apart. The purpose would be for defense should enemy DDs or other get close enough to warrant their use.

As for telling someone to "shut up" about their opinion, it doesn't give much credibility to any arguement you have to offer.

FreeloaderUK
21st Feb 2007, 14:48
Carriers did have 5inch guns that were used for anti-aircraft purposes but i spose firing armour-piercing shells or HE shells they could have been used against destroyers.

Samsonov
21st Feb 2007, 15:00
shgut up about these history things, its al about balance It wouldnt be very balanched if you can just attack with the carrier

Only a complete moron would "attack with the carrier". That's a waste of carrier.

However, destroying the CV with a destroyer gunfire while he can't defend just does not feel right (I know as I've done it many many times :cool: )

Part of the problem is that maps are tiny and forces start in contact with each other, and ALWAYS on same starting positions (no random starts as in other games). This is all due to poor production values for Eidos games in general (BSM included, sadly) :( Also CVs are slower than they should be.

Real CVs should be kept FAR from fighting, would move as fast as cruisers and on larger maps would/should be EXTREMELY hard to catch with surface forces. Once caught, CVs should easily be killed by cruiser-sized ships, though.

poisonpill
21st Feb 2007, 15:12
I think they can put that sub deck gun on a carrier and not worry about having a carrier own the seas. That gun is so crazy weak it would probably take 20 minutes to sink another carrier with it anyway.

whoopy91
21st Feb 2007, 15:13
Only a complete moron would "attack with the carrier". That's a waste of carrier.

However, destroying the CV with a destroyer gunfire while he can't defend just does not feel right (I know as I've done it many many times :cool: )

Part of the problem is that maps are tiny and forces start in contact with each other, and ALWAYS on same starting positions (no random starts as in other games). This is all due to poor production values for Eidos games in general (BSM included, sadly) :( Also CVs are slower than they should be.

Real CVs should be kept FAR from fighting, would move as fast as cruisers and on larger maps would/should be EXTREMELY hard to catch with surface forces. Once caught, CVs should easily be killed by cruiser-sized ships, though.

im not saying I would attack enemy ships with a CV, learn too read

Kai Robin
21st Feb 2007, 18:02
The problem with saying "blah blah game over" is this ISN'T a historical simulator. This is action first, history second. In this case the carrier factor should be addressed. Alot of these carriers had 5" or 8" secondary weapons, which should be allocated to artillery fire in the case that everyone runs out of planes. If worst comes to you could ram eachother.

For the sake of gameplay its ridiculous to tell the Carrier folk after two hours of hardwork for them to just up and quit because there wasn't a minor fix for an alternative victory. I'm a surface firepower guy myself, but all fronts should be equally represented.

imnotcanadian
21st Feb 2007, 20:25
If that happened to me....I would tell the other guy that we will just have a ramming match to see who wins,haha.

whoopy91
22nd Feb 2007, 16:07
does ramming has any effect ?

chip5541
22nd Feb 2007, 16:40
yes. I knocked 1 player down to almost destroyed then rammed him:rasp:

whoopy91
22nd Feb 2007, 17:40
awesome

jmstallard
23rd Feb 2007, 15:52
I accidentally rammed one of my own ships (in single player), and yes, it can do some significant damage.

imnotcanadian
23rd Feb 2007, 21:44
One time I was playing the demo,and I produced a sub and a bb first. I sent the sub for the carriers and the bb for the ship yards. when they crossed paths my sub was trying to submerge to go under,but it knocked my periscope off......I didn't know it could do that. I couldn't repair it either,haha.


But back on topic,yes...ramming does significant damage...especially head on and at fullspeed.

colonelklink
26th Feb 2007, 18:10
yeah i have had my periscope knocked off a couple times too
but it does get repaired eventually, takes a few minutes

FreeloaderUK
26th Feb 2007, 21:47
i wonder how the crew repairs the periscope if the sub is underwater lol

Admiral Sturnn
26th Feb 2007, 23:34
I know how they can fix it, you see lil scuba diving men get out from a hatch and start repairing it lol!.

but then again sharks might eat them lol!.

BlackLotus
27th Feb 2007, 01:38
I certainly hope I will never play you in MP **** :mad:

I don't quit if I'm about to lose ever, but in this case, both carriers were out of planes and both players had nothing else but their carriers...

What are they supposed to do? Ram each other to death?

Adolfz15
28th Feb 2007, 00:55
zOMG Carriers should have 18" guns FTWHEILHITLER!

officerpuppy
28th Feb 2007, 02:10
OMG FTW HEIL HITLER!
:scratch:
Surely I'm not the only one who noticed this?