George Clooney Posted September 16, 2016 Share Posted September 16, 2016 Giving ships a minimal chance to knock down some planes would be realistic. Going back to the World War II example, American ships shot down a fair number of Japanese kamikazes before they could carry out their attacks. The same argument could be made that soldiers and tanks should also have a minimal air defense capability (air defense units have been a part of just about every single military organizations since World War I). A national project (Aerospace Defense Command) could also be added to the game improve the odds of inflicting aircraft causalities. The problem we run into if you go beyond that (adding aircraft carriers, ADA units, what amounts to flak ships that escort capital vessels, etc.) is that it might be more realistic, but it can all become an unwieldy mess that paradoxically is less realistic, and certainly less playable. Some of the "Axis and Allies" variants I've seen were particularly bad that way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted September 16, 2016 Share Posted September 16, 2016 As the man said, the game year is not 1944. So knocking down even some planes in a naval attack is not realistic if the opponents air capability is gone. Maybe some crash on take off/landing? The argument is much stronger for land units with ADA using the realism argument. Again, this is a game. It is not the real world. Quote -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Clooney Posted September 17, 2016 Share Posted September 17, 2016 As the man said, the game year is not 1944. So knocking down even some planes in a naval attack is not realistic if the opponents air capability is gone. Maybe some crash on take off/landing? The argument is much stronger for land units with ADA using the realism argument. Again, this is a game. It is not the real world. Ships today also carry AD systems integrated with radar, increasing their legality despite the fact that ships today actually fewer AA guns. There is nothing difficult nor necessarily game changing about a few planes getting shot down while attacking ships. I'm not sure why you are objecting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WISD0MTREE Posted September 17, 2016 Share Posted September 17, 2016 Ships today also carry AD systems integrated with radar, increasing their legality despite the fact that ships today actually fewer AA guns. There is nothing difficult nor necessarily game changing about a few planes getting shot down while attacking ships. I'm not sure why you are objecting. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIM-7_Sea_Sparrow Range: 10 Nautical Miles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harpoon_(missile) Range: Over 67 Nautical Miles Am I missing something? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted September 17, 2016 Share Posted September 17, 2016 Nope WT you are absolutely correct. Plane launched ASMs vastly outrange naval defenses. 1 Quote -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Clooney Posted September 19, 2016 Share Posted September 19, 2016 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIM-7_Sea_Sparrow Range: 10 Nautical Miles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harpoon_(missile) Range: Over 67 Nautical Miles The part where anti-missile defenses have been developed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phalanx_CIWS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-630 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meroka_CIWS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted September 19, 2016 Share Posted September 19, 2016 The part where anti-missile defenses have been developed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phalanx_CIWS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-630 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meroka_CIWS Phalanx - range measured in meters AK-630 - same but suckier Meroka - brah do you even lift All of those have limited defense against ASMs. Hence why 1190 planes vs 50 ships does not kill 50 ships. So those things are already in the game basically. 1 Quote -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArcKnox Posted September 19, 2016 Share Posted September 19, 2016 Also completely irrelevant to the idea that ships completely unaided should be able to kill planes. Quote Praise Dio. Every !@#$ing day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted September 19, 2016 Share Posted September 19, 2016 Also completely irrelevant to the idea that ships completely unaided should be able to kill planes. yeah...there is no way that an enemy plane itself gets within 2km of an enemy ship. Like impossible. Quote -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoS Posted September 19, 2016 Share Posted September 19, 2016 Forget realism, it's just bad mechanics. Not that I care, as I'm always light on ships. But, it really is shit mechanics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bhuto Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 Well, in this case, I can suggest one thing maybe a aircraft carrier project???And to use aircraft carrier you will need say 6 MAP that will give both blockade and air superiority.Then the game may look more realistic Just a suggestion from a newcomer to the game Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.