A purposed problem with Aircraft carriers.

[_Spud]

We all should know that AC's don't go out of home port without a submarine (sm) close by, or in direct transit.

 

 

So how would AC and SM's be handled in game?

 

In modern naval science (my class) we are taught that AC's without the SM near by, or from direct transit is "EXTREMELY"

vulnerable to enemy capture.

 

Is this a problem for matchmaking... such as like in WoT were arties are without scouts and scouts are without arties?

 

Seems like a flaw in Warships....

 

 

Unless submarines will not be introduced in game. In which I will be humbly upset.

[Super_Dreadnought]

I'm not really worried about the dangers of having my CV captured in transit, afterall they are instantly teleported to and from the battleground.

 

As for the scouting problem, CVs (and BBs and CLs) can use scout planes.

[_Spud]

Deadnought, on 07 December 2012 - 03:29 AM, said:

I'm not really worried about the dangers of having my CV captured in transit, afterall they are instantly teleported to and from the battleground.

As for the scouting problem, CVs (and BBs and CLs) can use scout planes.

Get real here... I'm talking about the "historical factor" World of Warships is going to "have."

Without a submarine in game... Aircraft Carriers will be nothing but a waste of tonnage.

[alphakaynine]

Propane_expoldered, on 07 December 2012 - 03:42 AM, said:

Get real here... I'm talking about the "historical factor" World of Warships is going to "have."

Without a submarine in game... Aircraft Carriers will be nothing but a waste of tonnage.

i will have you know that aircraft carriers SANK the most tonnage during WWII Torps and bombs from planes killed probably 90%(give or take)of all ships.
ALSO there were many times in which the USS Enterprise left port without so much as destroyer escorts i think in the battle of midway?

[Tedster_]

alphakaynine, on 07 December 2012 - 03:47 AM, said:

i will have you know that aircraft carriers SANK the most tonnage during WWII Torps and bombs from planes killed probably 90%(give or take)of all ships.

yep.  the two largest battleships ever built were sunk by air power alone.

[Vergil118]

Propane_expoldered, on 07 December 2012 - 03:22 AM, said:

We all should know that AC's don't go out of home port without a submarine (sm) close by, or in direct transit.


So how would AC and SM's be handled in game?

In modern naval science (my class) we are taught that AC's without the SM near by, or from direct transit is "EXTREMELY"
vulnerable to enemy capture.

Is this a problem for matchmaking... such as like in WoT were arties are without scouts and scouts are without arties?

Seems like a flaw in Warships....


Unless submarines will not be introduced in game. In which I will be humbly upset.

I'm not sure where you got the idea that submarines had anything at all to do with carrier operations during the mid-20th century, but they didn't. Carriers and naval task forces on the whole used both cruiser/carrier based scout planes and flying boats for scouting. Fleet submarines were used only in certain situations for pickets several hundred to several thousand miles away from where carriers operated, usually more for attrition than for actual scouting.

I'm also unsure where you got the impression that a submarine with maybe a few dozen crewmembers could capture an aircraft carrier with a few thousand.

[Skygunner]

It has already been announced that submarines will not be appearing in game as a playable class.    You can read the debate about them here

http://forum.worldof...being-left-out/

 

Furthermore I have no idea where you got AC and SM as abbreviations.

 

http://www.navweaps...._ships_list.htm

 

Consult that list in the future to help avoid confusion.

[anonym_auUiRfWCi1jI]

Look right here to find out more about submarines...

 

 

Now, repeat after me, "There are no submarines in World of Warships"...

[Captain_Dorja]

How in gods name does something board and capture a vessel that:

1) has a crew of 5500 or so

2) often has constant air patrols around it

3) always carriers a security force of Marines.

 

If they aren't boarding and taking the thing, they are killing it in transit with missiles from a LONG way away, and subs aren't going to do jack about that.

[SimulationX]

I believe that destroyers were used to guard carriers too

[NagatoroHayase]

I can't tell if the OP is trolling or not about carriers being useless tonnage.

 

 

http://www.navweaps...._ships_list.htm

Consult that list in the future to help avoid confusion.

To be fair, 'AC' is on that list.

 

AC Collier (coaling ship)

 

But I'm not fully sure how having a ship filled with coal will deter enemy ships from capturing the Aircraft Carrier...

[Crag_r]

Propane_expoldered, on 07 December 2012 - 03:42 AM, said:

Without a submarine in game... Aircraft Carriers will be nothing but a waste of tonnage.

Not at all!

Their Air wing will also act as scouts giving me the opportunity to avoid a direct fight. Plus the Air wing does also carry enough torpedo and bombs to put fear into even the largest of opponents.

Also the thing about sub escort for carriers does not really apply to the games timeframe as carriers carried a whole variety of dual purpose AA guns. Because to be frank THERE IS NO SUBS IN GAME, OR WILL EVER BE AS CONFIRMED BY DEVS MANY... MANY TIMES.


Or not the best attempt at trolling i have seen

[Anikus_Augustus]

ScarlettRain, on 07 December 2012 - 05:12 AM, said:

I can't tell if the OP is trolling or not about carriers being useless tonnage.

I'm wondering the same thing. On one hand he can just be spilling jibberish nonesense with such a post. On the other hand, I have seen the kind of garbage school boards teach kids and the idiotic teachers that teach such classes.

[Wunderwaffen1945]

Always the same, some guys just don't read all informations

[nixxxie]

alphakaynine, on 07 December 2012 - 03:47 AM, said:

i will have you know that aircraft carriers SANK the most tonnage during WWII Torps and bombs from planes killed probably 90%(give or take)of all ships.
ALSO there were many times in which the USS Enterprise left port without so much as destroyer escorts i think in the battle of midway?

I beg to disagree. 70% of civilian tonnage losses was due to subs.

[DementedMind]

nixxxie, on 07 December 2012 - 07:20 AM, said:

I beg to disagree. 70% of civilian tonnage losses was due to subs.

Key word.

[Windhover118]

Propane_expoldered, on 07 December 2012 - 03:22 AM, said:

We all should know that AC's don't go out of home port without a submarine (sm) close by, or in direct transit.


So how would AC and SM's be handled in game?

In modern naval science (my class) we are taught that AC's without the SM near by, or from direct transit is "EXTREMELY"
vulnerable to enemy capture.

Is this a problem for matchmaking... such as like in WoT were arties are without scouts and scouts are without arties?

Seems like a flaw in Warships....


Unless submarines will not be introduced in game. In which I will be humbly upset.

Name one time, ONE time, an aircraft carrier has ever been captured.

[alphakaynine]

*military tonnage*

happy?

nixxxie, on 07 December 2012 - 07:20 AM, said:

I beg to disagree. 70% of civilian tonnage losses was due to subs.

[Gigaton]

Propane_expoldered, on 07 December 2012 - 03:42 AM, said:

Without a submarine in game... Aircraft Carriers will be nothing but a waste of tonnage.

I tried inputting this into my brain but it failed to compute.

Windhover118, on 07 December 2012 - 08:13 AM, said:

Name one time, ONE time, an aircraft carrier has ever been captured.

Katsuragi? Junyô? :tongue: And yes, I know that's not what you meant.

[Carrier_Enterprise]

Propane_expoldered, on 07 December 2012 - 03:22 AM, said:

In modern naval science (my class) we are taught that AC's without the SM near by, or from direct transit is "EXTREMELY"
vulnerable to enemy capture.

Have you thought of the destroyers, cruiser and Battleships? In what universe are carriers expected to defend themselves?

Propane_expoldered, on 07 December 2012 - 03:22 AM, said:

Is this a problem for matchmaking... such as like in WoT were arties are without scouts and scouts are without arties?
Seems like a flaw in Warships....

Planes have pilots in them, they also have radios and can report enemy movement.

Shells don't have pilots and radios and can't report enemy movement.

CVs have scout planes, Arties don't have scouting shells


PS: Please read the F.A.Q

[Capcon]

Propane_expoldered, on 07 December 2012 - 03:22 AM, said:

We all should know that AC's don't go out of home port without a submarine (sm) close by, or in direct transit.


So how would AC and SM's be handled in game?

In modern naval science (my class) we are taught that AC's without the SM near by, or from direct transit is "EXTREMELY"
vulnerable to enemy capture.

Is this a problem for matchmaking... such as like in WoT were arties are without scouts and scouts are without arties?

Seems like a flaw in Warships....


Unless submarines will not be introduced in game. In which I will be humbly upset.

Naval technology and tactics for 2012 do NOT automatically apply to situations of 70 years ago. No sub in the 40's could keep up with fleet carriers of the time so they did not run around together.

Subs in the 40's are assassins and area denial weapons.

And not to be unkind but your naval science class is not a naval history class obviously and this is very much about the historical, nothing more recent than 60 odd years ago or so and stretching back to more than a century ago for some ships.

World War I is now as remote in time to us as the Napoleonic Wars were to the folks from World War I.

[RogerWilco65]

In naval games I was always a Sub captain. When I heard about them not being included I was severly disheartened. I'll go to a carrier without too much of a fuss, but my heart craves for a Sub. I also thoguht Wargamings reasoning was [edited], no offence. Again, I'll still play, and enjoy the game...just wish Wargaming would have been a little more open minded, and more creative on the subject.

 

That's just my opinon.

[Ariecho]

Crag_r, on 07 December 2012 - 06:05 AM, said:

Also the thing about sub escort for carriers does not really apply to the games timeframe a

I was gonna ask for some references as well about submarine escorts during WW1 and WW2.  While I understand that submarines are an integral part of a task force nowadays, I don't believe that it was true during (or before) WW2.

[Ariecho]

Sgt_Joe, on 07 December 2012 - 04:18 PM, said:

In naval games I was always a Sub captain. When I heard about them not being included I was severly disheartened. I'll go to a carrier without too much of a fuss, but my heart craves for a Sub. I also thoguht Wargamings reasoning was [edited], no offence. Again, I'll still play, and enjoy the game...just wish Wargaming would have been a little more open minded, and more creative on the subject.

That's just my opinon.

There is another aspect that has nothing to do with history about adding submarines to the game.  Take your standard game where you need to either capture a base (if there is such a mode in this game) or kill everybody in the other team.  What happens when you have a submarine who hides the entire game?  Do you have to wait until the clock stops ticking to end the game?

[RogerWilco65]

Ariecho, on 07 December 2012 - 04:25 PM, said:

There is another aspect that has nothing to do with history about adding submarines to the game.  Take your standard game where you need to either capture a base (if there is such a mode in this game) or kill everybody in the other team.  What happens when you have a submarine who hides the entire game?  Do you have to wait until the clock stops ticking to end the game?

And there is the lack of creativity. Why not creat an oxygen system, that requires the submarine to surface, and stay on the surface to a certian amount of time, sort of like an ability with a cooldown.
Submarines of that era could not stay underwater for long periods of time. I don't know why people seem to think they are submarines of the 60s, but they arent. The had electric motors which powered them underwater, and they needed to be recharged. So in a sense, you could have 2 systems. One that drains the O2 levels as you are underwater, and one that drains your electric power, that once it reaches 0..the submarine surfaces, or if you run out of O2, the submarine instantly sinks, sort of like the system that is in WoT right now if you drive your tank into that water.