Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
HyenaHiena

Why not put midway at T8?

15 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

413
[STP]
[STP]
Beta Testers
2,022 posts
11,121 battles

Really, why not put midway at T8?

T8 fighters

T8 torpedo bombers

TX rng maybe you gonna hit something drop bombers...

Just put the danm ship at T8 in place of lex (another useless usn cv in this game). the TX AA its just gonna melt everthing.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
390
[WOLF5]
Members
1,486 posts
2,042 battles

And put what at T10? The Nimitz?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
630 posts
703 battles
22 minutes ago, AJTP89 said:

And put what at T10? The Nimitz?

Gerald R. Ford. WG will find a way to nerf it to be worse than Hak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,306
[TF16B]
Members
8,036 posts
16,968 battles
23 minutes ago, AJTP89 said:

And put what at T10? The Nimitz?

Sure; why not? It'll get nerfed so bad from it's actual tech level it might actually be competitive.

If nothing else; a Nimitz worth of WW2 era planes should give it a hangar capacity of 200 or so...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
141
[VVV]
[VVV]
Members
681 posts
10,320 battles
31 minutes ago, AJTP89 said:

And put what at T10? The Nimitz?

Actually if they followed historical progression  Midway was followed by Forrestal and she was followed by Kitty Hawk and Enterprise CVN-65. So you'd have branching tier X's one conventional powered and one Nuclear 

Edited by yamato6945

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
413
[STP]
[STP]
Beta Testers
2,022 posts
11,121 battles
5 minutes ago, RealNewDeal said:

Gerald R. Ford. WG will find a way to nerf it to be worse than Hak.

27 minutes ago, AJTP89 said:

And put what at T10? The Nimitz?

 

Lets make the Nimitz and put WW1 planes at TX!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,121
[ARGSY]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
5,103 posts
18,616 battles

Na, not the Nimitz, that would be slightly OP considering the movie "The Final Countdown". The USS Forrestal would be ok.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
201
[O_O]
Members
769 posts
4,726 battles
3 minutes ago, yamato6945 said:

Actually if they followed historical progression  Midway was followed by Forrestall and she was followed by Kitty Hawk and Enterprise CVN-65. So you'd have branching tier X's one conventional powered and one Nuclear 

To be perfectly blunt, Forrestal was commissioned only a little more than a year after Kutuzov.

 

- R

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,259
[WOLF2]
Members
2,992 posts
5,204 battles

I'm sure having same tier planes, and nearly double the reserves of lex and shok wouldn't be an issue.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
141
[VVV]
[VVV]
Members
681 posts
10,320 battles
8 minutes ago, Mister_Rawr said:

To be perfectly blunt, Forrestal was commissioned only a little more than a year after Kutuzov.

 

- R

Oh I'm well aware he asked what would be next I answered if Midway was tier 8 Forrestal is next next logical tier 9 in terms of US Carrier design  you can't neglect the worlds first Super Carrier 

Edited by yamato6945

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
201
[O_O]
Members
769 posts
4,726 battles
19 minutes ago, yamato6945 said:

Oh I;m well aware he asked what would be next I answered if Midway was tier 8 Forrestal is next next logical tier 9 in terms of US Carrier design  you can't neglect the worlds first Super Carrier 

Not arguing, just mentioning that contemporaries already exist in the game.

It would be hilarious to see an April Fool's event built around this; Midway moves to Tier 8, Forrestal comes in at 9 and Kitty Hawk at 10.  Announced as "Carrier Rework Complete."

Seriously though, this would be terrible and wreck the game but while we're speaking in hyperbolic arcs why not?

-R

Edited by Mister_Rawr
Butterfingers. Seriously, have you tried them? They're delicious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,257
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
8,780 posts
14,785 battles
28 minutes ago, Mister_Rawr said:

To be perfectly blunt, Forrestal was commissioned only a little more than a year after Kutuzov.

How could ANYONE ever accuse this game of Russian Bias?

18 minutes ago, Mister_Rawr said:

Seriously though, this would be terrible and wreck the game

And totally OP Russian battleships disguised as cruisers will never do that, LMBO!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
201
[O_O]
Members
769 posts
4,726 battles
3 minutes ago, Umikami said:

How could ANYONE ever accuse this game of Russian Bias?

Spoiler

zqhpUTB.jpg

-R

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×