Aircraft Carriers

[zaibatsukid]

Thoughts on Aircraft Carriers

 

When sending out planes, will or should the aircraft carrier be able to send out multiple squadrons? Then what is the point of playing? Mostly it would be just sending out planes and waiting around. It doesn't seem like it would be a fun experience. And if you think people complained alot about Arty in WOT what happens when they get aircraft carriers?

 

It would be interesting to see aircraft carreris get a different control type and get squadron management.

 

Historically once aircraft carriers were introduced into the world they soon became the most powerful thing out there.

 

In WOT they will probably be equvalent to arty, but how will Wargaming control it so that it is not OPed?

 

Discuss!

[Super_Dreadnought]

There is already lots of topics on Carriers.

[nabari]

although carriers in this game hansnt interested me much, alot of other people have asked, and gotten answers to these questions mate :) Q and A is your friend.

[anonym_auUiRfWCi1jI]

Well if you're considering WWII carriers, say the Yorktown, you'd have about 72 aircraft to manage.  I'm not sure how WG will divy them up into categories (VF,VB, VS, and VT), or if you'll be able to amass all the aircraft into one category.  The entire wing operations per carrier would not be just about sitting around, as your squadrons, or entire wing deploy, there are inherent managment issues (contact, combat, extend, retreat, return, new way point, the list could be longer, or shorter).  As carrier captains go, this is hardly a launch and sit platform.  With over 30+ ships on your side, there will be requests for overhead cover, patrols, scouting, and even bombing and torpedo missions.  You're going to be very busy once enemy contact is made, if not sooner, with battle groups also sending requests your way.

 

I hardly see a carrier captain sitting on his hands during this large of an engagment.  :Smile_popcorn:

[BigWaveSurfer]

t42592, on 04 January 2013 - 06:06 AM, said:

Well if you're considering WWII carriers, say the Yorktown, you'd have about 72 aircraft to manage.  I'm not sure how WG will divy them up into categories (VF,VB, VS, and VT), or if you'll be able to amass all the aircraft into one category.  The entire wing operations per carrier would not be just about sitting around, as your squadrons, or entire wing deploy, there are inherent managment issues (contact, combat, extend, retreat, return, new way point, the list could be longer, or shorter).  As carrier captains go, this is hardly a launch and sit platform.  With over 30+ ships on your side, there will be requests for overhead cover, patrols, scouting, and even bombing and torpedo missions.  You're going to be very busy once enemy contact is made, if not sooner, with battle groups also sending requests your way.

I hardly see a carrier captain sitting on his hands during this large of an engagment.  :Smile_popcorn:

good thing i like the Big gun ships....way too old and lazy to worry about all that other stuff :Smile_amazed:

[madmanthan21]

t42592, on 04 January 2013 - 06:06 AM, said:

Well if you're considering WWII carriers, say the Yorktown, you'd have about 72 aircraft to manage.  I'm not sure how WG will divy them up into categories (VF,VB, VS, and VT), or if you'll be able to amass all the aircraft into one category.  The entire wing operations per carrier would not be just about sitting around, as your squadrons, or entire wing deploy, there are inherent managment issues (contact, combat, extend, retreat, return, new way point, the list could be longer, or shorter).  As carrier captains go, this is hardly a launch and sit platform.  With over 30+ ships on your side, there will be requests for overhead cover, patrols, scouting, and even bombing and torpedo missions.  You're going to be very busy once enemy contact is made, if not sooner, with battle groups also sending requests your way.

I hardly see a carrier captain sitting on his hands during this large of an engagment.  :Smile_popcorn:

you mean 15+ ships right? or has KGB said there will be 30?

[zaibatsukid]

I wonder if it will be like artillery in that you pick specific targets every so many seconds. I guess your planes can reload either by coming back to the carrier or have separate controls in which they fire every so many seconds. They could come back to the carrier to restock on planes.   :Smile_veryhappy:

[sharlin648]

I guess you'd have to factor in travel time, so they could fly there, get intercepted by friendly fighters etc.  A carriers ammo is its finite number of planes so lets say you've got..err...a Couragious class carrier, you can launch 48 planes, thats how many it carried. Sending a strike out of a dozen planes you loose 8 to hostile fighters and AA fire, you've then got 40 shots left and so on.

[Northmeister]

well the repair cost has to be HUGE if u lose 48 planes !!!  :Smile_ohmy:

[Wunderwaffen1945]

Now i have decided to go through american carrier line while waithing others to show up

[zaibatsukid]

It be interesting cause when you "fire" your planes afterwards if they return you would theorically get them back in your ammo supply. So they would need something like gas? Or would you launch them and they constantly stay in flight? But if it is done that way then you would just mainly just float around without much action. I am curious to see how they design it so that you get to participate and find challenge in battle while still keeping it in flavor with a carrier. On such a big map I wonder if aircraft carriers wouldn't dominate? Much like arty on a open map.

[sharlin648]

Northmeister, on 04 January 2013 - 07:52 AM, said:

well the repair cost has to be HUGE if u lose 48 planes !!!  :Smile_ohmy:

Its not repairs, its ammo, your planes are your ammo and thats nothing compaired to what larger carriers held :p  Imagine loosing 90 from the Akagi, or 130ish on a Midway :s

[PrincessTerrik]

i read the dev Q&A a long time ago, so my memory is fuzzy, but i think there's a limit to how many squadrons and the size of them you can put up based on what tier you have, and in carrier ops the maps are actually knife range. . .one of the advantages of carriers is its enormous range of about 150+ miles, so you can launch from afar and never be close to enemy surface ships, whereas, like arty in wot, carriers can be hunted down because the range isnt long enough and there r boundaries you have to stay in, which means you can't run effectively not only because you cant just keep going but you're already far inside your atk range, so you don't have as much of a head start if u try to run

[Elysion]

So there was this space game i played, cant remember what its name was, where you basically could do everything, fly fighters right up to command carriers and organize squadrons and such.

 

I kind of enjoyed its interface. You selected the right kind of things for the mission, grouped them togeather, and gave them waypoints, and off they went.

 

It was realistic in that you had to keep patrols out there as well as send stuff off after objectives.

 

A slightly more streamlined version of this would probably be pretty fun. The more i wait for this game the more i want to try out carriers. I usually hate carriers.

[Enkryptid]

Wunderwaffen1945, on 04 January 2013 - 08:22 AM, said:

Now i have decided to go through american carrier line while waithing others to show up

i think my first goal in beta will get Each line of the American branch to at least T7+ should be doable, but that will give me the feel of each type of ships playstyle tactical gameplay strats and fun factor without throwing the differences between each country into the testing mix.

[Enkryptid]

Elysion, on 23 March 2013 - 06:24 PM, said:

So there was this space game i played, cant remember what its name was, where you basically could do everything, fly fighters right up to command carriers and organize squadrons and such.

I kind of enjoyed its interface. You selected the right kind of things for the mission, grouped them togeather, and gave them waypoints, and off they went.

It was realistic in that you had to keep patrols out there as well as send stuff off after objectives.

A slightly more streamlined version of this would probably be pretty fun. The more i wait for this game the more i want to try out carriers. I usually hate carriers.

maybe you are referring to EVE Online?

[Azumazi]

Enkryptid, on 23 March 2013 - 06:30 PM, said:

maybe you are referring to EVE Online?

No hes talking about this one command game that came out shortly after Wing Commander 3, and I know what he's talking about and it was a great game, but I can't for the life of me remember the name. It came out around the same time as Earth Siege 2 did as well.

Also for the carriers, it will be a bit more complex for a few reasons than just Planes = ammo

Depending on the planes, you will also have ammo loadouts for the aircraft, usually in the form of Torpedo's and bombs but you also have to remember that means managing how much you bring depending on how much weight each take up for the armored magazines. So you might be able to bring more bombs or more torpedos but same amount of aircraft of each, so that means you could end up losing all your dive bombers and have 50 torpedo's left but only 5 torpedo bombers and stuff like that. Later game will not be an issue since a lot of US and Japanese had the same planes doing both to make it easier to manage the logistics of it.

[brian333]

I too have wondered about the torpedo/dive bombers. For the record, the US entered the war with dual use bombers like the Douglas Devastator Torpedo Bomber http://www.militaryf...aircraft_id=732

Quote

...As such the primary armament for the TBD Devastator family was a single 1200lb. Mk XIII torpedo for attacking ships along their running broadsides. This offensive load could be replaced by carrying one 1000lb. bomb, three 500lb. conventional drop bombs, or up to 12 100lb drop bombs, these useful in conducting dive or level bombing against the decks of surface ships...

Although if selected as a tester I will play carriers, they really do not call to me as a primary ship class to play. I just don't think they will be fun in a tactical sense. The game for carriers is going to be a game of leadership, or as I like to call it in WoT, Lemming Herding. You see, for a carrier to be successful, he will either have to directly support ships in their attacks, or he will have to guide ships to attack the targets he selects.

 

The carrier skipper will have to be the master of multitasking. He will be in the best position to oversee the entire battlefield primarily because he will not be getting shot at until the end of the battle, but also because he will have to constantly judge, and constantly update his judgements, of the right time to strike an opponent. This will mean he is in the best position to be overall fleet commander, because all other ship classes will, necessarily, be involved in far more localized actions. A carrier skipper unprepared to take fleet command will actually be a hindrance to his team.

 

I'm sure we'll see Zapp Brannigans out there sending wave after wave of aircraft to their doom in the hopes of taking out a ship, and this may work often enough to prevent Zapp from learning better methods, but the hallmark of the effective carrier skipper will be that he is good as a strategist. Being able to react faster than any other player, the carrier skipper will be the first to exploit weaknesses in the enemy fleet, and the first to bolster weakening lines in his own. He will necessarily be the guy who has the broadest overview, and his ability to guide his fleet mates in actions which yield victory will be his primary contribution to the team.

 

I as a player am far too focused. It is my primary failing in WoT, in that I lose track of time when under stress and forget to watch the minimap. I don't multi-task well, and become non-verbal when the heat is on. I predict I will not be a very good, (by comparison,) carrier captain. Also, when I do communicate under stress, I tend to use language that alienates my teammates. If you as a player can avoid these things, or find them alien to your way of doing things, you may have what it takes to be an effective carrier skipper.