Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Admiral_Thrawn_1

Finally Found the Solution to AA Thanks To Hapa_Fodder

23 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

3,497
[RKLES]
Members
12,551 posts
14,267 battles

I believe I found the perfect loophole in Wargaming’s historical time frames for adding content to solve the CV problems and being inspired by the military service of @Hapa_Fodder  :Smile_honoring:

I propose adding the Phalanx CIWS to solve our CV problems. I will shoot down the aircraft, the bombs, the rockets, and on some cases the torpedoes if the torps are dropped too close to the ship.

499C4B38-9787-49B2-A4F8-8659286FFEC4.thumb.jpeg.cac8b1576c7d023783b46102271765c0.jpeg

It’s a gun weapons system, developed during the Cold War, and makes a dazzling display so WG may just have to give it to us. And since I believe in being fair we will simply replace the medium sized AA mounts such as the dual and quad Bofors mounts with these new units. Having about a dozen  or so of the Phalanx CIWS units aboard should be just about right... :Smile_trollface:

C0CAA2A7-0E86-40A3-A28E-8DB3BAC480DB.jpeg

Edited by Admiral_Thrawn_1
  • Cool 8
  • Haha 3
  • Sad 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
660
[TFK]
[TFK]
Alpha Tester
1,604 posts
19,665 battles

:Smile_teethhappy: :Smile_great: So what is the cooldown with that system? Can the reload be done in a match?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,900
Alpha Tester
6,439 posts
3,249 battles

Something tells me that people are going to comment on this unironically saying they want it in the game because they hate CVs so much.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
464
[D-H-O]
Beta Testers
1,161 posts
10,892 battles

Press 'O' to activate Priority Sector

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,012
[4HIM]
Members
3,013 posts
12,525 battles
2 hours ago, Admiral_Thrawn_1 said:

CIWS units

CIWS.  Doesn't that stand for 'Captain It Won't Shoot'?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
702
[SOV]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
1,868 posts
8,476 battles

I'll take 10!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
263
[DOG]
Members
1,103 posts
11,756 battles
3 hours ago, Admiral_Thrawn_1 said:

I believe I found the perfect loophole in Wargaming’s historical time frames for adding content to solve the CV problems and being inspired by the military service of @Hapa_Fodder  :Smile_honoring:

I propose adding the Phalanx CIWS to solve our CV problems. I will shoot down the aircraft, the bombs, the rockets, and on some cases the torpedoes if the torps are dropped too close to the ship.

499C4B38-9787-49B2-A4F8-8659286FFEC4.thumb.jpeg.cac8b1576c7d023783b46102271765c0.jpeg

It’s a gun weapons system, developed during the Cold War, and makes a dazzling display so WG may just have to give it to us. And since I believe in being fair we will simply replace the medium sized AA mounts such as the dual and quad Bofors mounts with these new units. Having about a dozen  or so of the Phalanx CIWS units aboard should be just about right... :Smile_trollface:

C0CAA2A7-0E86-40A3-A28E-8DB3BAC480DB.jpeg

There was a book I read years ago (I think it was called "The Last Carrier," or something like that).  The premise was that the Japanese had a big CV (Maybe a twin to Shinano.  I can't remember), that got trapped inside an iceberg for 30 years or so, until the ice melted enough to escape.  The crew didn't believe anything the heard on the radio abou the war being over, thinking it was propaganda, so they followed the last orders they were given, which was to attack Pearl Harbor again.  They caught a Tarawa class LHA in port, which looked like a CV to them, so they focused it.  It got its CIWS active, and shot down a bunch of planes, but they still damaged it heavily (among other targets).

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,006
[BONKS]
Members
1,474 posts
44 battles

Seems fitting given that we're apparently about to see TXX CVs.

ZmbvBbk.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,850
[WPORT]
Members
5,385 posts
10,416 battles

While we're just chatting about stuff we'd think would be interesting to see in the game at some nebulous point in the future, here's a thought. 
And you can see her, the Hiddensee, at Battleship Cove, Fall River, Massachusetts, where the USS Massachusetts is berthed along with her fellow Museum Ships.

"Hiddensee:

Historical Overview:

Originally commissioned by the East German People's Navy as the Rudolf Eglehofer, the Hiddensee is a Tarantul I class corvette built at the Petrovsky Shipyard, located near the Soviet city of St. Petersburg (formerly Leningrad). The world's only exhibited example of a Soviet-built missile corvette, Hiddensee was designed to oppose any naval threat to the East German Coast, and to fulfill this mission carried long-range STYX anti-ship missiles and an array of defensive weapons designed to ensure her own survivability.

Following the reunification of Germany, the Hiddensee served with the Federal German Navy until her decommissioning in April 1991. Shortly thereafter she was reactivated and transferred to the U.S. Navy. Joined briefly by a crew of 20 former East German sailors, a small civilian U. S. crew conducted extensive testing with the vessel at the Navy's Solomons, Maryland, facility in the Patuxent River. After 50 underway deployments in the Chesapeake Bay and Virginia Capes areas, Navy budget cutback severely curtailed operations, but she continued on as a research vessel until April 1996.

The Hiddensee joined the Battleship Cove fleet on June 14, 1997."

https://www.battleshipcove.org/hiddensee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,548
[WG]
Administrator, Developers, Community Department, WG Staff, In AlfaTesters
3,498 posts
13,885 battles

Hmmmm  :cap_yes:

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,261
[PVE]
Members
4,253 posts
18,541 battles
On 7/18/2020 at 7:04 AM, Admiral_Thrawn_1 said:

I believe I found the perfect loophole in Wargaming’s historical time frames for adding content to solve the CV problems and being inspired by the military service of @Hapa_Fodder  :Smile_honoring:

I propose adding the Phalanx CIWS to solve our CV problems. I will shoot down the aircraft, the bombs, the rockets, and on some cases the torpedoes if the torps are dropped too close to the ship.

499C4B38-9787-49B2-A4F8-8659286FFEC4.thumb.jpeg.cac8b1576c7d023783b46102271765c0.jpeg

It’s a gun weapons system, developed during the Cold War, and makes a dazzling display so WG may just have to give it to us. And since I believe in being fair we will simply replace the medium sized AA mounts such as the dual and quad Bofors mounts with these new units. Having about a dozen  or so of the Phalanx CIWS units aboard should be just about right... :Smile_trollface:

C0CAA2A7-0E86-40A3-A28E-8DB3BAC480DB.jpeg

The Radar in the game is from 1969 !!!!  We had Anti-Radiation-Missiles, anti-aircraft missiles and anti-ship missiles and I am baffled that we don;t have them now....   The Naval version tested in the 196image.thumb.png.c6a3ac00cc678a827f79e55c5534de0b.pngThe T249 looked like this:

37mm was a traditional naval round as far back as the hand cranked Hotchkiss anti-torpedo boat versions !!! 

@Hapa_Fodder why aren't we into the 1960 and the cold war yet???  We HAVE the Radar and the FDC systems from 1969 already????  Give us missiles and I'll show you the end of Carriers......and Radar boats.    Look at the Falklands if you doubt this....

Edited by Asym_KS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,497
[RKLES]
Members
12,551 posts
14,267 battles
11 minutes ago, Asym_KS said:

The Radar in the game is from 1969 !!!!  We had Anti-Radiation-Missiles, anti-aircraft missiles and anti-ship missiles and I am baffled that we don;t have them now....   The Naval version tested in the 196image.thumb.png.c6a3ac00cc678a827f79e55c5534de0b.pngThe T249 looked like this:

37mm was a traditional naval round as far back as the hand cranked Hotchkiss anti-torpedo boat versions !!! 

@Hapa_Fodder why aren't we into the 1960 and the cold war yet???  We HAVE the Radar and the FDC systems from 1969 already????  Give us missiles and I'll show you the end of Carriers......and Radar boats.    Look at the Falklands if you doubt this....

Because missiles would be much too difficult to balance and extremely annoying to try and use based on the guided Rockets in WOT Blitz and homing toroefoes in Subs Mode.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,775
[-K-]
[-K-]
Members
5,325 posts
19,468 battles
53 minutes ago, Asym_KS said:

Give us missiles

40 minutes ago, Admiral_Thrawn_1 said:

Because missiles would be much too difficult to balance and extremely annoying to try and use based on the guided Rockets in WOT Blitz and homing toroefoes in Subs Mode.

Actually, WG said they did try DDGs a while ago, and I think some first-person missile control, but they were always either too powerful (always hit the right spot, did huge damage) or not powerful enough didn't feel like a new weapon type if not manually guided (edit: I think it was this, actually). Some people speculate that the CV rework was built on a revised version of the concept.

Edited by Edgecase

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,261
[PVE]
Members
4,253 posts
18,541 battles
2 hours ago, Admiral_Thrawn_1 said:

Because missiles would be much too difficult to balance and extremely annoying to try and use based on the guided Rockets in WOT Blitz and homing toroefoes in Subs Mode.

NAW.  A good thought though....!  

Missiles would work just fine if they wanted them too.  Same with Torpedoes.  Too many people are making it sound as if "programming changes" are too difficult.  That is just Hoo-Doo droppings.....  The reality of the change programming problem is COST.....  Programming is expensive; since, a lot of game corporations out-source the actual game change programming rather than keep a large development team.  LoL is one of those games that kept their development staff it seems; and, look at the $$$ they are making !!!  And, the participation rate is the Gold standard.  Quality is Profit.  Change the Customers want is GOLD......

Any game can make serious improvements to their content......it really isn't that "hard" (unless, you have to completely change engines...)  In this game, I'd bet it's all about ROI and strategic intent.    Their minimalist "vision" goes the other way: to make the game simpler and as cheap to maintain as possible.   That's why they want Scenarios gone: one less maintenance activity.  And, the reason we are bleeding players:  No quality = no participation.  We are there.  You reap what you sow.

 

Edited by Asym_KS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
992
[NSC]
Members
2,333 posts
On 7/18/2020 at 10:00 AM, El2aZeR said:

Seems fitting given that we're apparently about to see TXX CVs.

ZmbvBbk.png

PT bug right? I saw that too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,261
[PVE]
Members
4,253 posts
18,541 battles
1 hour ago, Edgecase said:

Actually, WG said they did try DDGs a while ago, and I think some first-person missile control, but they were always either too powerful (always hit the right spot, did huge damage) or not powerful enough didn't feel like a new weapon type if not manually guided (edit: I think it was this, actually). Some people speculate that the CV rework was built on a revised version of the concept.

And.............AA is automatic. 

ASW is Automatic. 

Secondaries for a great many players are automatic.??? 

Planes aren't WoPs level control? 

Subs are a silly joke control wise..... 

Missiles are Fire and forget weapons that use the 1969 Radar and and Fire Control we already have in the game to hit or miss their targets based on what the target ship does to avoid a hit; what it does to deceive the missiles; what it does with CIWS; and, how it survives a hit or multiple hits based on consumables......  Ever play a naval game with missiles???  It can be horrendously complicated when there are "hundreds" of missiles in a meeting engagement between SAG's........

Bottom line:  it could be done with a missile being detected and engaged by the Automatic AA we already have.....  CIWS doesn't need to be animated !  Just change the rate of fire of what we already have and add an Anti-Missile consumable.....

And, Imagine the Angst a Radar ship, hiding behind a huge Island would have when that 200 pound ARM hits his superstructure and does some significant damage......  Game changing it would be.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×