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

Aircraft factories

149 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,551
[EGO]
Banned
4,105 posts

Could we please move the factories back to the mainland instead of putting them on Carriers.

‘Carriers are suppose to carry planes, not manufacture them. Also it takes more than 3 minutes to manufacture a plane.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by CaptainTeddybear
  • Cool 10
  • Thanks 6
  • Haha 2
  • Boring 11
  • Meh 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,691
[ARS]
Beta Testers
5,267 posts
5,775 battles
21 minutes ago, CaptainTeddybear said:

Could we please move the factories back to the mainland instead of putting them on Carriers.

‘Carriers are suppose to carry planes, not manufacture them. Also it takes more than3 minutes to manufacture a plane.

What factories?  You mean how the CVs bring planes from the hangar deck to the flight deck?

  • Cool 2
  • Thanks 3
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,471
[REVY]
Members
8,138 posts
6,118 battles
4 minutes ago, Helstrem said:

What factories?  You mean how the CVs bring planes from the hangar deck to the flight deck?

No.  The fact that CVs create new planes from scratch, resulting in compliments larger than their max capacity.  Kaga only carried 72 aircraft and 18 in storage.  In game it's got a factory that let's it add up to effectively another Aircraft Carrier to it.

nMMoKO1.png&key=d419f8ac7994e9aa2ae3950b

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
934
[PT]
Members
967 posts
2,994 battles

I don't think there is a single element of this game that resembles any form of navel simulation or realism... Just remember is a fun arcade WW2 naval shooter on a duckpond. 

  • Cool 3
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
482 posts
209 battles
24 minutes ago, capncrunch21 said:

And torpedo factories on cruisers and destroyers as well...

 

Torpedos don't fly across the map.

Torpedos run out of fuel

Cruisers and destroyers can be shot before, during, and after dropping torpedos they do this by being up the front.   Most Cv players struggle to move their ship from spawn (unless it is to park on the red line).

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
364
[VORTX]
Members
467 posts
6,774 battles
39 minutes ago, CaptainTeddybear said:

Could we please move the factories back to the mainland instead of putting them on Carriers.

‘Carriers are suppose to carry planes, not manufacture them. Also it takes more than3 minutes to manufacture a plane.

Historically and realistically speaking for the greater realism of the game, aircraft carriers carried spare airplanes and parts. A hundred or so “total” aircraft on any given CV is completely within realistic and historical accuracy. WG clearly seaks to institute more realism in the game, and less “arcade” in the future. Wait for subs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,321 posts
3,255 battles

Let's have ships sail their actual speed, so they would cover 8 knots across the map before the match timer expired. 

Let's have a sim instead of a game.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
992 posts
1,387 battles
27 minutes ago, Laser_Beam said:

struggle to move their ship from spawn (unless it is to park on the red line).

My goal is to park my CV on the red line boundary of the red circle.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,691
[ARS]
Beta Testers
5,267 posts
5,775 battles
42 minutes ago, Sventex said:

No.  The fact that CVs create new planes from scratch, resulting in compliments larger than their max capacity.  Kaga only carried 72 aircraft and 18 in storage.  In game it's got a factory that let's it add up to effectively another Aircraft Carrier to it.

nMMoKO1.png&key=d419f8ac7994e9aa2ae3950b

Only in extreme circumstances does it do that, and even then it is a pale shadow of the utter ridiculousness of the arcade buffs given to DDs.  I can't think of very many aspects of DDs that aren't monstrously buffed to make DDs playable.  Insane gun accuracy?  Check.  Multiple full spreads of torpedoes?  Check. Able to see taller ships before being seen? Huge check. Artificial resistance to shells?  Check.

All ships in this game have significant buffs for playability reasons.  This hyper-focus on CV hangar capacities is frankly absurd and highly selective.

  • Cool 9
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,699
[SIM]
Members
5,582 posts
9,008 battles
1 hour ago, capncrunch21 said:

And torpedo factories on cruisers and destroyers as well...

This. Right. Here.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,471
[REVY]
Members
8,138 posts
6,118 battles
1 minute ago, Helstrem said:

This hyper-focus on CV hangar capacities is frankly absurd and highly selective.

It's probably down to the fact that CVs are OP and their exists a historical precedent for their nerfing.

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 3
  • Meh 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,691
[ARS]
Beta Testers
5,267 posts
5,775 battles
Just now, Sventex said:

It's probably down to the fact that CVs are OP and their exists a historical precedent for their nerfing.

They don't seem to be OP to me and lots of other players.  They are stated to be OP by players that run nearly unchecked in their absence.

Further, limiting their hangar size as requested won't actually impact any but the poorest of CV players.  The unicum CV players that the anti-CV folks so relish complaining about would scarcely loose a beat.

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,471
[REVY]
Members
8,138 posts
6,118 battles
2 minutes ago, Helstrem said:

Further, limiting their hangar size as requested won't actually impact any but the poorest of CV players.  The unicum CV players that the anti-CV folks so relish complaining about would scarcely loose a beat.

So it wouldn't be a big deal if CVs had realistic hanger sizes then, so why not become more historical?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,818
[A-I-M]
Members
3,571 posts
14,437 battles
1 hour ago, CaptainTeddybear said:

Also it takes more than 3 minutes to manufacture a plane.

How long did it take in real life to reload torpedoes on a WWII-vintage DD?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,471
[REVY]
Members
8,138 posts
6,118 battles
14 minutes ago, MannyD_of_The_Sea said:

How long did it take in real life to reload torpedoes on a WWII-vintage DD?

According to this report on Japanese torpedo reload mechanism by the United States Navy, under ideal conditions it's 3 minutes.

http://www.fischer-tropsch.org/primary_documents/gvt_reports/USNAVY/USNTMJ Reports/USNTMJ-200D-0530-0549 Report 0-01-3.pdf

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,818
[A-I-M]
Members
3,571 posts
14,437 battles
6 minutes ago, Sventex said:

According to this report on Japanese torpedo reload mechanism by the United States Navy, under ideal conditions it's 3 minutes.

http://www.fischer-tropsch.org/primary_documents/gvt_reports/USNAVY/USNTMJ Reports/USNTMJ-200D-0530-0549 Report 0-01-3.pdf

 

 

And how many complete launcher reloads could be accomplished, without being resupplied from a sea tender?

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,471
[REVY]
Members
8,138 posts
6,118 battles
3 minutes ago, MannyD_of_The_Sea said:

And how many complete launcher reloads could be accomplished, without being resupplied from a sea tender?

Roughly enough to replenish the entire torpedo battery, sometimes a little less, sometimes a little more.  Apparently the Leningrad Soviet Destroyers had 10 reloads for 8 torpedo tubes.

https://www.quora.com/How-did-WW2-destroyers-reload-their-torpedo-tubes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,818
[A-I-M]
Members
3,571 posts
14,437 battles
6 minutes ago, Sventex said:

Roughly enough to replenish the entire torpedo battery, sometimes a little less, sometimes a little more.  Apparently the Leningrad Soviet Destroyers had 10 reloads for 8 torpedo tubes.

https://www.quora.com/How-did-WW2-destroyers-reload-their-torpedo-tubes

So, one reload and done. Who’d a-thunk it?

Thanks for the information.

Kinda makes me less than convinced of the strength of the OP’s argument...unless he’s lobbying for application of that principle across all types and classes of ship...nope, don’t see that in his post.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,471
[REVY]
Members
8,138 posts
6,118 battles
19 minutes ago, MannyD_of_The_Sea said:

So, one reload and done. Who’d a-thunk it?

Thanks for the information.

Kinda makes me less than convinced of the strength of the OP’s argument...unless he’s lobbying for application of that principle across all types and classes of ship...nope, don’t see that in his post.

Well, ship launched torpedoes were also more deadly historically.  Just two ripped USS Juneau in two.  It's also believed the USS Melvin split the Battleship Fuso with either one or two torpedoes.  If made deadlier in game, a limited supply of torpedoes could work for the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
342
[PHD]
Members
1,736 posts
7,123 battles
2 hours ago, capncrunch21 said:

And torpedo factories on cruisers and destroyers as well...

It's not the planes, just imagine how far and fast the pilots and aircrews can swim to get back to the CV to fly the new planes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
934
[PT]
Members
967 posts
2,994 battles
1 hour ago, Sventex said:

It's probably down to the fact that CVs are OP and their exists a historical precedent for their nerfing.

The crew of the Yamato, the combined fleet, the Italian Regia Marina, the Japanese Midway Fleet and the 1941 US Pacific Fleet agree.

Edited by LunchCutter
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×