Aircraft factories

[CaptainTeddybear]

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.

 

 

 

 

 

[_ENO_]

Oh look, this thread again. 

[capncrunch21]

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

[Helstrem]

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?

[Gabriel_LXIX]

Low effort b8

[Sventex]

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.

[LunchCutter]

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. 

[Laser_Beam]

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).

[Pirate_Named_Sue]

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.

[Wombatmetal]

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.

[black_hull4]

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.

[Helstrem]

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.

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.

[SkaerKrow]

1 hour ago, capncrunch21 said:

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

This. Right. Here.

[Sventex]

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.

[Helstrem]

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.

[Sventex]

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?

[Utt_Buggly]

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?

[Sventex]

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

 

 

[Utt_Buggly]

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?

[Sventex]

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

[Utt_Buggly]

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.

[RipNuN2]

[Sventex]

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.

[GrayPanther2018]

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.

[LunchCutter]

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.