Points or PL system to pick fleets?
- Thread starter Valen is my name
- Start date
Valen is my name
Mongoose
the hangar can only hold 20 aircraft according to a site that does naval work for the MoD, and the fighters wont be supplied until two years after the first aircraft carrier comes into service!
Still, id much rather have one Invincible than a Nimitz
Still, id much rather have one Invincible than a Nimitz
emperorpenguin
Mongoose
katadder said:
well with Invincible, Illustrious and Ark Royal that amounted to about 60 aircraft, so they can fill one of them :wink:
emperorpenguin
Mongoose
Valen is my name said:
you're probably the only person who would!
Valen is my name
Mongoose
yeah but i dont mind
dont forget HMS Invincible has been in a proper war, nimitz carriers havent, they have never been fired upon - launching planes to fly over iraq doesnt count as being in action, invincible went to the falklands and stuffed the argies!
dont forget HMS Invincible has been in a proper war, nimitz carriers havent, they have never been fired upon - launching planes to fly over iraq doesnt count as being in action, invincible went to the falklands and stuffed the argies!
emperorpenguin
Mongoose
hiffano said:
no the Harriers will be decommissioned once the JSF is in use. The Fleet Air Arm and RAF will both be using them
emperorpenguin
Mongoose
Valen is my name said:
the Nimitz class would maul the Invincible class in a fight! If the Nimitz had been used in the Falklands we'd have won more convincingly! That's why we're upgrading to proper carriers, the Invincible was only designed for ASW
Just found this on the RN website a comparison of Carrier sizes
Greg Smith
Mongoose
A comparison of the white star to modern carriers (depending on which size of WS you prefer).
emperorpenguin
Mongoose
hiffano said:
well the RN Harriers and Invincible are decommissioned....
emperorpenguin
Mongoose
Tank said:
the RAF ones are staying until 2015 the expected arrival date of the JCA/JSF
They'll stay in use until they arrive
I like the PL system, I do. Except when it doesn't reflect the actual worth of a ship and powergamers like my youngest brother just take swarms of the same ship because they're better. I don't think a points system would solve this problem either.
What would solve this problem? Encourage people to play more balanced fleet lists. Use the great beat-stick of social Darwinism to make people be better players and tacticians.
What would solve this problem? Encourage people to play more balanced fleet lists. Use the great beat-stick of social Darwinism to make people be better players and tacticians.
Darzoni said:
Darzoni - firstly many thanks for bringing this back on topic
Secondly, I think you make an excellent point - neither method (PL or points) really defeats the take as, "many of the most broken ship you can philosophy".
Several posters have suggested adding things like:
1. A ship rarity trait (where ships were rated as common, uncommon, rare and unique where the various levels represented how many ships of this type could compose a fleet etc).
2. A "battle group" or package selection - this idea involved several ships available for selection at a discount level (e.g. pack of 1 Corvan, 2 wings of Sentri (Patrol), 4 Vorchans (Skirmish) and a Centurion (Raid)) Normally that selection would be 4 FAP (at Raid) but various incentives could be added to make it cheaper and thus mixes more popular.
3. Balancing ships (and ship roles) sufficiently so there ISN'T a best ship for all situations and while neophyte powergame might pick all the same type of ship for his first bout, he would soon learn that tactics in the game reward "fleets" of a mixed composition capable of dealing with different game situations...after all ACTA is meant to be a fleet game.
Ideally of course 3 would be the answer I prefer regardless of playing around with the PL or the points system!
