S&P 40
- Thread starter DM
- Start date
DomSkelton
Mongoose
Seconded; very nice work both of you; has left me contemplating something other than the Coral Sea for a change.... :shock:
Dom.
Dom.
chaos0xomega
Mongoose
SCHWEET!
Now wheres the Surcouf? :twisted:
Now wheres the Surcouf? :twisted:
Captain Kremmen
Mongoose
Just out of interest, how representative is it for a british aircraft carrier to be engaging ME109's that hang around the entire battle?
I would not have thought it very often that the ME109 would have the range, would it not be more appropriate in a game like this to only allow carrier aircraft?
Are we not going to have a Bismark V ark royal and Hood type game where the germans field ME109's in the mid atlantic?? This would seem to make aircraft carriers pointless if you are allowed to have as many aircraft as you like without a carrier being present??
I suspect in my own friendlies I will only allow aircraft if you have a carrier....
I also agree with other comments about 8 inch guns outranging 15inch guns. I like the proposal that a 30" max be imposed on practical firing range, I think I will adopt this rule myself.
Cpt K
I would not have thought it very often that the ME109 would have the range, would it not be more appropriate in a game like this to only allow carrier aircraft?
Are we not going to have a Bismark V ark royal and Hood type game where the germans field ME109's in the mid atlantic?? This would seem to make aircraft carriers pointless if you are allowed to have as many aircraft as you like without a carrier being present??
I suspect in my own friendlies I will only allow aircraft if you have a carrier....
I also agree with other comments about 8 inch guns outranging 15inch guns. I like the proposal that a 30" max be imposed on practical firing range, I think I will adopt this rule myself.
Cpt K
Not very, unless you happen to be fighting in the Med
This one kind of falls into the "game vs. simulation" debate . There are no endurance or ammunition limits in the rules (apart from air to ground ordnance) so fighters can hang about pretty much for as long as they want. In practice fighter ammunition was limited to only enough for several seconds of sustained fire. Parshall and Tully's book shows graphically the cycling of Japanese fighters on CAP during the battle of Midway to rearm (not much refuelling going on - often they launched directly into combat). I'd be inclined to allow a fighter unit to engage in one or two dogfights (say 2 rounds of fighting) before having them break off for tea and buns. It mucks up the "priority" system a bit but then I tend to play historically based games and campaigns so I don't really use it.
captainsmirk
Mongoose
But DM did point out that the 8" guns do in fact out range the 15", even with a 30" maximum they will have equal range.
Straight gun calibre often has little meaning. During WW1 the German 11" was a match for the British 12" in penetration and the German 12" was better than the British 13.5". Simple because they used superior shells. Many things effect the capabilities of the weapon not just the calibre of the barrel...
Nick
Straight gun calibre often has little meaning. During WW1 the German 11" was a match for the British 12" in penetration and the German 12" was better than the British 13.5". Simple because they used superior shells. Many things effect the capabilities of the weapon not just the calibre of the barrel...
Nick
Captain Kremmen
Mongoose
DM said:Is this in the right thread?
I think I was being lazy and replied to 2 threads with one reply.....
All my fault.
K
PS I agree with the logic that theoretical range is irrelevant if you can't hit anything at a range there is no point firing....
Captain Kremmen
Mongoose
Wasn't Norway too cold for ME109's?????
Rather pathetic attempt to cover the fact that I did not bother to remember it was set off of Norway.
Personally I think I will be going with the "If you want aircraft pay for a carrier" school of playing, but that is just my humble opinion, probably not shared by all.
I don't think this problem existed in ACTA as most races only had the one fighter, and even if there was a good one and a naff one, the good ones would be carried by the carrier, or nobody would bother to field it.
In the real WWII world that is not normally the case, certainly British naval aircraft were fairly crappy throughout most of the war.
If VAS was ACTA the Brits would only have Spitfires on their carriers rather than crappy Fulmars and the Germans would load all their (imaginary) carriers with ME262's.......
Kremmen
Rather pathetic attempt to cover the fact that I did not bother to remember it was set off of Norway.
Personally I think I will be going with the "If you want aircraft pay for a carrier" school of playing, but that is just my humble opinion, probably not shared by all.
I don't think this problem existed in ACTA as most races only had the one fighter, and even if there was a good one and a naff one, the good ones would be carried by the carrier, or nobody would bother to field it.
In the real WWII world that is not normally the case, certainly British naval aircraft were fairly crappy throughout most of the war.
If VAS was ACTA the Brits would only have Spitfires on their carriers rather than crappy Fulmars and the Germans would load all their (imaginary) carriers with ME262's.......
Kremmen
Captain Kremmen
Mongoose
One may have been being just a little flippant....
K
K
