What's your Strategy?
https://forums.matrixgames.com:443/
ORIGINAL: Monter_Trismegistos
Don't forget about hordes of Essexes and other ships which in stock arrives way too early...
ORIGINAL: dereck
ORIGINAL: timtom
And it doesn't become any less hmm...odd considering all four CV's were laid down before their predecessors were lost, two so before the war even broke out.
If the Navy Department or whoever was responsible for naming ships had decided to stick with the original names (Oriskany, Kearsarge, Cabot, Bon Homme Richard), I wouldn't be writing this as presumably 2By3 would have represented them just like any other ships, two of which incidentally would (and did & should) arrive mid-43, a date that only the suicidal Allied players among us will be able to match.
To my mind, representing the actual force levels available at any given time rather outweighs the need for getting the name right. Name one the USS Oleg Mastruko for all I care.
Don't bother quoting facts. If they don't conform to "accepted WITP theory" the facts will get changed (or ignored). The Americans are cheated out of 4 carriers that would have arrived. Period. The ONLY question about their arrival is what name they would have had.
The original names of these four carriers were used by later Essex and Ticonderoga class carriers by the way.
ORIGINAL: Demosthenes
I was thinking the same thing myself - forget the christening names - what happened to hull numbers CVs 10, 12, 16, & 18? They were building before the war...are they cancelled unless you lose a carrier?
ORIGINAL: Bradley7735
ORIGINAL: Demosthenes
I was thinking the same thing myself - forget the christening names - what happened to hull numbers CVs 10, 12, 16, & 18? They were building before the war...are they cancelled unless you lose a carrier?
Yes, that is the reasoning behind the respawn rule. I'm not sure why it was ever implemented. It would take a lot less coding and resources to just include the historice ship hulls (CV, CA, CL, DD, DE, DM, APD, and SS) that are missing.
There are a lot of better options - there are innumerable better options than that (respawning). I can't believe names are more important than having the ships!ORIGINAL: treespider
ORIGINAL: Bradley7735
ORIGINAL: Demosthenes
I was thinking the same thing myself - forget the christening names - what happened to hull numbers CVs 10, 12, 16, & 18? They were building before the war...are they cancelled unless you lose a carrier?
Yes, that is the reasoning behind the respawn rule. I'm not sure why it was ever implemented. It would take a lot less coding and resources to just include the historice ship hulls (CV, CA, CL, DD, DE, DM, APD, and SS) that are missing.
Perhaps an attempt to get the US to play more agressively, knowing that any losses will be replaced by the respawns.
A better option may have been to make japanese ships worth more points early diminishing over time
ORIGINAL: Sneer
I doubt if additional 50 DE.DD.SS will change everything in 44 and 44 - 4 essex can speed up thing by few months that's all
As a japan I can increase industry and shipbilding at about 25% and I will be never allowed to build even one more Shokaku class CV even if my industry is ready for such a task
both sides are penalized
ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker
...and ironically gets airtime in the ears of game designers.[8|]
ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker
ORIGINAL: Sneer
I doubt if additional 50 DE.DD.SS will change everything in 44 and 44 - 4 essex can speed up thing by few months that's all
As a japan I can increase industry and shipbilding at about 25% and I will be never allowed to build even one more Shokaku class CV even if my industry is ready for such a task
both sides are penalized
How are both sides penalized? The US is )loses a TF more powerful than KB) while Japan gets to build all those CVs (Unryus etc) etc which historically were just a pipedream because of the Rocket Robinhood supply model. It is bad enough GG just castrated the CV force AND designed a production system that allows Japan to outproduce the US, but then to have someone complain that the Japanese don't get to use this Japanese industry further to build fantasy ships and say that they are penalized, this is too much. This is the kind of nonsense which raises my blood pressure and ironically gets airtime in the ears of game designers.[8|]
ORIGINAL: dereck
ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker
ORIGINAL: Sneer
I doubt if additional 50 DE.DD.SS will change everything in 44 and 44 - 4 essex can speed up thing by few months that's all
As a japan I can increase industry and shipbilding at about 25% and I will be never allowed to build even one more Shokaku class CV even if my industry is ready for such a task
both sides are penalized
How are both sides penalized? The US is )loses a TF more powerful than KB) while Japan gets to build all those CVs (Unryus etc) etc which historically were just a pipedream because of the Rocket Robinhood supply model. It is bad enough GG just castrated the CV force AND designed a production system that allows Japan to outproduce the US, but then to have someone complain that the Japanese don't get to use this Japanese industry further to build fantasy ships and say that they are penalized, this is too much. This is the kind of nonsense which raises my blood pressure and ironically gets airtime in the ears of game designers.[8|]
Nice to know I'm not the only one who sees the one-sidedness of things here.
ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker
Don't appear to agree with me derek, might get pooped upon.[:)] "Total Annihilation" in the Pacific RTS is what some folks appear to want.[8|]