Since the amount of CAS that can engage is defined by the total combat width, which isn't much in naval invasions, yo ucannot get massive swarms of CAS as you can get in ordinary land combat. In addition to that, CAS won't probably make a difference in invasion. That alone makes them practically useless, especially since longer-ranged naval bombers can still give your amphibious assaults "Air superiority" bonus. CAS has so little range in most sea zones they have like 5-10% mission efficiency due to huge zones involved. The idea that you can use Carrier CAS to support land troops is tempting but rarely works. (One of the benefits of carries is that you can easily reconfigure them to better suit particular missions on a much shorter timescale than refitting capital ship armament.) After you put the enemy fleet on the bottom, CAS give your carriers something further useful to do. That generally varies throughout the game. The mix of planes you carry on deck should match your intent for your carriers. Sub-hunters might have some fighters for AS (spotting subs), or just rely on the NAVs to do that along with sinking same. If you just want to defend your BBs while they do the sinking, you'll have only fighters. If you just want to sink the enemy fleet, you'll have only NAV.
You might have a few hundred planes instead of a thousand, but that's better than zero planes. You'll notice countries in Europe, with a lot of airfields close together, put less effort into carriers than countries that have to cross large oceans or deal with Pacific sea and air zone sizes. But one of the reasons to have carriers is the floating, mobile, airfield. A single engine carrier bomber was naturally cheaper than a twin engine land based bomber/patrol plane, but carried less payload a shorter distance.Ĭarrier CAS is multi-purpose - it can provide CAS for your invasions and coastal fighting, as well as attacking enemy fleets. An F-6F Hellcat cost about 60% what a P-51 did. Lesser stats than their land based counterparts as appropriate but there was little inherently more expensive, often the opposite was true. I'd also think CV types shouldn't have a hefty price premium over non carrier types. But at the same time they should be able to cover the same mission types whether both or one type is present. Ditto USN Avengers CVEs in the Pacific were dedicated ground support during invasion operations and almost always carried only fighters and Avengers.Ī combined bonus and better representation of attack profiles/ordnance could work well, like CAS having higher targeting and agility since this is used to determine AA hits, NAV higher damage but more vulnerable to AA/disruption. The attack on Midway Island's airbase was 50/50 Kates and Vals, more Kates than Vals participated in the bombing of Darwin, etc). Japanese Kates were "attack planes" and had greater bombload than the Vals (about half the 2nd wave at pearl harbor, bombing the airfields were B5N kates (cv NAVs).
Tag enemy fighters before they reach you, make sure your destination is marked but most importantly, make sure you have the right team for the job.There should also be a far less binary divide between the two. Preparation is key for a successful mission. Enemy fighters, flak guns, poor weather, low oxygen and an array of other perilous dangers await when the wheels are up.
Make it yours with a wide array of nose art and liveries, or design your own with the simple to use in-game tool.Įach mission is a high-risk expedition where danger comes from every angle. Procedurally-generated names, skills and back stories means a unique experience for everyone, but be careful, as death is permanent.Ĭarefully manage everything from fuel, ammo, hydraulics and more in your very own physics-based Bomber. Train and personalise your own Bomber Crew. About This Game Prepare your crew for their most dangerous mission yet and go chocks away for a sky-bound expedition in this strategic survival sim, Bomber Crew.
0 kommentar(er)
