The battleship is already extremely powerful since it's attack range is longer than artillery and cruisers. But what pushes it over the top is the fact that it can bombard normal units at that range without them even knowing where they are at. I think this is too OP. I think the battleship attack range should be changed to the blurry range of typical units which is think is around 42 * 1.6 = 67. It would still have the advantage of outranging artillery and cruisers, but at least you would be able to see that something is attacking you before it's too late.
Battleship attack range vs blurry range of typical units
This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.
-
-
I share this sentiment. We can see where airplanes are coming from, even though a target would normally have no idea where the bombers overhead are based. Certainly not when the bombers are coming from an aircraft carrier. But still, the game wants us to see them.
It should be a LOT easier to figure out where high-caliber cannon shells are coming from. Defenders can hear them while they travel through the air.
The one issue with range is that maps are designed with certain spacing in mind. The map designers purposely made some province centers in cruiser range, others in battleship range, and others out of battleship range. Changing the maximum range of a unit can have unpredictable side-effects depending on the map and the country you play with. I think the developers wanted to give battleships an extra boost by allowing them to reach certain cities and provinces they were not able to reach in the past. -
I disagree for many reason but I will start with the simple reason that all navies at the time had some very simple ways to fire on land targets out of sight range of firing units. I want to use some quotes from Naval Artillery: Firepower on Display at D-Day to show why sight distance is not the issue. "Because most gunfire support ships could not see their targets, indirect fire was required." and "Aerial observation was an important aspect of effective NGF." Also "Both infantry and airborne forces had gunfire spotters down to the battalion level, and some naval officers jumped with the paratroopers to provide an organic spotter capability." After reading the article the most realistic change would be to return short range fire to destroyers (but that would be best discussed in another post). As shown the Allies used Naval Gun Fire at ranges out of sight during Operation Overlord as well as the previous Operations including Husky (the Allied Invasion of Sicily) by using Forward Observers in direct contact with firing units at sea via radio.
Now lets look at the points raised by z00mz00m. Lets start with the seeing airplanes point. Planes are not just observed with an eye to determine where they came from, there was also an interesting new device called RADAR that could track planes. By as early as 1942 radar was being used on Allied ship and over 500 different early warning radar were built by the end of the war.
As for his point of "
z00mz00m wrote:
It should be a LOT easier to figure out where high-caliber cannon shells are coming from.
z00mz00m wrote:
Defenders can hear them while they travel through the air.
"Strategy is the art of making use of time and space. I am less concerned about the later than the former. Space we can recover, lost time never." ~ Napoleon Bonaparte
"Anyone who has to fight, even with the most modern weapons, against an enemy in complete command of the air, fights like a savage against modern European troops, under the same handicaps and with the same chances of success." ~ Erwin Rommel -
When you see the direction of fire from long distance, before the unit close enough to identify, all you can see is that "something" is firing at you from province X or ocean area Y. You can probably guess what it is based on the range.
That's all we need for battleships. Just to see "hey look something is firing at me" instead of the current system where the targeted unit loses HP quietly and mysteriously. That's just weird.
No need to make this complicated. -
S Schmidt wrote:
"Because most gunfire support ships could not see their targets, indirect fire was required."
Radar was still in its infancy and mainly used for spotting enemies, without the accuracy needed for detailed fire control.
So yes, being hit by ships you cannot actually "see" isn't really realistic. If he needs to see you to hit you, you can also see him (and he's presumably bigger, so you can see him even better).When the fake daddies are curtailed, we have failed. When their roller coaster tolerance is obliterated, their education funds are taken by Kazakhstani phishers, and their candy bars distributed between the Botswana youth gangs, we have succeeded.
- BIG DADDY. -
z00mz00m wrote:
The one issue with range is that maps are designed with certain spacing in mind. The map designers purposely made some province centers in cruiser range, others in battleship range, and others out of battleship range.
When the fake daddies are curtailed, we have failed. When their roller coaster tolerance is obliterated, their education funds are taken by Kazakhstani phishers, and their candy bars distributed between the Botswana youth gangs, we have succeeded.
- BIG DADDY. -
K.Rokossovski wrote:
We're talking about naval-to-naval gunfire here
K.Rokossovski wrote:
Radar was still in its infancy and mainly used for spotting enemies, without the accuracy needed for detailed fire control.
Also iirc THE BATTLE OF SAVO ISLAND and other Naval battles during the Guadalcanal campaign had US Navy vessels with Radar take part in those battles, you can read Radio over Radar: Night Fighting Chaos at Guadalcanal (12-13 November 1942) and see that there was already if nothing else a rude doctrine in place for using radar in combat.
K.Rokossovski wrote:
If he needs to see you to hit you, you can also see him (and he's presumably bigger, so you can see him even better).
"Strategy is the art of making use of time and space. I am less concerned about the later than the former. Space we can recover, lost time never." ~ Napoleon Bonaparte
"Anyone who has to fight, even with the most modern weapons, against an enemy in complete command of the air, fights like a savage against modern European troops, under the same handicaps and with the same chances of success." ~ Erwin Rommel -
OP's point is that BB's shouldn't have the ability to hit targets outside visual range.
Since we agree that both radar (limited, assisting FC use) and spotter planes (usually not available, and comms problems make them very hard to use against moving targets) couldn't be used, that means naval-to-naval gunfire must be (mainly) visually controlled. For that you must see the enemy, and if you see him, he sees you. Which proves OP's point.When the fake daddies are curtailed, we have failed. When their roller coaster tolerance is obliterated, their education funds are taken by Kazakhstani phishers, and their candy bars distributed between the Botswana youth gangs, we have succeeded.
- BIG DADDY. -
S Schmidt wrote:
K.Rokossovski wrote:
We're talking about naval-to-naval gunfire here
K.Rokossovski wrote:
Radar was still in its infancy and mainly used for spotting enemies, without the accuracy needed for detailed fire control.
Also iirc THE BATTLE OF SAVO ISLAND and other Naval battles during the Guadalcanal campaign had US Navy vessels with Radar take part in those battles, you can read Radio over Radar: Night Fighting Chaos at Guadalcanal (12-13 November 1942) and see that there was already if nothing else a rude doctrine in place for using radar in combat.
K.Rokossovski wrote:
If he needs to see you to hit you, you can also see him (and he's presumably bigger, so you can see him even better).
"I have not failed, i have just found 10,000 ways that wont work." - Thomas Edison
Need Support? Send a Ticket here! - Support Form.
Forum Rules - Forum Rules.
Chat Rules - Chat Rules. -
z00mz00m wrote:
When you see the direction of fire from long distance, before the unit close enough to identify, all you can see is that "something" is firing at you from province X or ocean area Y. You can probably guess what it is based on the range.
That's all we need for battleships. Just to see "hey look something is firing at me" instead of the current system where the targeted unit loses HP quietly and mysteriously. That's just weird.
No need to make this complicated.
"I have not failed, i have just found 10,000 ways that wont work." - Thomas Edison
Need Support? Send a Ticket here! - Support Form.
Forum Rules - Forum Rules.
Chat Rules - Chat Rules. -
z00mz00m wrote:
That's all we need for battleships. Just to see "hey look something is firing at me" instead of the current system where the targeted unit loses HP quietly and mysteriously. That's just weird.
-
Share
- Facebook 0
- Twitter 0
- Google Plus 0
- Reddit 0
-
Users Online 1
1 Guest