aircraft carrier improvement

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Its a no from me I am afraid.
      So, just to flesh out your statement a little. You (or your ally) intend to build this giant fancy boat that you intend to leave bare. And then rely on someone else filling it up with their planes. Okay. Lets say that works, you and your ally have a plan, they do most of the attacking while you defend. You then rock up to a country and declare war. But your friend has to leave or their internet drops out. There you are, a ship full of whizz bang gizmos that cant do anything because they are owned by someone else. But that's okay because you can still attack with your one, single, lone, solitary ASW.

      I get what your saying. It would be convenient to use a carrier owned by someone else. But the problems would be more than it is worth. Sure, there are lots of times coalition teammates are online together. But there are also lots of times they are not. So you would have limited opportunity to use it if not online together. If you want to get rid of their aircraft you have to leave it near land until they can respond to your request. Sail across the Pacific then they say they need to go back to base to heal them. And what would happen if they have planes patrolling and you just sail of into the sunset. Given the limited capacity of carriers, being unable to use it because your friend is offline would render it a useless waste of money.

      The post was edited 2 times, last by SquiffySquirrel: Spelling. ().

    • JackDesott wrote:

      In my opinion, is the aircraft carrier very good and it can be used as a tactical base. But it is annoying in my opinion that you can't land your fighter jets on the aircraft carrier of a member in your coalition. That might cause trouble in case of leaving a coalition, but I think it can be handled as an airbase has been destroyed and fighter jets will be able to fly to the nearest air base or just stay in the water as a transport fleet.
      Aircraft carrier has to be biggest waste of resources. it only holds 5 aircraft so why would anyone sail a AC without their own 5 planes.

      Last game 1 golder lost 3 ACs and its planes in 1 game (twice to me).

      Much better use of resources is create good navy.... take a port ... build airfield and fly over. Real combat I need like 20 -25 planes.
      "And I looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him "

      aka ...The killer formerly known as BuckeyeChamp

    • Exactly. My suggestion to improve the air craft carrier is to allow it to give higher healing capabilities (I get it, that is probably impossible to do with the software mechanics). If the carrier healed at 3HP (and then higher depending on the level) it would make it slightly more useful than doing what Buckeye said, take a port and build an airfield. Currently, when the carrier is in shallow water, it heals planes at +2, which is only marginally better than an airport in a city (+1).

    • I have built a few after the game is essentially won just to burn through resources. I have never really needed any of them. I used 2 against the UK in a game but it was still killing time and resources. :D
      "Retreat hell! We're not retreating ..we're just advancing in a different direction." General Oliver Smith USMC

    • JackDesott wrote:

      Well, I can understand your point, but in my opinion, cutting off the ability to use allies aircraft carriers should be enabled, or at least there should be an option for the user to enable a coalition open aircraft carriers. I can understand that it isn't very helpful if your mate is offline, but you got this problem, even if his fighter jets aren't on your carrier. So the game lives from users who are online, so I still think that there should be added that people can use the carrier of allies. Maybe, as I said before, they can implement the option of turning it on and off for allies.
      This sounds like a good solution. Also, if you use the aircraft properly and level it up, the Aircraft Carrier is perfectly fine. It requires a huge investment into Airforce, especially naval, but that's what it's for, no?

    • The carrier is good to ferry helicopters when they are out of range. For example, I'm in a game that I am playing as Russia. I just finished taking China and I conquered the Falkland Islands at the same time. I want to focus my attack on South America, so I built an airfield in the Falklands. I can fly my fighters and bombers over there but the helicopters won't make it. I'm taking them over on the carrier and moving my carrier aircraft by flying them.

    • Lobos04 wrote:

      The carrier is good to ferry helicopters when they are out of range. For example, I'm in a game that I am playing as Russia. I just finished taking China and I conquered the Falkland Islands at the same time. I want to focus my attack on South America, so I built an airfield in the Falklands. I can fly my fighters and bombers over there but the helicopters won't make it. I'm taking them over on the carrier and moving my carrier aircraft by flying them.
      you could put a chopper on a transport and escort with a ship that can defend itself. seems a big expense to ferry a few choppers.
      "And I looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him "

      aka ...The killer formerly known as BuckeyeChamp

    • Clock wrote:

      JackDesott wrote:

      Well, I can understand your point, but in my opinion, cutting off the ability to use allies aircraft carriers should be enabled, or at least there should be an option for the user to enable a coalition open aircraft carriers. I can understand that it isn't very helpful if your mate is offline, but you got this problem, even if his fighter jets aren't on your carrier. So the game lives from users who are online, so I still think that there should be added that people can use the carrier of allies. Maybe, as I said before, they can implement the option of turning it on and off for allies.
      This sounds like a good solution. Also, if you use the aircraft properly and level it up, the Aircraft Carrier is perfectly fine. It requires a huge investment into Airforce, especially naval, but that's what it's for, no?
      I think Ive sunk every Aircraft carrier ever encountered. Most dont realize concept of Carrier Group; IRL Carriers are escorted with like 8 ships and sure 3 or 4 subs else they would be a sitting duck. Also they hold 45 fighters plus support aircraft...not 5.
      "And I looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him "

      aka ...The killer formerly known as BuckeyeChamp

      The post was edited 1 time, last by The Pale Rider ().

    • Just imagine how much technology, time, buildings, and resources needed to build an aircraft carrier. Then compare that with maybe 5 airfields. The difference is mind blowing.

      No sane person would choose the aircraft carrier over the airfield I’m afraid….in its current form…
      I am Aeneas, duty-bound and known above high air of heaven by my fame, carrying with me in my ships our gods of hearth and home, saved from the foe. I look for Italy to be my fatherland, and my descent is from all-highest Jove.

    • That is why there needs to be incentive to build the carrier that distinguishes it from an air field. If it is possible, allow the carrier to heal planes at 3HP per day and increase the healing power to 6HP as you level up the carrier. (Note, this might be impossible to implement, I do not know how the coding would work). Currently, the carrier heals planes at 2HP per day in shallow water.

      The drawback of the airfield is it cannot heal planes, and the field hospitals only go to +3HP at max level. I feel like that is one way to distinguish the carrier.

    • Core issue that makes the carrier utterly redundant is the ease with which it can be replaced; just capture one of the nearby tiny islands and now you have an airfield, doesnt even need marines, and not only can *any* aircraft operate from there but it also allows you to airlift units.
      The Carrier itself as a unit is fine as it is; the cirumstances surrounding him just heavily disfavor him.
      Being hella expensive AND needing special aircraft (except helis) to operate from it? On top of that having a carrier makes a mavy almost always mandatory, if you intend to keep it that is.
      You could buff it until your mum would fit on it and it‘d still be pretty bad unless the actual „issues“ get addressed.
      I am The Baseline for opinions

    • eYou didn't notice that if you level it up it holds up to 15? Also, every aircraft unit seems to be a squadron of aircraft (except for officer). That seems to equal even more than 45 to me.

      Clock wrote:


      every unit is not a squad (5 planes). so if up to 15 than that gives you 15 planes. But still whats the purpose? If I invade a country Im taking a city with a airbase or can get an airfield functional in half a day. than continue when move fwd.
      "And I looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him "

      aka ...The killer formerly known as BuckeyeChamp

    • Maybe a possibility is for airfields to have a max capacity (maybe with tiers just like carrier tiers), to cost a lot more, and to take days to build. That still would not account for the cost of the aircraft carrier and it’s special aircraft but it would be a start.
      I am Aeneas, duty-bound and known above high air of heaven by my fame, carrying with me in my ships our gods of hearth and home, saved from the foe. I look for Italy to be my fatherland, and my descent is from all-highest Jove.

    • Aeneas of Troy wrote:

      Maybe a possibility is for airfields to have a max capacity (maybe with tiers just like carrier tiers), to cost a lot more, and to take days to build. That still would not account for the cost of the aircraft carrier and it’s special aircraft but it would be a start.
      so all the downsides of an carrier without any of the upsides? seems like an easy way to kill airforce
      I am The Baseline for opinions

    • Main advantage IRL for carriers is a moving Airbase. In reality how long would it take to establish a airbase in hostile territory (well fist would need boots on ground) as todays high tech aircraft can not just function on some defeated airfield. Aircraft carriers have never resulted in significant conquering of territory (well japan did but they were taking over areas with zero military).

      USA uses Carriers as mobile / flexible show of force. But with drones; long range missiles; stealth bombers who can launch to anywhere in world from N Carolina (they dont land anywhere else); even carriers are loosing their value.

      But key is without a Carrier Group and massive air fire power IRL Carriers would be sitting ducks.
      "And I looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him "

      aka ...The killer formerly known as BuckeyeChamp

    • Buckeyechamp wrote:

      I think Ive sunk every Aircraft carrier ever encountered. Most dont realize concept of Carrier Group; IRL Carriers are escorted with like 8 ships and sure 3 or 4 subs else they would be a sitting duck. Also they hold 45 fighters plus support aircraft...not 5.
      must be noobs. they dont understand that ACs dont DEFEND against other units? you will need some aa/naval support (frigs/crusiers) and maybe asfs too
      Україна
      Україна

      "The future is not written" - Anna Jija

    • Most people just don't use Aircraft Carriers correctly. Also, it would be nice if Naval Patrol Aircraft could land on them and they could have a feature that could carry aircraft along with them so that when the aircraft carrier moved the aircraft moved. Also, if you land planes on a carrier and your ally isn't moving the carrier or the other way around, is that really the game's fault? They're supposed to be active at the same time to coordinate it or can just leave it somewhere good.
      Also, you can put carriers next to each other, bam, 30 capacity with them next to each other. If the opponent doesn't have frigates, they're going to get decimated by NPA, etc. If no Cruisers, decimated by ASW and ships. If no Destroyers, decimated by subs. So Carrier Group + Aircraft + Submarines seems good. People really just use aircraft carriers too little and when they are used they are used improperly, I have never actually seen a carrier used properly. Also, for an example, I was going to land planes on my ally's carrier to bombard the Americas but I couldn't because it's not allowed in the state of the game as it is. My ally wasted tens of thousands of Romponents, Rares, etc. on those Carriers that would have been useful if allied planes could land on them and help out.

      By the way: Do the planes go back to the carrier if the carrier moves too far away? If they don't, what happens? I have never experienced this and I would like to know.