Pitting an American BB again, say, an Italian is probably an automatic US victory in any conditions other than 'sparklingly clear' simply because the Americans can fire in almost all weather, and the Italians cannot. Clearly, the balancing with the carrier needs to reduce their utter dominance, but simultaneously make them more resilient than they were.ĥ) Balance radar capability between the sides in some way. And we all know what happened on the rare occasions that BBs/BCs 'got the jump' on carriers. Once a carrier's air wing was knocked from the sky, the ship itself suffered either terrible or fatal damage in a matter of minutes. As we know, carriers in WWII were pretty much as glass cannon as they come. I can imagine these 'unrealistic' elements would be:ġ) Give battleships and BCs a fighting chance against carriers, which they generally had none.Ģ) Minimize the ability of carriers to swarm warships with simultaneous (and normally unavoidable) dive bomb and torpedo attacks from multiple directions (or, conversely, make the AA of destroyers, cruisers and capital ships far better than it actually was).ģ) Give destroyers the opportunity to close on BBs/BCs to a range to utilize torpedoes without these attacks becoming suicide missions.Ĥ) Allow carriers not to be an auto-KO once they are hit. Thus, I would hope the developers would set out to design the mechanics with as much realism as is possible, and then inject whatever 'game-like' qualities are necessary to keep things smooth. Why? Because I know that total realism isn't possible, so no matter what happens, there are going to be 'arcade-y' concessions.
0 kommentar(er)
