Cruisers inefective

Darn! Thanks Nephthys, I meant Jaws. I am just so used to using your name on the forums in S1914.

narf0708 wrote:

In game 1070133, I've had my first cruiser bombarding the one enemy infantry unit in Copenhagen for nearly 24 hours now. The unit was not killed, but only brought down to 49% morale. This seems to me to be unaccountably feeble.

As I'd rather not wait another 24 hours to kill the unit entirely, I'm going to be testing how the cruiser fares against a troop transport boat.

I like the ships. They are good for pulling an enemies troops back from the frontline to where they think a seaborne invasion will happen. They are good too because they can take a load of hits from large arty stacks and still kill the stack, even with one BB.

I haven't find any subject about flying carriers yet?

Did you ever write about this unit?

Used a lot in Asia?

11emeBCA wrote:

I haven't find any subject about flying carriers yet?

Did you ever write about this unit?

Used a lot in Asia?

Joe Bentleigh wrote:

11emeBCA wrote:

I haven't find any subject about flying carriers yet?

Did you ever write about this unit?

Used a lot in Asia?

Bytro have strongly hinted that they are working on adding aircraft carriers to the game.

What is still to come:

We’re still tweaking a lot of things, so be prepared to changes like adjustments to the balancing (maybe even drastic), further polishing e.g. to how the map is being displayed as well as upcoming new features. To not spoil too much right now, we will definitely unlock the alliance feature soon and release a 2nd map variant for more players. Air-warfare usability will be enhanced even further and someone mentioned something top secret which sounded like a combination of ships and planes. Let’s see what that may be.

There will be a large update for the airplanes in the future where the flying carrier maybe will be added too. And on beginning there was a slot for the unit in the statistics too

The rest was posted by Wilhelm allready.

Understood! Thank you old fellows!

Cruisers do have decent anti-air, and it is very inadvisable to send troops from point A to B without a naval escort. Unless you're trying to reduce upkeep costs that is.

And unlike S1914, you can't run into the waves to attack the bombarding ships with your rifle, which is a pretty nice change towards the realism

Kalantigos wrote:

And unlike S1914, you can't run into the waves to attack the bombarding ships with your rifle, which is a pretty nice change towards the realism

Joe Bentleigh wrote:

Kalantigos wrote:

And unlike S1914, you can't run into the waves to attack the bombarding ships with your rifle, which is a pretty nice change towards the realism

You mean, melee units like infantry can't attack ships at all? That would be good - I've wanted that to be the case in Supremacy for a long time ...

Kalantigos wrote:

It's one of the reasons for naval escorts. As far as I can tell (needs confirmation, but current play experience validates) all non-naval units become 5HP, 0 strength units when in the sea

I can say i lost a Destroyer in fighting agains a huge army of shipped land units. I was a bit surprised about it as they were supposed to have a 0 attack.

Yeah, I lost land units against land units on the open sea with no submarines for either side. Are they meant to ram each other or what?

Land units on sea have a certain defensive value. I'm not sure if that should be changed, but it does not feel entirely unrealistic to me (during the war many merchant ships were modified to offer at least a minimum of defensive capability against convoy raiders).

It should say that then. Like attack strength of, say, 0.25?

I agree. I'm not concerned about land units at sea having some sort of defensive value, but if it is not displayd it is legitimate to believe it is 0.

Futhermore it should be used only in fighiting with enemy fighing ships, while enemy convoy of only land units should not interfere eachother

It should say that then. Like attack strength of, say, 0.25?