I would like developer to divide armor classes for ships.

_Pyth0n_ wrote:

Carking the 6th wrote:

It’s a plane. Do you really expect it to be as strong as a ship? Not to mention that the bombers are waayyyyy cheaper and faster made. They are made to blow up ships, not be hardy vehicles. It would make no sense to give them as much health as ship or vice versa. In reality you’ll usually have a 2-1 or more ratio and it gets a lot easier.

Fair, but do remember a plane unit in CoW represents a whole squadron of planes (so 12), whilst a BB represents only 1 ship. I'd take my chances and say that 10 squadrons of bombers should be able to take out 10 ships. And I don't think anyone is arguing to increase NB's HP, but instead reduce BB's air defense dmg so that NBs are more effective.

And some ships may be critically or light damaged.

But also I think that a battleship group has about 3 ~ 10 ships and a battleship Flotilla have 10 “battleship groups”.

So I think a battleship Flotilla that have 10 battleship groups have 30 ~ 100 ships.

Ofcourse that 30 ~ 100 ships should have many ship other than battleship though...

Well in that case there is no need. I’m not sure about you guys but naval bombers usually crush battleships with ease currently. They are already one of the best ship counters in the game, they easily take down ships with a couple squadrons. Making them 1v1 ships when their price is like 3x lower and they already are great doesn’t feel much more cost effective…

_Pyth0n_ wrote:

Carking the 6th wrote:

It’s a plane. Do you really expect it to be as strong as a ship? Not to mention that the bombers are waayyyyy cheaper and faster made. They are made to blow up ships, not be hardy vehicles. It would make no sense to give them as much health as ship or vice versa. In reality you’ll usually have a 2-1 or more ratio and it gets a lot easier.

Fair, but do remember a plane unit in CoW represents a whole squadron of planes (so 12), whilst a BB represents only 1 ship. I'd take my chances and say that 10 squadrons of bombers should be able to take out 10 ships. And I don't think anyone is arguing to increase NB's HP, but instead reduce BB's air defense dmg so that NBs are more effective.

SamPGS_17 wrote:

_Pyth0n_ wrote:

Carking the 6th wrote:

It’s a plane. Do you really expect it to be as strong as a ship? Not to mention that the bombers are waayyyyy cheaper and faster made. They are made to blow up ships, not be hardy vehicles. It would make no sense to give them as much health as ship or vice versa. In reality you’ll usually have a 2-1 or more ratio and it gets a lot easier.

Fair, but do remember a plane unit in CoW represents a whole squadron of planes (so 12), whilst a BB represents only 1 ship. I'd take my chances and say that 10 squadrons of bombers should be able to take out 10 ships. And I don't think anyone is arguing to increase NB's HP, but instead reduce BB's air defense dmg so that NBs are more effective.

I think that one BB is still a fleet of battleships - that is the case for most units, it’s not specific to planes and it’s not exempted with naval units.

_Pyth0n_ wrote:

SamPGS_17 wrote:

_Pyth0n_ wrote:

Carking the 6th wrote:

It’s a plane. Do you really expect it to be as strong as a ship? Not to mention that the bombers are waayyyyy cheaper and faster made. They are made to blow up ships, not be hardy vehicles. It would make no sense to give them as much health as ship or vice versa. In reality you’ll usually have a 2-1 or more ratio and it gets a lot easier.

Fair, but do remember a plane unit in CoW represents a whole squadron of planes (so 12), whilst a BB represents only 1 ship. I'd take my chances and say that 10 squadrons of bombers should be able to take out 10 ships. And I don't think anyone is arguing to increase NB's HP, but instead reduce BB's air defense dmg so that NBs are more effective.

I think that one BB is still a fleet of battleships - that is the case for most units, it’s not specific to planes and it’s not exempted with naval units.

Well, if that's the case, it's extremely unrealistic. For destroyers I could maybe understand, but a single battleship has a manpower cost of 1900 IRL (for an Iowa-class), so I'd feel the game is made to resemble this. Ground units, of course, are meant to represent battalions (1 inf unit is rougly 1000 men + medics, support, logistic, etc.), and a light tank battalion would have between 10-70 tanks (a big range, but class divisions by country make things confusing). The general trend is, the bigger and more expensive a unit is, the less number of that unit is present in that unit. There'd be a larger number of ACs in an AC Brigade, whilst there'd be less HTs in a HT brigade (not by much, tbf). This doesn't apply to planes (they were organised into squadrons and wings respectively), but it does apply to ships. A single DD costs exponentially less than a single BB, so it'd make sense that the game represents a squadron of destroyers as a single unit, whilst also making a single BB or CV its own unit. Same applies to RRGs. This is why these units have the ability to be named, and why single BBs or CVs are referred to as "battle groups" instead of "squadrons".

oh - that point about naming units makes sense. But yeah, I am not 100% sure on this…

Looking at the news, when a BB is sunk is says “A battleship “(name)” has been sunk by the (unit)” or something along those lines. That tells me that it is singular.

Carking the 6th wrote:

Looking at the news, when a BB is sunk is says “A battleship “(name)” has been sunk by the (unit)” or something along those lines. That tells me that it is singular.

Carking the 6th wrote:

Looking at the news, when a BB is sunk is says “A battleship “(name)” has been sunk by the (unit)” or something along those lines. That tells me that it is singular.

But it is not clear that a battleship group is one ship this case alone.

I may be sure there were also cases where other formats were post.

So It is not clear that a battleship group is not accompanied by any auxiliary ships.

Probably with support ships, but no other battleships, I believe.

Carking the 6th wrote:

Probably with support ships, but no other battleships, I believe.

“ 6:19 am The 9th Battle Group (Romania) lost: 1 Battleship ”

Therefore,

①( Battle Group is )

Consisted of only one battleship and also no auxiliary ships.

②( 〃 )

Consisted of one battleship and auxiliary ships.

③( 〃 )

Consisted of several battleships and also no auxiliary ships.

④( 〃 )

Consisted of several battleships and accompanied by auxiliary ships.

I think all cases are possible.

Yes but a single battleship getting sunk costs a unit. That leads me to believe it’s a Ship (with auxiliary stuff, but they don’t matter) and not multiple.

Carking the 6th wrote:

Yes but a single battleship getting sunk costs a unit. That leads me to believe it’s a Ship (with auxiliary stuff, but they don’t matter) and not multiple.

I think it is more natural or reasonable to think that there is a difference between cases where a politically important warship such as a flagship or name ship sinks, and cases where an unknown battleship sinks.

In other words, my hypothesis is that during a unit engagement, battleships will actually sink one by one while their HP is being lost, but it will not be reported by newspaper until the last one has sunk.

pod_than wrote:

Carking the 6th wrote:

Yes but a single battleship getting sunk costs a unit. That leads me to believe it’s a Ship (with auxiliary stuff, but they don’t matter) and not multiple.

That hypothesis is inexplicable because multiple formats exist.I think it is more natural or reasonable to think that there is a difference between cases where a politically important warship such as a flagship or name ship sinks, and cases where an unknown battleship sinks.

In other words, my hypothesis is that during a unit engagement, battleships will actually sink one by one while their HP is being lost, but it will not be reported by newspaper until the last one has sunk.

SamPGS_17 wrote:

pod_than wrote:

Carking the 6th wrote:

Yes but a single battleship getting sunk costs a unit. That leads me to believe it’s a Ship (with auxiliary stuff, but they don’t matter) and not multiple.

That hypothesis is inexplicable because multiple formats exist.I think it is more natural or reasonable to think that there is a difference between cases where a politically important warship such as a flagship or name ship sinks, and cases where an unknown battleship sinks.In other words, my hypothesis is that during a unit engagement, battleships will actually sink one by one while their HP is being lost, but it will not be reported by newspaper until the last one has sunk.

Too many people are making sense here! How can we get official confirmation… I don’t want to have to ping freezy

I mean, does it really matter? We'll bring the discussion back to divided ship classes, since this ain't really relevant. If you want the question answered, make a new thread and ping freezy.

In the first place, if the story that a battleship group is consisted by many ships is accepted, it would reinforce the logic that battleships have high defense against aircraft.

So it should be more convenient for them that everyone believe the story that a battleship group is consisted by many ships though...

I heard Freezy say once that many things in the game are supposed to be simulated in the background and not actually shown. Support ships like this are probably just one of them, which would explain much more.