I am sure this has been covered by others before (so apologies in advance) but what I would like to see is a separation between Naval Bombers (the likes of SBD Dauntless, Fairey Swordfish, etc) which are there to attack enemy ships (with a small anti-sub capability) and Patrol Bombers (PBY Catalina, Shorts Sunderland, etc) which are very long range patrol planes optimized for long endurance and enough payload to carry adequate anti-sub munitions. The current Naval Bomber tries to do both jobs, and particularly for the LR recon, does not do the job well so I would propose:
Naval Bombers - pretty short range, optimized for surface ship attacks, carrier capable, with some anti-sub capability - so pretty much as they are now but with reduced anti-sub and lower anti-sub detection probability
Patrol Bombers - long range flying boats (mostly), with very long range, good anti-sub capability and some sort of ability to detect subs (not automatic but if on patrol then perhaps they get better and better info about their patrol zone). Perhaps you would be able to base these at any coastal province (given they were mostly flying boats). Or even a research option to do land-based LR naval recon planes (B-24 Liberator, Fw-200 Condor) which would be "cheaper" because they are derivatives of existing land planes but would need an airbase to operate from - even a situation where you could cheaply research a LR land-based naval patrol bomber directly from a strategic bomber (ie each level of strategic bomber would have a link to the same level of land-based patrol bomber) whereas flying boats would be a separate research line - more expensive but more flexible
Then, of course, why not have long range land-based high altitude recon planes - like the Ju-86P, stripped down PR Spitfires and Mosquitoes. These would have no offensive combat capability but would be very difficult to shoot down early in the game - basically being immune to similar or lower level Ints and with higher level Ints getting a chance of damage. Then players could run recon missions without using combat planes. Recon missions over neutral territory could be run with little risk of detection - make them like subs ie stealthy with perhaps a chance of detection?
To my mind these would add a further dimensions to the game which can only add to the enjoyment right?
5 Replies
15 Sept 2017, 11:35
The complete disability of planes to deal with surface ships is one of the most irrealistic features of the whole current CoW combat stats set. Bsically any naval stack of some size can sail anywhere, and only be afraid of other vassals (surface or sub). Historically, capital ships were ALWAYS kept out of reach of planes or under fighter cover, otherwise they would be sunk (just check out the Prince of Wales / Repulse drama). It was also the reason why the battleship was replaced by the aircraft carrier as the queen of the naval battlefield. CoW reflects that very badly, so I would surely support any approach that would make planes able to deal with surface ships.
15 Sept 2017, 14:04
Thanks for the suggestion.
Hmm complete disability? I wouldn't call it complete
For level 1:
Naval Bomber: 25HP, 8 Anti ship damage
Destroyer: 30HP, 2 Anti air Damage
-> Naval Bomber clearly wins vs. Destroyers
Battleship: 75HP, 3.6 Anti air Damage
-> Battleship slightly stronger than Naval Bomber
Cruiser: 50HP, 6.5 Anti Air Damage
-> Cruiser ~1.5x as strong as Naval Bomber
(in CoW it takes the anti air role of the ships)
And now compare the prices: The stronger ships are all 1,5 - 2 times more expensive than the naval bomber, so cost wise the naval bomber is still slightly better.
So yeah we can make the Naval Bomber a bit stronger (we will probably do that in the next balancing update), but it is far from useless now.
15 Sept 2017, 14:21
Stop making sense with numbers freezy The problem is that people normally don't want to invest so much in NBs to have enough to compete with a navy, but yea, a nice 5 stack mixed with other planes can take care of a sizable local threat.
15 Sept 2017, 19:40
Since the recent changes, I actually build more naval bombers. Even researched them way up in a pacific game I played. Perhaps they are still slightly (just slightly!) underpowered. My main issue with them is their range, as Rogo indirectly pointed out. Their range should be as high as tac bombers, perhaps slightly more, but less than strat bombers (they too need another serious buff against buildings, like double!). Having 2 variants would be nice, but imho not crucial.
16 Sept 2017, 00:59
Yes a range upgrade for higher level naval bombers would be much appreciated.
War is a game that is played with a smile. If you can't smile, grin. If you can't grin keep out of the way til you can. - Winston Churchill VorlonFCW Retired from Bytro staff as of November 30, 2020. >>> Click Here to submit a bug report or support ticket <<<
The problem is that people normally don't want to invest so much in NBs to have enough to compete with a navy, but yea, a nice 5 stack mixed with other planes can take care of a sizable local threat.
