The almighty helicopter

It is crazy how a group of helicopters can take out 8 cruise missile ships. Could you imagine if the US sent out its navies to Iraq and Iraq sent out old rusty helicopters and sunk the US's fleets with ease. I mean it doesnt make sense. Could you imagine how a recreation of a simcountry battle would look and how silly it would appear. Navies are now worthless if they can be taken out by a few helicopters. That shit is crazy. i rest my case.

Don't rock the boat man.b4 this change naval groups could rain ordinance on a country with impunity.at least there is a defensive response now.

if you want to defend against a navy, build a navy to strike back.

I have 20 carrier groups. U?

(The American juggernaut)

p, part of the point is that you can't be online all the time, i work 12 hour shifts, and of course after that, i'm not gonna spend hours fighting back between shifts, its possible that even with black outs, my country would fall with out me having much of a chance to fight back

having a defensive weapon that shoots at navies, is rather important from a game stand point

although, maybe it'd be better to make L2SMB an offensive/defensive weapon? rather than just an offensive weapon

also, from your analogy, the "old rusty helicopters," you talk about, would be like 120Q? which leads to something i've thought about for a long time, if these Helis are shooting at the fleet, even in a defensive mode, why doesn't the navy interceptors, and navy missile interceptors participate in the battle? if you where to attack the fleet, those would defend the fleet, but do nothing if the fleet makes the attack, doesn

Well said orbiter

I agree with orbiter.

Something really had to be done. But, I just attacked a friend to see what would happen. Her mobile unit lost nothing and her two defensive helicopter units and defensive missiles destroyed 12 of my cruise ships without taking any loses.

The navy should have some ability to defend against those helicopters.

I don't like your language and will remove you from the forum.

The gamemaster

can I haz your stuff when you leave adam?

@Borg Queen
You should go to Adam's thread about his decleration of war on one of the GM's countries.

The more info you give us, the better.
We will continue testing today and tomorrow and check war logs to see if anything needs to be tuned.

check the weapons document.
Taking out a vessel probably requires more than 100 hits. (If the quality of the vessel and the helicopter are the same).

I read Adam's message and sure, it was direct and full of expletives but perhaps represented his frustration. I don't agree with the inference that its acceptable to make a change and see what happens when the cost to a state in money and a person in time is considerable when such tests could be undertaken by GM's. I just retested the war with a strategic fleet alone. In the first shot at a city, not defences, 7 cruise missile ships were taken out, in the second 5. Net effect strategic fleet useless. This is tantamount to the fleet being defended by a rubber duck. Sadly the knock on effects are considerable. The ammunition is reducing in cost if we are to believe the changes in war cost are going down, well now the value of a cruise missile is close to zero given the ineffectiveness of the fleets firing them. The factories producing the missiles that barely if ever produce a profit will also be rendered useless. Perhaps the converting

Those ships are pretty cheap now...at least compared to what they were. But yes... I also agree that the hit rate on those ships is huge. Several people I've talked to have worked it out and yah...even reasonable defence will render the fleets completely useless. This situation is still way, way better than the old one where our only defence was to get online and destroy the fleets.

If your fleet was damaged by defensive missile batteries,your fleet was to close to the enemy's shore.

Also,if you find your navy insufficient,you can dismantle and sell all ships and ordinance and put those funds towards new military units that in your opinion are better than having a naval force.me personally, I still find the navy a potent and valuable asset.

My navy was 3000 to 4000 miles away from the target, and sure, it's an opinion Jamie, but it's not as potent as it once was and it's defences are pointless. Not a single shot was seemingly fired in defence from the naval unit, so what is the point in the various defensive weapons of the Strategic fleet?

So your saying that naval interceptors,naval missile interceptor batteries,and naval defensive batteries do not work? If that's true that is a major issue.

Yes they work. It's just that defence doesn't fight defence if you know what I mean. Your naval defence weapons work if they're attacked by offensive weapons. They do nothing when the defence is responding to your attack. Unrealistic but that's the way it's always worked.

they work when the other guy presses the attack button, not when you press it

but you've got to consider, how much damage should you be able to do with 12 CMS?

the previous problem was that you could take out any target, while taking no damage,

now you can't do any damage, but being able to do any significant damage with 12 CMS, is a bit over strong,

much of the complaints here don't really talk much of various other options, for instance, NFP destroy DH, if you where to use NFP, or B/F wings to clear the interceptors, then add NFP to your Cruise/Frigate assault, you'd slaughter the DH. and over all, in terms of cost, is much more fair to the defender, than before

more and more, the GM are turning the war game into a complicated sim-chess

I appreciate DD and Orbiter's views, but to take out all cruisers in two hits is unreal and not having a defensive action from the fleet defences irrespective of whether that's 'how it's always been' is shortsighted. If the navy had been left as it had always been, for me, we wouldn't be having this conversation. Besides there are other approaches, if the defences of the fleet are of a good quality the fleet should be substantially less vulnerable, likewise if the attacking helicopters are of poor quality none or near none of the attacks should be successful. I was at war with a C3. In a war where the C was a cat, and my strategic fleet the mouse.

haha the helicopter is not king......we just found a way round this ....we like bugs!

Yes, this was a change for the better from a defense perspective but navy's are now completely worthless. They need to be able to be much larger/have a lot more power. Otherwise, above the lowest of war levels, you can't use NFP or cruisers and the rest of the weapons were already worthless.

only a dickhead removes a person for stating the truth. please make the navy more effective and please take away that defense because it is two strong of a defense . yes i agree my language was a little harsh but at least my point was viewed.

There is no longer a role for the navies the way I see it. Either they need to be able to take down an air defence, like the good old days. Or they need to have way more cruisers. In the 100's prob and be able to take out targets without loosing to much per attack. I favour the breaking of air defence personally.