Lethal sea air strike

[snoopy369]

You can edit an XML file in Notepad, or similar (editplus, textpad, etc.). You can also open it in Excel; or use Altova XMLSpy home edition, which is a free xml editor (if you can find it!).

[wolfpack1]

Or you can download Dale's mod. Haven't tried the bomber and fighter, but the stealth bombers and jet fighters have lehtal bombing.

And where i can find Dale's mod ?

[MoonWolf]

Dale's mod. You also have a mod that only covers the bombing missions (and where these planes have lethal bombing), you'll find this also in the Creation part of the forum

Good luck

[wolfpack1]

last night i did it.

i changed to lethal bombing (fighters and get fighters)

I am a hapy man. Thanks eneryone for helping me.

The only thing that doesn't like me now is that 3 fighters are not enough to sink an enemy battleship (3 fighters= a carrier group) Fighters should have double strength against ships and armored vehicals But if i change that too, i think that there is no way for the AI to handle my offensives

Again thnx a lot

[MoonWolf]

Remember that battleships are huge and massive. It requires a lot of firepower to sink one. Will 3 jet fighters sink it btw?

[Modo44]

Originally posted by MoonWolf
Remember that battleships are huge and massive. It requires a lot of firepower to sink one. Will 3 jet fighters sink it btw?

Actually, one should, with the proper missiles. That's why no battleships are used anymore. They are too expensive to maintain, and too easy to destroy with modern weapons.

[Jaybe]

One should remember that a high-intensity air-to-sea fight has never been done with modern weaponry (anti-ship missiles vs. anti-missile guns such as phalanx, and such). We don't really know where the balance lies.

The last ship sunk by an anti-ship missile that I remember is off the Israeli coast, 30 years ago.

Edit: typo

[wodan11]

Good point Jaybe.

[Modo44]

I guess its was just the support cost that killed the BB, then...

[wodan11]

Originally posted by Modo44

Actually, one should, with the proper missiles. That's why no battleships are used anymore. They are too expensive to maintain, and too easy to destroy with modern weapons.

Isn't the same true of an AC?

Seems to me the telling factor is the projection of power. A BB is an artillery unit, all done and said. An AC is a base for mobile missile and anti-fighter platforms.

Wodan

[Jaybe]

Originally posted by Modo44
I guess its was just the support cost that killed the BB, then...

U.S. Battleships, most certainly! Old equipment, LOTS of manpower required to run. And that manpower is expensive in today's U.S. Navy.

Personally, I've tripled support cost (+2 iExtraCost) to battleships. OTOH, I've made changes to many units.

[ChrisiusMaximus]

The Argentine Air Forces caused a fair bit of havoc to the Royal Navy during the Falklands campaign, using missiles !

Although this was over 25 years ago now, are ships better equipped now to deal with air power ?

I think lethal air power has a place, its just that it has to be balanced to stop it being overpowered.

[Heraclitus]

I do wonder why Battleships need that much manpower.

[MrAnon]

@Jaybe: The killer cost was fuel. An Iowa-class carried about 2.3 *million* gallons of fuel oil (in 143 tanks...). So just a fill-up in the 80s would cost (being really nice on oil price, here) $2.3 million. At 15 kts (best economic speed), she needed *153 gallons* of fuel per nautical mile (double speed = triple consumption). A single one-way crossing of the Atlantic, therefore, would cost about $500,000.

Add to that the need to build almost all of your spare parts from scratch and you're talking some SERIOUS operating expenses!


@Heraclitus: Because the BBs were built in the 1940's, during WWII. Automation cost $$ and increased the build time while manpower was readily available. There are also secondary costs to increasing automation, like the time required for specialized training to use the automated gear. And increased maintenance requirements for the automated gear.

So during that timeframe, it made more sense to, say, train a seaman to lift a powder bag from the powder elevator, turn and drop it on the loading tray than to build a mechanism to do that same thing. Plus, if something happens to that seaman, you can stick another one in his place. If the automated system breaks, then you're just up a creek until it gets fixed.


@ChrisiusMaximus: Yes, ships today are much better equipped to handle AAW (anti-air warfare) specifically because of the disproportionate damage the Argies did to the RN. They sank 2 DDs, 2 FFs, 1 containership, 1 Landing Ship and 1 Landing Craft plus damaging 4 other ships badly enough that they were withdrawn while only losing 20 aircraft, many of them trainers.

@All: One way around the lethality paradox is to give the aircraft a bonus against ships. For example: Max damage at 50% (affecting land, sea & air targets) PLUS a bonus of 50% vs sea targets.

[jbp26]

Originally posted by ChrisiusMaximus
Although this was over 25 years ago now, are ships better equipped now to deal with air power ?

AEGIS > everything