Forums

Would like to address some of the Navel Vessels and the limitations the game engine allows for movement.
Just using the Type IX German Submarine as an example, this submarine could travel surfaced, 33,700 meters in one hour and 13,500 meters submerged in one hour at full speed. Using the 6 minute and 250 meter game rules, the submarine could move at full speed surfaced, 13.48 hexes and 5.4 submerged, where in fact the submarines in the JTCS can only move 2 hexes per turn.

Now using an old Battleship such as the USS Pennsylvania BB38, this ship could travel 39,000 meters in one hour and once again using the 6 minute and the 250 meter rules, this ship could travel 15.6 hexes per turn, but yet it also limited to only move two hexes per turn. Even an LCT can move three hexes per turn which is saying that the LCT is faster than a submarine or Battleship which it is not.

It would be nice if the movement of the navel vessels were brought up to date in the new upcoming patch just to add some realism to the game.

In my last post I mentioned that the German airfield bombers will not move. It would add more realism to the game if there were also airfield fighters available to patrol the sky and give fighter cover to not only navel vessels but also to ground troops. Have them operate just like the airfield bombers that do move.

Lastly, in further testing, and I mentioned that the German airfield bombers do not move, neither do the German 280mm rail guns.

Joe

Just as an aside, the majority of the ship movement we're talking about close in shore, particularly for large vessels, was for the purpose of shore bombardment. In these missions these vessels rarely comported themselves at high speeds, etc.... Also, the difficulties with modeling vessel movement in a game designed for land warfare is probably pretty egregious, particularly when you take into account that this game allows a vehicle essentially to go from zero to maximum speed, to zero with virtually no acceleration or deceleration effects (which for large ships are very considerable; just look at turning circles when under way). While these vessels are nice to haves, I think there are far more pressing things that get to very heart of what the CS is supposed to represent that are in need of fixing.

Just my two cents.

LR

Your comments are worth more than two cents Larry.
The appearance some years ago of the "bathtub navy" as I called it at the time, with the non-submarine submarine, the sad disabled battleship (damage control, anybody??), etc...best it just fades away.
CS is able to utilise some waterborne units such as landing craft with acceptable accuracy. NGS is fine with Off Board Arty. Maybe some limited patrol craft can be done.
The idea of trying to run air-to-air combat without the benefit of the dimension of altitude remains bizarre. Visibility over land is controlled by the terrain, and if over the sea is all round, all upwards , all downwards all 360 degrees..totally unrealistic. No clouds, no sun. No range/endurance limitations. No need to RTB for fuel, bombs and bullets. The game just can't do it, and we should accept that.
It can simulate, in a very limited way, on-map aviation such as spotters and helos. Remember DG-VN. But also remember that in SVN the only opposition was the little people's AA (and that was frightening enough.) In CS you can't fly at 1500' (which was pretty safe against SA fire). You can't fly your Phantom at 45000' which should keep you well above any AA gun I ever heard of. A good example of the limits of CS in the air is the fact that an on map aircraft cannot overfly an enemy hex.
With good design and management, it is possible, I believe, to do a reasonable simulation of helo warfare. In a sense, most helos were, in Vietnam, trucks . On the water, we can probably do patrol craft.
But let's forget about doing aircraft carriers, submarines, battleships, cruisers and most air combat. CS can't do it. It's a land warfare game.