(03-04-2014, 08:58 PM)iCon3q7 Wrote: ...
How would a single bomberplane or torpedoboat hold up against a battlecruiser? Not well is my bet.
...
You people speak about more realism and how it adds to more RP. Fine then, as you like to have the snubfighters do in all your propositions so badly against anything larger than a bomber, with having several fighters taking down a gunship at max...
Here's something for your realism... Exocet anti-ship missile
Quote:... can be launched from surface vessels, submarines, helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft.
And it's actually fired from jetfighters (AM39 variant).
*finishes sandwich, goes to bed, get gets up and does stuff to make money, eats another sandwich and sits down at the keys*
I'd like to say sorry for my mix-up in terminoligy.. When I say BS, I'm thinking about capital ships in general.
I'll try to explain the best I can.
I am not looking for 100% realism and and do not want something changed if the majority of the 'Old Dogs' don't approve. These are just some features I thought would add a bit of depth and maybe didn't require major work to implement.
I am still a bit confused about how the majority of you guys truly feel about the importance of roleplaying.
Sometimes it seems very important and other times people seem more interested in 'doin da pewpew'. Just want get a feel for the mood, so to say.
I hope that's clear enough.
Now:
The point you're trying to make is that there actually exists powerful anti-ship missiles, I get that.
Then I could argue that the reasons countries like China, USA, Russia, Great Britain and Japan are not using those missiles are something like this, this, this or this.
Then we could go on and on about offense and defense, but that's another point.
It's probably just that 'epicness' about 600 mio worth of ship I'm missing.
Again, I agree with you that 100% realism is not a good idea. Nukes and forced bathroom breaks would be a *itch. Maybe I should make a 5 option poll. *How much RP? 0-20%, 20-40%, etc.* Nah, better not.
