Right now ASB seems so obviously unloved, especially with the economy updates it has suffered.
Yeah, 99% of the time, Im convinced the devs forget SB even exists. Way too often there will be some update pertaining to something and it will mention AB and RB but never SB and getting an answer for how it will work for SB is like getting blood from a stone. Like the RP boost for new nations. Still waiting on an answer as to how that will work for SB
What is really stupid, is that with even a tiny bit of love, WT could destroy the Sim game genre competition and get a lot of new players from it
TBH, besides Russia, some aircraft carriers are needed in the game as AI such as CVN-65 USS Enterprise and CV-41 USS Midway in 1950s.
It’s a little odd to see a 1950s Navy jet launching from a Vietnam-era angled deck.
When they added modern AI Aircraft Carriers with modules i was very very happy.
However,i hope that someday carriers will be more used for more than merely landing/taking off
First of all,we need more modern carriers:USA has late 1980s jets and they still use the Forrestal (okay,that carrier was in service until 1992,but during that time the Enterprise and some Nimitz were already in service)
Russia can get the Kuznetsov-class
GB can get the Prince of Wales
China can get the Liaoning (Type 001) or the Shandong (Type 002)
France can get the Charles De Gaulle and/or the Clemenceau-class (either the Clemenceau or the Foch)
Italy can get both the Giuseppe Garibaldi and the Cavour (the Trieste is still too recent)
Then, aircraft carriers could also provide a form of advanced radar tracking for all allied planes, making them a more interesting target during EC
If i may add,all of the air naval branches in the game is still too undeveloped compared to their land counterparts
2 Likes
Technically its the Queen Elizabeth-Class Carriers, but yeah, that would be awesome. But maybe a tad too modern, but would love ramped carriers. like those used in the Falklands such as HMS Invincible which was commissioned in 1980 and decommisioned in 2005 or HMS Illustrious which was commissioned in 1982 and was decomissioned in 2014
HMS Ark Royal we have in SB currently, was decomissioned in 1979.
Edit:
That might be why we dont have some Soviet Carriers. As they were ramped and WT cant currently handle that. Aircraft like the Sea Harrier used a Ramp Launch not CATOBAR (I dont know if they could be launched via CATOBAR IRL) but im guessing its a “Game limitation”
2 Likes
Yeah it’s probably like that, if i stand correctly you can’t drive on a ramp like that in WT,you’ll just crash
It’s a serious challenge for them,but i hope it can be resolved because variety is what we need
If their latest variation were visually and practically different from the Ark Royal (which i bet it was) then it’s okay. I chose the Prince of Wales simply because it was the next class of aircraft carriers,and it and the Queen Elizabeth technically succeeded to the Invincible and the Illustrious
Yeah, Carriers are buggy enough (arrestor wires not catching or landing gear ripping off on take-off) Id not want to add ramps into the mix just yet. Youd probably explode upon contact.
Yeah, Queen Elizabeth-Class is the most modern of our carriers, but would be a tad wierd take off from them with a Sea Harrier FA2. Id doubt we’d get F-35s anytime soon. Something like an Invincible-class would be a good middle ground to “replace” the Audacious-class carriers we have in-game currently. Though that being said, with the exception of the Sea Harrier FRS1 and yet to be added Sea Harrier FA2. the Audacious-Class carrier is the “accurate” carrier for most of the naval aircraft we currently have in game, so its a more minor “upgrade” than it would be for most nations. Especially those with 0 representation
1 Like
Oh that’s why i fail most of my attempts with both piston and jet aircrafts, it’s not me that i’m blind.
Yep, that’s the reason why i’m not too reliant of taking the Trieste over the Garibaldi,for example.
The Trieste will be in service between April and May (if everything goes into plans),and even tho we still have some AV-8B+,this last carrier will mostly have F-35s which are already in service with the Cavour and were briefly in service with the Garibaldi
And since the Garibaldi will be decommissioned later this year,it will be a good chance to add her into this game (even tho it can only launch one single italian aircraft)
Its very possible. I’ve had a few (at least what i’d consider) “perfect” landings and flown straight off the end (with how “unreliable” replay is for long matches like SB, I never go back and check because it just causes CTDs) . I think latency plays a VERY big part in it, but also the slightly erractic behaviour of the carriers and how they “turn” can cause a lot of issues. A big part of what they need to fix is the routing/path the carrier takes and make its turns smoother and larger.
Ah yeah, that makes sense, I dont know much about Italy and her current navy/airforce so yeah, that would make sense
Latency plays a big role indeed,but also the model of the aircraft carrier plays a significant role,it may also be a problem of model collisions?
It would also be nice for Gaijin to implement a fully functional Optical Landing System for the Forrestal at least, since it was built with an integrated OLS. This mechanic would greatly help manage your landing
1 Like
Yeah it would, Buc is quite easy to land without that aid, as is the Sea-Vixen. But the phantoms are almost impossible. Even if it was just a HUD element and not something on the carrier itself
1 Like
Well IRL Phantoms had a gliding coefficient worse than a literal concrete brick,so on one side Gaijin is pretty accurate with their FM
On other hand,i don’t think that Phantoms during the Vietnam War plummeted into the sea everytime they tried a carrier approach
Yeah, you just have to be very very accurate on your rather steep glide scope and without anything to help guide you in (in cockpit) its just as much luck than skill. Especially with all the other issues that aflict carriers, especially when trying to land.
1 Like
This is probably exactly why. I wish they would figure out how to properly implement carrier decks for this to be viable, and to even help the current bugs.
1 Like
Yeah, like a lot of features, Carriers were added and then forgotten about, with occasional bodge jobs to keep them going
1 Like
I wonder how hard it is for gaijin to model carrier decks and AI that they have put it off this long.
that’s so true (I have made a bug report for the bot problem but gaijin ignore it)
I love when carrier AI drifts in place as I try to land on it
1 Like
It’s probably well within their abilities. But like a lot of things, it would currently only benefit SIM, and thus, holds minimal value for most of the playerbase. It’s also why I reckon things like cockpits are always a low priority
Only reliable way to land on a carrier these days: