| Thursday, November 21, 2013 - 08:24 pm |
I think we should just add defensive navy heli's.
I agree with Aries.
Being able to have navy inters/helis to protect the fleets would be a good idea. If we want to press them for being very powerful weapons.
On the flip side
We should keep navy heli's for (my belief being this)
Navy attack heli's should remain but they are weaker then planes in combat vs weapons. My personal opinion is that planes should remain as is Hit/Damage.
The Thing that should help them is to allow them more missiles per turn.
When attacking a garrison( or any defensive weapon) the stats for the attack heli's and navy heli's are the same. But navy helis fire less missiles per turn.(navy planes have double the rates helis do).
Helis should really be considered a fearsome weapon. They should be able to do well when attacking enemy garrison. Giving them a 5% hit rate and bumping them to fire 10 missiles per round should give them a good edge and allow them to preform a bit better then planes in ground attacks. But wouldn't overpower them.
400 attack helis(7per heli) = 2800 missiles per attack
250 navy helis(10per heli) = 2500 missiles per attack.
Something like that would keep them on a tad lower land based weapons. But if an enemy is 5000KM or more away would give you a real chance at helping or warring.
| Friday, November 22, 2013 - 02:56 pm |
submarines can be attacked by navy weapons, not by any land based weapons.
it is an advantage but subs do have an advantage by being under water.
you need torpedoes to destroy them.
they can also attack only navy targets and response will come from defensive destroyers.
We think that for now the navy is OK.
we will add these subs to other navy groups and add more navy groups.
then, with more experience and testing, we might tune it a bit but testing before the launch was OK, we tuned and balanced. we run many attacks both ways. It looks go as it is now.
| Friday, November 22, 2013 - 06:05 pm |
but according to documents a equal quality sub unit or maybe 2 units at the maximum thats 150-200B each has a chance of totally destroying a fleet thats worth trillions
is that true Andy? is it practically true?
| Friday, November 22, 2013 - 06:09 pm |
since as super said 1 sub takes out 1 destroyer but it takes 4-5 destroyers to kill 1 submarine
on 1v1 its even since subs cost approx $4B while destroyers 500M , but problem is that subs would crush the fleet after taking out the destroyers fairly easily and so cost wise its very uneven that 200B sub fleet annihiliates a fleet worth about 4T