Evrn trying to use mechanics to draw players away from undercost units isnt particularly successful.
262 was specifically intended to draw people to the better and more expensive fighters. But plenty of people play wildcats then complain the 262 is broken
I think its fine at 27. I think many of us agree the CAP 4s are all a bit too inexpensive, but we can't change the fact that they exist. Putting a "I don't like Essex class tax" on this carrier will only render it less used compared to its sisters. House rule them if you want, but the forum has never been in the business of revising existing cards, so to an extent, we've got to live with them. If we can stop going over the same ground over and over again here, I'll stop wanking about no DT on Somers over in that thread.
I will take that deal!
I just wanted to make sure we are okay with 27 points and Flag 2. I agree we can't do much about the Essex class, but the Flag 2 is the big differentiator for me.
The IJN Carrier Liberation Force - "Because We Care" Join the IJNCVLF. Service Guarantees Citizenship!
But when i was looking at the comparisons and Essex in particular its so easy to make this 28pts
by a small tweak!
Keeping the Essex's a little higher in cost and not letting them be a power creep can't be that difficult.
If you add a situational SA or low impact SA you justify the cost increase.
I just don't know why when many agree they are under cost we never look at Essex's 28 pts and start at that.
Sea's a Blaze's Ticonderoga was refreshing to see at 29pt. not that this unit needs those SA's or the power creep; just someone went in the right direction.
I get what you're saying, but to get this ship to 28+ points would require either A) a useful SA that would likely be labelled as "power creep" or B) A less useful "shim" SA that would end up making Bunker Hill or Essex the more desirable, competitive choice. I worked on the Sea's Ablaze Tico, it wasn't a deliberate effort to start with Essex and push cost up. That team wanted all of those SAs along with Flag 1 on the ship, and that is just where the cost landed. Compared to Essex, the ship has one more SA and a Flag rating. We arrived at 29 points naturally, not through some deliberate effort to make a ship more expensive than Essex. BTW, we deliberately avoided using 2 expert SAs because no previously released Essex class carrier had more than 1. Bunker Hill broke that ground when the Forum team released that card a few months later.
I really do think we're there on this one at 27. Its right in the middle of the other Essex class carriers points-wise, offers something different (Flag 2), and does nothing to "power creep" the Essex class. I see it as fairly costed and not making the USN air game any more powerful than it already is (or needs to be).
BTW, on a totally lighter note, its a shame she didn't share the full name of the later Spruance-class destroyer USS John Hancock (DD-981). John Hancock has the coolest stern I've personally ever seen in the US Navy:
BTW, on a totally lighter note, its a shame she didn't share the full name of the later Spruance-class destroyer USS John Hancock (DD-981). John Hancock has the coolest stern I've personally ever seen in the US Navy:
That's awesome! I always like it when the military bureaucracy allows some creativity. The Ms. 32 splinter camo on USS Freedom was very cool too.
The IJN Carrier Liberation Force - "Because We Care" Join the IJNCVLF. Service Guarantees Citizenship!
Are we all agreed on this? This is our first long-hull Essex - correct? On to the flavor text?
USS HANCOCK Class: Essex Class Carrier - long hull Commission: April 1944 Fate: Scrapped 1976 Displacement: 27,000 tons standard Length (OA):872 ft Beam: 93 ft Speed: 33 kts Armament: 12 x 5in/38 DP (4 x 2, 4 x 1) 32 x 40mm AA (8 x 4) 46 x 20mm AA (46 x 1) Aircraft Capacity: 90-100
Ship-Carrier USS Hancock CV19 1944 Cost: 27 Speed: 2 Flag: 2 Cap: 4 MG: 6-6-5 AA: 8 A/VA/HP: 4/11/4 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Torpedo Defense 1 - Each torpedo hit rolled against this unit deals 1 less point of hull damage. Expert Torpedoes - Once per turn, you may choose a friendly Torpedo Bomber. That Torpedo Bomber rolls one extra attack die when making Torpedo attacks this turn.
25 of 72
The IJN Carrier Liberation Force - "Because We Care" Join the IJNCVLF. Service Guarantees Citizenship!
But when i was looking at the comparisons and Essex in particular its so easy to make this 28pts
by a small tweak!
Keeping the Essex's a little higher in cost and not letting them be a power creep can't be that difficult.
If you add a situational SA or low impact SA you justify the cost increase.
I just don't know why when many agree they are under cost we never look at Essex's 28 pts and start at that.
Sea's a Blaze's Ticonderoga was refreshing to see at 29pt. not that this unit needs those SA's or the power creep; just someone went in the right direction.
What you're proposing is in the teams i called shimming. The problem is it doesnt work. The value added never compensates the points because invariably the utilities of the unit dont synergise. It was a common thing in earlier teak decks but is reined in as time went by.
You can, but the playtesting forum is dead, the playtesters have questions and concerns for some units and asked questions back in Nov. that STILL have not been answered...