Post by admiralwoodside on Mar 21, 2022 4:18:00 GMT
You spent 2 paragraphs on the attack of Flaks credibility. You can have a constructive argument without the attacks. You could have made your point in half the typing
If you count the words in my post your second statement is clearly incorrect. Furthermore, my comments in the first two paragraphs were not personal attacks, rather they were my assessment of the logical arguments offered by the long time veteran Forumini user flakstruk, whom I have always liked. I think your interpretation of them as a personal attack is an emotional response. I never said that flakstruk was this or that, which would have been a personal attack.
Let me recap, the UK offered the RAN two different Colossus class carries in WWII, so there is historical precedence. Therefore flakstruk's arguments in this instance are moot, and appear to be no more than straw man arguments. As for the aircraft use on the hypothetical carrier, he is giving us a list of what he will accept based on his authority, or as in his most recent post the authority of the card makers in his interpretation of existing protocol. I countered that it was a UK built carrier and would have used UK carrier doctrine. As the UK used a wide variety of aircraft in WWII there would seem to be no reason to artificially restrict the carrier to just two specific carrier aircraft types, which is what he is giving us a choice of. The UK Colossus class Forumini card did not have such a restriction to two specific carrier aircraft types so why should the Aussie card? I certainly acknowledge that the Colossus class carriers as used in the British Pacific Fleet did historically use Corsair (fighter version) and Barracuda aircraft, but since no such restriction to just two aircraft types was made on the UK Forumini card for this class, then that is the existing card precedent, which should be inherited to the RAN ship.
I also have made extensive remarks about the intended purpose of this card with respect to the quite small existing W@S Aussie forces, and the overall play balance issues which should be addressed in its making. In my opinion to arbitrarily say that we can only add one carrier at a time from a class would in this case restrict the RAN in W@S to one carrier for ever more as it is unlikely that there will ever be another one proposed in the Forumini. This is the one and only chance to somewhat play balance the Aussie side with the two hypothetical carriers that the UK actually offered them.
Cheers from Australia