As a stand alone fighter or bomber the USN has better, together you have some flexibility,
just seems more could have been done with it, as was with all the other Fighter Bombers.
I get what you are saying, but I am not sure what else we would do with it.
It does have the distinction of being the only US land-based fighter-bomber. And flexibility is indeed the key attribute of these aircraft. The other US choice is the expensive (and uber-powerful) USN Corsair.
What it will replace for me (some of the time) was putting a P-38G on a Forward Air Base to get that flexibility (plus use every turn). The cost will be a little better with the "F." Two of these on the land base is better than one P-38G on the FAB even if the "G" was 8 points. However, that only works if you have space on the land base.
The Forward Air Base was mostly conceived as a way to give "non-carrier" nations a way to expand their air game a bit. It can't take an objective, but it has the armor stats of a CV for the cost and capacity of a CVE. And it is "immune" to torpedoes.
Nice reply thanks; I'm not going to beat a dead horse here; the cards done it is what it is.
I was in the camp a little extra could have been given at no cost, just me.
We like to talk a bit about comparing the F4u-1d Corsair as a fighter bomber to others,
but when you look at both spectrums of the Corsair it is worth the 3 points over the 190A3 as a land based plane and the 3 points of the Firefly f mk1 as a carrier based plane.
Don't know how those point cost came to be, but it looks right to me.
Cap 1s fall into the trap of being a strategic asset in a tactical game. If you think about it, W@S is more Battle off Samar than Leyte Gulf. Sure you could play a leyte game but you dont get the manouvering aspect of the battle, ie Hasley/tf34 chasing the decoy fleet exposing taffy 3. But you do get a good sense of the clashes between taffy and center force.
The units on the shelf are all of them at the momemt. I cant brain properly to play.
If i have to pick a single unit, uss wasp. The mini is gorgeous but its just not in any of the scenarios, fleets or set ups i typically played
RB made it clear when chitose and rufe were released that he didnt want units dependant on others. Seabasing is the exactant SA for floatplanes and none of them are gamebreakingly powerful.
The overall unit cap prevents extreme swarms as well.
The forum may vote on units;; hows its designed is up to you.
War at Sea is not an exact simulation and its air game is a far abstraction from the rest of the game.
You may believe RB had no intention on units being depended on others I feel differently or to say how you may feel units relate to one another.
The Rufe was a prime example or a well qualified unit to represent Sea Basing, I don't believe he intended to flood the game with that SA.
Forget swarms or a weak unit [whats a detachments] -- placement advantage of such is a big advantage alone.
I think the Myrt was a good example of how some units have to obscurely fit into the game.
I think their is a consensus this unit is is a bit over done.
Sea Basing is getting way out of control in this deck I believe 3 units already; this unit needs to be tied to a ship not have open range on Sea Basing.
Its already been given a plane type which it just resembles;; Spotting is an accurate example of its purpose, Sea Basing is not.
Its to much to add Escort to the P-38, but we can turn this thing in to Pegasus.
That’s certainly more beneficial for a navy that doesn’t have ready access to 9 vital escorts.
I've seen your poll interesting.
My thoughts on this unit are based on an 8 vital and 8 bomb value;; To me a more accurate proposal.
As for your polling, what ever todays interested parties vote the consensus though the years, was it should have been 8.
Using that and comparing units for cost as best we can, the P-38G I will agree is in that 8.5 range, and the P-38F is in the 9.5 range, as are so many air units.
Comparing with other comparable units not just the 190, look at the DAP Beaufighter and Hurricane MXII your not far off.
What would the Firefly FMK1 cost without the every Carrier turn plus.
I'm not changing any minds here, but don't tell me this unit at 9 pts with Escort is over cost especially with whats been done in the past by Expansion Teams.
I just look to give a new unit its best chance for table time, something its Navy doesn't have, its not replacing an original, and doesn't upend the game.
I think the 190a3 and Stuka 87E at 11 is a worst fit than this at 9.