Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 101
05-31-2012, 06:57 AM
See you have an opinion
doesn't make you right
just makes you opinionated

and I have one as well
doesn't make me right either

But makes me AS right as you

Remember information gained from the net is often incorrect (indeed if sourced from Wikis USUALLY wrong)
the phrase is "garbage in garbage out"
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 102
05-31-2012, 07:02 AM
Quote:
Remember information gained from the net is often incorrect (indeed if sourced from Wikis USUALLY wrong)
the phrase is "garbage in garbage out"
what a load of crap that is.

And your opinion about what a battleship is, or that carriers are obsolete are simply incorrect, by any standards. It's not my opinion that i (and others)stated, it is fact. If you want to ignore facts, and rather choose your opinion. Start every sentence you say in future with : in my opinion...
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 103
05-31-2012, 07:07 AM
in the opinion of MANY serving military officers the carrier is a sitting duck

AN exersize performed by the USN simulating an attack on a carrier task force by an "unnamed Gulf state" resulted in the total destruction of the carrier force in most variations of the simulation.

A similar (computer based) simulation shows that multiple surface/ air contacts can overwhelm an carrier in existance.

but this will be proven if/when the Gulf kicks off

the definition of a battleship (in the Game ) is closer to mine than yours
And the Definition in common use in much of the world is closer to mine than yours

so I guess we have to agree to disagree
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 104
05-31-2012, 07:14 AM
Quote:
the definition of a battleship (in the Game ) is closer to mine than yours
And the Definition in common use in much of the world is closer to mine than yours
the word battleship is not even used ingame the GALAXY X is defined as dreadnaught cruiser in game (see you are wrong again)...and your definition is so wrong, i have to ask myself which world you are talking about, since it can't be the one i live on.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 105
05-31-2012, 08:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by sollvax
in the opinion of MANY serving military officers the carrier is a sitting duck

AN exersize performed by the USN simulating an attack on a carrier task force by an "unnamed Gulf state" resulted in the total destruction of the carrier force in most variations of the simulation.

A similar (computer based) simulation shows that multiple surface/ air contacts can overwhelm an carrier in existance.

but this will be proven if/when the Gulf kicks off

the definition of a battleship (in the Game ) is closer to mine than yours
And the Definition in common use in much of the world is closer to mine than yours

so I guess we have to agree to disagree


If an enemy throws enough firepower at anything it will die. The trick is having enough firepower. How would a battleship group be any less vulnerable?

And that isn't just 'any' 'unnamed gulf state', since Iraq had missiles and sank zero carrier groups. If the carrier's aircraft (and/or battleship's guns, but they don't have the same range yet.... cruise missiles are more likely but they can be launched as easily from carriers or crusiers as from battleships) take out enemy missile sites fast enough, their firepower will be at least significantly reduced.

If the 'unnamed gulf state' shoots first, they could manage a mini-pearl, but would likely suffer the same fate as Japan. The US economy might not be the best but it can still outproduce any 'unnamed gulf states' given sufficient incentive, not to mention the involvement of other nations that would almost certainly be there if any 'unnamed gulf state' fires first.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 106
05-31-2012, 08:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raudl View Post
the word battleship is not even used ingame the GALAXY X is defined as dreadnaught cruiser in game (see you are wrong again)...and your definition is so wrong, i have to ask myself which world you are talking about, since it can't be the one i live on.
So? The Klingons in ST III refer to the Enterprise as 'a federation battlecruiser.' The official designation of a ship and how objective observers define it are often not the same.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 107
05-31-2012, 09:34 AM
Quote:
If an enemy throws enough firepower at anything it will die. The trick is having enough firepower. How would a battleship group be any less vulnerable?
A battle ships Guns do not go away and leave it for extended pereiods??


Quote:
And that isn't just 'any' 'unnamed gulf state', since Iraq had missiles and sank zero carrier groups.
Iraq is not the state in question (and theres a reason it did not sink any Iraq was attacked over LAND)
Quote:
If the carrier's aircraft (and/or battleship's guns, but they don't have the same range yet.... cruise missiles are more likely but they can be launched as easily from carriers or crusiers as from battleships) take out enemy missile sites fast enough, their firepower will be at least significantly reduced.
yes
however this is impossible in some cases


Quote:
If the 'unnamed gulf state' shoots first, they could manage a mini-pearl, but would likely suffer the same fate as Japan.
you mean become an economic super power??
or get nuked for no valid military reason?

Quote:
The US economy might not be the best but it can still outproduce any 'unnamed gulf states' given sufficient incentive, not to mention the involvement of other nations that would almost certainly be there if any 'unnamed gulf state' fires first.
but they won't
Because they don't need to
the first shot sets who loses
A cruise missile launch would be a pearl all its own
it would "wake a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve"


And there very definately ARE Battle ships in the Game
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 108
05-31-2012, 10:07 AM
Quote:
So? The Klingons in ST III refer to the Enterprise as 'a federation battlecruiser.' The official designation of a ship and how objective observers define it are often not the same.
Klingons put battle in front of every word: Battlesong, battlecry, battlefart, battle**** etc...
one thing klingons aren't, is objective.
A better example to your case would have been cpt. sisco, refering to the defiant as Warship and not escort as it is designated.


Quote:
A battle ships Guns do not go away and leave it for extended pereiods??
wow, if i switched off my higher brain functions i could come up with a better statement.

Quote:
however this is impossible in some cases
got to love your oneliners...but would you care to specify " some cases"?

Quote:
And there very definately ARE Battle ships in the Game
maybe by your definition, and maybe on the klingon side, since they love the word battle in front of everything.
but we have allready established that your definition is incorrect.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 109
05-31-2012, 11:15 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by sollvax
A battle ships Guns do not go away and leave it for extended pereiods??
And there very definately ARE Battle ships in the Game
I really wanted to stay out of this argument about what is and is not a Battleship.

But what idiot says let's have a group of 5 Carriers, nothing else, no Fast Frigates, No Submarines, No Destroyers and than let's send every single aircraft 200 clicks east for some reason. And than disarm and service all the missile defense and point defense systems at once. Carriers have more than just planes on them for defense. Groups are made of more than one ship type to fill in the gaps, I can't remember an operation where they only sent Carriers. Could be wrong but.

There is no ship in this game Designated as a Battleship.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raudl View Post
Klingons put battle in front of every word: Battlesong, battlecry, battlefart, battle**** etc...
one thing klingons aren't, is objective.

maybe by your definition, and maybe on the klingon side, since they love the word battle in front of everything.
but we have allready established that your definition is incorrect.
The Klingons do have Battle Cruisers and even a Battle Carrier, and yet even they have not a single ship with the designation Battleship. (I know it's after your quote Raudl, but it is more to Sollvax)

And in all seriousness what does 21st century Naval designations have to do with the Original Posters complaint that flying through Theta Radiation and Warp Plasma should not effect his airtight space ship? I mean why should he change his tactics or try and dodge it when the game could be changed to suit his tactics.

I suppose in a sense you can call any ship anything you want, but if I start referring to my Assault Cruiser as a Nuclear Submarine and than ask what weapons go well on a Nuclear Submarine, some smart arse will say Nukes, and everyone else will wonder just what the hell I'm talking about and if I'm in the right Forums. By referring to it as a Sovereign or Assault Cruisers everyone gets it. You could refer to the Dreadnought as Battleship, nobody will know what your talking about unless you say Dreadnought or Gal X but you could do it.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 110
05-31-2012, 12:00 PM
Play the Fed mirror event later
and look for the "Battleships"
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:34 AM.