battleships -> cruisers

[Dash_Riprock]

Just for realism's sake, shouldn't battleships be renamed to cruisers? Battleships became all but obsolete after WWII and were mostly decommissioned by most nations during the 50's.

[Gen. Ripper]

or used for nuclear testing against surface fleets

heh, anyway, if you wanted to for "realism" sake, you could proberly mod the name change (i assume)

[torq]

They ARE cruisers. Battleships usually don't shoot at planes
They are just called battleships in the game.

I always thought that a ship icon on the map actually represents several 'real' ships. Carriers don't hunt subs for themselves too, you know... in the 'real world' it's a job for the Destroyer class ships, subs, and anti-sub aviation. Just use your imagination - a single carrier icon, I think, should represent something like this:



Carriers don't travel alone while sub hunting nowadays looks like this:

[Dash_Riprock]

They ARE cruisers

Thats exactly my point. I dont mean change them, just rename them.

[Chimaera]

It would look pretty funky if it was kept as the single icon for a BB or CV at full zoom, but when you zoom in, you see a carrier stike group. However, it could be argued that BBs would have a place in global thermonuclear warfare when fitted with missiles and AA guns, as several Iowa Class ships were in the 1980s. The only reason that such ships are not in commission today is the fact that they are massively expensive to run and there is no superpower that threatens America. If the Cold War arms race had continued to this day, rest assured that a new class of Battleship outfitted with the latest missiles would exist.

[KingAl]

Carrier and Cruiser both start with C, and are both 7 letters long. If you mouse over a naval unit, you want to be able to tell what it is without squinting, hence the unit window at the side. The clear distinction between the words 'Carrier' and 'Battleship' make this much easier. Realism shouldn't compromise ease of use.

[xander]

http://forums.introversion.co.uk/defcon ... hp?p=30923 ?

xander

[Dash_Riprock]

Carrier and Cruiser both start with C, and are both 7 letters long. If you mouse over a naval unit, you want to be able to tell what it is without squinting, hence the unit window at the side. The clear distinction between the words 'Carrier' and 'Battleship' make this much easier. Realism shouldn't compromise ease of use.

Ah, that is a good point. While I just look at the icon to see what type of unit it is, I guess it could help some people to have a very clear distinction like that.

[MikeTheWookiee]

Battleship does for me. The thing is, especially for new players, everyone knows what a battleship is. It's a hoofing great lump of metal with lots of big guns pointing outwards. Some people may not even know what a frigate or cruiser IS, let alone give a fig about the complexities of what each is used for in modern warfare. Also you couldn't ever make the joke in chat "you've sunk my battleship. Boom! Boom!".

You should be able to mod the names for yourself, I'm pretty sure english.txt doesn't count as critical. Of course the change will only affect you and not your opponents.

On the single carrier / carrier group thing: nah. That's what good old mixed fleets are good for. If a carrier was indeed a carrier group it would have better defence than only being able to launch fighters at incoming threats. Although I take the point on them not having depth charges and that being destroyers' work. I believe that's been done for the sake of simplicity and tactics.

[Chimaera]

Battleship does for me. The thing is, especially for new players, everyone knows what a battleship is. It's a hoofing great lump of metal with lots of big guns pointing outwards. Some people may not even know what a frigate or cruiser IS, let alone give a fig about the complexities of what each is used for in modern warfare. Also you couldn't ever make the joke in chat "you've sunk my battleship. Boom! Boom!".

You should be able to mod the names for yourself, I'm pretty sure english.txt doesn't count as critical. Of course the change will only affect you and not your opponents.

On the single carrier / carrier group thing: nah. That's what good old mixed fleets are good for. If a carrier was indeed a carrier group it would have better defence than only being able to launch fighters at incoming threats. Although I take the point on them not having depth charges and that being destroyers' work. I believe that's been done for the sake of simplicity and strategy.

Fix'd.

You won't stop the nerds.