|
Post by angus725 on Oct 22, 2010 0:37:38 GMT -5
Alright, seemingly that we might be changing BB4 limit to BB5s, I think it's also time to change the secondary ship limit to something either bigger or more diversified to encourage more GB friendly strategies or tactics with smaller ships.
Personally, I'm not decided between BB1s and 2s, as BB1s are generally considered the same, similar, or worse than PCAs currently. BB2s, on the other hand, could have a little too much range, firepower, or something along those lines, but will be nice for the diversity.
BB3s would be far too close to BB4s, and will result in a stiffer battleline, which is something I'd rather not see outside a HA or BB room.
And as I got to go again, I'll continue this post at a later time >.>
|
|
|
Post by outcast5 on Oct 22, 2010 1:16:56 GMT -5
One stupid suggestion is enough for a day :/
|
|
crizza
Fleet Leader
GoD Fleet XO
Posts: 40
|
Post by crizza on Oct 22, 2010 16:37:34 GMT -5
i like the pcas
|
|
|
Post by elnoble on Oct 23, 2010 17:32:53 GMT -5
One stupid suggestion is enough for a day :/ On what section was your yesterday's suggestion?
|
|
|
Post by generalbr on Oct 30, 2010 14:05:52 GMT -5
Not a bad idea, because if the limit changes to BB5s, i think PCAs would lose alot of their importance and the only thing they would be good for is to either sub killing or AA.Puting BB1s would be an appropriate change as they would be to BB5s what PCAs are to BB4s in the current FL estrategy. BB2s not so much, to much firepower and range, plus fuso and colorado would have , to me, a clear advantage.
|
|
|
Post by masc24 on Nov 15, 2010 21:19:44 GMT -5
I wont generalize all PCAs because Furious and Asama suck, but Moltke and Pensacola are better than their BB1 counterparts, and might be better all around ships than the rest of the BB1s as well. Revenge probably being the exception of the rule.
|
|