Are they possibly too expensive?

1 Carrier + 3 Planes = 15$
3 Battleships = 15$

Wouldnґt anybody prefer the Battleships?

Or:

4 Planes = 12$
3 Missile Launchers = 12$

Wouldnґt you prefer the MLs?

Given that Planes do only 1 damage, are they overpriced? Given that Carriers, even fully-loaded, can neither beat nor outrun Battleships, are they useful at all?

Discuss.

Correction: A fully-loaded Carrier *can* beat a single Battleship, *if* it fires first. However, A Carrier with 3 Planes will lose, if I got it right this time.

But a 4-Plane-Carrier costs 18$. Why not sell me a bridge instead?

One major difference: Carriers have a 6 range, unmatched by any mobile unit. WIth such a range, a player can keep a carrier out of danger, with the exception maybe of a battleship. And the damage they do can be split up however it is needed to be most effective. If an enemy does manage to put your carrier in eminent danger, you could always fly the planes to safety. So carriers are nearly immune to attrition. Battleships do have some range, but they have to put themselves in danger to attack, compared to carriers. They are also limited how deep they can reach inland, so most units will be able to avoid a threatening battleship. Its not so true of carriers.

They are expensive though, and can't be your main force for that reason. It's nice to have a unit that you can rely on surviving for some time though.

As far as planes vs. missile launchers, again, attrition plays into it. It is nearly impossible to destroy planes, as they can always retreat, and never take damage. Of course, missile launchers can lay down massive fire, so its a give and take situation, as it always is in MA.

Thats one more thing that makes Massive Assault so great. You can't just rely on one unit. You have to have a good cross section of units to do well. Especially on island maps.

the fact that most poeple wouldbuild planes anyway is why most poeple can afford carriers.

they are not onla good offensive weapon but you cna retreat airplanes from a town that has no friendly ones in range thuse saving $9. if you play the wall secnario (i think that's what it's called) you'll see the valuable range a bombercan provide granted it's not the hardest mission it still helps quite a bit.

Carrier is an awsome weapon.

1) 6 +3 range. No comments.

2) 7HP

3) you can replace a damaged carrier for 6$ and transfer planes

4) makes use of extra planes you may have

5) you can distribute 4 damage anyway you choose and not limited to 3damage packs of a BB

6) leaves no hopes for enemy's ground units without naval support.

7) it can hide behind land masses from BBs and lauch planes above islands.

I think it's underpriced

Well....this is just another discussion on the subject about usefullness of certain units and first of all i want to say that suhc discussions are abit pointless IMHO
why? because NO unit is useful "as itself" any unit is more or less useful as a part of combined force
the CORE of strategy in MA is creating and using combined forces.And usefullness of unit is based on role it plays in combined force
Aircraft carrier can be a DECISIVE force in large-scale naval battle.I seen such battles on Wasserland and New Paradize
When really huge fleets (with dozen battleships in each) clash an extra carrier is MORE useful than a three more battleships - primarily because of planes attack range
First task of carrier planes is killing damaged units.In large naval battles it's often problem - there is a pair of damaged battleships (with 1-2 hits left) but you can not finish them off because all your ships are out of range.Then a carrier move in - and destroy them.ANd btw in large naval battle batleships will never be able to hit a carrier if you properly cover carrier with destroyers.
Next...suppose i am conducting invasion on enemy continent.My fleet is superior but enemy has large surface force featuring towers launchers and stuff.
So what do i do? send transports with artilleries of robots? artys will be destroyed by enemy long range fire instantly and robots lack range and wont do much on their own
so carrier with 3-4 planes will be able to clear the coast from enemy artillery and therefore it will be more useful that even 4-5 robots or artilleries

Well... the good point about the Carriers (fully loaded, of course) is that they can be covered by cheapter ships, like Destroyers (or even sometimes empty Naval Transports) - thus becoming absolutely ureachable for the enemy.

I am currently playing against Drungary on New Paradise, and he's got 4 Carriers... very impressive against my 2 Carriers.

The fifth one is already on the bottom... (he didn't cover it well enough and moved too close to my undisclosed HIGH economy country).

Anyway, one huge naval battle with lots of dead ships was over, but due to a couple of successful land operations he managed to assemble that new Carrier fleet with enough smaller ships to cover them... and the game is in its climax now...

As soon as we finish, I'll post a replay.

i personally would like to see different types of planes in MA...but that's probably will be in MA2 only....
for now i also think that planes firepower should be increased..it's loo low now...i vote 2 damage for plane .
and this will make carriers even more nasty than thay are

2 damage planes would really change the role of planes. now if you decreased teh reange it might be ffeesable.

what you could do is make it once you get to withn say 3 hexs you get 2 damage you get 1 past 3 hexs.

that would bring soe realcomplex strategy into play.

Or have a new air unit that has a short range, but does more damage. That way you have different combinations of how to set up your carrier, etc. Both plane types could land on a carrier or city. More strategic decisions.

With a shorter range, though, planes would be very limited in effectiveness... Enemy units could easily stay out of their range.

I know this isn't going into MA 1, just throwing it out for thought.

Hehe, I guess this is exactly what Mrakobes was saying Sorry

i would see no reason to buy a short range plane. i mean most epoelp don't use planes tof closer combat. anyway by the time it reaches teh 3 hx mark the 6 hex plane could of hit 2x.

what i would like is a shoot while travel option. say you move your plane from city a to city b you can attack a veihcle in teh 6 range of the origional city.

What about making Planes $2? They seem not really so much more valuable than a Tank?!

I'll have to disagree with that.

Tanks: 1 range.
Planes: 6 range.

Tanks: 2 moves.
Planes: 12 moves between cities

Also, tanks are highly affected by attrition, as they are always on the front line. Planes are very difficult to get rid of. If you plan things right, you'll keep a plane you buy at the beginning of the game all the way to the end. Your tank will prolly only last a couple combat rounds, if even that.

Yes, tanks deal out more damage, but that's their role. A Plane's role (at least in my strategy) is to soften up artillery if it ventures too close, and to clean up damaged enemy units.

Itґs not only that, but also that Planes are severely limited by basing.

If a few clear hexes in each country were made "Airbases", I would be content with the Planes.

a land aircraft carier that could hold 2 planes would be cool. it would realy shake things up or maybe three planes.

But not movable; that would be weird. Rather an Airfield terrain feature. Say 2 in a large country, and one in medium/small countries.

Now that's a good idea... An air platform of some kind. Yes, planes are difficult to use in large territories, and that could allieviate that. It could even be a buildable unit, similar to a tower (immibile, with good HP). It would still be fairly balanced because placing a plane on one of those would be riskier because the platform could be destroyed. It would have to be fairly cheap though, for anyone to want to buy them.

crazy ideas...there is not such thing as "surface aircraft carrier" in realiity and i dont think its possible in MA.
maybe in MA they make an ability to build cities to deploy planes there...

but there are airports in real life.