Board Thread:Game Updates/@comment-1820055-20150808000124/@comment-26574811-20150810134313

139.216.148.160 wrote: Yeah wow. DMaybe you considering things from a Real Life perspective instead of a game perspective? Even in a real life perspective, do you think that the Akizuki-class AA (and all the other ships remodelled into AA) were effective in stopping the US Air Force armada? "Fleet defense is something a Destroyer or a CVE should do". Lol what are you a naval scholar?

I don't think you understand the meaning of the word "useful". (Not a native english maybe?) As long as they help in the battle, they are still "useful". Be it if they're a supporting role or whatever. Discrediting them because it is not their "role" to support is not addressing the point in question (The question of whether they are "useful") Well, if you really have to be THAT strict on the term, yea. But look at those game forums, they use "useless" every day, and none of them fits your strict definition of being "useless". It's fine as long as you know what I mean.

And, Carriers are no longer support role since (technologically) 1930s/ (actually, due to the way admirals think)1942, I am seriously against all those game designs that limit them to be "supports". I'll say it again, Mahan is dead, and so is his theory.

I'm no scholar, but I do know one who is quite famous in my country, he taught me quite a lot.