I just posted this in a different thread "I like this" below, about a day ago.
What do you think?
>What about making the bombers historically accurate. This would necessitate large formations of bombers to have a chance of success. With a limited player base like in Aces High, this severely limits large formations UNLESS we had automated bombers. This could be done by allowing each bomber pilot lead say... 3 other automated bombers in a formation. The 3 otto bombers would do their best to keep up with the lead plane, and would hold a decent formation, and drop with relatively good historical accuracy. The other 3 planes would have otto gunners with accuracy that mirrors the human controlled gunnery statistics of AH. This would bring large formations of bombers to AH, and still allow the effectiveness and sense of accomplishment to bomber pilots WITHOUT having super accurate bombing computers, that somehow negate the effects of turbulence (which there would be in real life, and which would randomize the drop.
To do this, bombers with simplified flight models could be programmed to follow the leader. The leader could select different numbers of bombers for his flight depending on a) the type of airfield he flew from, b) the status of that field with respect to damage, c) relative numbers of players for his country. This would allow large stratiegic formations from rear bases, and smaller tactical strikes from front bases. Also, if a side was outnumbered, they would be allowed more bombers to help keep the balance even. Experimentation in the game could be used to determine a fair (bomber formation modifier) to compensate for being outnumbered 2 to one or 1.5 to one. Maybe it could simply be based on number of aircraft int he air at a given time for each country, so that it would balance out any formation death staring that could occur.
Anyway.. this was just a brain storm.. what do you guys think?
CJ
