Author Topic: Suicide diving level bombers (Read 3036 times)

DREDIOCK · « **Reply #45 on:** August 29, 2004, 12:18:09 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by ace31st
ok how about the b25s on the raid of japan. noe

HT probably wouldnt do that anyways because he would want to keep some fun in the bombing. i dunno just my opinion

Yess and those were B-25's NOT B17s and lancasters.

B25's did do shallow dive bombing and strafing runs. 17's and Lancs did not

And NONE had an exterior view

Tilt · « **Reply #46 on:** August 29, 2004, 05:27:22 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by ace31st
jabo planes for noe bomb runs? no i dont think so.

what do you think the lancasters did when they took out the dam? they flew noe cause they didnt want to be detected. bombers are built for both purposes, i.e b-1b lancer does noe bomb runs.

Bouncing bombs were released by the bombadier from his position which required a presice run upto the damn marking the release point from the damn towers................

Totally impossible to do as a formation..........

ace31st · « **Reply #47 on:** August 29, 2004, 06:47:22 AM »

i give up i cant even talk with you historys wizzes around countering every thing i say.

drediock we dont have b25s so the 26, 17, lancs, are the next best thing.

now if your doing the bomb sight noe what happens if you come up on a hill eh? booom your right into it and you wouldnt even know what had hit you.

B17Skull12 · « **Reply #48 on:** August 29, 2004, 10:48:07 AM »

You guys also are not remember we do have 1 level/dive bomber in the game and that is the Ju88A4. would you just leave that out of the option for these possible new implaments?

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #49 on:** August 29, 2004, 10:49:29 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by ace31st
i give up i cant even talk with you historys wizzes around countering every thing i say.

You're the one flip-flopping. Go back and re-read your messages.

It's not as much as your use of historic facts as the way you switch your position from "model it if it happened in WW2" to "model what works in the MA", depending on what best suits your position.

ace31st · « **Reply #50 on:** August 29, 2004, 10:58:27 AM »

how the hell am i flip flopping?

if you guys want "historic" bombing, every single mission we should should be 3 hours long, at 20k , MAYBE hit our target.. be bombarded by flak then be swarmed by fighterrs afterward and then rtb another 3 hours.. doesnt sound like much fun to me... we do whatever it takes in the MA to get the job done and i dont think we should change that

Easyscor · « **Reply #51 on:** August 29, 2004, 11:06:28 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by DREDIOCK
And NONE had an exterior view

Depending on the year, a B-17 had a crew of 9-10 men to look out for bandits and an intercom to instantly alert the rest of the crew. For this reason the bombers should continue to have exterior views from all positions.

It can't be helped if dweebs abuse exterior views to dive bomb with the heavies but IMO removing exterior views isn't the answer. Hitech has said he hasn’t seen enough of this to consider it a problem so until it’s happening much more often I wouldn’t expect anything to change.

If it becomes something they decide to fix I hope it will be to disable the bomb release or arming based on angle to the horizon if in B-17s or Lancasters or any bombers that launch as a formation.

DREDIOCK · « **Reply #52 on:** August 29, 2004, 11:08:02 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by ace31st
i give up i cant even talk with you historys wizzes around countering every thing i say.

drediock we dont have b25s so the 26, 17, lancs, are the next best thing.

now if your doing the bomb sight noe what happens if you come up on a hill eh? booom your right into it and you wouldnt even know what had hit you.

We counter because we have a strong arguement to counter with

There isnt a whole lotta difference between the B25 and the b26 mission wise in what each did.
B26's could do and did the same type runs as the 25.
The 17's and lancs did not.
Nor should they here.

If your doing the bomb thing and come up on a hill you go BOOM yes. Exactly how it should be.
Plan your route bothin and out. Time your run then get back in the cockpit and it wont be a problem.
Orrr just before dropping grab a little alt. so you miss the hills and trees then make your run and ge back in the cockpit.
you dont need to be scraping leaves off yourplane to go NOE.
Just be low enough to be under dar. And by the time your dropping the bases has been flashing for a while already anyway so they know your there. just get a little more alt just before your ready to drop. Usually only takes 3-4 seconds of grabbing tops to get high enough to miss most trees and hills .

Just try it for a while, you will see you can do the same things you have been doing only it will be more realistic and challanging.
and in the end you will become more skilled

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #53 on:** August 29, 2004, 11:21:00 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by ace31st
how the hell am i flip flopping?

if you guys want "historic" bombing, every single mission we should should be 3 hours long, at 20k , MAYBE hit our target.. be bombarded by flak then be swarmed by fighterrs afterward and then rtb another 3 hours.. doesnt sound like much fun to me... we do whatever it takes in the MA to get the job done and i dont think we should change that

You just did it again. Last message you said we're arguing history with you, now you say you're arguing on the side of "fun."

What you describe as "no fun" is what should be happening. Except you have fighter escort, everyone plays their does their job, and you hit the target. Why the hell do you think there's formation mode - and the formation breaks when you manouver hard?

Ahhh ... forget it ... keep driving your Lancs at 50 feet ... just be sure the ground crew picks the sheep parts out of the intakes.

Easyscor · « **Reply #54 on:** August 29, 2004, 11:21:33 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by ace31st
how the hell am i flip flopping?

if you guys want "historic" bombing, every single mission we should should be 3 hours long, at 20k , MAYBE hit our target.. be bombarded by flak then be swarmed by fighterrs afterward and then rtb another 3 hours.. doesnt sound like much fun to me...

Shame, I didn't check the roster but it sounds like you missed the Ruhr Valley scenario and I don't think the guys who flew the B-17s would agree with your assessment.

Just because it's the MA doesn't mean you should "do whatever it takes in the MA to get the job done and i dont think we should change that." IMO that attitude is one of the problems with game play in the MA.

Tilt · « **Reply #55 on:** August 29, 2004, 11:21:54 AM »

Just checked and from F6 with the POV set to give a forward view when down/forward-up is chosen you can see exactly where you are goiing.

So restricting bomb release to F6 would not inhibit forward vision even if external views (F3) were off in F6 mode.

Skull my view is that if the ac can be either "attack" or "bomber" then in "attack" f6 and formation options should be disabled and the bomb release put back with the pilot.

In "Bomber" mode the formation is optional but F6 has to be used to release bombs.

The effect would be...........

Dive/shallow dive bombing would be single ac only and only those ac with alternative attack role status. (eg Ju88)

B17's, Lancs, Ar234's would then be forced to use F6 (they are only available as bombers) forcing their use as level bombers as either formations or single ac.

In addition if "bombers" had their bombs time fused the additional effect would be..........

Only single ac could carry out effective NOE raids..............

This would reveal some inconguities which IMHO should be resolved anyway.........

Ju87, Il2 m3, C47, A20, Val, SBD etc are all "attack" planes and should not really have a bomber role as prescribed to level bombers.

Easyscor · « **Reply #56 on:** August 29, 2004, 11:28:10 AM »

Now it sounds like we're in agreement Tilt.

ace31st · « **Reply #57 on:** August 29, 2004, 11:35:46 AM »

FORGET IT

ahhhhh you all are driving me crazy. i dont care anymore really whatever i just prefer NOE over high alt.

i agree with you all about the suicide dweebs attacking CV's. i am not one of them. i usually go high alt for cv's.

the RUHR valley scenario is still NOT real life so it wont simulate EVERYTHING that WW2 pilots went through. seems you cant see over that.

Easyscor · « **Reply #58 on:** August 29, 2004, 11:56:59 AM »

ace31st

I just reread the thread. It isn’t that we disagree with noe raids like Ploesti. It’s that this thread started with a condemnation of divebombing heavies and B26s (with formations I assumed).

I for one don’t usually reread all the post and your position became unclear in the later parts of the thread. It appeared to me you were advocating divebombing heavies or that any game play no mater how lame is ok which many of us consider a “bad thing” and different from noe missions.

DREDIOCK · « **Reply #59 on:** August 29, 2004, 01:31:20 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by B17Skull12
You guys also are not remember we do have 1 level/dive bomber in the game and that is the Ju88A4. would you just leave that out of the option for these possible new implaments?

I think the bombes of primary concern are the heavies, the Lancs and 17's

I personally have no problem with any bomber that was used as a dive bomber being used here