Originally posted by ChopSaw
Outbreak:
The idea is to eliminate unrealistic game play.
...snip.....
Not really.
I 100% guarantee there will ALWAYS be unrealistic gameplay in AH, because no matter what "rules" you make --- in the end nobody dies for real. That fact alone means people will fly and fight in radically different ways than the real pilots did.
And, there is no command structure, so jobs important for the team will NOT get done unless they're fun. So, forget enormously realistic techniques like, oh, combat air patrol at set alts, or long range escort.
Now add in the compromises reality has to make in order to keep things fun (instead of pure work). Things like the stall horn, or ammo counters, or trim (which works VERY differently than it does in real planes, since computer joystacks act very differently than ones in aircraft.) Things liek not having to sit on the runway to warm up engines, or not colliding with friendlies who happen to choose the same runway 2 seconds befroe you get there.
AH will never get realistic gameplay in the sense you mean it.
What AH CAN do is give realistic models. That means duplicating hard performance characteristics (like climb rates and maxc speed at each alt); it also means duplicating the "feel" of weapons systems when the model has to bend for practical reasons (like having 2x fuel burns since airfields are close, so short ranged planes feel short ranged, and having the T-34 load ammo slowly to "simulate" the cramped turret arrangement).
Every time AH appropriately bends reality to make things work, there will be an opportunity for gamers to exploit the compromise in "gamey" ways. Its just gunna happen, and there's nothing you can do about it.
BUT you can strive to make the models as realistic as possible (in both the measurable data and in the imponderable "feel" planes and vehicles have). Thats generally what HTC does, and they do a good job of it.
For whatever reason, they have decided to apply a different standard to bombers than they do to every other weapon system in the game. While bombs and bullets are precisely charted with careful tabulations based on physics, drawn as if with sharpened draftman's tools; the bomber itself is sketched with a thick fingered crayon.
(BTW I am NOT talkingabout buff guns, which I think are 100% appropriate. They get kills, but they balance for the fact that bombers od not operate with large crews and in large formations, escorted by fighters. The current gun system seems to me to be a completely valid design set up.)
I've said it befoire and I'll say it again....bombers should ahve bomb bays. This single measure would change the way they're used, bu thats not the point. (In fact, including the bomb bay angle drop limits would not eliminate dive bombing the way you guys mean it -- especially for the lancs.) The point is much simpler: bombers were designed around bomb bays, and AH shouldn't ignore that. Its the whole point of the weapon system, and AH is such a quality product that it feels plain wrong to have such a huge compromise made.
I've been watching...dive bombing is MUCH less common than you'd think from these forums. It's no t a gameplay problem, it doesnt impact the MA, and buff guys who had to avoid exceeding 30 degrees (for B-17) would still function the same. BUT....
It is silly to require pilots to press "o" to open the bomb bay, and then let them "drop" the bomb inverted through the top of the wing and the fuselage's main spar.
(Should it be a bit embarassing... ??)
