Can the ordinance porking be addressed?

[Airscrew]

I can agree with Edbert and say that as long as there are bombers in the game then someone will think its necesary to take out FHs to help take a base.  That used to be the tactic 4 years ago when I started playing.   Take Lancs to 15-20k, use laser bombsite, drop 2k of bombs on each FH and then take out the VH and deack and capture.    I dont totally agree with your statement  

folks who would rather pi$$ off other folks than engage them in simulated air combat

I dont think all the bomber pilots are trying to ruin the furball, (theres probably a couple that do it on purpose to pi$$ someone off) they want to capture the base, and as long as there are enemy planes in the area they will do what ever they can to get rid of those planes.  Including bombing the FH's.  

The counter to that is taking out BHs and/or Ordnance on the opposing fields so they cant bomb the FHs.  Thats perfectly acceptable to me also.

However I also agree with Whels,  we need more ack,(twice as much) and  quad 20's and 40's would be nice.   FHs and ordnance bunkers need to be harder.   Most bunkers I've seen are built with 10" concret walls and roofs and then covered with 2 feet of earth.    .50, 20mm and 30mm should not be able to take out a bunker like that, nothing short of a 1,000lb bomb to take out ordnance.    And all though I think FH's should be harder I cant not think of a rational why to explain why you shouldnt be able to blow one up with a 500 or 1,000lb bomb.   I would like to see it take 5,000lb to take out a FH or double the number of FH's or add reventments where aircraft are parked.  Also increase the hardness of the CV's say to 18,000lb to sink a CV and within a certain time limit

[Virage]

Originally posted by Simaril

It should be, "is the balance (between base effectiveness and the methods of blunting that effectiveness) out of whack?"
 

I'm suggesting that the game is imbalanced by a lack of hardness on base strat targets.  It allows a fighter to pork a field too easily imo.

[DipStick]

Originally posted by whels
you want to stop the easy pork?  then turn ack accuracy up. within 1k of field AA should be hyper accurate, not the 1 hit in 4 passes like now.

AA is a joke as it is now. maybe we need quad 20s and quad 50s  and lots of them on fields.  make it require buffs or multiple fighters attacking @ 1 time to deack a field and/or pork fields n survive.

Been saying it a long time, would really cut down on the pork-n-vulch gang.

Make ack Max leathality and make all puffy ack mannable/killable only.

[Airscrew]

Whels, dont forget we used to have higher Ack accuracy a couple of years ago and a lot of people complained about super uber ack and eagle eyed gunners that could take out a plane at 3k.  and the ack got toned down. Last night I deacked a base and only got one ping on me.  on one gun position I flew straight at it, didnt even jink or move from side to side.  Ack never touched me

[GooseAW]

Only read the 1st couple o posts but i think It's a great idea to harden the ammo "bunkers". FHs come back up quickly not so with ord. At least that way 1 dweeb in a uber ride can't take it all down. Everybody gets there fun.

While we're at it, harden the CVs some.

[Mister Fork]

The obvious answer?

Remove all ordinance and fuel from bases and place the disabling/reducing for both back to the ordinance and fuel factories inland. That way, if you want to pork ordinance and fuel, you have to organize a sortie inland and bomb the factories.

But that's just my opinion.

[Simaril]

Originally posted by Mister Fork
The obvious answer?

Remove all ordinance and fuel from bases and place the disabling/reducing for both back to the ordinance and fuel factories inland. That way, if you want to pork ordinance and fuel, you have to organize a sortie inland and bomb the factories.

But that's just my opinion.

Sounds like a fun solution -- guys who like the strategic (as opposed to tactical) elements of the game havent had much impact of late. The current factory strat system supplies points, but the impact on capture is indirect enough, and dealyed enough, that it isnt very gratifying.

With your suggestion, the buff guys could have a huge impact on base capture without dropping hangars. We might actually see less furballer frustration, because buffers' activities wouldnt have to take away the dogfighters' fun. The  capture guys might find themselves escorting a raid, or upping en masse to intercept one (like happens with HQ raids), rather than rushing around porking ord/troops at a half dozen bases.

This idea wouldnt hurt any of the core constituencies, and woudl reward behavior that comes closer to "historical" situations. I think it would be a winner all around.

But, I have a feeling its too dramatic a departure from current practice for HTC to try it.

[Airscrew]

At first I read Fork's idea and thought it would create more problems,  then I read  Simaril's and think this might actually work.  But may be difficult to coad, especially with HTC working on TOD.

With this system it would appear that bombers would not need to necessarily attack bases, but attack strat targets.  
 
If I'm a furballer then bombers attacking strat targets and reducing ord and troops has no affect on my style of play.   I play to engage in air combat and dont participate in base capture or winning the war.

If I'm a strat player and play to capture bases and win the war then I have to protect my strats and also bomb the enemy's strats to help win the war.
I could see a strategy of attacking enemy bases but only to take out the Bomber hangers from any bases that are near my strats.

Bombers hit strat targets like Ordnance Factories,  for every 25% of damage, reduce bombs tonnage and types available,
ie:
Ordnance Factory 100% - all bomb sizes and rockets available
Ordnance Factory 75%   - 500lb and >  and rockets available
Ordnance Factory 50%   - 250lb and >  and rockets available
Ordnance Factory 25%   - only Rockets available.
Ordnance Factory  0%    - no ordnance

Bombers hit strat targets like Barracks/Troop facilities, for every 25% of damage, reduce Troops available
Troop Facilities 100% - 10 troops available
Troop Facilities 75% - 8 Troops available
Troop Facilities 50% - 5 Troops available
Troop Facilities 25% - 3 Troops available
Troop Facilities 0%  - no troops available

with this damage + availability you can still wage war just not as effectively.  Less troops available then you need more goons to transport troops.   Smaller bombs? then you need more bombers to attack targets.

Ordnance factory will regenerate with time or players can resupply similar to HQ repair.

This still does not prevent the bomber type from bombing FH's if they really want to so I would still be in favor of increasing the hardness of hangers,  double the ack and raise its lethality, add mannable 88's for air and ground targets.

Maybe it would work and maybe it wont.  We have to have our dreams...

[Mister Fork]

MajorTom & Simaril, I think we're onto something here.

I like the idea of reducing the troops, fuel, ordinance, and others for bombing the large factories.

That way, those who furball, always will furball and porking bases is no longer an issue - you gotta pork the country - or at least, earn it.

[Bruno]

Porking Ordinance? How did that get passed? Did you contact your councilperson?

A rule established by authority; a permanent rule of
      action; a statute, law, regulation, rescript, or accepted
      usage; an edict or decree; esp., a local law enacted by a
      municipal government; as, a municipal ordinance

[Airscrew]

I think there is a solution here but I wouldnt include Fuel, unless you mean drop tanks for extended ranges.   Limiting fuel would impact both the furballers and the strat players.  mostly the furballers  

The only setup with Fuel you could use that would lessen the impact for fighters was if fuel was distributed by gallons.
ie: if Fuel is 100% then all planes get full tanks.   if Fuel is 75% then only 800 gals of fuel available per plane.   50% then only 600 gals available, etc.

For me what was always wierd about fuel porkage was the percentages.
Fuel is down to 75% so a Yak or LA would have less fuel than a P-51 or a P-47.  Even more lopsided 75% fuel doesnt even affect a bomber, it only affects the fighters.   its worse when it was 25%,  some planes are pretty worthless at 25% fuel availability, but even at 25% fuel a Bomber can still fly out 1 or 2 sectors and drop bombs.

[Mister Fork]

In real life, your fuel factories would be a very valuable asset to protect ~ if a raid was upped, the consequences of not defending that factory would have an immense impact on your ability to do future battles. I like it alot.  Every army and airforce feeds on it's ability to put fuel in the tanks.

[Airscrew]

I agree that ".In real life, your fuel factories would be a very valuable asset to protect "
But as Lazs and others have pointed out before, for at least the last 4 years I've played,  this aint real life.

I agree that "the consequences of not defending that factory would have an immense impact on your ability to do future battles. "
Which might work well in the CT but porking fuel in the MA will impact the strat players and the tactical (furballers) players, which was one of the points we were discussing was a way to balance out the needs for the strat players and the tactical players

I personally dont like the idea of someone having the ability to go to one or two spots on the map and reduce the fuel available for everybody.

Fuel factory damage in the CT might be a good idea, but I dont think its good for the MA

[Lye-El]

Originally posted by MajTom
Last night I deacked a base and only got one ping on me.  on one gun position I flew straight at it, didnt even jink or move from side to side.  Ack never touched me

Happens to me all the time...from the Ack/Osti end. The Bandit flys directly at me and I fire and fire and if he doesn't kill me he goes 20 feet over my head. Heck, I have had them fly right into my Osti without being able to hit them. Of course they go down, but not from gunfire. And this is from somebody who has lots of hours in Ostis/Ack. Much more than any other aspect of this game.

Last night I could usually only up one Osti per base because I would up, VH goes down, Osti goes down. Change base. rinse and repeat. In a lot of cases the FHs were up but nobody was upping fighters. The VH is the primary bomb target, tank target. If anything needs hardening, it's the VH.

[LePaul]

Some have brought up some good ideas, some have made this a complaint that anything that affects fighters is a bad thing.

I wasnt suggesting this as a bomber limitation as some are using it for.  I noticed it most often whenever GVs were nearby and I couldnt equip my P-38G with rockets and bombs.

Edbert:  The flying Ive done with my squad (Wings of Terror)...we havent taken all the fighters down in a long long time.  Its mostly been to move a CAP over the field to keep it supressed, JABO the town and try to get the goon in.  Then, once the field is ours, everything is available minus the VH, which is something we take down first.  I havent seen the FH porking you're referring to.

But as others pointed out, the strat system isnt working well.  

You cant kill a field's fuel supply to 0% (and that would further annoy the fighter guys).  But, in a few swift passes thru the somewhat inefective AI ack, the ordinance can be brought down all over the battlefront by one aircraft with cannon.

Im not suggesting hardening it because its unfair buffs can come in NOE and ruin your field.  I'm simply saying its pretty unbeleivable one aircraft can disable something so easily.

That's all.  Not a whine.  Just a suggestion about upping its hardness.  If someone ones to pork every fuel or ordinace along the front....I would think it would require something beefier.

Peace!