Author Topic: Attack without ords (Read 1924 times)

Karnak · « **Reply #30 on:** January 02, 2006, 03:22:18 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by bozon
ord down - shuts down all "bomber" labeled planes. Or to be more exact all planes that have no "no ord" option (but these are all "bombers").
IL2 is labled under the attack category and may be rolled in a clean configuration, A20 is labeled bomber and must load bombs.
Mosquito is also labeled as "attack" even though one may consider it a bomber as well.

Bozon

Erm, not exactly.

The A-20 can be scored either as an Attacker or as a Bomber. The Il-2 can be scored the same. Generally if a aircraft in the Bomber category (FYI, there are only Bombers and Fighters) has forward firing guns it can be scored as an Attacker. The reason that destroying all ordnance disables the A-20 and not the Il-2 is because the A-20 cannot not select bombs. It must take off with bombs in the bombay.

The Mosquito is not a Bomber. The Mosquito can be scoed as a Fighter or as an Attacker. It cannot be scored as a Bomber and it is disabled if the Fighter Hangars are destroyed.

bozon · « **Reply #31 on:** January 02, 2006, 06:22:42 AM »

As I said, the exact reason is lack of "no ord" option, which only (what HTC considers) bombers, suffer from. I also believe this is intentional and that the original idea was that bombers would not be used as mobile gun positions.

As more planes were added to the game, the categorization became weired. IL2 is a bomber that spawns from the BH, but the mosquito is launched from the FH. A20 purpose is quite simillar to our model mossie, but spawns from the BH. Go figure.

This also means that the mossie has no outside view while IL2 and A20 has it (and if it is supposed to represent multiple crew SA, they all have a crew of 2). Not that I care about it much, but the Mossie is such a pretty planes that it would be nice to see it from the outside on boring long flights.

Bottom line is that there is no clear rule to who should be able to select no ord in the hanger except for HT's whim. Personally, I think there is no good reason why the A20 cannot select "no ord" when IL2 and Mossie can.

Bozon

Morpheus · « **Reply #32 on:** January 02, 2006, 07:47:46 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Karnak
Erm, not exactly.

The A-20 can be scored either as an Attacker or as a Bomber. The Il-2 can be scored the same. Generally if a aircraft in the Bomber category (FYI, there are only Bombers and Fighters) has forward firing guns it can be scored as an Attacker. The reason that destroying all ordnance disables the A-20 and not the Il-2 is because the A-20 cannot not select bombs. It must take off with bombs in the bombay.

The Mosquito is not a Bomber. The Mosquito can be scoed as a Fighter or as an Attacker. It cannot be scored as a Bomber and it is disabled if the Fighter Hangars are destroyed.

OMG what?

The Mosquito has a bomb bay. Who is to say that it to should not be able to take off without bombs in the bomb bay? That's the silliest thing I have ever heard. The only reason "it must take off with bombs in the bomb bay is because that's how HT has it setup right now. lol Jeeze

Care to tell me how and why the Mosquito is less of a bomber than the A20? The both have bomb bays, they both have foreward firing guns now. The only thing the A20 has that the mossi doesnt is a tail gun, a tail gun which is about as useful as tits on a bull.

I know the facts, I know how they're all scored and what categories they can be scored under... The argument is to allow the A20, like the Il2, to take off without ord. And it is a very valid argument.

If a bomb bay is what makes a bomber, a bomber then the mossi should be setup the same way as the A20 is now.

thrila · « **Reply #33 on:** January 02, 2006, 08:32:05 AM »

The mossie should be allowed to spawn from the VH simply because mossies are cool and sexy.

Some mossie footage Though this raid went terribly wrong the low level footage is great.

Kweassa · « **Reply #34 on:** January 02, 2006, 09:03:59 AM »

Quote

Care to tell me how and why the Mosquito is less of a bomber than the A20? The both have bomb bays, they both have foreward firing guns now. The only thing the A20 has that the mossi doesnt is a tail gun, a tail gun which is about as useful as tits on a bull.

The same reason why 110s are considered as a "fighter", or rather a "destroyer(zerst?er)", than a bomber. The same would apply to the Imperial Japanese Ki-45. The Bf110 and the Ki-45 was designed as "heavy fighter" from the start. The Mosquito was conceived as a bomber but was produced, served, and classifed as a fighter. AH's classification of aircraft as bomber/attacker/fighter is entirely US style, but other countries classified their fighters differently.

Could the same be said for the A-20? I think not.

The A-20 is an attacker, not a fighter. HTC didn't arbitrarily classify the Mossy as a fighter/attacker and an A-20 as an attacker/bomber. If the existence of an internal bombbay alone makes the Mossy a bomber, then the Yak-9B would also qualify as a bomber - which, clear is not. Therefore, quitely simply and logically, anything that is not a fighter is tied to the BH, not the FH, and all aircraft tied with the BH requires the existence of ordnance to be airborne. This is the arbitrary part.

So, if people really want A-20s enabled without ordnance, then they should ask all bombers or bomber/attacker class aircraft be able to take off without ord, rather than ask HT to grant a waiver to the A-20 only.

cav58d · « **Reply #35 on:** January 02, 2006, 12:26:00 PM »

I just wish HTC would please respond and give us his views on this before this becomes the longest thread ever =)

Karnak · « **Reply #36 on:** January 02, 2006, 01:23:52 PM »

bozon,

Can you find any missions on which the A-20 flew as a fighter or as fighter escort? The Mosquito FB.Mk VI did both of those with regularity. The mission profiles of the A-20 and Mosquito Mk VI had overlap, but the Mosquito also had a lot of fighter tasks in the missions it flew whereas the A-20 was only an attack bird.

The version of the Mosquito we have is a Fighter-Bomber and was flown by Fighter Command, not Bomber Command.

If you want a quick way to ID a Mossie as fighter or a bomber/PR look at the wind screen. If it is flat then it is a fighter and if it is split in the middle and angled backwards in a shallow V then it is a bomber or PR Mossie. The Mk VI has a flat windscreen.

cav58d · « **Reply #37 on:** January 02, 2006, 09:28:45 PM »

hallllo?????

Morpheus · « **Reply #38 on:** January 03, 2006, 12:34:12 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Kweassa
The same reason why 110s are considered as a "fighter", or rather a "destroyer(zerst?er)", than a bomber. The same would apply to the Imperial Japanese Ki-45. The Bf110 and the Ki-45 was designed as "heavy fighter" from the start. The Mosquito was conceived as a bomber but was produced, served, and classifed as a fighter. AH's classification of aircraft as bomber/attacker/fighter is entirely US style, but other countries classified their fighters differently.

Quote

The A-20 is an attacker, not a fighter.

Karnak.....

Quote

Can you find any missions on which the A-20 flew as a fighter or as fighter escort? The Mosquito FB.Mk VI did both of those with regularity. The mission profiles of the A-20 and Mosquito Mk VI had overlap, but the Mosquito also had a lot of fighter tasks in the missions it flew whereas the A-20 was only an attack bird.

Im sorry guys you're wrong there.

It was used extensively in a night fighter role over France, Denmark, Holland and Germany until replaced by the Mosquito. The night fighter role of the A20 was developed in response to growing losses of British heavy bombers to German night fighters. The A20s would position themselves around known German night fighter bases and wait for aircraft to return. Then they would intercept them while on approach. It was considered well suited for the roll as a night fighter due to the fact that it had a large enough interior to house the bulky radar equipment of the time.

Yet again the A-20 would prove its worthiness as a Fighter when in late 1943, the 47th Bomber Group consisting of A-20G Havocs was infact reasigned for a period of time to fighter escort, to fly high cover for Allied shipping convoys in the Mediterranean.

The P-70 which was a modified A-20 fitted with an airborne intercept radar and four 20-mm cannon mounted on the belly, was used as an interim night fighter until the P-61 was available. Wow, kinda like what the 110 was used alot for.

The A20 Havoc was used as a fighter-bomber/attack/escort/night fighter just like the mosquito was. The mosquito, replaced much of the A20 Havocs' roll as a fighter escort and any hopes for a continued and refined version of the P-70 early on. Which is why you did not have A20's escorting heavy bombers and providing top cover for shipping lanes to the degree that the Mosquito did.

Tilt · « **Reply #39 on:** January 03, 2006, 06:53:00 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Kweassa
, then the Yak-9B would also qualify as a bomber - which, clear is not.

Yes it was................

or rather at least a pure attack ac.

to one side.............to me the Havoc was pure attack ac much as (in reality)the FB Mossie was. (Night fighting Mossies to one side)

I still believe we would benefit from a true attack classification

Delirium · « **Reply #40 on:** January 03, 2006, 07:27:04 AM »

Ok, can anyone tell me why it makes a difference if someone ups in a bomber that has eggs or not? Allow anyone to up in buffs if they so desire, does it unbalance the game?

What the heck is the difference?

Morpheus · « **Reply #41 on:** January 03, 2006, 10:49:32 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Tilt
Yes it was................ or rather at least a pure attack ac.

to one side.............to me the Havoc was pure attack ac much as (in reality)the FB Mossie was. (Night fighting Mossies to one side)

I still believe we would benefit from a true attack classification

The A20 did perform Night Fighter ops. \

I am not arguing the facts nor trying to change history.. The mossi did what the A20 could have done if it where not there. The mossie replaced and took over much of the A20's duties as a night fighter early on.

Grits · « **Reply #42 on:** January 03, 2006, 11:14:10 AM »

I believe the A-20 also performed night-fighter missions in the PTO before the P-61 got there, but I'm not positive.

rshubert · « **Reply #43 on:** January 03, 2006, 11:18:37 AM »

It always happens, the thread goes off on some tangent...

Let's simplify it.

It is proposed that the A-20 should be allowed to up when ord is not available at the field. There is no "no ord" option selectable in the hangar for the A-20.

Arguments pro:

D3A Ju-88 and IL2 can do so, and they are tied to BH as is A-20.
A-20s were used in the attack role, and in the fighter role.

Arguments con:

there don't seem to be any.

FWIW, I agree, there should be a no-ord option available for the A-20. Also, while we're at it, add the underwing rocket option to the list. Real A-20Gs had a rocket option.

Kev367th · « **Reply #44 on:** January 03, 2006, 11:23:25 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Karnak
bozon,

Can you find any missions on which the A-20 flew as a fighter or as fighter escort? The Mosquito FB.Mk VI did both of those with regularity. The mission profiles of the A-20 and Mosquito Mk VI had overlap, but the Mosquito also had a lot of fighter tasks in the missions it flew whereas the A-20 was only an attack bird.

The version of the Mosquito we have is a Fighter-Bomber and was flown by Fighter Command, not Bomber Command.

If you want a quick way to ID a Mossie as fighter or a bomber/PR look at the wind screen. If it is flat then it is a fighter and if it is split in the middle and angled backwards in a shallow V then it is a bomber or PR Mossie. The Mk VI has a flat windscreen.

Even easier - Glass nose = B model, solid nose = FB model. (In general).

Seems strange our FB VI can't be scored as a bomber. FB - Fighter/Bomber.

About time they got rid of the exhaust shrouds also.

Think an easy way would be -
If you can up a group of 3 it should only be available under 'bomber' and SHOULD have to carry eggs.

If you can only up as a single should be available under attack or bomber but should not have to carry eggs.

There may be some e.g. Mossie that may be able to be available under all three 'roles'.