Bring back dropping fuels to 25%

[ChopSaw]

Originally posted by SuperDud
And if you use up that much ammo you seriously need more practice.

You're stuck in a loop and you still don't know what you're talking about.  Moreover, you're determined not to do anything to learn.

[E25280]

Originally posted by ChopSaw
.

Third, bomber guns;  Lasers’?  Really?  Let me show you what Skuzzy wrote me about that recently.  Skuzzy writes:  “The whole gun solution for bombers was changed.  They sort of auto-converge now, but not focused on one point, so there is more of a dispersal
pattern.”  I also told him that it seemed the guns converged at 500 instead of the 600 that seems to be the consensus on the BBS.  Skuzzy replied, “Been that way since AHII was released.”  In AH1 I could ping a plane at 1.4.  Not damage him at that range, but let him know I was there and aware.  At distance 1.0 I could make his plane dissolve if he was silly enough to be on my six at co-altitude holding steady.  I always had my convergence set at 650.  In AH2, I cannot touch an aircraft at 1.4.  At 1.0 I can barely touch him and have to use half my ammo to get any effect.  At the same time the fighter plane can hit me with cannons and/or machine guns with enough effect to damage my bombers if not take them out.  This has led to newbie’s coming up on my six at co-alt with a more than fair chance of hurting me.  Slightly more experienced pilot’s are coming up on my six, throttling back to hold the 1.0 distance and dumping all their ammo into my bombers, knowing I won’t be able to do much to them in return and also knowing I’m spending a lot of ammo to do it.  Sure doesn’t sound like lasers’ to me.  

Regardless of what the "slave guns" are doing, you are at least controlling the two machine guns on your sight.  The rest scattering about should make a hit more likely.

I also have a hard time believing anyone is doing much to you at 1.0 other than distracting you. . . speaking from humble (and humbled) experience.  I don't know how to post links to threads, but there is a thread in the wish list forum titled (oddly enough) Wish List by Boxboy.  As of this moment the last post was by Spatula on 3-04-06.  I was having a bad day and went on a rant, only to be thouroughly slapped down by the big man HTC himself, on the very subject of the relative effectiveness of buff guns vs the pursuing fighter's guns.  "Warning, the thread contains various math results, the reading of which has already caused the cranial implosion of one BBs member."

In case you don't read it (and actually, maybe I don't want you to read it . . . don't know what is more embarrassing, being wrong, or having done all the math to prove it), in a nutshell, at d1.0, the fighter is a seriously fudged monkey in relation to the bomber, assuming both can actually be on target at that range.

Cannons are likely more effective when they hit due to their explosives; although I have to believe any hit at that range with a cannon would be rare.

[ChopSaw]

Originally posted by E25280
Regardless of what the "slave guns" are doing, you are at least controlling the two machine guns on your sight.  The rest scattering about should make a hit more likely.

I also have a hard time believing anyone is doing much to you at 1.0 other than distracting you. . . speaking from humble (and humbled) experience.  I don't know how to post links to threads, but there is a thread in the wish list forum titled (oddly enough) Wish List by Boxboy.  As of this moment the last post was by Spatula on 3-04-06.  I was having a bad day and went on a rant, only to be thouroughly slapped down by the big man HTC himself, on the very subject of the relative effectiveness of buff guns vs the pursuing fighter's guns.  "Warning, the thread contains various math results, the reading of which has already caused the cranial implosion of one BBs member."

In case you don't read it (and actually, maybe I don't want you to read it . . . don't know what is more embarrassing, being wrong, or having done all the math to prove it), in a nutshell, at d1.0, the fighter is a seriously fudged monkey in relation to the bomber, assuming both can actually be on target at that range.

Cannons are likely more effective when they hit due to their explosives; although I have to believe any hit at that range with a cannon would be rare.

My comments weren't based upon math or numbers or settings.  They were based upon experience.  Cannons are indeed more likely to affect me than .50 cal, but I've had situations recently where the 50's were catching me on fire, hitting my oil lines and of course causing leaks in my fuel tanks.  Twenty mm cannon are the ones that seem to hit me most often, but I’ve also had the cannon from a 190 pounding me from that distance and that seems ridiculous.

I’ve also gotten information on the hardness of HQ’s from HT and Skuzzy.  HT writes that the HQ simply doubled its toughness over what it had in AH1 and now requires a complete destruction to have any effect to the respective countries radar system.  Skuzzy wrote me saying the HQ required 37,500 lbs of ordnance to bring down.  I’ve heard other stories of people trying to take down the HQ’s, but didn’t have any personally observed evidence until just the other night.  We took 4 formations of B-24’s, each with the 4 x 2,000 lb. bomb load out.  Salvos were set to 4 and the delay was .05 (minimum).  Three full formations made it to the target and hit.  Two full formations were dead on target with the third getting a partial hit.  That means well in excess of 48,000 lbs. hit that HQ almost simultaneously.  The point I’m making is, something other than numbers is a variable in this situation.  I suggest the same is true of the bombers guns.

I’ll try to find your thread.  I’d like to read it.

[Saxman]

Well, this thread went quickly from someone making what he felt was a serious request, to the typical furballer vs toolshedder squabble, to teetering on the edge of a flame war. Incredible.

Where's all our moderates at? The partisanship 'round these parts is worse than Congress.

[hubsonfire]

Originally posted by hubsonfire
canned replies, this thread has run it's course.

I called it first!

[ChopSaw]

Originally posted by Saxman
Well, this thread went quickly from someone making what he felt was a serious request, to the typical furballer vs toolshedder squabble, to teetering on the edge of a flame war. Incredible.

Where's all our moderates at? The partisanship 'round these parts is worse than Congress.

Not recently.  The house appropriations committee voted 62 to 2 yesterday to kill the UAE deal which would have taken control of six major US ports.  Both parties have been very serious about killing the deal.  Bush has finally united them.  Today the leaders of both the house and senate went to Bush and told him there was no way the deal was going to go through.  Congress was going to bust Bush’s veto of any legislation which would prohibit the take over.

………….(sigh) Of course now they’re arguing about which party killed the deal.  Both sides want the credit.

[Saxman]

That still doesn't change my point. Neither the toolshedders or furballers are willing to budge. The middle ground (which is where I place myself. I'm virtually pure fighter with an occaisonal jabbo strike, but I prefer fighting somewhere in defense or to help take a base) is being turned into a smoldering pile of slag.

Although as a point of order; a flaw with the argument that by furballing you're tying up guys that could be defending or attack a base is that probably the majority of the enemy BEING "tied up" are just other hell-with-the-war furballers who would otherwise be in some other out of the way corner of the map

[SuperDud]

Yeah, I was pretty much having fun, had some time to kill before work. It's only a game, nothing to get worked up over. I was enjoying stirring the pot. Just because I don't agree with you chop doesn't mean I'm wrong. I still bomb, not much but enough so that I haven't lost my touch. I still say buffing is too easy, especially for the effect it can have on the game. I also still believe it's easy to kill anything coming from dead 6 at 1K without going bingo ammo. Why is your veiw more right than mine?

Oh and thanks for the spell/grammer check, I forgot I was being grade:aok BTW, I'm not very smart, I'm about the dumbest person you'll meet, my name says it all. But it's been fun, keep up the good work dueax!:noid

[Tilt]

I would be quite happy to have it attritable to 0%

However the amount of effort that it should take  should be very considerable.

Strat Fuel would constantly pour into an air field so to maintain fuel levels at any where near 0 (for any time) would require the strat to be levelled....... and or a sustained high level of attrition.

Fuel should not only be held in large earth bound bunkers requiring serious bombing but dispersed around the field in smaller barrels under camo nets about 30/40 of them that can hardly be seen from the air.

Barrels will quickly burn out when hit..............bunkers will smoke for the usual periods. (to reduce FR hit)

and finally fuel would be dispenced/rationed in gallons or litres and not in %'s of the various capacities.

or at the very least rationed by cruise  power range and not % capacity.

gas guzzlers should be penalised by fuel attrion!!!!!

[Zazen13]

Originally posted by ChopSaw
The fuel on a field should be reducible to 25%.  That’s the way it was in AH1 and I didn’t see any lack of furball opportunities there.  Nor did I see a “lone Tiffy” porking large numbers of fields.  

You weren't looking very hard then becuase it happened all the damn time, usually 3 bases wide and 3 bases deep, essentially removing fighters from the game on the active portion of the map...

Zazen

[ChopSaw]

Originally posted by Zazen13
You weren't looking very hard then becuase it happened all the damn time, usually 3 bases wide and 3 bases deep, essentially removing fighters from the game on the active portion of the map...

Troops and ordnance bunkers still have about the same time of pop up that they did in AH1.  Do you see any situation where fields are porked for either of these three wide and three deep?  I sure don’t.  And if I did, it wouldn’t be from one guy in anything.  The very best I can do with my bombers in AH2 is 5 or 6 fields porked for one strat….say troops.  And by the time I finish with the last the first and second are popping back up.  The situation you describe would take an effort from a group of individuals.  There’s no way one guy could do it.

I studied those maps in AH1 a good deal and I never saw the situation you just described.  That doesn’t mean it didn’t happen, I’m sure it did, but it didn’t happen on a regular basis and it certainly wasn’t the work of a single Tiffy pilot.  Especially with the way the AH1 maps had the fields spread further apart.

[dedalos]

Originally posted by ChopSaw
How do you think it works in war?  You think they didn't bomb buildings to prevent the enemy from being able to fight?  Once again, this game was conceived as a war game.  Not just a fighter vs. fighter game.

Do you think they did not destroy ammo bankers and factories to prevent bombers form bombing them?

You are right.  This game is not only about fighters.  I would assume it would be ok with you guys to allow fighters to intercept your buffs.  Weelllllll, they may need fuel for that.  

Lets just stop pretending here.  This is not about fighters or furbalers.  Its about being able to bomb with 0 resistance.  You can do that off line also.

[dedalos]

Originally posted by ChopSaw
Well I don’t know about all of them being “arrogant punks”, but your postings have always defined you very well.

I doubt very much that any bomber pilot (in your words bufftard and/or toolshedder) wants to bomb buildings without fighter’s attacking us.  What we would like is the ability to have an effect on the game when we do drop buildings.  I can understand this is an inconvenience to you and if we went back to 25% fuel it would be an even greater one.

I spoke to a furballer who called himself that.  He like furballing and wasn’t ashamed to say it.  He said 25% fuel was not a problem for him since he liked to defend bases as a rule and he always had plenty of fuel to do that.  I have nothing at all against furballers.  It’s an important aspect of the game.  I do have something against furballers that whine about everything not being their way.

I’d also like my bomber guns de-nerfed.  The current nerfing that’s been done to bomber guns isn’t enough, is it?  We’re still shooting fighters down.  So instead of learning to do it right, you complain to HTC in hopes they’ll nerf bomber guns further.

The way bombs drop has been nerfed from AH1 and that’s still not good enough for you.  We’re still dropping buildings and that won’t do, will it?  In AH1 a hanger could be dropped by one salvo of 1K bombs from a formation.  Now it takes two slavos.  But you complain to try and get the bombs nerfed some more because we still take down hangers and that ruins your “fun”.  Or you try to get the bomber sight nerfed.

Bottom line?  You want the game to be arranged in such a way that you won’t be inconvenienced in any fashion.  You want to be able to shoot down bombers without the pesky inconvenience of having them actually hit you when they shoot.  You don’t want your hangers, fuel, or ammo load out effected.  Just wouldn’t be fair, would it?

I’m sorry.  I seem to have lost track.  Just who is it, again, that’s trying to have the game all their own way and force everyone else to play it that way?

OK, my bad.  I should know better than try to explain how I see things.  Lets continue the conversation when you develop the ability to carry one.  You do realise that I was not responding to you?  

Keep plaing the game the way you like, believe it or not, no one has ever tried to stop you from doing that.  but as long as you are trying to stop me from playing the game, I will make sure you have a reall reason to come in here and cry.  First 3 shorties every night from now on will be ord porking.  I'll see how many others I can get to do it.  No whining though, ok?  This is a war, and in real life ord was a target.  I would expect you to be hitting my fuel, FH hangers, church and virtual home.

One last thing.  What chess piece do you fly for?  I'd like to start with yours first if that is OK with you.

[ChopSaw]

Originally posted by SuperDud
Yeah, I was pretty much having fun, had some time to kill before work. It's only a game, nothing to get worked up over. I was enjoying stirring the pot. Just because I don't agree with you chop doesn't mean I'm wrong. I still bomb, not much but enough so that I haven't lost my touch. I still say buffing is too easy, especially for the effect it can have on the game. I also still believe it's easy to kill anything coming from dead 6 at 1K without going bingo ammo. Why is your veiw more right than mine?

Oh and thanks for the spell/grammer check, I forgot I was being grade:aok BTW, I'm not very smart, I'm about the dumbest person you'll meet, my name says it all. But it's been fun, keep up the good work dueax!:noid

I’m well aware you Burger Kingers like to stir things up.  You seem to believe I might be getting hot under the collar.  Sorry to disillusion you, but I’m laughing my rear off.

You’re right.  Just because you disagree with me doesn’t mean you’re wrong.  It also doesn’t mean you’re right.

I didn’t say I went bingo on ammo, I said it used more than I care to use.  Four hundred to 500 rounds.  I’ve got other fighter planes that want me to shoot them, you know.  Seems a bit selfish for one guy to hog so much ammo that could be used on his team mates.  Currently my best effort has been to shoot down 6 fighters before going bingo on ammo.  Of course then I’m cat food for the next fighter that comes up and the best I’ve landed is 5.  I will of course take your advice and continue to practice on the d1.0 guys on my six.  Who knows?  There’s even a chance you might be right on that one issue.

I believe my view “is more right” than yours because my view is an overall view.  It is not restricted by a special interest, in your case fighters.  I’m not solely into bombers, fighters, or gv’s.  I believe they all play and should play an integral role in the game.  The thing I liked about AH1 is it forced you to use more than one type of vehicle to achieve victory.  You couldn’t rely upon fighters only or bombers only or gv’s only.  There were times when you had to use a gv, times when you had to use a fighter and times when a bomber was a really good idea.  It’s still that way in AH2, but to a lesser extent.  Now things are oriented even more towards fighter aircraft than they were in AH1.  It has unbalanced the game toward larger numbers being more important than in AH1.  Now, whoever has the most pilots wins every time.  Before, tactics and strategies could gain victory from superior numbers.

Why are you calling me “two” in French?

[ChopSaw]

Originally posted by dedalos
Do you think they did not destroy ammo bankers and factories to prevent bombers form bombing them?

You are right.  This game is not only about fighters.  I would assume it would be ok with you guys to allow fighters to intercept your buffs.  Weelllllll, they may need fuel for that.  

Lets just stop pretending here.  This is not about fighters or furbalers.  Its about being able to bomb with 0 resistance.  You can do that off line also.

I don’t know how you’ve done it, but you really have missed the point.