Triple Buffs Should GO

[tedrbr]

Originally posted by SkyRock
One player, one plane!

One Player, One Plane, and Up To 6 GUNNERS!!!

Bring Back Da Death Star!!!!!


Seriously, these threads are usually full of people that only want bombers in the game as easy targets to pad their scores with and see their names in lights, or don't want any bombers at all, or ord.  If three bombers give them problems, they want only 1 to deal with.  Nothing should interfere with the furball.

Don't bomb our hangars!  We don't want to defend them!  Oh, they over 10K, takes too long to climb up there.

The 3 bomber flight is a decent compromise.  Bombers easy to shoot down in game, which is why they operated in groups of 60 to 100 with escorts during WWII.  If you are getting killed by bombers easily, you are doing it wrong.  No patience.  

Buff drivers often can't get a mission going with many folks.  Gunners often are inexperienced noobs that can't hit anything, or burn off your limited ammo.  If a buff driver get's an "escort", he usually uses the buff as bait, or runs off after the first con he sees, again leaving the bomber un-escorted.  

Buff drivers also invest ALOT more time in any one sortie than most fighter pilots do.  So, by all means, create another reason to leave the buffs in the hangars.


As to the ease in which CV's are sunk.  CV's during the war had high, middle, and low CAP, as well as picket destroyers.  CV's in game almost NEVER have ANY CAP over them.  They are undefended.  So, they get sunk.  
Not always bombers gets the CV either, running a CV right up on to Shore Batteries and leaving enemy ord up are bases near a CV get them sunk often enough as well.

[Chalenge]

Dont blame the bombers for ruining your fun. Fleets can be straffed down by any plane in the game and then theres the dive bombing lanc syndrome. Ive seen both too many times to count. One determined con is all it takes. I think what your really upset about is that someone actually took the time to learn how to use a bomber the right way.

[storch]

when ever the mood stikes me I make complete formations "go"  the gamey 1,000,000 guns slaved to the zoom sight is what should go.

[Saxman]

Also, during WWII any ship under attack by high-altitude level bombers would be maneuvering like MAD to evade. CVs also wouldn't park a mile off an enemy base.

The vulnerability of CVs in the game is as much due to moronic use OF the carriers, as any overbalanced bombers.

[Kweassa]

From a different perspective, I agree with Zanth.

 I remember when the bombsight calibration theme was first added to the game - I wrote the "how-to" manual on it. We were all guessing that the concept behind the 3-buff formation was to increase the general survivabilityand  volume of ordnance dropped, in compensation for the loss of accuracy the bombsight calibration brought.

 While the old calibration method didn't resemble the actual Norden by much, it did bring in an adequate skill factor into the process of calibration so that it brought out a situation that roughly matched that of real life. The calibration was done by hand, by "marking" a target space to configure the relative ground speed of the buffs. This created a certain margin of error in the bombing process, and while the most experienced players could minimize this margin, it still took some effort to achieve pin-point accuracy.

 For the vast majority of average skilled players, playing it "safely" and spreading out the bombs in salvos in compensation for the lack of accuracy was desirable.

 ...

 Unfortunately, for some reason, HTC succumbed to the whines and exchanged the calibration method to a vastly dumbed-down version of it. No more manual calibration required - just stabilize airspeed, press a button and there, it's done.

 The end result is what we have nowadays. There are pin-point hangar-busting buffs in the game again. We've gone backwards in time and arrived at the old days of AH1.

 However, unlike AH1, where we had only one bomber aircraft doing the "smartbombing", now we have three.


 So either perk the 3 formations, or bring back the old bombsight.

[brucerer]

I agree that the bombing seems too accurate, but i wouldnt support removing the formations. It makes a heavy bomber mission feel more realistic (even if its not).

A single bomber would be just about useless when attacking fields. And Considering FH's pop after 15 mins, making them slightly easier to destroy is no big thing. Its pretty tough to take them all down with a single formation - it is possible i know, ive done it. But they pop before you can even get back to base and land.

I guess i'd support a change to the bombsight - the old method where you had to track a spot on the ground is attractive to me. It would require more skill as a bombadier. I also like how it works in the b-17 games as someone mentioned above. I used to play it on the Amiga back in the day

It'd also be awesome if the gun turrets worked like auto-ack when no-one was manning them - except this would probably make the formations near-invincible

[thndregg]

Originally posted by BlauK
I am all for bigger formations, but their guns should have more reasonable dispersion. Nowadays they are like lasers.

I remember this discussion from long ago. HT saw no reason to change anything, so he stated.

[Yeager]

this discussion has been on going since the early 1990s.  The more things change, the more they stay the same.

[Kten]

yes please ban fighters from the game, everytime i spawn in there strafing and bombing the AF.

If 90% of the clowns i encounter didn't fly straight to my six they might live longer and not whine on the forums.

[REP0MAN]

I like the formations and if I get killed by their lazers, it's my dumb fault. It makes me a better pilot to figure out a way to NOT get hit by them while knifing through the formations. That is a good time.

Now bombers that can release 3X the bomb load at 800 feet AGL, thats a different story.

[Emu]

Originally posted by Zanth
In game a formation of 3 bombers was unheard of until a little while ago.  2/3's of ya maybe to new to remember that.  NO one was screaming for bombers be more powerful - in fact the reverse!   BUffs "laser" sight was to be replaced by a harder sight WITH 3 BOMBERS TO MAKE UP FOR IT.  

That is all forgot and the lazer sight is BACK ON, however the 2 extra bombers didn't go away.

Many a great cv vs port battle been messed up by one point monger.  

Not to mention - level bombers have never - ever - if I wasn't clear -NEVER- sunk a cv in war

EVER!

I don't even think they tried?


Anyway formations were made for a reason and this wasn't it.

Although not exactly a CV, the tirpitz was indeed a large battleship attacked by level bombers with success:

The smokescreen was not active on the third attempt - "Operation Catechism". Tirpitz was finally sunk immediately to the west of Tromsø, in the bay of Håkøybotn, on 12 November 1944 by 617 and 9 Squadron Lancasters with Tallboys on their third attempt. The ship was struck by three Tallboys. One glanced off turret armour, but the other two pierced the ship's armour and blew a 200 foot hole into her port side. Soon after, internal fires set off a magazine and blew off "C" turret. Tirpitz capsized within minutes of the attack, and close to 1,000 German sailors, out of 1,700 aboard, died.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_battleship_Tirpitz

Not saying it should be as easy as it can be in Aces High, but definitely possible.

Emu

[bj229r]

It should be mentioned that the Tirpitz was docked--apparently it was concluded that it would befall the same fate as the Bismark at sea

[SirLoin]

I like formations but guns should be only be shooting from manned position...Single buf option gets all guns converging like it is now.

[Karnak]

Originally posted by SirLoin
I like formations but guns should be only be shooting from manned position...Single buf option gets all guns converging like it is now.

The guns from the three bombers converge at 500 yards, not at the target.

The guns on a single buff do not converge at all.


Somehow I doubt SirLoin will ever open this thread and read this though, as nobody ever seems to listen to it.

[AAolds]

My vote would go for keeping formations available.