Author Topic: more gunners  (Read 1543 times)

Offline kennyhayes

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 504
more gunners
« on: May 28, 2007, 08:28:46 PM »
I wish that you could have more than 1 gunner in a bomber becase if 2 fighters attack you at the same time from differant dirrections you would be able to take care of one of them and then get shoot down by the other and maybe this option could only be avalible with 1 plane so it would not be so confusing. with formation turned off.

Offline Wes14

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2996
more gunners
« Reply #1 on: May 28, 2007, 09:07:36 PM »
sorry,we dont need everyone flying death-star bombers.

Warning! The above post may induce: nausea, confusion, headaches, explosive diarrhea, anger, vomiting, and whining. Also this post may not make any sense, or may lead to the hijack of the thread.

-Regards,
Wes14

Offline folkwufe

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 124
Re: more gunners
« Reply #2 on: May 28, 2007, 10:55:07 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by kennyhayes
I wish that you could have more than 1 gunner in a bomber becase if 2 fighters attack you at the same time from differant dirrections you would be able to take care of one of them and then get shoot down by the other and maybe this option could only be avalible with 1 plane so it would not be so confusing. with formation turned off.


most the time a gunner cant hit is target any way so how would it help?

Offline DaddyAck

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 842
more gunners
« Reply #3 on: May 29, 2007, 03:05:34 AM »
I do not think that a second or third or whatever number gunner be allowed, all it would do is encourage the use of bombers as ackstars like they were in warbirds.

Offline Gianlupo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5154
more gunners
« Reply #4 on: May 29, 2007, 03:12:48 AM »


Stop beating the dead horse! It's been asked a lot of times, and, as DaddyAck said, it would never happen because bombers could be turned into mobile antiaircraft platforms.

Think about supporting good threads, like the one in my signature! :D ;) :p
Live to fly, fly to live!

Offline DaddyAck

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 842
more gunners
« Reply #5 on: May 29, 2007, 04:57:53 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Gianlupo


Stop beating the dead horse! It's been asked a lot of times, and, as DaddyAck said, it would never happen because bombers could be turned into mobile antiaircraft platforms.

Think about supporting good threads, like the one in my signature! :D ;) :p


I love that picture, it so much captures what I was thinkin. :rofl

and yes, I agree about your flaps damage model post.

Offline Gianlupo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5154
more gunners
« Reply #6 on: May 29, 2007, 05:59:15 AM »
Thank you! :) That picture is the more funny I found goggling "beat a dead horse" ;)
Live to fly, fly to live!

Offline AAolds

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 442
more gunners
« Reply #7 on: May 29, 2007, 07:06:26 AM »
I'd much rather a co-pilot option in some bombers, rather than more gunners.  As for the flying ackstar, I think it would be funny.
The AArch AAngelz is its own country, we owe loyalty only unto ourselves and those we fly with at the moment.---AAolds AArch AAngelz XO.

I love to GV and do Jabo missions vs GVs, get used to it.  Being good at one helps in the other.

Offline tedrbr

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1813
Re: more gunners
« Reply #8 on: May 29, 2007, 12:37:32 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by kennyhayes
I wish that you could have more than 1 gunner in a bomber becase if 2 fighters attack you at the same time from differant dirrections you would be able to take care of one of them and then get shoot down by the other and maybe this option could only be avalible with 1 plane so it would not be so confusing. with formation turned off.


Too much history with Deathstars and AckStars from other WWII combat flight games.  It will never happen.  

My personal experience is to do my own gunning.  Most gunners you can get are no good at the job.  Waste ammo, shoot at friendlies, shoot at everything out to 5K distance, can't hit targets, and leave without telling you.  

A good gunner should be able to make use of gun positions and external view to even deal with 2 planes.  Two or more not-so-good gunners not going to be that much help anyways.

Offline kennyhayes

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 504
more gunners
« Reply #9 on: May 29, 2007, 05:18:23 PM »
WOW you don't get it NVM

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
more gunners
« Reply #10 on: May 29, 2007, 05:51:29 PM »
Oh, we get it, trust us. We just don't think you know this has been rehashed since before this game was open to the public!

Offline cav58d

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3985
more gunners
« Reply #11 on: May 30, 2007, 12:26:26 AM »
LMFAO GIN AND WES.

You guys are freaking hilarious.  lmfao.:rofl :rofl
<S> Lyme

Sick Puppies II

412th Friday Night Volunteer Group

Offline SAS_KID

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1098
      • http://www.myspace.com/saskid
more gunners
« Reply #12 on: May 31, 2007, 12:51:33 AM »
No need for more than one gunner. I mean who wants a bunch of people who have been trained by 999 and Zazen to become the ultimate deathstar in one plane.:cool:
Quote from: hitech on Today at 09:27:26 AM
What utter and compete BS, quite frankly I should kick you off this bbs for this post.

The real truth is you do not like the answer.

HiTech

Offline 1Way>

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 26
Simple Solution
« Reply #13 on: May 31, 2007, 05:29:54 PM »
OPTION: 1

The simple solution is to not allow the 'joining' of a bomber by more than one gunner below a certain altitude.

I would suggest 12.5 -> 15 thousand as the 'floor' for multiple manned bombers.

That way, multiple gunners could be incorporated in high altitude strategic precision bombing...just like it WAS...

And below that 'certain' altitude the gunners are automatically sent to tower....with the exception of the primary auxiliary gunner...that joined the mission on takeoff and climb out.

Modeled like this, you would not get the short hop death star missions as were so common in AW....where we would up a Mitch fully gunned and tear the guts out a furball...

Further, the altitude join limitation would force the fighters to team up in groups of 2-4 or more if their base was being bombed from altitude...for they would know that just like the real 17's there would probably be a set of eager hands aloft twitching .50 cal triggers.

As it is now, a single pilot fending off an attack from 3 or more bogeys is a hair raising adventure, and one not often survived.

Further, if a gun is shot out and your in it...you should be dead. If you pilot lands gear up and your in the belly, you should be dead or incapacitated like a pilot wound...left with the decision to either bail out over enemy territory or weather the flight and take your chances of bleeding out.  

The bombardiers position should be man-able by the primary auxiliary gunner.

When a bomber group is manned by more than one gunner, the auto-gun functionality can be limited or or eliminated depending on the number of gunners that have joined/returned to tower

OPTION 2:

Allow up to 3 gunners as an option that can man the 3 planes of the formation. Under this scenario the pilot cannot gun and is responsible for flying/navigating/bombing.

The gunners cannot jump from plane to plane, only from gun to gun. The auto gun functionality is not formation wide, and only specific to each plane and its gunner.

If a gun is shot out with a gunner in it, that plane has lost all functionality to gun, or it could return to a limited or unlimited auto-gun functionality.


ALTERNATES:

Do not allow multiple manned formations from forward bases. Limit this functionality to only one base...the high altitude base near HQ.

Include these options in the Perk structure to curtail/limit abuse.

Disable gun functionality for multiple gunner formations below a certain altitude.

CONCLUSION:

There are creative and technical solutions [beyond the present solution] to eliminate the plague/fun of death stars and the unrealistic problem they create in a game that endeavors to simulate to an extent WW2 air combat.

The original models of AW and WB that allowed deathstars were slanted to much in favor of the gunners/bombers.

The present model is slanted to far in favor of the fighter/interceptor.

I am sure the team at HTC, with an open discussion and think tank on this forum, can create a more median compromise that more closely models the role of the manned bomber in WW2 air combat.

With all the talent at HTC and on this board...are we really done with this ongoing request/issue ?

ONE LAST THING:

If a mission is created using strat bombers, the designation of a "lead' formation or flight should be allowed. The lead plane in the lead flight should have a navigators position.

The 'lead' navigator can update the way point map in flight, and assign engineer parameters on the fly to each flight/formation. He would be able to update or change primary/secondary targets and assign targets to each formation in the flight.

The navigators job could include dispersing a group on approach to target for optimal bomb tracks for sub target sets, rendezvous points and updated egress paths.

The 'lead' navigator in essence would be group commander...in control of all the flights/formations

Flight planning detail such as this should also be limited to the high alt field near HQ, where one has to overfly 4-7 sectors before encountering the enemy.

And finally...being able to assign more than one instance of a strat bomber in mission planning would be icing on the cake.

This would in effect create a true group style formation where 'units' or 'squads' of bombers, comprised of up to 6 flights each could accompany one another.

Different loadouts could be assigned to the individual instances. One squad could load for hard targets, the other soft.

Thats a wish list thing....just dreaming...

http://www.303rdbg.com/sop-formation.html

Offline CAF001

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 75
more gunners
« Reply #14 on: May 31, 2007, 05:43:42 PM »
no one wants the 3 hour flights from HQ to the lines tho.