ok some ideas in how to make the B17 better...............

[Beefcake]

Now first off, let me begin by saying that in real life, yes a B17 vs a 109....the winner would be the 109. BUT.... this is a game, you are supposed to have fun. If the game was set to real life standards then it would suck. Anyway on to some of my ideas.

Ok here is number 1. This is short, simple and crude, but it gets the point across. Do this guys, raise the buff duribility and raise the gun damage. This would solve the buff probs, but would cause many more probs. So it's not a good idea, but one to go on.

2. Here is a pretty good idea that I like. Beware guys I'll have a hard time putting this into words, but I'll try my best. (my writing skillz suck   ) Ok first off, we start by leaving the buffs as they are. But here is what we change. How about we raise the amount of damage the wings and tail can take. This way it would take alot of a hits to blow off a wing, instead of one or two like it does now. Let me try to give an example, lets say we have a battle between a 17 and a F4U-1C. Now in the arena today, it would only take one or two hits to bring the buff down. But with my idea, the 17 could take many more hits, maybe even 30 or 40 cannon hits, without losing a wing, BUT, the plane would suffer so much damage that it could not be controled. I.E. lost elevators, rudder, no engines, you get the idea. This would give the buff pilot a chance to ditch or run for home, or other.  

My main point is this, the B17 need some MAJOR work. The plane should fun to fly, and should have a really good chance vs any fighter in the arena. Anyway, I hope you guys will read this and reply with some ideas (HT and pyro). Anyway I'm tired, bed is calling, I hope you guys can understand this. Hehehehe O and Guys...........thanks for listneing.


The Beefster- AH Full Time Buff Pilot
 

[Pongo]

Just one point.
If you armour it against the F4u1c, how will the 109 G6 take it out? or the 51 or any other plane.
It would be better to just intoduce the B29, it would realisticaly have the capabilities you want.
Or you could give the buff M2 20mm on the nose and tail so that most approaches would be much more dangourous

------------------
Pongo
The Wrecking Crew

[Citabria]

historically lone buffs in the pacific theater would go on missions with 2 to 4 escorting fighters succesfully.

the entire reason for escort fighters is to escort vulnerable bombers. there was a reason bombers needed escorting.

BUT, I do believe the masses prefer the GAMEPLAY way out of this instead of using this common sense historically accurate method of close fighter cover from more than 1 fighter.

why not? It's much easier. who cares how it really was?

we just wanna have fun, dont need that historical crap right? history is boring who needs it? I bet that was just a myth about bombers being shot down by fighters in droves when unescorted.

HERE IS HOW IT REALLY WAS BACK THEN:
the bombers had more guns and their guns could shoot farther and the aluminum the bombers were made from was 1 inch thick, in fact they stopped making bombers out of aluminum by 1940, past that all american bombers were made from solid steel and much faster than the aluminum bombers. also around 1941 the USAAF realized that gasoline was flamable and reasoned that it was too dangerous to be used for fuel so they used solar power to keep engines and fuel tanks from destroying the aircraft when hit.


gameplay ruins many historical tactics in these ww2 flightsims the way it has in Warbirds      

dont ask for artificially improved airplanes ask for a better airplane for gods sake man


you need a b-29 and I do believe the b29 would fit in to AH quite nicely with its size durability, speed, defensive gun system (the AH b17 already has the gun system the b29 had in RL)


b-29: 10 50 cal in 4 turrets (4 in front top turret) slaved to multiple gunner stations
 and 2 50cal 1 Hispano in the tail

B-17: 13 50 cal in dual and single mounts w individual gunners.


the b17 could take damage to a point(3 30mm rounds) but it was still a tin can just like every other aircraft in the ww2 sky, not a tiger tank. many people forget that.


sorry bout that i guess this is a bit of a rant.
I kinda fly off the handle everytime I hear that word...

GAMEPLAY


(shudder)    

------------------
CitabriAirbatiC

"There Is No Spoon"

[This message has been edited by Citabria (edited 03-28-2000).]

[Kieren]

Beefcake-

I have to agree with the other guys here. About 30-40% of my sorties in the MA are bomber, and I usually don't have that much trouble getting hits on target.

You were ranting on open tonight about flying an hour to die in a second... you also related you had your head in the sights when it happened. If I understood correctly it was a 109 that got you? Leave your tail open for an undefended attack and anything in the game (well, not a c47  ) will take you out.

If you press on into heavily defended territory without escort, expect to get shot down. If you allow yourself to be coalt or below when you encounter a fighter, there is a pretty good chance he will get you.

Sorry to say, but if the changes you suggest were implemented you would see iron B17's capping bases from capture. I sure hope that doesn't happen!

I guess I don't understand what you would expect to happen in a bomber vs. fighter situation. It seems sometimes you believe flying for an hour entitles you to be assured of hitting your target.  

You really ought to fly something else besides the B17, I might add. You don't appreciate just how dangerous the approach to a 17 is until you have tried to attack one. A good 17 gunner will give you fits, as will a good B26 gunner.

There is already a debate concerning the lethality of various guns, especially the .50's. If the .50's should get more lethality, you realize it comes with a price tag; you will kill fighters faster, but they can get you quicker, too. It will come down to who shoots straighter.  

[Vermillion]

The Luftwaffe did an extensive study of guncams, and downed aircraft, on the vulnerability of B-17's.

I don't own a copy (I wish I did), but the results I have been told were that to destroy (shootdown) an average B-17, it took either:

15-20 20mm Cannon Shells in a single area
or
3-5 30mm Cannon Shells in a single area

Now, these were average results and I didn't do the study, so please don't post pictures of badly damaged B-17's that made it home.  

Now if you are armed with x4 20mm cannons, 20 shells is about a good 1/3 second concentrated burst.

------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
Carpe Jugulum
"Real Men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires"

[MANDOBLE]

Just two notes Beefcake:

1 - We are not the AH programmers. We cant change any of those things.

2 - Buff lethality is impressive just now. Buff durability is impressive just now. Better work in stealthy aproaches, flying formation with another buffs or get a pair of P51 as scorts.

[Mox]

 

Originally posted by Vermillion:
15-20 20mm Cannon Shells in a single area
or
3-5 30mm Cannon Shells in a single area

I wish my buff was that tuff...
1 ping wonders kill me with a single HogCannon round usually outside of my .50's range.

I have no problems with a buff going down after 15 rounds of 20mm in the "same area".  The key here is "same area".  I'd find it fairly difficult to place 15 rounds of any type of cannon in the exact same area, the rate of fire and high speeds/closure rates make this almost impossible in AH.  
If any of you are able to do this on a regular basis I'd like to take a ride with you so I can see how your doing it!

I've killed a buff with 3 30mm shells but they were not in the same area, in fact one was the nose, one round hit the center, and the third hit the tail.  I fired at 100.

Mox
The Wrecking Crew

[funked]

Guys, when you are in the plane being shot, you have no idea how many hits you are taking.  The sound is NOT an accurate indicator.  The only person who knows how many hits you took is the shooter, because all hit scoring is done on the shooter's computer.

[Vermillion]

Mox one thing is to realize that a single "ping" sound doesn't necessarily mean you were only hit by one shell. Only Pyro can tell you exactly how it works, but I do know that its not a one to one relationship.

Also when I said "one area" I meant like the  inner wing , the tail, the cockpit, a fueselage section.  I didn't mean like a 3 foot diameter area  



------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
Carpe Jugulum
"Real Men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires"

[Pongo]

From both sides, I feel the bombers are modeled accuratly, I would rather not see any changes. People arnt droping me with one ping, but I dont like to see the 1c coming co alt its true.
Some of the times I die in a buff it is because I loose sight of the interceptor in close. Usually he pops up in  a near stall right behind me and gives me the final kick in the teeth. One set of eyes is a real disadvantage in that scenario. Lack of wash behind the 17 is as well.
Other then the first few weeks with the 1c though I always find buffs a challenge to kill. But the most important thing in flying them is position. The best way to learn how to win the fight for position in the buff is to try to shoot them down, this shows you that things that give the interceptors fits.
I wasnt supprised that weazle was a good positional buff pilot, he spends lots of time hunting them.
The addition of more accurate struct. limits on the planes since beta has also hurt the buff a little. You used to be able to go really evasive then hit x let it recover as you swithced to the gun pos of choice.  that will cost you your wings know.
The buff guns still shred me if I dont respect them.

------------------
Pongo
The Wrecking Crew

[Mox]

 

Originally posted by Vermillion:
Mox one thing is to realize that a single "ping" sound doesn't necessarily mean you were only hit by one shell. Only Pyro can tell you exactly how it works, but I do know that its not a one to one relationship.

Verm and Funked, I know thats my point.    Why has something not been done to correct this obvious error?  Sound is generated locally thus there should be zero lag envolved.

I'm sure Pyro is too busy to explain in detail but when he has the time (if that ever happenes)many of us here would like a detail explanation of the actual way a bullet is fired and calculated as a hit across the internet.  

I'm not a programmer by any stretch of the imagination but I work with developers on a daily basis and when I can show them there's a problem they usually listen and attempted to either fix the code or find a way around the problem.  I think there's been enough talk here about the cannon hogs and the weak .50's to warrant a look to see what was changed.  What more do we have to do?  I'm not that far away, I guess I could make sure to have pizza and lots of beer delivered every Friday to help the guys out!

So how about it Pyro, do you guys take bribes?  

I never thought I'd be so picky about a wonderful game but developers know the product is never done, there's always room for improvments.

Verm, I know what you mean now...  

Mox
The Wrecking Crew

[This message has been edited by Mox (edited 03-29-2000).]

[Swoop]

Well firstly, I agree 100% with Beefcake's idea.  With tougher wings and tail buffs would still go down just as easy to a good fighter pilot.....however, it's the way they go down that makes the difference:  Instead of 'ping - zoom back to tower' us dedicated buff pilots would have to contend with dead engines, limited controls, etc.....and suddenly the game gets a lot more fun.  

Secondly, why on earth aren't ping sounds 1 to 1?  It's not hard. Other sims seem to manage it....and it'd end all the arguments about 1 ping kills.....ok, how bout please?

Swoop

[Kieren]

You do realize it's *ping* *zoom* back to the tower for everyone, right?  

[Fishu]

If B-17 gets any tougher, then we need to decrease its maximum altitude also!

B-17 flying on regular basis +30k is something unbelievable  

That what I know, B-17s used to fly around 25k. not around 35k  

[AKDejaVu]

I enjoy a thread such as this from an individual that I haven't seen over 10k in a buff since I read this post for the first time.

I don't think that HTC should do anything that would make these things ackstars at low level.  It almost sounds as if that is what most people are asking for.

AKDejaVu