Unrealistic Bombing Accuracy

[RangerBob]

While this is certainly an excellent online combat flight sim, I am aware that a number of procedures must be included in any online combat flight sim that, although not 100% realistic, are required for playability. A good example is not requiring all the mixture settings and other tasks required of a real combat pilot in the interest of playability. None of these should have any real effect on the tactics or strategies used in the flight sim.

Both my uncles served as combat pilots in WWII. One flew B17's early in the war until capture as a pilot before fighter escort was really available, and a film has been made of his exploits that was shown on A&E or something. The other flew divebombers off of carriers in the Pacific early in the war through the end of the war. He was the first pilot to be rescued by a helicopter.

I've spoken at length with these living heroes (one just died 2 weeks ago) about tactics and their daily missions. The B17 pilot, Col James Geary, provided the most detailed information of his exploits. I showed him several flight sims. He made it clear that the employment of the level bomber in Aces High was just not realistic.
 
For instance, all of us are aware that B17's were not used to fly over enemy airfields picking out individual targets one by one, and then turning around to do the same on another pass. That was the job of the Jabo pilot.

As a result I would suggest that the bombing accuracy of the level bomber produce hits that are somewhat random with respect to location of the cross hairs seen at the time of the drop. Knowing that this would produce numerous hits all over a target, such as an airfield, I would also suggest that any hits on the runway produce craters that would affect the landing and takeoff of planes.

In my opinion, and I'm sure I'll hear a number of other opinions, this would cause the level bomber to be used in a more realistic role than that of a surgical target for target attack we now find it being used for. Based on these changes I would expect pilots to toggle a complete bomb load over a target.

Level strategic bombers employed as area bombers. Jabo attacks for those surgical attacks.

Just my suggestion...and yours?


Ranger Bob

[This message has been edited by RangerBob (edited 04-14-2001).]

[Fokker]

I could agree if jaboing where realistic, but with present ack accuracy and deadliness, its not feasable. Ack must be taken out before jaboing as it is now.

I agree that picking out targets one at the time with one single bomb is not realistic. I belive in real life they always used salvo, or dropped the whole load in one go.

If accuracy in bombing is decreased and salvos made more or less neccessary to hit targets, it would be more realistic. However, blast radius of bombs would have to be increased and ack and structures had to take less to damage. Or else it would be to difficult to disable a field.

Its only occasionally we get waves of bombers organised, which would be neccessary if accuracy is less than now.

[Fishu]

Absolutely too accurate, though, bombers usually operates in AH alone and sometimes you might see even more in a formation.. though, not many.
In real life they used far more bombers to do this job.

[loser]

ive said it before and ill say it again...i dont mind my bombs being spread,, as long as you give me the opportunity to have 200 other AI bombers with me.....

[Dowding]

I never seen more than about 8 bombers in the MA flying and attacking the same target. That happens about 0.5% of the time.

The super accuracy has to be there - it's a gameplay concession. Otherwise what would be the point of flying buffs? Salvoing the bombs in one drop for a single bomber would be pointless - you could do more damage in a jabo plane.

If you make the buffs 'realistic', either you make a flight of 'ghost' AI controlled planes to go with your pplayer controlled buff (most people are against this) or you'll never see another bomber in the skies of AH.

[TheWobble]

well the super accuracy "game concession" was enough to make me cancel my account....so i guess the gameplay issue works both ways..some want a simulation, some want a game i guess....

[RangerBob]

While the acks are deadly jaboing can be effective. Our squad, VMF323 headed by Ripsnort, specializes in jabo attacking airfields. If I remember right we can close a field with a handful of squad members in less than 2 minutes and that includes the vehicle hangar, all acks and all hangars.

As for the dispersion of bombs in a level bomber I am also suggesting that the craters on runways from such bombs have an effect on landings and takeoffs if you hit those craters landing or taking off. As a result these heavy bombers would be able to cause damage to a field even without taking out individual acks etc.

I understand all your arguments about "gameplay", I really do, but one has to be careful not to hang his hat on the old "gameplay concession" argument. That was done in the old Airwarrior sim and it became a joke. There were so many gameplay concessions it became a totally unrealistic flight model, and a totally unrealistic toy of a game.

I'm still for fixing the bombing accuracy of the heavy and medium level bombers. They just weren't used to take out individual targets. Don't incorrectly adjust their capabilities for gameplay to overcome some other problem, such as deadly ack, fix the other problem.

Ranger Bob

[SageFIN]

Well the situation in AH calls much more for tactical bombers than strategical. IMO no strategic bombers should ever have been added. This would have eliminated all the whines concerning buff gun and bomb accuracy and the boosted toughness as well as the countless other whines + relevant observations. Too bad that also the bomber part of the community would have been eliminated too so perhaps it was not financially feasible. (Yea, who could imagine a WW2 flight sim with ETO planes and not having The American Buff, B-17   )

------------------
---
SageFIN

"I think IŽll believe in Gosh instead of God.  If you donŽt
 believe in Gosh too, youŽll be darned to heck."
---

[SOB]

 

Originally posted by TheWobble:
well the super accuracy "game concession" was enough to make me cancel my account....so i guess the gameplay issue works both ways..some want a simulation, some want a game i guess....

What about the post in the O'club where you said you cancelled your account because Operation Flashpoint got you?


SOB

[SOB]

 

Originally posted by RangerBob:
I understand all your arguments about "gameplay", I really do, but one has to be careful not to hang his hat on the old "gameplay concession" argument. That was done in the old Airwarrior sim and it became a joke. There were so many gameplay concessions it became a totally unrealistic flight model, and a totally unrealistic toy of a game.

I understand your argument against the precision bombing, but this is a gameplay concession that is already in place, which makes it possible to have a real opinion about it...not just a guess as to how it's going to be.

I enjoy flying bombers, and like the way their bombing accuracy is.  That being said, I personally wouldn't be opposed to a required line-up time like I've heard WarBirds has, or even removing the zoom in the bomb site.  When I first started flying AH, being the non RTFM type that I am, I had no idea for the first couple of months that you could zoom.  That made it really interesting trying to take out targets...even hangars.


SOB

[TheWobble]

 

What about the post in the O'club where you said you cancelled your account because Operation Flashpoint got you?

it was the straw.

[SOB]

cc...so it was just one of the issues that made you feel it was no long worth subscribing to AH.

[TheWobble]

It was really conflicting to me actually..i really enjoy AH but seeing as how I fly bombers 99% of the time coming to grips with what i see as a really annoying and unrealistic thing never being changed because of "gameplay concession" started to erode my interest a bit...then when flashpoint popped up it kind of pushed me the extra inch needed to sway my interest away from AH.


However seeing the new planes and such i doubt abscence from the MA will be long term at all.

I WILL be back...bombs fixed or not...the game is just too damn addictive.

But i still really hate the bomb modeling..no wind drag, no drift/dispersion at all... this game pays such close attention to detail then totally ignores something like that..

"gameplay concession"  
well why not giving all the planes 10,000 rounds...

My point is when does it stop being a WW2 sim with A FEW gameplay concessions and starts being a GAME with a few simulation concessions?

as a bomber pilot, to me, that has already happened.

[Fokker]

I remember Hitech once stated he wanted to create the most realistick WW2 air combat simulator possible. With emphasis on flight modelling. Getting the planes to act as close to the real thing as possible.

I would expect this to go for most of the action in AH. So far there are quite a few things to get a bit closer to reality. The bombing accuracy and lack of taking account for wind-drift etc.

I sure would like all units to act and feel as close to the real thing as possible. And that goes for fighter planes, bombers, vehicles and vessels.

I cant see that the game will be less fun. I would expect it to be even more fun and challenging.

Endless furballs get quickly boring. The fun of using planning, tactics and coordinated operations gets never boring. Thats where I find the best times in the game.

Looking at the development of WW2OL, I think that game will become very tempting to jump to, if AH do not develop some of the same emphasis to the strategic and tactical elements of WW2 warfare.

I have been playing WB for many years. The reason for changing to AH was that it included more units. Ground vehicles and the fleet which you can man and direct. Even thoug flying the fighter plane is what i do most of the time, it is a very nice change to do other activeties now and then.

[Dowding]

RangrBob - like SOB, I'd like to see the WBs bombsight in AH - i.e. you have to fly level before dropping, in order for the bombsight to aim. I'd also like to see cratered runway having an effect on field operations - although nothing would stop people from using the grass to take-off.

Other than that, there's nothing particularly 'wrong' with the buffs.

Wobble, without 'gameplay concessions', this would be a crap product. You seem to be of the kind who wants everything 'harder' because that somehow makes this a better 'sim'. Fine -  no icons; one life per day; one hour turn around for reload at a field. I'm sure that would be a lot of fun, and the MA would be down to perhaps 30 people online at peak time.

Sim or not, this is still a game, and it's a little sad you can't see that.

Moreover, HTC has to appeal to a wide audience, while still having a strong element of realism. I think they have achieved that admirably.

BTW, I don't think many people really care why you left, although they'd have a hard time working it out considering the three different versions you have given.