Perk the ORd

[StokesAk]

-1

[FireDrgn]

Sooooo, you are saying new players should never get to use bombers?  That would be the result if your idea were implemented.

No actually i did not say any such thing.  I think AK AK makes the most sence here..   My idea was to perk ord on formations. Why should one player get 3 bombers full of ord to dive bomb then bail....  It is not any were close to being balanced.

You would think it crazy if someone asked for a formation of gvs.......

[SmokinLoon]

I'm not so sure I'm on the "perk the ord loadout" bandwagon just yet.  However, I do think there should be some type of incentive to take a B17 w the 16/250lb bombs vs taking the 6/1k bombs (or any aircraft with lighter ords).  Currently, though I'm not a stat-rat like some I'd be willing to be for every single 250lb or 100kg bomb taken up there are twenty (or more) 1000lb or 500kg bomb taken up.  I'm not sure just how the ord would be perked, if one were to take notice the ENY/perk status is coded at the aircraft level and not below (into the "guts" for the aircraft).  Something tells me it makes for a complicated coding situation if HTC were to dive into that realm.  They are busy with things they deem more important.

I've often thought that the ord system should be coded similar to the fuel (3 fuel depots destroyed = no DT, the 4th = %75 max fuel).  If one ord bunker is taken out, then no 1000lb bombs (or bigger), if 2 ord bunkers are taken out then no 500lbs, if 3 ord bunkers are taken out then no 250lbs bombs.  Regardless if the 4th one is taken out, always allow the 100lb or 50kg bombs to be loaded up.

[Stoney]

...I do think there should be some type of incentive to take a B17 w the 16/250lb bombs vs taking the 6/1k bombs (or any aircraft with lighter ords)...

If you salvo 4 X 250lb bombs with no delay, they'll practically behave as 1 X 1000lb bomb.  I'm not sure this accomplishes anything, other than limiting the overall bomb load to 4,000 pounds.

[waystin2]

I say no to perked ords unless they are special ordnance or gun packages.  Otherwise I suggest you disable the ords near your fight, up a plane to deal with the offenders, or learn how to Wirbel. 

[Karnak]

BnZ,

My K/D ratio vs bombers was always monstrously in my favor compared to my K/D vs fighters, which was still in my favor.  Bombers are easy targets unless you crawl up their tulips or attack them at WWI speeds.

[Ack-Ack]

No blind spot? I've noticed. How can something which you have almost no angle to attack from without facing the chance of being shot by .50 cals be called "easy"? About as "easy" as de-acking a base by yourself and coming through with a whole plane.

While the B-17s and -24s have no blind spots, they do have areas where they can't get full deflection on their guns.  The smart and skilled players know how to exploit this and engage bombers with virtually no worries of being shot down or damaged.  These boards have many threads on the proper tactics to successfully engage bombers, I would suggest you try reading them and you'll see why some of us think they're easy to shoot down but since its a contrary position to yours, you'll just ignore it.


ack-ack

[BnZs]

BnZ,

My K/D ratio vs bombers was always monstrously in my favor compared to my K/D vs fighters, which was still in my favor.  Bombers are easy targets unless you crawl up their tulips or attack them at WWI speeds.

That makes some sense, considering the plane in your avatar.

[BnZs]

While the B-17s and -24s have no blind spots, they do have areas where they can't get full deflection on their guns.  The smart and skilled players know how to exploit

"Exploit" may be the right word here. The angle you *don't* see in gun camera footage is boring in on the buffs in a pure vertical Dive. Basically, you see front-quarter and rear quarter attacks. Now, explain to me AGAIN why questioning why these approachs were apparently *not* a death sentence in RL but is suicidal in AHII is unreasonable?

hese boards have many threads on the proper tactics to successfully engage bombers, I would suggest you try reading them and you'll see why some of us think they're easy to shoot down but since its a contrary position to yours, you'll just ignore it.

I wonder, why has no one answered my question about k/d ratios of interceptors vs. American heavies in the war?

[mechanic]

BnZs i think its because we shoot alot better in a game than is possible in real life. And practice alot more too.

[BnZs]

BnZs i think its because we shoot alot better in a game than is possible in real life. And practice alot more too.

That should make the increase in lethality go both ways though shouldn't it? And I was under the impression the gun performance was pretty closely modeled in this game anyway.

I think the principal difference, though this sounds counter-intuitive , is that one guy focusing the power of 6-9 gun positions can be a lot more lethal than 6-9 separate gunners firing at will.

[Ack-Ack]

I wonder, why has no one answered my question about k/d ratios of interceptors vs. American heavies in the war?

Probably because the real world K/D of interceptor vs. US heavy bombers isn't relevent within the game.   We don't use the same tactics and we don't face bomber streams made up of thousands of bombers or their hundreds of fighter escorts.


ack-ack

[BnZs]

Probably because the real world K/D of interceptor vs. US heavy bombers isn't relevent within the game.   We don't use the same tactics and we don't face bomber streams made up of thousands of bombers or their hundreds of fighter escorts.


ack-ack

Uh, why precisely is it not relevant? Especially when I compare to stats from FSOs where conditions are set up to be as realistic as practical and the relevant aircraft (carefully modeled for accuracy) are crossing swords? C-Hog vs. random B-17 Vs in the MA may make for skewed results, 190A vs. bomber formations in FSO much less so.

The situation from the actual war you are describing is actually much more perilous than what interceptors typically face in-game in either the MA or FSO.  Therefore the exchange rates in-game should actually be better for the interceptors, correct?

[Stoney]

The situation from the actual war you are describing is actually much more perilous than what interceptors typically face in-game in either the MA or FSO.  Therefore the exchange rates in-game should actually be better for the interceptors, correct?

I believe I addressed this in other threads bearing on this topic, but...

There is no way to accurately compare the conditions faced by Allied bomber pilots and Luftwaffe interceptor pilots in real life to what we do in-game.  Yes, we know some of the same lingo, formations, aircraft nuances, etc. but AH2 is a much more lethal (as opposed to dangerous) place, across the board, than real life was during the war.  So again, I'll repeat what I've contended in other threads:  the more aggressive and less patient tactics used by AH2 pilots when intercepting bombers, does not allow for a credible comparison between historical and in-game kill to death ratios.

[LLogann]

Oh man, that is the kind of thing that makes you a SPEIR!!!   

Probably because the real world K/D of interceptor vs. US heavy bombers isn't relevent within the game.   We don't use the same tactics and we don't face bomber streams made up of thousands of bombers or their hundreds of fighter escorts.


ack-ack