We're missing the point - bombers dont need to be perked

[BaldEagl]

I 'm going to try to remember what I've read here and respond in a way to some of it.

I haven't seen the B-29 yet but I think it might be worth comparing it to the other perk bombers in the game.  I've only had a chance to fly the level bombing Mossie once and thought it was a nice addition and worth the perk price but I spent over a year flying the AR-234 in formation as my exclusive bomber ride.

With the 234 I'd always bomb from 16,500 feet at full speed (about 415 mph).  I was accurate from that alt on any target and with the old strat system I could take out well over half of a city strat with 3x500 kg bombs per plane.  Under the old scoring system (not the name in lights system) that was about 450-500,000 points per sortie.  I haven't been flying bombers in about a year now so I don't know what the conversion rates are.

A typical mission was 45 minutes and over a year to year and a half and hundreds of missions I lost one, maybe two 234's to enemy fighters; usually 262's and I killed a couple of them myself.  Mostly I waved and said bye-bye as I rtb'd at around 550 mph.

Turning a formation of 234's at 415 mph was never a problem.  Cut throttle after the drop, start a slow turn and, as speed bled off, complete the turn and throttle back up.  If I needed a second pass I'd lift the nose while completing the turn then drop it again to get speed, calibrate and drop.  Not a problem.

And all of this for a perk price of 65-70 perks per plane or about 200/sortie.  With the load-out the 29 carries it makes me wonder if it's not perked too low?  If not it must have some serious flaws.

[Tupac]

I landed 17k damage, now I'm gonna fly a lanc and try to do the same thing.

[Lusche]

With the load-out the 29 carries it makes me wonder if it's not perked too low?  If not it must have some serious flaws.

I wouldn't call it flaws - Some traits & circumstances do limit the efficiency / impact on game compared to those one may have expected. It's vulnerability to fire and the perk price combined have the effect that most B-29 will climb pretty high. This takes a lot of time. The sheer amount of bombs is often overkill for all tactical purposes, just doubling the load isn't exactly doubling the impact on a battle (see Lancs vs B-17s). If you take the 40x1000 options, you can easily run out of fuel before you run out of bombs.

[Lusche]

I landed 17k damage, now I'm gonna fly a lanc and try to do the same thing.

Almost any bomber in game can land way more than that... most without even trying hard. You can land 24K in a Ki-67, a B-17 is good for 33k or 50k, depending on loadout & mission length

[Tupac]

It was a single plane

[dirtdart]

Well now I have to try it for myself.  Even if you haven't said anything unbelievable, I can't just take your word for it that the B-29 is so incompetent that it doesn't deserve perking.  And since I'm not about to install the game again, I guess this argument's done.  I didn't miss your point, I disagree with it.  The only way I could agree would be if the fires aren't a bug.

Fair enough <S>.  I don't think the bomber is incompetent.  I just don't think that it's overall impact will change the game dynamic sufficiently to merit it's current cost. 

[5PointOh]

I actually think many are missing something.  AH does not have engine fires.  It has fuel fires.  That has been no indication from HTC in the update notes that the modeling of AH has changed and that the engines in planes can now catch fire.

So I'll wait for the patches and see if HTC decideds that there is an issue or not.  If they say there is no issue with the hardness of the self sealing fuel tank areas, then so be it.  After than the 29 may become a more usable option for the MA.

[dirtdart]

I actually think many are missing something.  AH does not have engine fires.  It has fuel fires.  That has been no indication from HTC in the update notes that the modeling of AH has changed and that the engines in planes can now catch fire.

So I'll wait for the patches and see if HTC decideds that there is an issue or not.  If they say there is no issue with the hardness of the self sealing fuel tank areas, then so be it.  After than the 29 may become a more usable option for the MA.

I sense anecdotal evidence oozing from the peanut gallery.  The P-61 using all of it's ammo to shoot down a B29 should be good.  Especially considering by the time those planes got back to their bases of origin they had very little fuel left.   

[Vinkman]

I know this sounds inflamitory but hear me out.....

Bombers don't create the damage; bombs do.  Just the fact you can take 4 - 4,000lbs cookies in a 29, 8 - 2,000 and bunches of  1,000lbs and 40 500lbs means its the ord loadout is where the value is at.  This is a mamouth amount of ord for for one plane and its formations. 

Don't get me wrong - I absolutely love flying the B-29 and plan to fly it more.   That being said, HiTech spent much time making other bombers for all of us and we hardly see other bombers other than 24's, 17's, lancs and maybe the occational KI-67.  Why don't we take smaller bombers?  Economy of scale with loadouts, plain and simple.

Bomb Loadouts need to be perked, especially above 500lbs.  This would smooth out the use of bombers and ordance pairity in the game and recognize the destructive power of bombs above 500lbs.  Especially since HITECH made calibration a lot easier since I started this game. 

I know this is an entirely new way of looking at things but I think this is the right way to go.

I like this idea. 

[SEraider]

How would this work, exactly?

Right now, the perk cost of a plane is not 'spent' if one lands successfully.

How would the perked ord be landed successfully? Would the perk cost of the ord load be recovered if the sortie ends on the runway?

That is a very good question that I am still think about.  There has to be an equitable trade-off.  Maybe a 2-tiered system?  Cost A if landed successfully or B if lost?  Or just cost A when used.

Think of it as use lesser bombers with lesser load-outs to save up.  Then buy it on heaver bombers.

Bombing in this game compared to what it was is pretty easy now and you can earn perks pretty quick now.

[Vinkman]

NOTE:  I have yet to figure out how to do tables. THey look write during the edit, then don't align when posted. hopefully you can follow until I get it sorted. Thanks 



How about a Plane-perk number: because planes are faster, tougher, more heavily armed than one another, this number would characterizes those attributes with higher being better.

And...
a Bomb-perk number which is scaled with Bomb load.

See the following tables…….

Plane perk number

Plane           Plane-perk   
A-20       0   
B-17      1   
B-24      2   
Lancaster   2   
Ki-67      0   
B-29      4

Bomb Perk number
   
Bomb Load   Bomb-perk   
0      0   
1000      0   
2000      0   
4000      1   
6000      1   
8000      1   
10000      2   
12000      2   
14000      2   
16000      4   
18000      4   
20000      4      


The Perks required for each incremental bomb load are the product of the two numbers……

   Bomb perks per incremental Bomb Load                           
Plane    0   1000   2000   4000   6000   8000   10000   12000   14000   16000   18000   20000
A-20   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0
B-17   0   0   0   1   1   1   2   2   2   4   4   4
B-24   0   0   0   2   2   2   4   4   4   8   8   8
Lanc   0   0   0   2   2   2   4   4   4   8   8   8
Ki-67   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0
B-29   0   0   0   4   4   4   8   8   8   16   16   16


The total perks per Bomb load by plane are the sum of the values across the rows as the load increases and are shown in the next table…..

   Total Perk Points per Bomb Load by Plane                                    
Plane    0   1000   2000   4000   6000   8000   10000   12000   14000   16000   18000   20000   
A-20   0   0   0   0                           
B-17   0   0   0   1   2                        
B-24   0   0   0   2   4   6                     
Lanc   0   0   0   2   4   6   10   14   18         
Ki-67   0   0   0                              
B-29   0   0   0   4   8   12   20   28   36   52   68   84


I picked values for bomb-perk and plane-perks to illustrate the point of how required perks could vary with both plane type and bomb load. I'm not recommending these exact values, this is just a starting point to discuss the method.

If you land the plane successfully you get all of your perks back. If you don't you lose them, just like today.    

[moot]

Vink,

Lay out all your table items.  Take each item and put it in TD /TD tags, spaces removed inside those tags.  Take each row and put it in TR /TR tags.  Take the whole table and put it in TABLE /TABLE tags.
Set the column positions with the first line in a table, by adding spaces after each item inside the td tags, to push each following column to the right.  Every row should automatically show its items correctly lined up in their columns.

[Vinkman]

Vink,

Lay out all your table items.  Take each item and put it in TD /TD tags, spaces removed inside those tags.  Take each row and put it in TR /TR tags.  Take the whole table and put it in TABLE /TABLE tags.
Set the column positions with the first line in a table, by adding spaces after each item inside the td tags, to push each following column to the right.  Every row should automatically show its items correctly lined up in their columns.

Thanks Moot. This is a bit better.

How about a Plane-perk number: because planes are faster, tougher, more heavily armed than one another, this number would characterizes those attributes with higher being better.

And...
a Bomb-perk number, which is scaled with Bomb load.

See the following tables…….

Plane perk number

Plane	Plane-perk
A-20	0
B-17	1
B-24	2
Lancaster	2
Ki-67	0
B-29	4

Bomb Perk number
   

Bomb Load	Bomb-perk
0	0
1000	0
2000	0
4000	1
6000	1
8000	1
10000	2
12000	2
14000	2
16000	4
18000	4
20000	4

   

The total perks per Bomb load by plane are the sum of the values across the rows as the load increases and are shown in the next table…..

   
                                    
Total Perk Points per Bomb Load by Plane                                    

Plane	0	1000	2000	4000	6000	8000	10000	12000	14000	16000	18000	20000
A-20	0	0	0	0
B-17	0	0	0	1	2
B-24	0	0	0	2	4	6
Lancaster	0	0	0	2	4	6	10	14	18
Ki-67	0	0	0
B-29	0	0	0	4	8	12	20	28	36	52	68	84

I picked values for bomb-perk and plane perks to illustrate the point of how required perks could vary with both plane type and bomb load.

If you land the plan successfully you get all of your perks back. If you don't you lose them, just like today.    

[SEraider]

Thanks Moot. This is a bit better.

How about a Plane-perk number: because planes are faster, tougher, more heavily armed than one another, this number would characterizes those attributes with higher being better.

And...
a Bomb-perk number, which is scaled with Bomb load.

See the following tables…….
   

That is a pretty reasonable start for this idea.  I wonder if HTC would even consider this or something similar.

[SEseph]

That is a pretty reasonable start for this idea.  I wonder if HTC would even consider this or something similar.

I don't think it would be all rosey like you think with this. You'd also be forced to perk attack load outs. Then we'd move onto the fact noobs couldn't fly the 'super bombers' because they don't have the perks. More over, if we're perking planes like such, why not add the same idea to Fighters?

Why not perk the formations? As it works now... You'd pay about 100 for a B29, and 300 for 3. This means loosing a single drone is 100 perks, the guy flying his Lancs loses Nothing atm for his formation. The same works with the Mossie's. Pay per plane, the formation costs more. The code is already there in theory.