Observations from a milkrunning, score orientated, bombdweeb

[Tilt]

It seems to me that its far to easy to "game" the bombing score system. Whilst many (I am sure ) are not at all interested in score and even less interested in bombing score I do think it worthy of some analysis.

 Effectively to become rated #1 bomb**** all you have to do is launch a B29  (Formations @ 20 x 500lbs or singles at 8 x 2000lbs) 3 or 4 times, carefully avoid the Zoney's and Denniss's (large maps required) and make a couple of Goon captures.

Job done. No real participation in the "conflict" (except maybe for the captures) just take the time to climb to ridiculous altitudes, think way ahead re enemy sector counters and utilise the mega accurate bombing model still in place at 35K and hit the main town building cluster on a milk run that ensures you virgin towns.

Whilst many may loath the inclusion of bombers in the game I would welcome a score system and gamplay model that encouraged a greater interface between bombers and the core conflict.

My preferences would be.

1) Greater bomb drift with altitude. Taking B29s to 30-35k should IMO incurr an accuracy penalty. It would be easy in Arena Setup to add some "jet streams" (wind) above 30K but I am not sure even this would bring about the desired effect. It does seem to me that level bombing accuracy is very much the same (or at least very little affected) regardless of altitude. I should not be able to repeatedly get accuracies of 20-30 metres from 35K (it should be more like 200 -300metres if not 400 -600metres).  IMO as altitudes increase so carpet bombing should be more the only method of hitting even large targets. This would affect hit % and damage ratings.

2) Reduce the score level for town buildings and radically increase the score rating for strat. I think town buildings score should still be higher than all other "targets" but the real prize target for big heavy bombers should be strat buildings. Interceptors would then have a much better idea of the ultimate target and given this knowledge would be more likley to invest time on the intercept. Further it may bring strat attrition back into the game a bit more.

3) Increase the reward for fighters attacking bombers, either thru more perks or more score for bomber interception. Equally increase and bring into the bomber score system the categories related to kills on enemy  (airborne) aircraft via gunnery.

4) Move capture points somewhere else. I know with the present score system goon capture becomes some sort of "leveller" forcing the milk runner into more dangerous pursuits. However the real "gamey" milk runner, ably assisted by his squad, need only bide his time and secure a couple of captures to bring his score to an unassailable figure. Never really risking his score ratios as would those who suffer goon loss time after time supporting their fellows in the day to day land grab of the arena. I think we now have enough ride types re goons, m3's , jeeps, storches, etc to add a new classification relating to transport (troop and material) , observation and logistic support.

Leave bombing for bombers.............. if only we can pull them a little more integrally into the game play.

[earl1937]

It seems to me that its far to easy to "game" the bombing score system. Whilst many (I am sure ) are not at all interested in score and even less interested in bombing score I do think it worthy of some analysis.

 Effectively to become rated #1 bomb**** all you have to do is launch a B29  (Formations @ 20 x 500lbs or singles at 8 x 2000lbs) 3 or 4 times, carefully avoid the Zoney's and Denniss's (large maps required) and make a couple of Goon captures.

Job done. No real participation in the "conflict" (except maybe for the captures) just take the time to climb to ridiculous altitudes, think way ahead re enemy sector counters and utilise the mega accurate bombing model still in place at 35K and hit the main town building cluster on a milk run that ensures you virgin towns.

Whilst many may loath the inclusion of bombers in the game I would welcome a score system and gamplay model that encouraged a greater interface between bombers and the core conflict.

My preferences would be.

1) Greater bomb drift with altitude. Taking B29s to 30-35k should IMO incurr an accuracy penalty. It would be easy in Arena Setup to add some "jet streams" (wind) above 30K but I am not sure even this would bring about the desired effect. It does seem to me that level bombing accuracy is very much the same (or at least very little affected) regardless of altitude. I should not be able to repeatedly get accuracies of 20-30 metres from 35K (it should be more like 200 -300metres if not 400 -600metres).  IMO as altitudes increase so carpet bombing should be more the only method of hitting even large targets. This would affect hit % and damage ratings.

2) Reduce the score level for town buildings and radically increase the score rating for strat. I think town buildings score should still be higher than all other "targets" but the real prize target for big heavy bombers should be strat buildings. Interceptors would then have a much better idea of the ultimate target and given this knowledge would be more likley to invest time on the intercept. Further it may bring strat attrition back into the game a bit more.

3) Increase the reward for fighters attacking bombers, either thru more perks or more score for bomber interception. Equally increase and bring into the bomber score system the categories related to kills on enemy  (airborne) aircraft via gunnery.

4) Move capture points somewhere else. I know with the present score system goon capture becomes some sort of "leveller" forcing the milk runner into more dangerous pursuits. However the real "gamey" milk runner, ably assisted by his squad, need only bide his time and secure a couple of captures to bring his score to an unassailable figure. Never really risking his score ratios as would those who suffer goon loss time after time supporting their fellows in the day to day land grab of the arena. I think we now have enough ride types re goons, m3's , jeeps, storches, etc to add a new classification relating to transport (troop and material) , observation and logistic support.

Leave bombing for bombers.............. if only we can pull them a little more integrally into the game play.

I agree about the score nuts, I never look at mine. I would like to see AH have total damage points winner for each of the bomber models in this game. That would promote people flying different models. One of the other ways to stop all this high altitude stuff, which by the way, was a very inaccurate way of hitting targets in the real world, is to have different layers of clouds, with a density of .6 or 8 thickness, then the bomber pilot would have to do some planning to hit his or her target. Another point about the bombers, AH should allow 1 gunner in each drone, but only be able to fire from the position they occupy, but still be able to move to other gun positions in that drone, and should not be able to fire all the guns in the formation. This would bring the waist guns into play more than they are now. Just a thought! That way, when the lead bomber pilot is in his bomb sight, he would not be defenseless as he is now. I see more and more, fighters waiting until the bombers are over their target before they attack. That would balance up the bombers and fighters when it comes to bombing!

[Karnak]

You left off, re-balancing the score reward for bombing town centers compared to the reward for bombing more dangerous, more valuable targets such as cities, factories and the HQ.  Right now it is vastly more efficient and safer to bomb a series of town centers in the backfield, an act that is vastly more effective for earning bomber score and perks, yet is useless in terms of assisting your country.

[dirtdart]

yet is useless in terms of assisting your country.

On country. "wow man XXX is ranked #3 WTGs abound" <---- never happens
"OK, bring in the goon"  "Ahhh the town is popping!!"
"Goon useless"
#3 guy laughs all the way to the score bank. 

I have made 50K damage points on a single lanc run hitting town centers.  I agree with Tilt completely.  Towns should be near worthless to a "Bomber Pilot".  Hangers, Ordnance Bunkers, Factories, should be the most valuable targets.  Bombers may have been used to bomb civilians a la guernica et al, however it sure would be nice to see a more enticing strategic use for them.   

[flatiron1]

make aerial kills a component of bomber score.

[Slate]

   I miss the wind. 

[Karnak]

make aerial kills a component of bomber score.

Not needed, just make the primary targets the strategic targets.  I am not saying town centers should be worthless, but they should be notably secondary as they are easy and useless to counterproductive depending on the circumstances.

[uptown]

I always thought that hitting hangers should be worth more points then town buildings. For the simple reason you have to first of all know how to locate it and 2nd, it's a more valued target IMO.

Awarding more points for killing town in jabo runs should be worth more, as there's more risk involved, then level bombing from 8K and above.
Also I wouldn't mind seeing perk costs on all formations, not just the perked aircraft. Another idea would be to award points by drop alt. Lower the drop = more risk = worth more points, and vice versa.

[SilverZ06]

just get rid of the score system all together.  with no scores to worry about people might actually fight and not care if they get shot down.

[Lusche]

I once made the following proposal:

Only strategic targets do count for bomber score. Taking down structures at/near bases is tactcial combat and counts under attack. That's nothing revolutionary, as we have a very similar thing already with fighter vs attack mode. You still can kill everything, but it just may not count for your score, just like deacking or killing M3's in fighters.
Note that medium bombers would get a boost in usefulness, as most of them do have an attack rating (B-26 should really get it too)

[Lusche]

just get rid of the score system all together.  with no scores to worry about people might actually fight and not care if they get shot down.

With no scores you will simply lose a lot of players.

[Slash27]

make aerial kills a component of bomber score.

Never understood why they weren't.

[tmetal]

An idea I have had rattling around in my head for a few weeks would be to increase the perks or score earned for killing bombers over a set altitude. For (hypothetical) example: bombers killed under 28,000ft earn 100% of the current perks/score awarded to the attacker, bombers killed over 28,000ft earn 150% of the current perks/score awarded to the attacker.

Oh and +1000 for making the strat targets more worth while targets in any way possible.

[Rob52240]

This is exactly why I pay no attention to score.

[icepac]

Leave the accuracy but take away the ridiculous reward for this behavior.

As suggested above, make the true strategic targets be the ones that earn points and let destroying generic structures pay out far less than they currently do.

Having the city's center or the strats themselves worth many more points........and the damage actually having an effect on the enemy's ability to do make war.