Observations from a milkrunning, score orientated, bombdweeb

[DarkHawk]

I would love to see wind added into the game. makes bombing more difficult and more rewarding when you hit your target.

DHawk

[RedBull1]

1) 
2) 
3) eeeh I think 3 kills can be reward enough, plus a perk or two 
4) 

All in all I like the idea personally Tilt! 

 

[AKP]

hangars are worth more than town buildings now.  The issue is that 3 X 1000 lb bombs dropped on a hangar... kills one hangar.  Ok,,, maybe a nearby gun if you are lucky.  3 x 1000 lb bombs dropped on town center gives you half a page or more of destroyed buildings.

And.... bombing score points appear to be in some way tied to the amount of damage it takes to destroy the object.  If that is the case, by making town buildings worth less, you would be making them easier to destroy, and therefore towns easier to take.

On the flip side... if you make strats and hangars worth more... it would (if what I am assuming is true) make them HARDER to destroy.

I agree with the idea of making strategic and tactical targets worth more... Im just not sure it can be done as easily as some think.

[Chalenge]

Oh come on! You want the rules changed so the bombers become hangar queens is what you really mean. We already dont see enough bombers and now you want even less. You WILL see less if you force them lower because they will be easy prey.

My weekly laugh is watching SHawk fly around with his escort parked very neatly on his six. Dont take that away!   

[Lusche]

I agree with the idea of making strategic and tactical targets worth more... Im just not sure it can be done as easily as some think.

That depends a lot on the approach taken. Right now i see three different ones

1) Meddling with the worth in score points.
Seems to be difficult for the very reasons you just pointed out. HTC would probably change the whole way score points are computed in detail. (one way could be limting the score points a single bomb could gain).  And if hangars are getting worth way more than towns in terms of score... well, we know what then will happen

2) Making strat having a bigger impact on gameplay.
Now this is way more difficult than many players think. It's terribly easy to totally wreck gameplay balance with this, especially when taking into account that most players do not actually care for these things unless there is some very drastic effect tied to it. Even now just a little more, but coordinated effort could have a big impact on gameplay, but the ignorance about this is quite astounding

3) Make only strategic targets count for score in "bomber mode".
I still think this is quite a simple and logic change, but then it had been my own idea, so I might be biased 

[Lusche]

Oh come on! You want the rules changed so the bombers become hangar queens is what you really mean. We already dont see enough bombers and now you want even less.

Who in this thread want's to get them used less or at lower altitudes?

[AKP]

Oh come on! You want the rules changed so the bombers become hangar queens is what you really mean.

Not me... I enjoy a good bit of bombdweebery quite often.  Make the strats worth my time and I will hit those instead.  I dont use 29's though

[Citabria]

bombers will bomb the most concentrated object per sqare foot target if they are going for score.

the only mistake htc made was how they divided up the objects in the city complex.

make them more concentrated than the most concentrated parts of town and the buffs will flock there.

its really that simple.

humber of kills in a fighter or number of buildings blown up with one bomb is all the score dweeb wants.

[Zoney]

.

 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.

You did a very nice job defending not too long ago mate <S>.

[Citabria]

yeah I don't think the city strats are attractive targets. I just upped a b29 formation with big bombs for giggles and bombed a city... the building blocks are so large that it is worth nothing to bomb if you want to light up the text bar. no splash damage from 4k bombs.. zzzzzz... boring. bombing is already boring as it is. the only thought I had after that waste of time is it is even less satisfying than plinking the centers of towns which is also boring.

you can do tons more damage to towns and get more perks for less time and effort. it is almost as irrelevant as plinking a strat complex.

strat complex is irrelevant in MA gameplay for most bomber dweebs and war winners ignore it.

[Greebo]

Judging by the way many people fly in the MA, score must matter to them. Why else would so many people go to such lengths to avoid any sort of risk of dying when the object of the exercise should be to have fun? So playing with the scoring system should be a good way to influence the way the MA is played. From my POV I'd like to see more combat per hour in the MA and for the scoring system adjusted for to that end.

The fighter score should incorporate a mechanism to take into account the relative numbers of friendly and enemy players in the area. So every time you score a kill your FE tots up the number of red and green icons and applies an adjustment based on those numbers. So lots of red and few green icons visible at the time of the kill gives a better score for that kill and vice versa. This hurts those players who always fly in a horde, but encourages other players to go and bust up that horde. This means more combat for everyone.

Making the city worth bombing scorewise would be a good idea. I would like to see bombers forced down from the ridiculous alts many bomb from by introducing a wind layer at say 15K to make high alt bombing less accurate.

I'd also suggest adding a 10 second delay for GVers who bail out of their vehicles to avoid a death. So after hitting the exit button, a "crew exiting the vehicle, wait 10 secs" message appears and for  ten seconds the GV sits there helpless before it disappears to other players. This makes sitting on the concrete a much more risky proposition.

Also make a spawning GV not appear to other players until it either moves or moves its turret. That gives it the option of exiting a camped spawn without being seen. If spawn camping stops working as a way to get easy kills then the fight would move away from the spawns.

[M1A1]

Man there is no satisfying anyone around here. The current system is in place because folks complained about the old zone strat system. Well this is what you get, you all complained this into to being. If you want bombers to bomb worthwhile and meaningful targets there has to worthwhile and meaningful targets in the game! Reintroduce the old zone system with factories and cities for each zone and make them the important strats. Watch said bombers go for those. This is yet another fine example that there is never any pleasing this community and also of be careful what you ask for.
 If I offend anyone I am sorry but you all need to shut yer mouths and spend way less time on here squeaking and more time flying. Stop being a bunch of squeaky old women. Sorry for the vent but man you guys could ruin the best wet dream around in the forums..

[HawkerMKII]

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.

If your going to give a penaly to the bombers then the fighter need one also.....like O2..if you run out you better hit the deck

[Lusche]

yeah I don't think the city strats are attractive targets. I just upped a b29 formation with big bombs for giggles and bombed a city... the building blocks are so large that it is worth nothing to bomb if you want to light up the text bar. no splash damage from 4k bombs.. zzzzzz... boring.

Just as a side note... 4k bombs are the wrong loadout for that specific target in question. The City is actually the only target that requires a loadout with smaller bomb sizes. the 250lb loadout in the B-29 is the most efficient for this job. That way a single player can kill more than half of the city in a single sortie and indeed "fill up his text buffer".
Of course, compared to milking town centers this will "wreck" his bombing hit%

[Citabria]

but the fun of the B-29 is the 4k N00K! bombs. well in as much fun as bombing can be. pickling them on the center of a town and watching everything go poof and the text buffer go berserk... well thats as close to entertaining as flying for hours afk gets.