Level Bombing

[Butcher]

I play another game called War in the Pacific Admirals Edition, one of the major factories in the game is level bombing which some of the best squadrons with high experience get around 9-13% accuracy at 15-22,000ft.

Normally you need to build up experience to accurately bomb or least have a better chance to hit something, norton bomb sight for example is a factor as well - however is level bombing far to easy in Aces high?

I've been plastering Mandalay in Burma with Wellington bombers, and so far the accuracy rating for 18,000ft with 14 squadrons have been around 4-8%, most of the time I don't hit anything major except for a plane here or supply dump there.
 

[Lusche]

however is level bombing far to easy in Aces high?

In comparison to the "real thing"?

Yes, by several magnitudes.

[Butcher]

In comparison to the "real thing"?

Yes, by several magnitudes.

What I am getting at, I know we need a balance of "arcade" vs realism to keep newer players in the game, however I think level bombing is far to arcade - one Lancaster can shut down a decent size base on its own.

Altitude and everything else is a factor of course, but why made it so easy when realistically it was not?

[Lusche]

One thing coming to my mind immediately:

If HTC would make level bombing 'realistically' difficult... what would happen? Yup, even more unstoppable P-51 divebomber raids.

[tmetal]

I think if level bombing is made less accurate in AH more drones would need to be added to a single player's formation.  In your first post you stated you where using 14 squadrons and achieving 4-8% accuracy in a different game; can you imagine consistently getting that kind of accuracy with only 3 planes? level bombers would quickly become the biggest hangar queens in the game (and some of them already spend most of their time in the hangar).  I agree that level bombing accuracy in AH is very easy currently, but with only 3 planes to a formation I don't think is causes enough of a problem enough of the time to warrent a change.

[W7LPNRICK]

also, if people are unsuccessful at something, they stop trying fairly quick. Bombing is something a newb on here can do with reasonably little skill/experience even @15K. We HAVE TO have enough early success to keep people coming back.

[lyric1]

also, if people are unsuccessful at something, they stop trying fairly quick. Bombing is something a newb on here can do with reasonably little skill/experience even @15K. We HAVE TO have enough early success to keep people coming back.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ That sums it up right there. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Why would some one up for a long haul mission of a possible couple of hours & get little for it.

Bombers in game would be rare indeed in AHII if the hit rate was as realistic as WWII.

[Butcher]

good points all around, i don't look to change anything just bring up a discussion. A major point said is correct there is not plane with three drones, I'm flying with 50-75 four engines just to shut down a small AF

[Reaper90]

Easy fix: reduce bombing accuracy to historical levels, but give each pilot the option for up to 11 drones when he lifts.... four 3-ship formations in a diamond. 

Reasonable damage for a bomber jock, awsome mass bomber formations, and WHOA NELLY lots of bombers for the fighter guys to kill!

Short of that, bomber guys, remember, accuracy is easy when the buffs are on the deck! Ya can't miss! 

[SmokinLoon]

I'm curious if HTC can adjust a setting somewhere to incorporate a natural "spread" in falling bombs.  In the MA's in AH, there is no wind, we have auto pilot, we have a very easy  method of dialing in the bombardier sight, etc.  I'm not vouching making the method of bombing harder, I'm vouching for increasing the natural spread of the falling bombs so instead of being able to drop 3/1k bombs on a hanger from 20k alt with ease, the new standard would force people to drop 4/1k bombs because of the larger variables involved.

Bombing is too easy in AH, IMO.     

[pembquist]

I don't think the bombing is too easy given the state of game play.  I think it would be nice if there was a minimum bomb level though, make the bombs need to be dropped from a minimum of 5000 feet agl or something.  The lankstuka and low level carpet suicide bombing are just dumb.

[Karnak]

For any such change to work, gameplay wise, free bombs would have to be entirely removed from fighters, even 250lbers, the ability to damage structures with aircraft caliber guns removed or massively reduced and targets rebalanced so that worthwhile damage can be obtained with only a ~5% hit rate.

The bombs could remain on fighters, but you'd probably be looking at a minimum cost of something like 10 perks per 250lber, 20 per 500lber and 40 per 1000lber.  Much lower than that and fighter dropped bombs would be too dominant and effective given the now softer target requirements to make a 5% hit rate mean something.

GVs would become much more dominant due to the sudden lack of bombs on fighters.

[Lusche]

I have to admit with the growing impact of unstoppable P-51 raids on CVs and bases, I'm really starting to wish for a perked ords system 

[Karnak]

I have to admit with the growing impact of unstoppable P-51 raids on CVs and bases, I'm really starting to wish for a perked ords system 

I have long advocated for at least the 1000lber/500kg class bombs on fighters to be perked.  Perhaps the 500lber/250kg class bombs as well.  But right now that could be for a very light cost, say 4 perks for a 1000lber loadout and 2 perks for a 500lber loadout.  If bombers were changed to have historical accuracy levels those perk costs would not be nearly enough and you'd need the 250lber/100kg class perked as well.

[titanic3]

Yaaaayyy, no more porking and bomb/auger!!!

+1!

Less bombing, more dogfight!