wind layer at 30k

[caldera]

Having encountered 36k B-17s bombing radars recently (I didn't even know B-17s were perked!  ),  it seems to me that avoiding the fight is what some bomber "score enthusiasts" are all about.  Not asking them to hold still and die, but 36k?  Come on.

How about a 5mph wind layer at 30k and above? 

The wind would slowly change direction like a clock, say a full revolution every two hours to keep things fair.
Planes could still fly at absurd heights if they wanted to be Nancy-boys, but it would be harder to bomb with impunity from up there.

[Delirium]

I would like to see wind layers every 5k feet, starting at 15k. Currently, there is no reason to bomb at lower altitude and being able to plink small structures at 25k+ is absurd.

[100Coogn]

36k!  Even as a former Rook, that would be considered quite high.
Maybe anything that high, just disable gravity and let the plane float
into outerspace. 

 Coogan

[Chalenge]

-1 and I mean NO!

We dont have enough players as is and now you want to run off the bomber guys? Not smart.

[Delirium]

Some wind or, better yet, cloud layers would add to the game.

[Lusche]

or, better yet, cloud layers would add to the game.

You are not bombing often from high altitudes I guess ...

[icepac]

How about you just climb up and shoot them down?

Maybe the original poster indeed climbed up 30,000 feet only got killed by b17 gunners?


I don't have any problem killing anything below 90,000 feet and bagged 4 of my 5 b29s this tour at over 36,000 feet.


The sim already has EZ mode spiffs with remote spawns (yet some people still can't be bothered to tank that one mile to an enemy base).

[BigKev03]

Well historically the 17's max alt was around 36k.  So is it wrong for some to take it to that alt?  However, I do think that if there was a way to incorporate a way of limiting going above a planes max ceiling level then I am for it.  I mean the performance of the plane at or near its max ceiling had to be affected in some way.  Dont know if it can be done but I am sure if it could HTC would fix it.  However, dont blame someone for taking the time to fly that high.  Remember the golden saying "altitude is safety".

BigKev

[Eric19]

Well historically the 17's max alt was around 36k.  So is it wrong for some to take it to that alt?  However, I do think that if there was a way to incorporate a way of limiting going above a planes max ceiling level then I am for it.  I mean the performance of the plane at or near its max ceiling had to be affected in some way.  Dont know if it can be done but I am sure if it could HTC would fix it.  However, dont blame someone for taking the time to fly that high.  Remember the golden saying "altitude is safety".

BigKev

big kev we already have this implemented into the game ever takin a Lancaster up to its service ceilling?????that would be about 28k after 28k it has an almost level climbrate at about 50ft/min I know this cause one of my squaddies a while back when we were on a bomber run in 17s at 30k he was in a Lanc and could not climb past 29k so the performance for these bombers and fighters seem to be right on the money now granted a lanc without bombs will climb to about 32k and quit is still quiet in impersive I think and also when your in the pony D if you've ever watched the manifold pressure it will go down at about 12k I think it is then it will go back up to full at like 17k or something and the samething at 25k and higher

[Chalenge]

Some wind or, better yet, cloud layers would add to the game.

The bright cloud layer we have now is quite ridiculous and keeps most bombers below 15k already. The clouds look great from the ground (some say so anyway) but add another layer of difficulty in seeing lower cons and attacking bombers that have chosen to fly just below them.

Personally I would prefer the big puffy clouds like RoF has or none at all.

[Delirium]

The bright cloud layer we have now is quite ridiculous and keeps most bombers below 15k already. The clouds look great from the ground (some say so anyway) but add another layer of difficulty in seeing lower cons and attacking bombers that have chosen to fly just below them.

Good!

Do you see a problem with this?

[SmokinLoon]

I wish HTC would implement wind at a constant speed from 5 to 15 mph and have the direction rotate around the map just as they do with the sun.  Every 15 mins have it change in direction by 45°.

Why not?  It would make bombing less accurate and more like it was in WWII, meaning a true carpet bomb would be needed for the high altitude bombing runs. 

[Chalenge]

Good!

Do you see a problem with this?

Yes and its an obvious problem if you ever spent time attacking bombers at that altitude you might understand what that is.

I understand that the cloud layer is realistic and that thin layers of cloud at that altitude occur frequently. I just wish they would be distributed a little more randomly and act more like clouds (move).

Asking for wind layers though is attempting to change the game to force people to interact more directly with a single style of play. I am against that just like I am against limiting fuel and for the same reasons.

[Delirium]

Asking for wind layers though is attempting to change the game to force people to interact more directly with a single style of play.

No, wind and cloud layers make accuracy decrease the higher you decide to fly. Sure, the bombers can still fly at 35k but they may not be able to pickle two bombs per hanger or they might opt for saturation bombing (towns and cities).

[caldera]

Asking for wind layers though is attempting to change the game to force people to interact more directly with a single style of play.

More like forcing them to interact at all, instead of avoiding it.  How many different styles of play could they possibly be interacting with at 36k?