Fixing bombers

[TheRapier]

After witnessing weeks of bombers making high gee manuevers and viermots doing dive bombing, I will suggest some changes to address this.

As history has proven, unescorted bombers didn't fair well in running attacks on their own, with only gunners to defend. The current implementation makes them into near Death Stars.

Gunners
1. There is a group of people who have become expert in flying the machines just inside their structural limits. That seems fair. However what is NOT fair is that they have all their guns working. Given that all crewed weapons are manned by gunners that are standing or not strapped with the possible exception of belly turrets (in planes that have them), and these crew members would probably be nursing broken bones and injuries from a split S or roll, these guns should be disabled after high gee manuevers. That could be on a timer with a total limit to numbers of times it can be repeated. What should not happen is that the bomber split esses and emerges with all guns firing.
2. Gunners in real planes would vary in skill and have limited points of view. In the current set up, ALL gunners in all bombers of a flight of 3 are as good as the best gunner with an unlimited F3 view. That means an attacking fighter essentially runs into a buzz saw. Accuracy of guns in various positions can be degraded by a percentage to simulate various skill levels.

Bombs
1. Bombs should not release above a certain dive angle.
2. If this is difficult, bombs should not release above a certain speed.

Bomb and Bail
1. Allowing bomb and bail essentially doubles (or more) the number of sorties for a given pilot, which creates a volume of attack that makes it difficult for defenders to hold a field. If a bail is registered from an undamaged plane, damage of the bombs is halved.

I believe this will result in more equal and realistic fights and to some extent, stem the endemic horde warrior mentality.

[tuton25]

I agree with everything except for the bomb and bail
It should be like a C47 were if you spawn back in the bombs dissapear

[guncrasher]

I agree with everything except for the bomb and bail
It should be like a C47 were if you spawn back in the bombs dissapear

been like that for years.


midway

[kvuo75]

As history has proven, unescorted bombers didn't fair well in running attacks on their own, with only gunners to defend. The current implementation makes them into near Death Stars.

bombers dont fare well in this game either, if the attacker knows what he is doing..

I dare say most people in game either dont know how or are too impatient to set up a proper attack on bombers.

when done right, a set of unescorted bombers is free kills.

[EagleDNY]

I bomb a lot, and I do agree with some of this.   4-engine bombers are not dive bombers, and their bombs should NOT release unless the autopilot is in level flight and the player is in the bombardier position.  Period.  The driving of lancstukas from the pilots position in F3 mode and carpetbombing the gvs is just playstation gamey.  That said, there are plenty of twin engine bombers (JU88s, A20s, B25s, B26s, etc) that did dive bombing and attack missions, and these should be gone thru on a case by case basis to see who should be allowed to bomb from the pilots seat.  (Somebody check me, but I don't think the Betty or the Ki-67 did dive bombing).

That said, the gunnery is just fine as it is.  You have told them what I DO get - let me tell you what I DO NOT get:
1.  I don't get 8 sets of eyes searching the skies for enemy fighters.
2.  I don't get gunners in multiple planes engaging multiple targets at once.
3.  I don't get the ability to have my gunners actually engage anything while I am in the bombsite over the target.

So if you are insane enough to try to crawl up by B-17s tail, I can step on the rudder and turn right & left, but I am not pulling some high-G split-S on you.   I may go ahead and nose up or down to make you have to climb up to catch me, or give you a longer tail chase, but that is about it.  

The "bomb and bail" problem is not limited to bombers - I see plenty of P-51 base porkers that do the same thing.  A quick suicidal bomb run, strafe a couple of strats until the ack gets you, then rinse & repeat.  The disappearing bombs solution you propose would do nothing to stop either one, as I could just wait until bomb impact then then fly into the dirt and crash instead of bailing out.  A lot of coding by HTC for no benefit at all.   The problem is that there is very little benefit to me flying home (in either a bomber or a fighter) unless I need perks, and I usually don't.  If there was some other benefit to actually bringing a ride home that might change (and there have been some other proposals in the forums about that).

$.02

[Lusche]

Gunners
1. There is a group of people who have become expert in flying the machines just inside their structural limits. That seems fair. However what is NOT fair is that they have all their guns working. Given that all crewed weapons are manned by gunners that are standing or not strapped with the possible exception of belly turrets (in planes that have them), and these crew members would probably be nursing broken bones and injuries from a split S or roll, these guns should be disabled after high gee manuevers. That could be on a timer with a total limit to numbers of times it can be repeated. What should not happen is that the bomber split esses and emerges with all guns firing.
2. Gunners in real planes would vary in skill and have limited points of view. In the current set up, ALL gunners in all bombers of a flight of 3 are as good as the best gunner with an unlimited F3 view. That means an attacking fighter essentially runs into a buzz saw. Accuracy of guns in various positions can be degraded by a percentage to simulate various skill levels.

Are you going to apply the same kind of reasoning to fighters too? Or is it really just meant to dumb down bombers under the flag of 'realism' ? 

[tuton25]

Getting rid of the F3 bombing is probably the best solution

[kvuo75]

yes get rid of f3

[TheRapier]

Are you going to apply the same kind of reasoning to fighters too? Or is it really just meant to dumb down bombers under the flag of 'realism' ? 

That is an interesting choice of words and it presupposes that the bombers weren't jacked up first . They haven't always been this way, correct? So from my point of view, its not "dumbing down". It's more about reaching some point of reasonable game balance.

You are also sort of implying that I have an agenda, which I feel is really unworthy of you. I will say that I have thought about this a long time before making the suggestion.

It seems fairly obvious to me that there is an imbalance and an inaccuracy here. Dumbing 4 engined bombers down from aerobatic manuevers is a silly suggestion and I withdraw it. Of course most B17s in WWII pulled split esses as a regular thing so I stand corrected about realism.

We can of course assume the game is perfect the way it is and leave it at that. That seems to be the prevalent response to suggestions. Thank you all for your attention.

Please, play on! I will leave this to the experts who enjoy the game of the BBS.

[Volron]

Getting rid of the F3 bombing is probably the best solution

yes get rid of f3

It's been mentioned before (not word for word); Bob didn't wait for Carl to finish scanning the skies in the Top Turret before he could start scanning in the Bottom Turret.  Get rid of F3 in bombers, give me AI Gunners AND the ability to man all guns if I wish.

[Tilt]

My view would be

If Bomber (re bomber/attack) is chosen......
Then
Formations enabled
Bomb release only from F6 after # secs in F6.

If Attack (re bomber/attack) is chosen
Then
Formations disabled
Bomb/Torpedo release from either F1 or F6 after # secs in F1/F6


Obviously if only the  "Bomber" option (e.g Lanc, B17 etc) is available then the bomber settings are forced on.

This allows the pilot to operate his attack ac ( Boston, B26, B25, Ju88) in attack mode to dive bomb targets and release bombs from the pilots seat whilst being limited to a single plane and (during the bomb release period) having the same view over the nose that a pilot would have enjoyed.

It also disables F3 low level carpet bombing of vehicles and limits the heavy formation "pure bombers" to level bombing. (F6 always returnes the ac to level flight)

[TwinTail]

Then you would either need to drop the definition of bomber from a few A/C or give them the correct varients (if they exsisted) to compensate for a bomb site. (A20, Stuka, SBD, D3A etc)

[Tilt]

Then you would either need to drop the definition of bomber from a few A/C or give them the correct varients (if they exsisted) to compensate for a bomb site. (A20, Stuka, SBD, D3A etc)

It's an attack/bomber choice and you can do it with the plane set choice we have as it is. The biggest change is that torpedo planes have to be designated attack( when torps are loaded) to allow the pilot to release. This also stops the ju88 taking a formation for torpedoes.

[Rino]

It's been mentioned before (not word for word); Bob didn't wait for Carl to finish scanning the skies in the Top Turret before he could start scanning in the Bottom Turret.  Get rid of F3 in bombers, give me AI Gunners AND the ability to man all guns if I wish.

     So you want three chances AND otto autogunners to fill in for missing humans??  Um, no.

[SmokinLoon]

F3 has been afforded to a class of aircraft, it appears that anything in that class of aircraft is automatically gifted F3 views.

Ever wonder why the IL-2 and Stuka Ju87G-2 no longer have F3 capability?  Look at how they are "coaded".  Neither have "bomber" behind their name.

I'm not sure how this monster they call "coad" works, but I'd like to think HTC would be able to limit some functions in certain circumstances.  For instance, if troops can not be let out of an M3 unless the player is in the driver seat, then why can't level bombers not be able to drop ord unless they are either in the pilot or bombardier's seat?