More ordnance updates....

[Tank-Ace]

We got different types of bombs, and thats a fantastic start. But we still need to rework how ordnance is selected, and add some more options for a couple of planes to make it great.

1) Keep current arrangment, save for the few odd-balls such as the bombs on the 110 being selected along with the gun package, or the F6F's DT and bombs being on the same selection column. Two options to work with. A) we could have a pop-up inform you when you have slected two incompatible load-out options (say, you try to select DT and bombs for the Hellcat, which interfere with eachother). You hit okay, and pick which one you want. Or B), we could have the incompatable ordnance options be greyed-out, based on what you have currently selected.

Biggest advantage to the second option, is that its pretty strait foreward, and would work better with gun-bomb packages, like on the 110 or the 410.



2) Add more options to the existing planes. The 190F is particularly lacking compared to what it could carry in real life. Give it the 8x 50kg bombs, the 1000kg centerline bomb, 2x 250kg wing bombs, and a single torpedo. The P-38 could carry 4x 1000lb bombs, or 2 2000lb bombs as well, IIRC. F4U-1D should also recieve the 2000lb bomb option. The 190A-5 had an option for wing drop-tanks at the expense of the 2 extra MG FF 20mm's. Considering the 190's rather limited range, it would be a particularly usefull addition, allowing it to carry wing DT's and the centerline bomb.

3) depending on what ordnance options are added, introduce perked ordnance. 4x 1000lb bombs on a P-38 could be a bit unbalancing if left unrestricted, for example. Similar issues might be encountered with the 1000kg bomb on the 190. Would be the most survivable German aircraft carrying more than around 500kg (1000lbs) of ordnance.

[Ack-Ack]

The P-38 could carry 4x 1000lb bombs, or 2 2000lb bombs as well, IIRC.

P-38s couldn't carry 4x 1,000 pounders.


ack-ack

[Tank-Ace]

P-38s couldn't carry 4x 1,000 pounders.

ack-ack

Hmmm... Was that something else? Its possible I'm just imagining that one, but I don't think so.

[Ack-Ack]

Hmmm... Was that something else? Its possible I'm just imagining that one, but I don't think so.

Whether or not you don't think so, you're wrong.  Show one picture or mission AAR that shows a P-38 (any variant) taking off with 4x 1,000 pounders on an operational combat mission.  If they carried 4,000 pounds worth of bombs it would be 2x 2,000 pounders, not 4x single 1,000 pounders.

ack-ack

[Karnak]

Somebody did post a very nice photo of a field modded P-38 carrying six 500lb bombs.

[Ack-Ack]

Somebody did post a very nice photo of a field modded P-38 carrying six 500lb bombs.

Depending on the variant it might not have been a field mod.


ack-ack

[Butcher]

Much as I want to stay away from this topic, but I have to ask - if for example a P-38 could carrying twin 2,000lb bombs, but wasn't used on an operational scale, should it be allowed in Aces High? Just because it "could" doesn't mean it was used operationally unless field moded or for a specific mission.
I don't recall 38s carrying 4k of ords, or ever seeing photos - but for sake of it, they could and have on one mission, I don't think it should be allowed for Aces High purposes. It's a game, next thing we know nothing but 38s will be flying missions to drop every hanger, or F4u's.
I torment between historically accurate and trying to keep Aces High balanced as a game. If 38s can carry 4k of ords, then the next argument will be B-17s carrying a full load and it will simply go down hill from there.

I think the best thing we can do is add or modify all historical ordnance loads from planes in game already.

[HighTone]

I would like to see the 1 x 250kg bomb and one DT for the Ki-84.

[Ack-Ack]

Much as I want to stay away from this topic, but I have to ask - if for example a P-38 could carrying twin 2,000lb bombs, but wasn't used on an operational scale, should it be allowed in Aces High? Just because it "could" doesn't mean it was used operationally unless field moded or for a specific mission.
I don't recall 38s carrying 4k of ords, or ever seeing photos - but for sake of it, they could and have on one mission, I don't think it should be allowed for Aces High purposes. It's a game, next thing we know nothing but 38s will be flying missions to drop every hanger, or F4u's.
I torment between historically accurate and trying to keep Aces High balanced as a game. If 38s can carry 4k of ords, then the next argument will be B-17s carrying a full load and it will simply go down hill from there.

I think the best thing we can do is add or modify all historical ordnance loads from planes in game already.

P-38s on occasion did use 2,000 pound bombs and even a 3,000 pounder but never 4x 1,000 pounders.

ack-ack

[SmokinLoon]

The 8/50kg bombs and the 250 and/or500 kg SAP bombs for the 190F-8 would be nice.   

[Hazard69]

Since this is a ordinance related thread I'd like to ask here:

Whats the difference between the High Capacity and Light Case bombs ? They both seem to have the same effect in game. Are the HCs heavier performance wise? LCs aren't going to blow up if hit by enemy fire are they?

Much as I want to stay away from this topic, but I have to ask - if for example a P-38 could carrying twin 2,000lb bombs, but wasn't used on an operational scale, should it be allowed in Aces High? Just because it "could" doesn't mean it was used operationally unless field moded or for a specific mission.
I don't recall 38s carrying 4k of ords, or ever seeing photos - but for sake of it, they could and have on one mission, I don't think it should be allowed for Aces High purposes. It's a game, next thing we know nothing but 38s will be flying missions to drop every hanger, or F4u's.
I torment between historically accurate and trying to keep Aces High balanced as a game. If 38s can carry 4k of ords, then the next argument will be B-17s carrying a full load and it will simply go down hill from there.

I think the best thing we can do is add or modify all historical ordnance loads from planes in game already.

HTC has been pretty rigid about this matter, and rightly so. No field mods in game (imagine the can of worms that would be if ever allowed). The luft-birdies would be an absolute nightmare. Pity though, I'm told some P38s have a pure 50cal load-out and that the P38-L engines could output more power than in game. 

[Tank-Ace]

Whether or not you don't think so, you're wrong.  Show one picture or mission AAR that shows a P-38 (any variant) taking off with 4x 1,000 pounders on an operational combat mission.  If they carried 4,000 pounds worth of bombs it would be 2x 2,000 pounders, not 4x single 1,000 pounders.

ack-ack

You misunderstand me. I don't think I'm imagining that SOME allied fighter carried 4 1000lb bombs, although it not at all impossible I'm wrong.

I was asking you if you knew of an allied fighter that did so, or if I was just imagining that.

[Tank-Ace]

Much as I want to stay away from this topic, but I have to ask - if for example a P-38 could carrying twin 2,000lb bombs, but wasn't used on an operational scale, should it be allowed in Aces High? Just because it "could" doesn't mean it was used operationally unless field moded or for a specific mission.
I don't recall 38s carrying 4k of ords, or ever seeing photos - but for sake of it, they could and have on one mission, I don't think it should be allowed for Aces High purposes. It's a game, next thing we know nothing but 38s will be flying missions to drop every hanger, or F4u's.
I torment between historically accurate and trying to keep Aces High balanced as a game. If 38s can carry 4k of ords, then the next argument will be B-17s carrying a full load and it will simply go down hill from there.

I think the best thing we can do is add or modify all historical ordnance loads from planes in game already.

Entire reason I asked for the perked ordnance. IIRC, the 1000kg bomb for the 190F was AP. That means with the new bomb types, three of them could take out a CV. Even when I used the Ju-87 with the 1800kg bomb (and that thing wallows like no other at 10K), I generally made it through.

If we have a fighter capable of lugging around a ~2000lb AP bomb (3000lbs effectivly on a direct hit), or 4000lbs of GP bombs, then that becomes unbalancing to the game. Thus the perks; it limits unbalancing loadouts while maintaining historical accuracy.



P.S. Were the 50kg bombs the 190 carried GP bombs, or were there other types it could carry? Because if it got the AP 500kg, and the 50kger's were AP as well, that would also improve the usefullness of the 190F on JABO missions.

Considering that its the primary JABO variant of the 190's, it seems to be a bit lacking in that capacity in AH. Its not the only one with such issues, but its the biggest one.


Something else I was curious about, regarding ordnance types and loadouts..... did the Japanese not make more AP bombs for the B5N than the 800kg one? Considering that ships would be a big target, one would think that other AP bombs would have been made as well.

[Karnak]

The Japanese 800kg AP bomb is actually, if I recall correctly, a 16" shell for the Nagato class BBs with fins attached.

[Ack-Ack]

You misunderstand me. I don't think I'm imagining that SOME allied fighter carried 4 1000lb bombs, although it not at all impossible I'm wrong.

I was asking you if you knew of an allied fighter that did so, or if I was just imagining that.

I didn't misunderstand anything.  You were wrong and you're just trying to save face and backpedal by claiming you meant "SOME allied fighter..." instead of what you originally claimed in your post.  Remember the only result of backpedaling is that you'll eventually end up on your ass.


ack-ack