163

[Delirium]

I think that there is a good argument to be made that the 163 is too cheap. 

I beg you to consider the fact that patrolling over HQ/strats is incredibly boring. Who wants to circle it for an hour or more and potentially not see any action? The Me163 is the ability to engage a bomber group without having to waste so much time doing nothing.. Frankly if the bombers would fly at a reasonable alt the interceptors wouldn't need to fly Komets to get up there. I'd much rather fly a 190 than a Me163, but when they are in bombers at 33k the plane set gets pretty limited.

Can you consider instead limiting players to a certain number of ME163s per month (with the current perk cost)? Say each player has the ability to fly 3 Me163s per month and after you have failed to land the 3rd one, you're out of luck until the next month.

Also, the resupply is far too easy. I'd make the risk/reward a bit more weighted in the bombers favor. I'd recommend removing all resupply (or minimizing the effectiveness) so that the strats or HQ aren't up before the bombers even get to land.

[Karnak]

I beg you to consider the fact that patrolling over HQ/strats is incredibly boring. Who wants to circle it for an hour or more and potentially not see any action? The Me163 is the ability to engage a bomber group without having to waste so much time doing nothing.. Frankly if the bombers would fly at a reasonable alt the interceptors wouldn't need to fly Komets to get up there. I'd much rather fly a 190 than a Me163, but when they are in bombers at 33k the plane set gets pretty limited.

You usually have a lot of warning before the enemy raid reaches the target.  Relying on the Me163's three minute climb has bred laziness.  The bomber players and their escorts have invested a lot of time to reach the target, it is only fair that the interceptors have to invest a bit of effort to stop them.

Can you consider instead limiting players to a certain number of ME163s per month (with the current perk cost)? Say each player has the ability to fly 3 Me163s per month and after you have failed to land the 3rd one, you're out of luck until the next month.

I don't think this would work.  Who wants to go on the first x number of raids before the enemy's Me163 supply runs out?  If there aren't first raids, then the supply will never run out.

Also, the resupply is far too easy. I'd make the risk/reward a bit more weighted in the bombers favor. I'd recommend removing all resupply (or minimizing the effectiveness) so that the strats or HQ aren't up before the bombers even get to land.

Irrelevant if the bombers don't have enough of a chance to survive to drop their bombs.

[Delirium]

You usually have a lot of warning before the enemy raid reaches the target.  Relying on the Me163's three minute climb has bred laziness.  The bomber players and their escorts have invested a lot of time to reach the target, it is only fair that the interceptors have to invest a bit of effort to stop them.
I don't think this would work.  Who wants to go on the first x number of raids before the enemy's Me163 supply runs out?  If there aren't first raids, then the supply will never run out.
Irrelevant if the bombers don't have enough of a chance to survive to drop their bombs.

What do you want? Removal of the aircraft altogether?

The problem is the bombers and their escorts will have the advantage every single sortie is the 163 is removed. If the 163 is removed there will be no possible way defenders will be present in large enough numbers to stop a strat/HQ attack (particularly with escorts present).

I'd be willing to have 163s removed entirely from AH if the bombing accuracy above 20k was very poor. I guarantee we won't see bombers any lower than they are now even if the 163 was removed. For me it is a question of time, for loitering over a target wasting my precious little time online is a complete waste of said time.

[ReVo]

You usually have a lot of warning before the enemy raid reaches the target.  Relying on the Me163's three minute climb has bred laziness.  The bomber players and their escorts have invested a lot of time to reach the target, it is only fair that the interceptors have to invest a bit of effort to stop them.
I don't think this would work.  Who wants to go on the first x number of raids before the enemy's Me163 supply runs out?  If there aren't first raids, then the supply will never run out.
Irrelevant if the bombers don't have enough of a chance to survive to drop their bombs.

First of all if HTC decided to double/triple the 163 perk cost I would have no problem with that. However..

What escorts? Most of the bombers I see have no escorts. If you are worried about 163's bring more bombers/fighters for protection. Also it has nothing to do with laziness, it has everything to do with the fact that I don't want to waste my time upping and chasing strat raiders for an hour just to have them bail out once I get close. (Which quite a few bomber pilots do on a regular basis) Getting to the strats should be hard and should require you to bring large numbers of aircraft and if you fail to do this you deserve to be shot down. Quit asking HTC to hold your hands and remove an aircraft just because you don't like being shot down.

[Butcher]

In my opinion escorts are a waste of time against me163s. Your only real hope is someone presses beyond 500mph and goes into compression - assuming the bombers are operating above 25k in which the me163 does accelerate rather fast and tends to compress, however it can come out of it.
I've seen all kinds of escorts, Me262s, P51s, Spit 14s etc none can take on an Me163 unless its an extremely novice pilot.

I've shot down my share in the 163 and faced enough - Its perk is rather generous considering any pilot with at least a years experience can handle and fly a 163 with ease and score a few kills. True they do blow up, but the 163 holds all the cards to get in position, and get a few kills before fuel/ammo is gone.
I've also had buffs shoot me down, while the 163 can take a few rounds, in the right place it will explode.

I believe 100 perks would be enough for it.

[Karnak]

What do you want? Removal of the aircraft altogether?

No.  I want bomber raids to primarily face piston, or even jet, interceptors, with only the occasional Me163 or swarm of Me163s.  Right now the Me163 is so potent and so cheap nothing else gets used if the raid gets within Me163 range.  The effort expended by the attacking bombers and the defending Me163s is way out of balance and it makes the bombers not even try, as noted by Citabria.

[Schen]

Me 262 is 180-260 perks make the 163 somewhere around the 80-160 range with the current eny filter make math easy and simple

[icepac]

The problem is people not reading a strat raid until they start flashing.

[Wmaker]

Me163s is way out of balance and it makes the bombers not even try, as noted by Citabria.

Saying that the bombers aren't currently even trying is one big hyperbole and complete and utter nonsense at that.

Now, if you want more people to try and do HQ-strat raids by limiting Me163 more somehow, is another matter.

[icepac]

I still land about 70% of my HQ downing raids and sometimes get the added bonus of a 163 kill.

[Acidrain]

Mossie has a distinct lack of guns.

A Tempest can do what you described the Me262 doing.  Not as well, but it can do it.

When did the Mossie enter the picture?  and you arent stopping any serious base take with a tempest for long...nice try

[GhostCDB]

Fester plays the game so much I don't even think he knows what he is saying sometimes. 

300 perks for a 163, that is more than a 262.

Hardly anyone can get 6minutes out of the 163 let alone aim the cannon on the 163 but if utilized to potential then it can actually do a lot of damage for a pilot.

So 100 perks is probably enough in my opinion. 

[icepac]

Who needs a 163 when you can take off under B29s at the strats in a 262 and run them down at 30,000 + feet and still have enough fuel/alt to go back 5 sectors to get home?

[WWhiskey]

We want to encourage game play,  the price of the B-29 is to high and /or the reward for a strat run to low, in my opinion!
if the strats payed double or triple points as opposed to a city center, more bombers would fly to them, not just B-29s but lancs and B-17s
Operationally,  the ME 163 only claimed 9 victories for the war compared to how many long range bomber missions from may 1944 to V.E. day?   The numbers in game   favor the 163 compared to ww2, not that many other numbers don't for most fighters,  just an FYI

My opinion would be to raise the ME163 price to around 100/125,  lower the B-29 price by a third. And double the perk value of the strats to help make it more "WORTH THE TIME AND EFFORT" for the bomber drivers!

[surfinn]

This thread and another like it was started as a result of 31-37k b29s having to actually fire their guns at a aircraft that wasn't on the edge of being incapacitated at the alts they spent a long time to get to.
I was doing bomber interceptor missions on the same day this thread an another like it was started. The only person higher than me was fester still at the strats in a set of b29s at 32k, I was in a 110g2 at 29k.   He was circling the area to get alt before he headed into enemy strats. (we were on the same side)

With that said the 163 should not be perked any more than it is due to its limited range, limited ammo load, and limited availability.

I keep hearing how some one else spent so much time getting their bombers to alt and it cost them 300 perks and some one upped a 163 in 7 Min's to shot them down at 33 k. It was the bombers choice to climb forever into what he thought was a totally safe zone for him to fly in. He didn't have to fly into 163 territory.

So because he wasn't smart enough to stay out of 163 range, the 163 should cost as much as his b29s.

The strats are 1945 Berlin, deal with it and bring help or fly your 33k b29s out of 163 range.  But trying to incapacitate a entire map by hitting strats without having to face opposition by uber perking a 163 is bs.