Author Topic: bomber formations  (Read 7762 times)

Offline gyrene81

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11629
Re: bomber formations
« Reply #15 on: June 07, 2013, 12:04:36 PM »
one way (out of a few) that i could picture it working is with perked ords and each additional drone over the initial 3 costing perk points (limit the max number of drones to 11), then change the bomb dispersion. continue to allow only 1 gunner. no matter what, certain people would do whatever they could get away with to farm perk points.

base structure hardness would probably have to change as well in order to prevent a single person (with a ton of bomber perks to burn) from being able to shut down even a large air base in a single pass. that change would end up making any ordnance available to attack aircraft ineffective for anything but gvs.


if the idea is an attempt to make strat runs more appealing, there are better ways...make them worth something to those willing to spend 2 hours getting on target, then make thier destruction actually mean something to the war effort and make it more difficult to resupply them.
jarhed  
Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. - Terry Pratchett

Offline muzik

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 980
Re: bomber formations
« Reply #16 on: June 07, 2013, 02:00:29 PM »
one way (out of a few) that i could picture it working is with perked ords and each additional drone over the initial 3 costing perk points

This works against all of the stated intents because...

-Historical realism (for those who care) wasn't typically 3 B24s on a bombing mission.

-Safety/survivability/success (for new players or vets) offers new players some success early on instead of months or years of struggle. It's bad for the game growth. Same goes for vets facing long odds.

-Game marketability all around, but especially in time zones where peak hours are not as populated, would increase. This is a unique feature. It's more realistic. It's more fun. 24 in formation would look a million times better than 3 in formation or even the gaggle of 3s you sometimes see.

-And for any other reason I stated...

continue to allow only 1 gunner. no matter what, certain people would do whatever they could get away with to farm perk points.

I'm not stuck on AI gunners so I would concede that, but I'm not sure what perk farming you're talking about. Whatever it is, the perk system is easily adjusted to lower perks and make it unthinkable.


base structure hardness would probably have to change as well in order to prevent a single person (with a ton of bomber perks to burn) from being able to shut down even a large air base in a single pass. that change would end up making any ordnance available to attack aircraft ineffective for anything but gvs.

This is where I think the most change would revolve around. I don't like the "base shut down" aspect of the game. It was a simple basic concept that served as a good starting point for a game like AH, but it needs to be put to bed for a richer, more complex game.

I'm not saying this has to happen, if changing object hardness is the only way that would be allowed then oh well.

My thought; bomber pilots need 3 things, targets, a sense of purpose and a challenge. Bases at this point are the most available [targets] so let them stay that way, but don't shut down a base just because a building is blown up. Give them points for destroying buildings or even hits on the field. Use the Air Warrior system of diminishing combat ability the more the base is hit. Every bomb that hits a field could cause a drop in "readiness" and points for the bomber pilot. Give us runway craters to effect take offs and landings.

Towns, could be destroyed for points and for diminishing effect on "morale." I know we don't have a function for morale. But we could easily. It could be a simple effect like decreasing rebuild time for the base and the town. The amount of effect a single formation would have on morale/rebuild time could be so small it would take 20 accurate sorties to have a significant effect or it could be 5 sorties. It would depend on how the game plays out and it would have to be tweaked.

As far as capturing towns, again, if the old way just won't go away then obviously the building hardness would have to be addressed, but that doesn't mean bombers couldn't continue to bomb for morale or for any other effect. Personally I think a different way to capture should be implemented.  

if the idea is an attempt to make strat runs more appealing, there are better ways...make them worth something to those willing to spend 2 hours getting on target, then make thier destruction actually mean something to the war effort and make it more difficult to resupply them.

The idea never was to make strat runs more appealing, although that cannot be ignored and is easily accomplished by making strats the biggest point payoff.

The idea was to make the game more fun for all concerned, to provide more targets and success for fighters of all skill levels, to provide more success to bombers of all skill levels, to provide an artificial boost to non-peak hours, to provide a sliver of realism to the look and feel of bombing missions and perhaps to begin to move the game in a new direction...

I appreciate your input. <S>
« Last Edit: June 07, 2013, 02:50:17 PM by muzik »
Fear? You bet your life...but that all leaves you as you reach combat. Then there's a sense of great excitement, a thrill you can't duplicate anywhere...it's actually fun. Yes, I think it is the most exciting fun in the world. — Lt. Col. Robert B. "Westy" Westbrook, USAAF 6/<--lol@mod

Offline Ack-Ack

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 25260
      • FlameWarriors
Re: bomber formations
« Reply #17 on: June 07, 2013, 02:33:48 PM »

Again, it's unrealistic and an unfair advantage when two or more fighters hit bombers from multiple directions.


How is it unrealistic?

ack-ack
"If Jesus came back as an airplane, he would be a P-38." - WW2 P-38 pilot
Elite Top Aces +1 Mexican Official Squadron Song

Offline Rino

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8495
Re: bomber formations
« Reply #18 on: June 07, 2013, 02:40:16 PM »
Oh yeah man. Just bought my first PC today, as well. Before this I was playing AH telepathically.

 :D

     Well that certainly explains your K/D ratio  :D
80th FS Headhunters
PHAN
Proud veteran of the Cola Wars

Offline muzik

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 980
Re: bomber formations
« Reply #19 on: June 07, 2013, 02:47:15 PM »
How is it unrealistic?

ack-ack

What reason would a b17 crew have for firing all guns in one direction while a second attacker comes in from another?

Fear? You bet your life...but that all leaves you as you reach combat. Then there's a sense of great excitement, a thrill you can't duplicate anywhere...it's actually fun. Yes, I think it is the most exciting fun in the world. — Lt. Col. Robert B. "Westy" Westbrook, USAAF 6/<--lol@mod

Offline Arlo

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24759
Re: bomber formations
« Reply #20 on: June 07, 2013, 03:02:26 PM »
     Well that certainly explains your K/D ratio  :D

Yeah. I used to get so depressed about it. Now, instead of keeping track of that, I go shag the neighbor's cat every half dozen times I get shot down. Almost makes getting shot down worth it but it's hard to explain to the old lady if my timing's off.

Offline gyrene81

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11629
Re: bomber formations
« Reply #21 on: June 07, 2013, 03:03:28 PM »
this is where you're going to get a lot of resistance...

This works against all of the stated intents because...

-Historical realism (for those who care) wasn't typically 3 B24s on a bombing mission.

-Safety/survivability/success (for new players or vets) offers new players some success early on instead of months or years of struggle. It's bad for the game growth. Same goes for vets facing long odds.

-Game marketability all around, but especially in time zones where peak hours are not as populated, would increase. This is a unique feature. It's more realistic. It's more fun. 24 in formation would look a million times better than 3 in formation or even the gaggle of 3s you sometimes see.

-And for any other reason I stated...
you're just thinking of u.s. bomber formations that were developed during the strategic bombing initiative to increase the survivability of bomber crews. the thing is, the russians, germans, japanese and other countries thought differently and used different tactics. if historical realism is part of your intent, then the u.s. and british heavy bombers would be the only ones allowing a 3 plane box formation. there are accounts of u.s. medium bomber missions in the pto that only used 3 or 4 bombers instead of the hundreds used in europe.

safety and survivability is a matter of player learning and interaction...just giving them more drones won't increase their survivability.

12 total planes in a formation of 4 boxes with 3 planes in each box would a lot more workable than 24. think about how far they would be spread out and the effort it would take trying to defend from the front bomber gun positions. still, if you're looking at new players consider this, how many new players would know that they must circle the field to allow all the drones to get off the field? the form up is time consuming and . that is not even mentioning the reprogramming of bomber formations to prevent them all from trying to take off at the same time like they do now. charging perks for each additional drone beyond the initial 3 gives players a choice based on need, as well as goals. they can choose to take as many as they have points to use. a lot fewer people would be doing the bomb n bail thing or going with the lancstuka maneuvers if there are perk points involved.

as for marketing, you're way over estimating the appeal. showing a p-51 vs a 109 or a corsair vs a ki-43 has more appeal than any number of bombers. maybe showing 109s and 190s attacking a 30 plane gaggle of bombers would strike someones "oh cool nerve". and there isn't anything more realistic about 24 planes in a bomber formation than there are 3 or 12.


there are people right now that go to the ew and mw arenas and do whatever they can get away with to earn perk points so they can use them in the main arena.
jarhed  
Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. - Terry Pratchett

Offline Ack-Ack

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 25260
      • FlameWarriors
Re: bomber formations
« Reply #22 on: June 07, 2013, 04:15:31 PM »
What reason would a b17 crew have for firing all guns in one direction while a second attacker comes in from another?



Ah...you're talking in relation to AH.  Can the gunner switch to different planes in the formation or is it dependent on the pilot switching?  If the gunner can switch planes himself, then it would be possible to track and engage two different targets.  The gunner hops into one of the drones and then the pilot can man the guns in the bomber he's in.

ack-ack
« Last Edit: June 07, 2013, 04:21:54 PM by Ack-Ack »
"If Jesus came back as an airplane, he would be a P-38." - WW2 P-38 pilot
Elite Top Aces +1 Mexican Official Squadron Song

Offline acesav

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: bomber formations
« Reply #23 on: June 07, 2013, 06:21:21 PM »
wait are they really gunna put in a nuke???

Offline muzik

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 980
Re: bomber formations
« Reply #24 on: June 07, 2013, 06:23:22 PM »
Ah...you're talking in relation to AH.  Can the gunner switch to different planes in the formation or is it dependent on the pilot switching?  If the gunner can switch planes himself, then it would be possible to track and engage two different targets.  The gunner hops into one of the drones and then the pilot can man the guns in the bomber he's in.

ack-ack

I was comparing a single player (pilot/gunner not pilot and a joiner) using the system as currently modeled to AI gunners that can fire at multiple attackers from multiple directions at the same time.

I never brought up the possibility of a joiner jumping from aircraft to aircraft if that's what you're asking. My suggestion concerned only AI gunning being implemented or retaining the current system. I don't believe minor changes to the current system is in the best interest of the game. AI gunners that increase the realistic scenario of defending against simultaneous attacks without the pilot being required to participate is.

Fear? You bet your life...but that all leaves you as you reach combat. Then there's a sense of great excitement, a thrill you can't duplicate anywhere...it's actually fun. Yes, I think it is the most exciting fun in the world. — Lt. Col. Robert B. "Westy" Westbrook, USAAF 6/<--lol@mod

Offline gyrene81

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11629
Re: bomber formations
« Reply #25 on: June 07, 2013, 06:36:22 PM »
AI gunners that increase the realistic scenario of defending against simultaneous attacks without the pilot being required to participate is.
actually, no it wouldn't but...you would love warbirds.
jarhed  
Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. - Terry Pratchett

Offline MrKrabs

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2152
      • AH-Freebirds.com
Re: bomber formations
« Reply #26 on: June 07, 2013, 07:04:31 PM »
wait are they really gunna put in a nuke???

2 weeks...
The boiling pot is put away and the crab has gone back to sea...

Offline muzik

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 980
Re: bomber formations
« Reply #27 on: June 07, 2013, 08:17:09 PM »
you're just thinking of u.s. bomber formations that were developed during the strategic bombing initiative
...russians, germans, japanese and other countries thought differently

I know there were instances of small attacks by bombers. But 24 aircraft is not representative of the strategic bombing you are trying to compare this to. 24 is nothing. All sides conducted missions of this size regularly, especially the Jap, Ger, and others. They couldn't muster much more and wouldn't risk much less if they had a choice because it was too unsafe and unproductive to send them in smaller numbers.



safety and survivability is a matter of player learning and interaction...just giving them more drones won't increase their survivability.

Even without AI gunners it absolutely would.

Even 4 fighters (with good aim) attacking a formation could have a tough time finishing off 24 bombers before they run out of ammo OR got shot by the dozens of gunners The odds 24 bombers get shot down is nil, EXCEPT during the initial novelty of this new feature when the likelihood of hordes of fighters looking for formations to swarm on is highest. When the novelty wears off, furballers will likely still prefer dogfights.

With AI gunners, bomber survivability increases slightly with vet pilots, mostly due to situations where a vet is alone against multiple attackers. Survivability increases more with inexperienced players (relative to his survivability without AI) due to his lack of gunnery skills, SA, and multi tasking while on approach to target.



as for marketing, you're way over estimating the appeal. showing a p-51 vs a 109 or a corsair vs a ki-43 has more appeal than any number of bombers.

The word "showing" suggest you're looking at this from a television commercial viewers perspective. Look at it from a new or old players point of view. Imagine yourself flying a formation, look out the window or in f3 mode and look at the bombers. Which is more awe inspiring 3 planes or 24 in a typical ww2 formation like Fish posted?

Or from an attackers perspective. You're in a fighter and you come up on formations of 24. Still again, which is more incredible?

I would wager that the biggest, most glaringly noticeable dissimilarities between AH and the real war is a lack of large formations of bombers or nice coordinated formations of ANY aircraft for that matter. Everywhere you look you see poster children of the uncoordinated no matter how hard they try. At first sight, little in the game gives a strong sense of "being there."

Formations of 24 aren't the end all be all of ww2 sims, but they can create a huge first impression of an epic, coordinated air war.

and there isn't anything more realistic about 24 planes in a bomber formation than there are 3 or 12.

There is though. Those 4 plane missions you referred to earlier were often by smaller faster attack bombers, not the 17s and 24s. But the most typical mission size was way over 12 regardless of what type of aircraft you describe.

Plus, a 24 plane drone formation will always stay in better formation than a mission put on by 24 players who attempt to fly formation. As a result better mutual defensive fire. The look and the effect are more realistic than player coordinated missions.

how many new players would know that they must circle the field to allow all the drones to get off the field?

They'd learn the first time they did it. That learning curve is certainly easier than learning how to shoot well enough to defend three planes or be obliterated. There is only one bomber pilot I know of that is truly feared in the game due to his shooting ability and many players have played for a decade. You keep insisting on teaching them, but it won't ever happen, it's a factor you can't control. Adding drone formations is a factor we can control and it benefits all of us.


that is not even mentioning the reprogramming of bomber formations to prevent them all from trying to take off at the same time like they do now.

That is not difficult to program, all it takes is changing a couple numbers. And they don't exactly take off at the same time. I could care less if they changed that aspect or not but the pilot would still have to fly in a circle for form up even at the current rate drones follow.

a lot fewer people would be doing the bomb n bail thing or going with the lancstuka maneuvers if there are perk points involved.

Bomb and bail or lancstukas is off the subject a bit. I don't like seeing either personally but they are not hugely important to me. I consider lancstukas the gamier. Stopping them could be a matter of perk use, but I don't think that needs to include charging for each bomber. There are plenty of ways htc could stop this if they wanted to. Bombs could be prevented from releasing below XXXX feet AGL in high alt bombers. Bailing could be prevented for XX minutes after bomb release. It seems Htc doesn't care to stop it so it does no one any good discussing it.

there are people right now that go to the ew and mw arenas and do whatever they can get away with to earn perk points so they can use them in the main arena.

There is nothing you can do to change that until they change the perk system. If you state specifically how it affects this idea I might have an idea that would deter it otherwise I don't see how this has anything to do with bomber formations.
Fear? You bet your life...but that all leaves you as you reach combat. Then there's a sense of great excitement, a thrill you can't duplicate anywhere...it's actually fun. Yes, I think it is the most exciting fun in the world. — Lt. Col. Robert B. "Westy" Westbrook, USAAF 6/<--lol@mod

Offline muzik

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 980
Re: bomber formations
« Reply #28 on: June 07, 2013, 08:39:45 PM »
actually, no it wouldn't but...you would love warbirds.

Despite our past disagreements, I have no problem discussing this idea with you in a civil way and you have done the same here. But you keep debating things like this when I know you are smart enough to know better. How could you possibly believe that a pilot jumping from gun to gun firing at single targets is more realistic than AI gunners that can defend every side of your bomber at the same time as it was in WW2? Come on, seriously.

I've tried Warbirds, it has fallen way behind.

Now that I think about it, there is another way to implement my idea without using large drone formations. A command that slaves any bomber to a lead aircraft and keeps all players in nice formations that leaves one pilot to worry about navigation and everyone else to defense.

I think it would be a great compromise but it still wouldn't be as good as using drones. Drones are a population multiplier that increases action/activity for everyone. There is no question other than what programming or server challenges it presents and I see little of either without a huge increase in subscriptions.
Fear? You bet your life...but that all leaves you as you reach combat. Then there's a sense of great excitement, a thrill you can't duplicate anywhere...it's actually fun. Yes, I think it is the most exciting fun in the world. — Lt. Col. Robert B. "Westy" Westbrook, USAAF 6/<--lol@mod

Offline Zacherof

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3993
Re: bomber formations
« Reply #29 on: June 08, 2013, 12:07:16 AM »
In game name Xacherof
USN Sea Bee
**ELITE**
I am a meat popsicle