I'm not overestimating. I don't believe that this idea will draw new subscriptions in droves, but it will help to set AH further apart.
People buy with their eyes. This is in part eye candy. If I am new to flight sims and I start comparing a game like IL2 to AH it will be a tough choice. They both have strong points IL2 might just have more strong points, AHs big one is the potential arena population. Large formations would be an attention getter. Most guys won't even get into the strat aspects of the game for a year while they get beat up trying to learn to fly and fight. Strats are an out of sight, out of mind aspect of the game.
This idea is also practical for the reasons I've already stated. It just makes sense that the most iconic image of the war should be seen regularly in AH.
sorry Muzik but you are over estimating, a lot. the value of the bombers isn't going to increase by increasing the size of the formations. people comparing something like il2 or warthunder to aces high are looking at the graphics, not the bombers or the flight models. if they don't like the graphics, 100 plane formations wouldn't change their minds.
I agree that most guys come in here with their (stay with me here because I'm using your own statement to prove my point) EYES ON FIGHTER AIRCRAFT. They want to be fighter jocks. If they are uneducated about the realities of air combat they will probably come in and try to re-enact common themes found in media...escorting bombers, attacking bombers, fighter sweeps without ever giving thought to how little they know about air combat.
No matter how you look at it, this feature will enhance their first impression of the game. It will give them any of those experiences they chose. Too much regulation of this feature would be a mistake. Not enough would be a problem only if every means was exhausted in the effort to steer troublemakers in the right direction.
You make plenty of good points on why/how to keep players behavior in check. Your point on bomb and bails brought up another idea. Back to the punishment. Any player who bails out of a large formation doesn't get a new one that day. Maybe two days. It's a silly practice and it makes perfect sense to say 'if you throw it away, you lose it.' Would a commander in ww2 be given another command if he blew off his responsibility to his unit?
again, over estimating the value of the bombers. do a film of a mission being flown by a bunch of fighters in formation and you will get more attention than a formation of bombers. especially considering the fact that you believe it to be difficult to do.
looking at 24 plane formations, with auto-gunners...there would be less need for fighter escorts than there is now. and i'm talking about controlling usage based on player success/failure (i.e. avoiding retard behavior to increase the opportunities to behave like a retard if that is how they choose to waste their points), you on the other hand talk about penalizing in a manner that would drive people away. world war 2 pilots wouldn't fly their planes in the manner that 99% of the player population flies their toon planes, should all players be punished and denied the use of toon planes for doing such things? this is a combat flight simulator, taking peoples toys away is not the way to encourage them to continue to pay for the privilege of playing with the toys. letting them earn it by being successful is more encouragement than denying access based on behavior.
Even after a sortie where drones were lost, those drones will be replenished 1 every half hour simulating resupply problems.
The perk system only benefits vets who know how to manipulate it. Green newbs are punished for lack of skill the way the perk system works. They don't even have the benefit of a few free perks as a result of joining. I'm not opposed to using the perk system to regulate this idea. Never have been, just weary of over-regulation at the expense of the fun.
how would having to wait 1/2 hour to get a drone back be any incentive whatsoever? that's a bit contradictory to what you're wanting to accomplish and the idea of over regulating. the perk system rewards everyone once they figure out its value. the abuse is only coming about because it's made easier by the arena accomplishments being tied together, stop that and you stop most of the abuse.
i think you're overlooking the fact that we don't have civilian populations to affect with morale. aside from the ethical aspects, it just doesn't fit with an air combat simulator. we don't have multiple large cities with industrial centers and heavy troop concentrations to bomb. we don't have armies of ground troops to demoralize and in need of air superiority in order to invade a country and take over its cities. that's a different game. the value of bare ground is zero. the credit given to real bomber crews was dropping ordnance on a target and surviving long enough to return to base. they didn't get credit for dropping bombs on civilians or bare ground. the number of bombers put into the air against a target was a matter of logistics based on the knowledge that bomber crews were going to be killed and targets would be missed. the more planes in the air with bombs the more likely there would be success against the enemy. and i believe saturation bombing (which is what you're talking about) wasn't even thought of until vietnam. we have bases, towns and strats. bases with their buildings and towns are the ends to the means. the buildings on bases, in towns and at the strats, are the primary targets...aircraft, vehicles, rail roads, supply convoys are secondary. changing that, changes the entire game to something that would be too arcade like.
oh and i forgot..would you like me to show you how not difficult it is to fly bombers in formation? we can do a strat run and i can show you.
