bomber formations

[Arlo]

So bomber pilots are grievers?

No .... but players are. If you suggested one player operating 24 tanks, it would still
be object overload capability by one squad.

I Didn't I just suggest a conservative alternative?  5 formations of 24 allotted to an entire arena is too radical?

Yes. Going from 2 drones to 23 drones is radical.

[asterix]

Other than that, Htc could implement a similar restriction I seem to remember from AW days. They could limit the total number of bomber formations at a time or per hour. They controlled/stopped spit usage this way. In this case it would be a constant restriction on how many were available.

No military in the world had unlimited resources. Our resources could be limited based on how much damage the strats (or a new bomber factory like the old spit factories) have sustained. Normal bomber allowance per country/per hour could be 50 at any particular time.

It could be first come first serve or players could be allocated slots. Or it could be a combination of the perk idea and the resource restrictions.

I understand why some bombers are already restricted by perk cost, but not allowing subscribers to fly buffs at all because of total number or slot restriction would make some quite unhappy. How about restricting the total number of buffs controlled by a single player to 3, ...oh wait that is already done  .

24 bombers controlled by one player seems unbalancing to me too, because in my opinion single fighter pilot should have a reasonable chance in stopping one buff player getting to target and sending him/her back to tower. I believe that large formations should consist of many players. Maybe there should be a formation mode option similar to the autopilot wingman mode.

[Zacherof]

What's the point of adding something you can do offline???
You know you can change ai drones right? No Ned to pay $15 a minh anymore for you.

Not to mention there's no challenge without a real person(not that there any better in game) trying to shoot you down.

Wether or not I get my 262's rocked has anything to do with m opinion/wanting this.

Now if you were to say random liason and cargo flights in enemy territory, that would be cool.

[MK-84]

Perhaps a very crude (on purpose) autopilot for multiple formations so that when it does come time to jump to the guns the bombers don't all break formation from one another?
[/quote

This is going to make missions alot more fun 

[gyrene81]

Not to mention there's no challenge without a real person(not that there any better in game) trying to shoot you down.

you wouldn't sing that song if there was auto gunners in a 24 plane formation.


*pssst* you know if you need a 262 to kill bombers, you're doing it wrong...try it in a 110.

[Zacherof]

No ai period

[gyrene81]

party pooper...no ai? so you would prefer them unable to defend...then pat yourself on the back when you land 20 kills in your 262?

         that would be like all the da heroes congratulating the cherry picking ho tard dweeb in the tempest when he lands 3 kills.

[Zacherof]

party pooper...no ai? so you would prefer them unable to defend...then pat yourself on the back when you land 20 kills in your 262?

         that would be like all the da heroes congratulating the cherry picking ho tard dweeb in the tempest when he lands 3 kills.

I forgo a  at the end
injustice don't see how I'd kills aren't registered and scored and you don't game name In Lights how itt nothing but a harder offline run

[muzik]

If you suggested one player operating 24 tanks, it would still
be object overload capability by one squad.

Apples and oranges. And the word is "COULD" not "would".

You don't know what htc might find when experimenting with this. You don't know what steps they might take to avoid overload. You haven't considered any other game changes that might make this a controlled and measured activity.

So it's safe to say, your only concern is object overload.  Point taken and addressed.

What's the point of adding something you can do offline???
You know you can change ai drones right? No Ned to pay $15 a minh anymore for you.

Not to mention there's no challenge without a real person(not that there any better in game) trying to shoot you down.

Wether or not I get my 262's rocked has anything to do with m opinion/wanting this.

Now if you were to say random liason and cargo flights in enemy territory, that would be cool.

When you start making half way intelligent comments, stop repeating after someone else, stop hinting at your awesomeness in game, and tossing INSANELY random ideas into the mix you might turn out to be worth discussing this with.

I understand why some bombers are already restricted by perk cost, but not allowing subscribers to fly buffs at all because of total number or slot restriction would make some quite unhappy. How about restricting the total number of buffs controlled by a single player to 3, ...oh wait that is already done  .

That little emoticons knowing wink is hilariously ironic being that you don't know what the idea was. No one ever said that single or 3 plane formations would be restricted by hour slots. Only the large formations.

24 bombers controlled by one player seems unbalancing to me too,

That's because, and I could tell this from your first comment, you haven't read nor understood all of this post.

because in my opinion single fighter pilot should have a reasonable chance in stopping one buff player getting to target and sending him/her back to tower.

Why? State reasons please.

I believe that large formations should consist of many players.

Again, why? Because we have an abundance of players who want to be easy meat for fighters?

Maybe there should be a formation mode option similar to the autopilot wingman mode.

Interesting idea, I wish I would have thought of that.

Perhaps a very crude (on purpose) autopilot for multiple formations so that when it does come time to jump to the guns the bombers don't all break formation from one another?


This is going to make missions alot more fun  

Um, maybe you should reread a few posts back,  coumyideagh

[muzik]

double post

[Mister Fork]

Allowing the historically accurate and correct 24 bomber group would indeed alter the dynamics of the game.  And it should be a 'perked' option. But if implemented it should follow...

- forcing the player who initiated the flight to take off and then slow down to allow all 23 remaining bombers (and 4 wings) to form up on his flight
- allow only for slow moving turns otherwise the out-of-formation bombers go poof like current AI bomber wingman
- cost something like 500 or 1000 perks
- when landing, the lead player lands first but if he/she ends their flight to early, they loose perk points to airborne planes
- allow the lead bomber to switch between wings and then individual bombers
- AI gunners for all other wings
- only one other player can gun in a wing of their choice

But seriously - this would be a game changer...take down an entire airfield - flattened - with one pass. Imagine a formation of 24 Lancs or B-29. OMFG. Flattened.  Image a entire squad upped bombers each with 24 bombers - you could have up to several hundred bombers in the air.  However, it would be historically accurate for a true bombing mission. But OMFG. Imagine the mayhem it would create!

24 may be too much. How about 12?

[gyrene81]

I forgo a  at the end
injustice don't see how I'd kills aren't registered and scored and you don't game name In Lights how itt nothing but a harder offline run

 in english please...i no speeky gobble de gook.

[Wiley]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't 24 bombers in formation such as this be able to pretty much level a field and a town in one pass?  In the hands of one player?

So we change the object hardness to make that impossible, right?  Now jabo has little to no role, or unequivocally requires a horde.

How is either of those two scenarios beneficial to gameplay?

Wiley.

[muzik]

Allowing the historically accurate and correct 24 bomber group would indeed alter the dynamics of the game.  And it should be a 'perked' option. But if implemented it should follow...

- forcing the player who initiated the flight to take off and then slow down to allow all 23 remaining bombers (and 4 wings) to form up on his flight
- allow only for slow moving turns otherwise the out-of-formation bombers go poof like current AI bomber wingman
- cost something like 500 or 1000 perks
- when landing, the lead player lands first but if he/she ends their flight to early, they loose perk points to airborne planes
- allow the lead bomber to switch between wings and then individual bombers
- AI gunners for all other wings
- only one other player can gun in a wing of their choice

But seriously - this would be a game changer...take down an entire airfield - flattened - with one pass. Imagine a formation of 24 Lancs or B-29. OMFG. Flattened.  Image a entire squad upped bombers each with 24 bombers - you could have up to several hundred bombers in the air.  However, it would be historically accurate for a true bombing mission. But OMFG. Imagine the mayhem it would create!

24 may be too much. How about 12?

I agree except for

The perks. At first, I can accept them. I would rather see changes to the strat game as we discussed and a restriction of bombers based on simulated resource allowances.

Flattening airfields. Not the intent I had imagined. Strat runs are more realistic and an AVA mod should agree. Flattening fields is fine as long as the current method of shutting down fields by taking out buildings is changed somehow.

12. As I said earlier. 12 is slightly more challenging for fighters, but 12 is still easy meat for 2 good fighter pilots and 500 to1k perks is not going to be worth the risk at all. That perk cost alone is going to draw out the sadistic sob's in droves.

I like the speed restriction idea for the entire flight. A realistic cruise speed. Someone pointed it out a couple pages back. With this kind of defensive possibility, no more high speed running buffs.

Slow turns was always my in mind.

[muzik]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't 24 bombers in formation such as this be able to pretty much level a field and a town in one pass?  In the hands of one player?

So we change the object hardness to make that impossible, right?  Now jabo has little to no role, or unequivocally requires a horde.

How is either of those two scenarios beneficial to gameplay?

Wiley.

You're not wrong, but you're not right and you haven't read the whole post.