Please Adjust Fuel Tank Damage

[guncrasher]

At 50%, you can still up any plane and with the exception of a few popular planes (namely the La7), there isn't a fighter than can't still make the 25 mile round trip to an enemy airfield for the furball action.

Also, in most cases all it takes is THREE M3's to resupply a field well enough to bring up the fuel tanks, ords, etc.  That 6000 yard jaunt on average takes how long?  Or, better yet, up from another nearby field. 

then why request fuel be lowered if it only affects the la7?




semp

[Karnak]

then why request fuel be lowered if it only affects the la7?




semp

50% would seriously limit the time a short range fighter such as the Bf109K-4, Fw190D-9, Spitfire Mk XVI, Typhoon Mk Ib, Yak-3, La-5FN, P-39, P-40 and Hurricane Mk II would have to fight once it had arrived at the nearest enemy field.  Using such fighters for offensive ops when the fuel was limited would be significantly inconvenient.  Using the Spitfire Mk VIII would help the Spit fan a bit, but the others would be stuck.

This change would encourage increased use of the high fuel capacity fighters that also carry good bomb loads.  P-47N and P-51D would likely be the largest benefactors.  To a lesser degree the Japanese fighters would benefit as well as the twin engined British and German fighters.

[The Fugitive]

So lets do away with killing hangers, ords, town so we can all just furball 24/7 woooooot fun for all

No I think the other things still need to be targets, it is just that fuel is a being porked that bad is a pretty big hit. I was here when we could knock it down to 25% and it was very easy to send a few guys out to pork surrounding fields as the buffs climbed to target. Using 2 guys here, 2 guys there we had small radar alerts over half a dozen sectors. It made hiding which base was the target easy, and once the hangers were down there was no way to defend and a couple guys could flatten a town at their leisure as the goon flew in unmolested.

If the same was done today with the hordes we have they could easily do a couple fields back making either a long trip for nothing as the base it captured LONGGGGGG before you could get there, or up from a porked base to have enough fuel for a couple quick passes them bogie IF your the type that likes to land.

Whats needed is a way to guide the horde to make the base capture still inviting for them, but much more inviting for defenders. I don't necessarily like to "furball", I prefer to fight. Either for a base, or to defend one. Fighting FOR one means I have to join the horde, defending I have to fight a horde neither much of a fight truth be told. I would like to see alot more strategic fighting and more tactics used. How to guide the hordes to play that way with out taking the fun away from them is the question. On top of that, if you could/did would the defenders get organized enough to make a fight of it?

[Karnak]

Whats needed is a way to guide the horde to make the base capture still inviting for them, but much more inviting for defenders. I don't necessarily like to "furball", I prefer to fight. Either for a base, or to defend one. Fighting FOR one means I have to join the horde, defending I have to fight a horde neither much of a fight truth be told. I would like to see alot more strategic fighting and more tactics used. How to guide the hordes to play that way with out taking the fun away from them is the question. On top of that, if you could/did would the defenders get organized enough to make a fight of it?

A few years ago I posted an idea to encourage that by having system generated missions every hour to take or defend a base and strats.  For example the Rooks might get a mission to attack A20 and the Bishops would get a mission to defend A20.  Every offensive mission had a defensive mission countering it and participation was rewarded with perks, success giving a bigger reward.

[The Fugitive]

I think something like that would work. I wonder if a part from "Combat Tour" could be used in the MAs for that. Was CT that advanced? We all know that if a "leader" leads there tends to be plenty of followers. If the server generates the "lead" would people follow? Could be interesting to see if it woruld work.

[alpini13]

+1 makes perfect game sense

[DaveBB]

When a field is under heavy attack I up a P51D or La7 with 25% fuel.  I usually don't even get a chance to expend all my ammo, let alone burn through all my fuel.  Whats the range of the La7 with 50% fuel on max cruise settings?

[SmokinLoon]

50% would seriously limit the time a short range fighter such as the Bf109K-4, Fw190D-9, Spitfire Mk XVI, Typhoon Mk Ib, Yak-3, La-5FN, P-39, P-40 and Hurricane Mk II would have to fight once it had arrived at the nearest enemy field.  Using such fighters for offensive ops when the fuel was limited would be significantly inconvenient.  Using the Spitfire Mk VIII would help the Spit fan a bit, but the others would be stuck.

This change would encourage increased use of the high fuel capacity fighters that also carry good bomb loads.  P-47N and P-51D would likely be the largest benefactors.  To a lesser degree the Japanese fighters would benefit as well as the twin engined British and German fighters.

IMO, the only fighters we would see less of on the offense would be the La's, and maybe the Yak-3.  The Spits 9, 16, and 14 would be reduced to 12-13 min if restricted to 50%, but the 1, 5, and 8 would all still have 15-17 mins.  With throttle management the flight time in a Spitfire is extended more so that any other aircraft by comparison.  Take a look at the P40's, the worst one is the P40E and that would be restricted to 18 min flight time (best being P40F w/ 19+ mins).  The Hurricane Mk II would have 16 mins, the Mk I and Sea Hurricane would both have 19+ mins.  The Typhoon would take a hit just like the La7, but just how popular of a plane is it to begin with?

If ENY is a factor, then the Ki-61 "Tony" will be the biggest benefactor.  Most people over look that plane for some reason (gen 1 graphics maybe?). But when restricted to %50, the Tony still has 28 mins of fuel.  Quite nice.

Trust me, I've looked at how fuel would effect every aircraft in the game.  In most cases, it isn't going to restrict most aircraft offensively, and it wont effect any aircraft defensively.  Any aircraft can still be taken, only the extended range is a factor.  In the case of ords, it is all or none.  Which is more restricting?

      

[SmokinLoon]

When a field is under heavy attack I up a P51D or La7 with 25% fuel.  I usually don't even get a chance to expend all my ammo, let alone burn through all my fuel.  Whats the range of the La7 with 50% fuel on max cruise settings?

11 minutes of flight time.

[Karnak]

Are you including the increased transit times for the slower, poorer climbing aircraft in your calculations?

[SmokinLoon]

Are you including the increased transit times for the slower, poorer climbing aircraft in your calculations?

Yes, but I'm more so looking at flight time.  Mostly, I'm looking at adding another localized strategy concept that will force players to think twice about which plane they take up if 50% fuel is all that is available.  Or, guess they'll have to up from another field in their La7, but then again that would be a moot point for them to do, eh?  (longer flight from field further away or up from said field with lower allowable flight time thanks to 50% fuel).   

I'm not exactly sure why there is all the knee jerkin' against this, it isn't going to stop anyone from using them defensively, and in most cases 3-4 guys win M3's will bring up fuel to 100% at an airfield.  It is just the initial speed bump that wont allow players to up the La7 and do as they want at the typical fringe ranges.  Only those players they rely on the La7 time and time again are going to be effected and even then only in the short term. 

This is all about adding another strategic element to AH, because currently fuel is an afterthought.  It effects nothing locally and at the strats.  Make it an issue and force players to manage their throttle to extend the flight time of their favorite plane, or pick another.             

[715]

Doesn't look to me that he included any flight time at all.  He just quoted the total endurance time at mil pwr as listed in the hanger.  So for the Hurricane I the 20 minutes he mentions has to include the transit time as well, which means it has very little fighting time over the attacked field, especially if the Hurri pilot wants some altitude at the fight.  Example: Hurri I, 50% fuel, mil pwr, climb to 10K; at 25 miles (1 sector) E6B says there is only 11 minutes of fuel and 52 mile range.  So if I want to be able to return to base thats only about 6 minutes of fighting time.  (Although in truth, when defending against the horde, I rarely get to return... or last 6 minutes for that matter.)

[SmokinLoon]

Doesn't look to me that he included any flight time at all.  He just quoted the total endurance time at mil pwr as listed in the hanger.  So for the Hurricane I the 20 minutes he mentions has to include the transit time as well, which means it has very little fighting time over the attacked field, especially if the Hurri pilot wants some altitude at the fight.  Example: Hurri I, 50% fuel, mil pwr, climb to 10K; at 25 miles (1 sector) E6B says there is only 11 minutes of fuel and 52 mile range.  So if I want to be able to return to base thats only about 6 minutes of fighting time.  (Although in truth, when defending against the horde, I rarely get to return... or last 6 minutes for that matter.)

Interesting you mention that.  I had already tested out some endurance issues, just for kicks.  I tested what I did because they represent the best of the best in climb and speed vs the not so good, yet the Hurri and P40 have %45 and %63 more fuel than the La7.  The end results are only 5+ min difference, which can add up to double to time over target.   

Map and bases: "NDISLES"; A1 to A4 (approximately 25 miles apart).  Tested off line.  Burn Rate is 2.0, just like MA's.

Constants: Upped from A1 on E runway and continued due E heading until arrival at A4. Took planes to 10k alt, then level flight until A4.  All planes upped with 50% fuel, no DT, standard guns and ammo.  All planes made three passes on drones.  First was from south, second from north, third from SE, then went level fight and RTB'd to A1.  Full throttle entire flight (no WEP) except in attack dive and landing phase.

La7: 50% = 11min.  It took roughly 2min 50 sec to get to 10k, arrived at A4 made the three separate attack passes on drones (from S, from N, from SE), then RTB'd to A1 at 3200 ft.  Landed with less than 1 min fuel left.

Hurricane IIC: = 50% = 16min.  It took roughly 3min 45sec to reach 10k, arrived at A4 and made three separate attack passes on different drones (from S, from N, from SE), then RTB'd to A1 @ 3800ft.  Landed with 5 min fuel left.

P40E = 50% = 18min.  It took roughly 4min 27sec to get to 10k, arrived at A4 and made three separate attack passes on different drones (from S, from N, from SE), then RTB'd to A1 @ 3500ft.  Landed with 6 min fuel left.

Both the Hurricane IIC and P40E could have made another 3-4 attack runs at drones before *needing* to head for home. 

Disclaimer- Obviously some of the variables in the testing are things I cant control such as the position of the drones upon arrival.  This effects the set up and egress, but regardless I believe the differences upon landing back at A1 would be less than 1 min under these circumstances.  Also, throttle control and nose pitch are those "manageable" things that players can control that I did not take in to consideration.  The La7's range is greatly effected if the juice isn't slurped up on full throttle and a gentle 100-250 fps dive is held while RTB.  There are a lot of other things involved.  I tested the extreme just for reference.  Oh, and in no way I'm I saying that offline drones = MA targets, it was just used as a control. 

My conclusion: the La7, with %50 fuel, can travel 25 miles, while climbing to 10k, spend 2-4 min over target based on throttle management, then RTB successfully.  Oh, and in no way shape or form does %50 restrict the La7 or any plane for defensive purposes.      

[Karnak]

3-4, even 6-8, attack passes on the drones doesn't seem like it is enough time to justify the trip.  My experience with such offensive sorties is that, barring getting shot down in short order, the combat duration is fairly long.  50% fuel would, for practical purposes, eliminate anything with Spitfire/Bf109ish fuel endurance from offensive operations.  75% is a noticeable inconvenience in using those platforms for offensive operations.

All in my opinion of course.