Bomber Combat simulation in Aces High

[Brooke]

You cant defend against multiple attackers from different directions.

It helps the attackers when there are lots of them, of course.  But even in that situation, attackers usually aren't closer than 1000 yards from each other, meaning that you can shoot at one attacker and then switch to the next one.

If you get good at aiming, you're guaranteed to destroy an attacker with a WALL OF LEAD,

Good aiming is definitely good for defense.  You aren't guaranteed to shoot down an attacker, though, even in a B-17 or B-24, and certainly not in anything else.

for the first months or years in bombers, you get luck or no defense at all.

I'm not sure what that means.

You can't defend AT ALL when you need to be bombing your target.

Yes, you can.  You calibrate when you are clear.  You defend up to the point where you need to drop your bombs, hop into the bomb sight to drop, then back into guns.  You are gone from your guns for 10-20 seconds.  If that is too long, you have two options:  don't drop your bombs and defend instead, or have a gunner.  In scenarios, you often have a chance at a gunner unless no one was shot down short of target.

And the argument that it should depend on player skill is nothing but ego stroking. It takes no skill to shoot down bombers, and Brooke's comment proves that beyond doubt.

Of course shooting down bombers is a skill.  In scenarios where shooting down bombers is a big part of it, you clearly see that.  You will see guys like Killa with 20 bomber kills, the average pilot getting a few bomber kills, and the below-average pilot with none.

[Lusche]

There I am, arguing year after year that bombers are not overpowered at all but merely victims, that they should not be nerfed or downgraded at all because any lack of success in killing bomber is just a result of impatience and bad tactic and spending actually more time in bombers than in other planes...

And what's the result?

Lusche knows he can shoot down most bombers with ease. They are his primary targets. He uses them to pad his score. He has a vested interest in seeing them remain easy targets..

I'm really getting tired by people in here in general.

[Brooke]

Lusche, as a gastropod, has a vested interest in undermining humanity (or at least in ruining their gardens). 

[McShark]

To shoot down the Snailman in his set of 17's can be very satisfying!! 

Means you did most of it right! Usually after the third attack round you just have enough plane left to rtb 

A question regarding buff modelling:

Do the eggs in a buff explode when hit by MG or cannons?

As I tend to put quite a lot of cannon rounds in a belly, without result sadly...

[Lusche]

To shoot down the Snailman in his set of 17's can be very satisfying!!  

 

If you find that one satisfying, ask the folks who killed me in a B-29 41 times so far  

A question regarding buff modelling:
Do the eggs in a buff explode when hit by MG or cannons?

No.

[Randy1]

. . . Lusche knows he can shoot down most bombers with ease. They are his primary targets. He uses them to pad his score. He has a vested interest in seeing them remain easy targets. . . .

   This guy has skills Muzik.  I was in a P47M with a big E advantage over his 234.  It was a pure 1v1.  I had him.  I made several passes and got some hits.  Then he pulled up and sucked me in to a climb that gave him the only chance to use those crummy 234's rear guns.  Game over.  That was pure skill on his part. 

[Rich46yo]

I like the bomber model as it is. They are only "victims" if you dont count the damage and havoc they cause with their Ords. And since we dont have stats for that I guess we dont count them.

[BnZs]

The victims of bombers are the fights, As is, their primary purpose in the MA is griefing everyone on BOTH sides of a fight via tool-shedding. There are times I would give a hundred perks to be able to shoot down friendly bombers... If they had something else to do while the rest of us enjoyed dogfighting then the sillieness of the modeling wouldn't be a very pressing issue.       Also, were single-player controlled formations made slightly less insane, I would be quite open to the idea of allowing multiple players to join and gun for a formation. A formation that is quite formidable because half a dozen players are manning it is quite reasonable, as opposed to the absurdity of a unit controlled by a single player being able to dump tens of thousands of pounds of ord while killing as often as it dies.

[Karnak]

The victims of bombers are the fights, As is, their primary purpose in the MA is griefing everyone on BOTH sides of a fight via tool-shedding. There are times I would give a hundred perks to be able to shoot down friendly bombers... If they had something else to do while the rest of us enjoyed dogfighting then the sillieness of the modeling wouldn't be a very pressing issue.       Also, were single-player controlled formations made slightly less insane, I would be quite open to the idea of allowing multiple players to join and gun for a formation. A formation that is quite formidable because half a dozen players are manning it is quite reasonable, as opposed to the absurdity of a unit controlled by a single player being able to dump tens of thousands of pounds of ord while killing as often as it dies.

[muzik]

It helps the attackers when there are lots of them, of course.  But even in that situation, attackers usually aren't closer than 1000 yards from each other

I've played this game as long or longer than you. Not steadily as you should know, but as long.

I know what's typical, and 3 attackers 1k apart are just as likely to end in death as 3 in oposing directions. I'm not going to argue effectiveness of the multitude of attacker positions with you.

Your unofficial statistics are enough to demonstrate that bombers aren't "balanced" in game.

Good aiming is definitely good for defense.  You aren't guaranteed to shoot down an attacker, though, even in a B-17 or B-24, and certainly not in anything else.

I was exaggerating Brooke. Fortunately, you are right, most don't reach a skill level to worry about. Which just makes the argument that bombers are not balanced even more valid.

I'm not sure what that means.

It means when a noob can't get any satisfaction in a fighter and resorts to the only other flying activity, he has little reason to stick around barring some fanatical devotion.

A noob with only a moderate interest in trying this game, won't stay.

Yes, you can.  You calibrate when you are clear.  You defend up to the point where you need to drop your bombs...

Again, I'm not going to argue the multitude of possibilities. I've killed dozens or hundreds of guys on their bombing pass. It's their most vulnerable moment.

Giving up your chance to bomb your target so you can defend is not a valid option when you spent a half to one hour flying a mission already and playing drag the fighter until he dies is NOT what you consider a fun game activity.

You may be ok with that, but some people would rather the game be slightly more SANE in the first place. Bombers didn't drag fighters around germany, porpoising to 30k, trying to shake them before they can make a bomb run.

Of course shooting down bombers is a skill.

You need to cut back on the "literal" in your diet. It can cause heart disease.

When the "smarter" bomber pilots, drag you to 30k, it takes a lot of "skill" to prevent yourself from lunging at them in a rage because they make you chase them around for eternity to set up proper attacks.

This guy has skills Muzik.

He's very talented at making charts.

There I am, arguing year after year that bombers are not overpowered at all but merely victims, that they should not be nerfed or downgraded at all

You poor thing. And here you are arguing that they shouldn't have a fighting chance either. Seems you support all the causes. Grief much?

[Rich46yo]

See rule #4

[The Fugitive]

You worded that perfectly.  It captured exactly what I was thinking as well! 

[hitech]

He's very talented at making charts.


You poor thing. And here you are arguing that they shouldn't have a fighting chance either. Seems you support all the causes. Grief much?

Muzik, Knock off the attacks and insults.

HiTech

[Brooke]

bombers aren't "balanced" in game.

If this is the heart of what you mean, then we can skip arguing about how it takes no skill to kill bombers (it does take skill), how bombers can't survive attacks (they can in various situations survive), and the simultaneously contradictory statement of how attackers are always shot down by bombers (attackers are not always shot down).

Instead, we can talk about what you are really advocating:  what would be "balanced" in your view?

[Lusche]

  This guy has skills Muzik.  I was in a P47M with a big E advantage over his 234.  It was a pure 1v1.  I had him.  I made several passes and got some hits.  Then he pulled up and sucked me in to a climb that gave him the only chance to use those crummy 234's rear guns.  Game over.  That was pure skill on his part. 

Actually it was pure luck on my part, as it was the only fighter I think ever shot down with the 234s rear guns despite of trying hard and often. The only other kills I ever got were proxies from guys running into me
I don't doubt that I am one of the "above average" guys of the MA (well, how much "above" can be disputed a lot ), but in that particular aspect I totally suck. I have no idea how some can rack up an impressive kill tally shooting the rear guns... I for sure can't 

My K/D in the Arado is very, very much tilted towards D.