Bomber Combat simulation in Aces High

[BnZs]

That would require the thing you are claiming to be absurd to actually be absurd.  As it isn't, you fail.

Argument via "You're wrong and I'm right nah-nah-nah!"? I am ashamed to admit that I can't quite remember the Latin term for that particular logical fallacy.

[FLS]

Parity? Not necessarily. I would be okay with a buff formation being as lethal as a pilot, a bombardier, and 18 999000s  on the guns could make them. The hard part will of course be finding 18 999000s to gun for you, but everything has its challenges right? 

I thought it was a response to bombers and bomber formations firing all guns bearing on the target. Thus parity.

[Karnak]

Argument via "You're wrong and I'm right nah-nah-nah!"? I am ashamed to admit that I can't quite remember the Latin term for that particular logical fallacy.

No, just common sense.  Something you seem to intentionally suppress in regards to this subject as you can't possibly be as dense as you pretend to be.

You need to support your claim that bomber formations are absurd.  Existing gameplay in AH is pretty strong evidence that they are not and that they function in a reasonably manner within the game.  You have not provided that support.  Instead you resort to out of context and distorted wild eyed hysterics to make your position seem reasonable.  If you were to resort to plain logic and cold statistics rather than drama you know your position would be untenable, hence your refusal to do so.

[BnZs]

I thought it was a response to bombers and bomber formations firing all guns bearing on the target. Thus parity.

Well, a formation with 18 skilled human gunners on board wouldn't SEEM like parity for any poor lone fighter pilot attacking it-they'd tear him to shreds. However, you have to consider what those 18 players would NOT be doing in the MA simultaneously, such as flying up to 54 bombers of their own. That is what I call the "big picture"  

[FLS]

Well, a formation with 18 skilled human gunners on board wouldn't SEEM like parity for any poor lone fighter pilot attacking it-they'd tear him to shreds. However, you have to consider what those 18 players would NOT be doing in the MA simultaneously, such as flying up to 54 bombers of their own. That is what I call the "big picture"  

I call that a hypothetical argument. My big picture would involve actual MA behavior. 

[Xavier]

Actually it's called demonstrating absurdity by being absurd, also known as satire. For further research into the genre I suggest reading the following:

http://art-bin.com/art/omodest.html

So your whole thread on fighter drones is satirical? For a frightening minute I thought you were serious, I'm glad you were just messing around! 

[BnZs]

So your whole thread on fighter drones is satirical? For a frightening minute I thought you were serious, I'm glad you were just messing around! 

Actually I think an entire "Interceptor" category for things like 110s and 190s that scored only Bomber kills might be a good idea. But the drones...probably not. 

[Lusche]

Actually I think an entire "Interceptor" category for things like 110s and 190s that scored only Bomber kills might be a good idea.

Friendly He 111: "Please help me, there's a Jug trailing me!"
190: "I'm sorry, but I'm in interceptor scoring mode"

[Xavier]

Actually I think an entire "Interceptor" category for things like 110s and 190s that scored only Bomber kills might be a good idea.

Why?

[Karnak]

I call that a hypothetical argument. My big picture would involve actual MA behavior. 

But that requires looking at things in their context, something BnZs won't do because only by isolating certain stats can he make his argument seem reasonable.

Actually I think an entire "Interceptor" category for things like 110s and 190s that scored only Bomber kills might be a good idea. But the drones...probably not. 

I am aware of many Spitfires that were shot down by Bf110s and Fw190s.

[FLS]

But that requires looking at things in their context, something BnZs won't do because only by isolating certain stats can he make his argument seem reasonable.

Perhaps the language and tone we choose to disagree with each other affects the likelihood of promoting different points of view. 

[PJ_Godzilla]

Argument via "You're wrong and I'm right nah-nah-nah!"? I am ashamed to admit that I can't quite remember the Latin term for that particular logical fallacy.

Can't help you there but the latin for your previous argument regarding drones would be the "reductio ad absurdum". Speaking for myself, I did find the concept of fighter drones to be absurd and so I thought the argument somewhat compelling -but diminished by the obvious fact that the bomber mission is quite different from the typical fighter mission and that the incentives issue to which Karnak repeatedly returns ( like some kind of one-note braying donkey  ) is probably overriding...

[FLS]

Argument via "You're wrong and I'm right nah-nah-nah!"? I am ashamed to admit that I can't quite remember the Latin term for that particular logical fallacy.

Ironically your response, misstating his position, is fallacious argument.  Many threads feature examples of most of the common fallacies.

[muzik]

They have about the same odds that a late 1944 luftwaffe newbie with 160 hours total flight time did when the stuck him in a 109 and sent him up against the a stream of escorted B17s. 

You must have missed the response to this failed argument when it belonged to lusche...

Apples and ANVILS.

In a fighter, I am solely responsible for successfully operating a fighter just as it was in WW2.

In a bomber, I am tasked with doing the job of 10 other people, frequently several at the same time.

Both of you seem to have trouble seeing the absurdity of comparing a new fighter pilot to a bomber pilot.

Fighter plane = An aircraft designed to be operated by ONE person.

Bomber = An aircraft, as DESIGNED, incapable of successful operation by a single person.

[Karnak]

Both of you seem to have trouble seeing the absurdity of comparing a new fighter pilot to a bomber pilot.

Fighter plane = An aircraft designed to be operated by ONE person.

Bomber = An aircraft, as DESIGNED, incapable of successful operation by a single person.

AH is a game.  How it handles bombers is a game mechanic.  What things were in reality is mostly irrelevant to this discussion.