Author Topic: Defending the strats - a case study  (Read 4177 times)

Offline Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23938
      • Last.FM Profile
Re: Defending the strats - a case study
« Reply #60 on: September 07, 2014, 08:52:17 PM »
Less than 1/10 losses over the strats?

My detailed strat run AA losses:



note that a mission consists of three AH 'sorties' (=1 formation)
And as said before, not a single drone was ever even hurt by puffy ack.

« Last Edit: September 07, 2014, 08:56:59 PM by Lusche »
Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman

In November 2025, Lusche will return for a 20th anniversary tour. Get your tickets now!

Offline Scherf

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3409
Re: Defending the strats - a case study
« Reply #61 on: September 07, 2014, 09:46:41 PM »
I must be magnetic then. I posted a fairly extensive WhineWhaaaLookatmeeee thread on the subject. Like I say, I lost one Mossie in every four (single birds, I never flew formations, didn't have the perkies), to PWs due to flak over the strats. Each time, the film showed a hit sprite somewhere on the port wing.
... missions were to be met by the commitment of alerted swarms of fighters, composed of Me 109's and Fw 190's, that were strategically based to protect industrial installations. The inferior capabilities of these fighters against the Mosquitoes made this a hopeless and uneconomical effort. 1.JD KTB

Offline thndregg

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4053
Re: Defending the strats - a case study
« Reply #62 on: September 08, 2014, 12:34:29 AM »

That's what I miss most on a personal level - large, escorted, high altitude bomber missions.


You've intercepted some of mine. :). Damn, I miss those days. Next month, I'll see about resurrecting some of that... hopefully.
Former XO: Birds of Prey (BOPs - AH2)
Former CO: 91st Bomb Group (H)
Current Assignment: Dickweed Heavy Bomber Group

Offline Chilli

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4278
Re: Defending the strats - a case study
« Reply #63 on: September 08, 2014, 03:46:47 AM »

{snip}
When HQ is taken out, what we should see is country channel text light up with information from individuals to supplement the lost dar information.

 :D I don't know what game you have been playing.....  definitely doesn't sound anything like the group in AH  ;)

It would be nice, but text chat is for calling each other dweebs, HOs and such  :bolt:

Offline Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23938
      • Last.FM Profile
Re: Defending the strats - a case study
« Reply #64 on: September 08, 2014, 07:06:59 AM »
Like I say, I lost one Mossie in every four (single birds, I never flew formations, didn't have the perkies), to PWs due to flak over the strats. Each time, the film showed a hit sprite somewhere on the port wing.

Flying formations would have changed that to one Mossie in every twelve  :D

And yes, the hit placement system is a bit strange too (even when putting aside the fact that drones don't get hit at all): I very frequently get hit in the Center Fuel tank in my B-29. The odd thing is, I can't find any entry in my logs that a different fuel tank has been hit at all  :headscratch:
Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman

In November 2025, Lusche will return for a 20th anniversary tour. Get your tickets now!

Offline DREDIOCK

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17775
Re: Defending the strats - a case study
« Reply #65 on: September 08, 2014, 08:25:53 AM »
How about we simply intensify the numbers of ack over and around HQ and the rest of the strats
Death is no easy answer
For those who wish to know
Ask those who have been before you
What fate the future holds
It ain't pretty

Offline Slate

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3242
Re: Defending the strats - a case study
« Reply #66 on: September 08, 2014, 08:42:18 AM »
   Increase the difficulty of pinpoint bombing like it was when AH first started. What was the accuracy of WW2 bombers? Certainly not 99-100% like we have here. That would change the base takers ability to down hangers so quickly and easily. The wind layers seem to have no effect either.  :airplane:
I always wanted to fight an impossible battle against incredible odds.

Offline DREDIOCK

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17775
Re: Defending the strats - a case study
« Reply #67 on: September 08, 2014, 08:44:23 AM »
   Increase the difficulty of pinpoint bombing like it was when AH first started. What was the accuracy of WW2 bombers? Certainly not 99-100% like we have here. That would change the base takers ability to down hangers so quickly and easily. The wind layers seem to have no effect either.  :airplane:

Dunno. I cant hardly hit doodly in a bomber at anything over 12K.

Then again Im not what can be considered a dedicated bomber jock
Death is no easy answer
For those who wish to know
Ask those who have been before you
What fate the future holds
It ain't pretty

Offline The Fugitive

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18251
      • Fugi's Aces Help
Re: Defending the strats - a case study
« Reply #68 on: September 08, 2014, 08:52:47 AM »
  Increase the difficulty of pinpoint bombing like it was when AH first started. What was the accuracy of WW2 bombers? Certainly not 99-100% like we have here. That would change the base takers ability to down hangers so quickly and easily. The wind layers seem to have no effect either.  :airplane:

No, it can't be buff specific, it needs to be HQ specific.  If you make bombing harder well have less bombers. If you make the damage to little the buffs will disappear. Right now we just need the balance adjusted.

One guy can knock out radar in an hour or so for his trip and it takes one guy 3 or 4 hours to repair that damage. So adjust it so it only takes 1 guy 5 trips to bring it back up.

I know, but if 5 guys run supplies it will only be down for 12 minutes making the bombers run a waste.... not if there is 5 guys spaced out 12 minutes apart. Now the run becomes a tactic instead a "griefing" play.

This way the attacker has to work at just as the defender does.

Offline Zoney

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6503
Re: Defending the strats - a case study
« Reply #69 on: September 08, 2014, 10:52:13 AM »
I logged in on Saturday and our HQ was hit.  My wingman, Wiley, logged in and we spent the day defending the strats and the HQ.  Not once did HQ get taken out again and we had many many try.  We flew TA152's which I consider to be the finest interceptor in the game.  We traded off landing and rearming so there was always at least one of us in position.  Frankly, it was very fun and very exciting.  In conclusion, yes, you can defend your HQ but you need patience, determination and a decent skill set.

Wiley has been a member of JG11 for a couple weeks now and I'm glad to have him, great guy, really good stick and fearless.  Sometimes, he's even higher than me (when I'm taking off or landing).
Wag more, bark less.

Offline Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23938
      • Last.FM Profile
Re: Defending the strats - a case study
« Reply #70 on: September 08, 2014, 11:06:48 AM »
Frankly, it was very fun and very exciting.  In conclusion, yes, you can defend your HQ but you need patience, determination and a decent skill set

It works that way only at and near prime time, and on a map that makes it possible. On SFMA for example, one had to hover directly over the HQ for an attack which may, or may not come in the next two hours.
That's about as exciting as flying resupply goons for the same time
Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman

In November 2025, Lusche will return for a 20th anniversary tour. Get your tickets now!

Offline Wiley

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8097
Re: Defending the strats - a case study
« Reply #71 on: September 08, 2014, 11:17:26 AM »
It was a lot of fun, and I'm sure we saved the HQ once (barely) and probably our presence saved it from being hit repeatedly because the bombers knew we were there waiting for them.  After we halted them cold, nothing more came in.  I'm sure we made a difference to our side.

With that said, I can only think of a couple other people who enjoy that kind of gameplay that would be willing to commit to that kind of mission over the course of a day.  It is definitely not for many.

It works that way only at and near prime time, and on a map that makes it possible. On SFMA for example, one had to hover directly over the HQ for an attack which may, or may not come in the next two hours.
That's about as exciting as flying resupply goons for the same time

Yeah.  It was across Saturday afternoon, not peak numbers but not dead either.  There were enough guys that thought they had a free shot at first to make it fun, but like you say, loitering for 2 hours is not fun gameplay.  If you keep an eye on the likely approach vectors though, it is possible to go do something else and still retask back to the strat area as needed.

...I can't believe I just said that to Snailman, of course he knows that... ;)

I'm starting to like a lot of things about Fester the more I play on it.

Wiley.
If you think you are having a 1v1 in the Main Arena, your SA has failed you.

JG11

Offline GhostCDB

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1730
Re: Defending the strats - a case study
« Reply #72 on: September 08, 2014, 12:44:38 PM »
I am a puffy ack magnet I don't care what any chart says.
Top Gun

Offline 715

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1835
Re: Defending the strats - a case study
« Reply #73 on: September 08, 2014, 02:25:30 PM »
How about we simply intensify the numbers of ack over and around HQ and the rest of the strats

2 times 0 is still 0.  I've done tests regarding the CV puffy ack (and the CV group has a lot of it).  In ten tests in B17s (at 10K I think) the CV puffy ack had zero probability of taking out my set of 3 bombers before I dropped.  In fact it managed to take out a single plane of the 30 total.

If someone wants your HQ or strat target dead, you're only option is to assign someone to fly around each target for hours doing nothing whatsoever.  And, given that your one plane with maybe two to four guns that can damage a bomber are going up against 3 planes with a total of something like 30 guns that can kill you instantly, that still isn't a guaranteed save of the strat/HQ.

Offline whiteman

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4228
Re: Defending the strats - a case study
« Reply #74 on: September 08, 2014, 02:59:16 PM »
One problem I see with HQ/strat defense is no one ups when the early warning is put out. Second, when people do up they are upping at a base 10-20 miles from the raids current location. At the point you're never going to catch them as you're climbing and trying to run them down. Theres a 7k base behind the HQ on festema, its maybe two sectors back but thats 7k you don't have to climb and bring a drop tank. In a 152 you should be able to them if you up when they are a sector from the city