Bombing & Bailing is getting ridiculous

[Ack-Ack]

and how do you propose to "fix" it?

I don't know what the perfect solution would be, which is why I've never offered a "fix" to the problem.

I dont have my head in the sand, you guys do. 

No, it's not us.  You have a tendency to dismiss problems if they don't effect you and then claim it's not a problem since you don't experience the issue.

you guys think that hitech can actually change how people play just by changing the code.  you fail to see that most of the solutions offered will actually affect those who do want to play rather than punish those who bail.


semp

Which is why I've never offered my ideas for a solution because, quite frankly, I don't think there is one that would satisfy all parties.  Just because we don't have a good solution to the problem is no reason to dismiss it, like you are doing.

 

[The Fugitive]

fugitive you are wrong.  some of those "solutions" do affect me.  for example stopping people from bailing out from undamaged bombers.  you know how many times I have bailed because either the base was taken and I have no interest in going to the next or to join another mission?   if you stop me from bailing then all I have to do is point the bomber nose straight down 20 seconds later I am gone.

other solutions like giving "kills and perkies" just by being within icon range are funny as hell.  you dont get perks for proxies right now, you really think it would be a good change?  right now you dont get perkies for damaging an airplane unless you actually get the kill.  so why should you get perkies for proxies and not for helping bring a plane down?

semp

I don't think anyone is looking to make it so you cant bail from a good plane, but the cost should be a lot higher.

To a person like you who likes to bail, and avoid the combat other are looking for the price of a couple hundred perks, or bombs not counting toward score or damage done won't bother you, but to others it might be enough for them to think twice and stick it out for the fight. They just need to find the right "carrot".

[guncrasher]

fugitive higher than what?  I get no perkies or points if I bail before I drop my bombs.  so you want to multiply my zero points and perks to make  it what?  zero again?  and if I drop and then bail we already have a system where your perkies and points are cut in what 1/2?  so please anybody here do explain how much more you can "punish" bombers anymore?



semp

[guncrasher]

btw I sunk a cv today that hadnt been touched, no resistant whatsoever and yet i got 15 perk points.  couple of years ago I used to get 25 perks even if it was damaged.  but then again you guys dont notice things like that.




semp

[Cjpedrido]

Perhaps the damage model for fighters vs. bombers is flawed.  Bomber pilots may be bailing because they stand little chance against the fighters and decide to bail instead of becoming the inevitable kill.

So why not just up the damage criteria to down a bomber?  Also why not look at giving them more ammo to defend themselves so maybe they will reconsider the engagement?

Some of the prior postings argue about penalties, loss of score, game restrictions, etc. and other acts of vindictive retribution for those who bail.  This one side thinking will result only in cancelled subscriptions which benefits no one. 

[Zimme83]

No, no, no. That would lead to jabos being replaced by low level buffs leveling everything before they are shot down.

One lesson learned in a very hard way during WW2 was that buffs dont survive against fighters, no matter how many guns they have. Buffs need escort. In AH we have more experienced gunners since we can reup as many times as we want. We also have fighter pilots that constantly volates rule 1A buff killing "-Never attack from dead 6". So buffs in AH are more succesful than buffs irl when it come to defending themselves. Problem is to get the buff pilots to understand that. 

[The Fugitive]

fugitive higher than what?  I get no perkies or points if I bail before I drop my bombs.  so you want to multiply my zero points and perks to make  it what?  zero again?  and if I drop and then bail we already have a system where your perkies and points are cut in what 1/2?  so please anybody here do explain how much more you can "punish" bombers anymore?



semp

Wow, knock the sand out of your ears! CHARGE you a penalty. In the case of the cv you sunk, you get 15 perks, but you bailed so it cost you 85 perks (100-15=85). Would it still be worth it to you to bail or would you fight your way home?

Or if you bail the cv returns to were it was Un damaged, would you still bail?

[guncrasher]

Wow, knock the sand out of your ears! CHARGE you a penalty. In the case of the cv you sunk, you get 15 perks, but you bailed so it cost you 85 perks (100-15=85). Would it still be worth it to you to bail or would you fight your way home?

Or if you bail the cv returns to were it was Un damaged, would you still bail?

I fly at 5.5 altitude to sink cv's.  I always get hit, so I could bail if I wanted and not be charged with a penalty or I could just dive right into the water or i could turn around and decide to use guns to damage the other ships on the fleet.  I can do any of this in order to avoid being attacked by a fighter.  even though I hardly ever see anybody defending a cv.

In reality you wont stop those who dont want to fight, but your solution will hurt those who do.


semp

[pembquist]

There must be several different bomb and bail motivations/descriptions.

1.) Screw You Cowboy: Bombing at 30K flying for 2 hours, "When I blow the crap out of this city my need for agency, so unsatisfied in real life will finally be met, euphoria will ensue," watch nme defender darbar grow, when nme fighter within 4K bail. Rationale: passive aggresion more satisfying (bird in hand) than the remote possibility of shooting down nme fighter (2 in bush,) especially when compared to the despair from the shame of failing in an effing VIDEO GAME. "WHY CAN'T I EVER WIN????"

2.) Oh For Chris'sakes: "I have no control surfaces 2 engines etc., my time is valuable for chris'sakes I'm not going to wait around for mister egomaniac fighter jock to set up his high speed off angle run just so he can feel glorious, sorry to offend but its a tough world buddy."

3.) I'm on a MISSION: (not a mission in the sense of pickupmission but in the sense of MISSSION,) "I've GOT to KILL those hangars/gvs in town/ack factory as part of my megalomaniacal plan, the bomber is a tool to be discarded when not working,  it doesn't work without bombs, duhhh!! My time is important and I have a JOB TO DO, sorry bub if you don't like it you can go furball with your (young cat/type of willow,) friends."

4.) AFK: Player launched about 90 minutes ago and immediately ALT TAB back to work. Now he's got 15 minutes to play between sales calls, back in the game...."huh, look how far I've gone" RETURN RETURN RETURN "where's a furball anyway...oh look at that big red darbar over the HQ, funny I was just there."

5.) ALT F4: The player hears keys in the front door and remembers all those casual promises he made 5 hours ago in the morning to his wife things like: paint the house, buy groceries, get a job, turn off the stove, feed the baby etc etc and realises he is still in his underware with a puddle of drool on his keyboard ALT F4 ALT F4 ALT F4 ALT F4 ALT F4 ALT F4, panic panic, despair, shame, suicidal thoughts etc. etc. "People were lined up my 6? I've got bigger problems bub, anyone know a good divorce lawyer??"

[Fate]

I dont defend bomb and bailing.  I am pointing out that it is really pointless to try to give solutions to something that isnt really a problem once you realize that there is no solution.

You say there 'is no problem' and 'is no solution' as if they were facts. Yet myself and others find it problematic, and myself and others have suggested solutions. You may - and obviously do - disagree with those solutions, but your argument alone doesn't discount their legitimacy.

I also disagree with your assertion that attempting to address the problem will drive players off. For every action there's an equal & opposite reaction. I'd suggest that any players driven off by the inability for them to game the system will be countered with more players attracted to a simulation environment that enforces simulation-true play. The way I see it, you're likely trading one player who has no real investment or interest in the type of play this game is based on for one who does.

While I have no plans to abandon the game due to this type of activity, I will say that when I 'take a break' from the game, more often than not it's preceded by a day or two of being on the receiving end of heavy gaming... players taking bases with mass suicide attacks (up, bomb, auger, up, bomb, auger, up, bomb, auger)... which invariably include bombing & bailing because... well... that's the only way they can get the job done. You've already had people on this thread admit that they have, in fact, been driven from the game temporarily by this type of activity. Yet you assert that limiting it will drive people from the game. Seems to me you're just choosing one type of gamer over another. Then again - so am I. But I believe the type of gamer I'm choosing is the type this game was made for.

[BuckShot]

Increase the bomber's reward (3x?) for shooting down fighters.

Maybe they will stick around in hope of getting more perks for killing attacking fighters than they would from dropping bombs on inanimate objects.

[Fate]

5.) ALT F4: The player hears keys in the front door and remembers all those casual promises he made 5 hours ago in the morning to his wife things like: paint the house, buy groceries, get a job, turn off the stove, feed the baby etc etc and realises he is still in his underware with a puddle of drool on his keyboard ALT F4 ALT F4 ALT F4 ALT F4 ALT F4 ALT F4, panic panic, despair, shame, suicidal thoughts etc. etc. "People were lined up my 6? I've got bigger problems bub, anyone know a good divorce lawyer??"

 

[guncrasher]

Increase the bomber's reward (3x?) for shooting down fighters.

Maybe they will stick around in hope of getting more perks for killing attacking fighters than they would from dropping bombs on inanimate objects.

now this is a great idea. 



semp

[Zoney]

Increase the bomber's reward (3x?) for shooting down fighters.

Maybe they will stick around in hope of getting more perks for killing attacking fighters than they would from dropping bombs on inanimate objects.

Brilliant, heck give them 5 times the perks if it will at least make them try.  Remember though, there are guys that just aren't very good and still wont stop bailing because 5 times zero is still zero.  Still, I like the idea.

[bustr]

Increase the bomber's reward (3x?) for shooting down fighters.

Maybe they will stick around in hope of getting more perks for killing attacking fighters than they would from dropping bombs on inanimate objects.

Only if they get those points regardless of getting home safe. Then what will you give them to spend those points on?

Late nights pacific time, I run into low level bombers all the time trying to flatten towns and fields I'm defending. Those guys really should get something for providing that much entertainment along with the willingness to steam right in there below 10k.

In the end, Hitech has to agree this is a good idea, or this whole spitballing is one group agrees that Hitech should horse whip another group of players because they are not playing the game in the manner the first group wants them to. Good thing AH is run by a Dictator, Democracy would kill the game in one tour.