New Hardness settings for Base Ammo Bunkers

[oTRALFZo]

How long is this trial and when will it go back to it's original setting?
I have seen through this setting that more often Ammo bunkers are still up in recent times with much less people targeting them.

I do feel that the impact of that is that it will be getting a bit more difficult to stop or even slow down hordes

[JimmyD3]

I don't have any hard data, but my observations are it has slowed down the horde, if anything. Personally, I think the bunkers were to soft anyway. At least now it takes 850# of ordinance to take them out. Bombers will still bomb, Jabo's will still dive bomb, it just takes a little more effort now. 

[icepac]

I guess no more hitting ords with a c202.   

On the bright side, the c202 is pretty good at high altitude if you can manage fuel burn.

[Animl-AW]

I don't have any hard data, but my observations are it has slowed down the horde, if anything. Personally, I think the bunkers were to soft anyway. At least now it takes 850# of ordinance to take them out. Bombers will still bomb, Jabo's will still dive bomb, it just takes a little more effort now. 

Yeeeup!
AW damage model (i know repeat) the masses wanted more reality, I gave them more reality and Relaxed Realism didn’t like it because it was just a lil harder.

This setting is more realistic and some don’t like it. <shrug>

Yu’ll never ever make everyone happy, ever.
<S>

[Randy1]

I don't have any hard data, but my observations are it has slowed down the horde, if anything. Personally, I think the bunkers were to soft anyway. At least now it takes 850# of ordinance to take them out. Bombers will still bomb, Jabo's will still dive bomb, it just takes a little more effort now. 

How about a compromise?  When I attack ammo bunkers, I use rockets.  Three rockets for each ammo bunker before the hardening was just about a sure kill..  How about setting it to 4 rocket hardness that have to be well placed so there is no room for error.  Five rockets would give you a bit of wiggle room..

Four rockets would bring back in the F4u1D as an example carrying 8 rockets for ammo bunker attacks, but a five-rocket attach using the P38 or P47 would be a more reliable rocket attack platform.  Tank wise that would take 3 HE instead of four HE now.

A compromise is even more important when a map requires long air or tank routes to the next air base.

Just a thought.

[Dadtallica]

A single fully loaded P47 can still stake out the VH, both bunkers, and the radar on a small base if you use guns. Dealers choice on how you divvy it up. 

Or it can take out two VH’s with one full load out and a few gun strafes.

A P38 can almost do it still it’s just missing the 500lb. You might get lucky with the 20mm cannon but probably not much compared to eight 50 cals.

[1Cane]

It's a terrible idea benefits the horde.
Want more realism hao about stopping buffs de-acking v-base from 25k



                                                             

[Randy1]

A single fully loaded P47 can still stake out the VH, both bunkers, and the radar on a small base if you use guns. Dealers choice on how you divvy it up. 

Or it can take out two VH’s with one full load out and a few gun strafes.

A P38 can almost do it still it’s just missing the 500lb. You might get lucky with the 20mm cannon but probably not much compared to eight 50 cals.

Really depends on how well the base is being defended. 

What we are talking about here is trying to limit gunned downed ammo bunkers.  The typical 190 ammo bunker attack.  I see Hitech thoughts on this and agree.  I am just suggesting backing off just a  bit on the hardness. 

I do agrre ammo bunkers should be harder than radaar towers.