Author Topic: bombs away on new version  (Read 680 times)

Offline zipity

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 197
bombs away on new version
« Reply #45 on: May 21, 2002, 05:05:54 PM »
>>>I say "boo" to a person who will do nothing more than fly around and knock down lean-to's for the express purpose of disallowing people from playing as they wish.


How is this different from spitquakers who hang out at high alts over their bases waiting to dive down on "fluffs" when they go to the norden?  Even the act of furballing is disallowing someone from playing as they wish.  I've been in attack planes before and been jumped by n1k's who don't want me to drop my bombs on their base.  Its a game and people will develop strategies to have fun their own way, which might up set other players.. oh well, thems the breaks.

I do think this may go along way to giving Lazs what he wants, the end of the bomber in AH.  After flying for an hour to gain alt, having 4 bomber deaths recorded because you went to the bomb site, leaving your mini-squad undefended may cause bomber pilots to shy away from formations.  If that happens, then what you have left is an under-defended bomber that can't hit anything.  Hopefully HTC will at least implement a warning for the buff pilot that tells them when a fighter is attacking and from where.  The same result a bomber pilot would have had during WWII when 1 of his gunners spotted a con.

One last comment, I like to fly all the planes in AH, drive the GVs and boats.  I don't really enjoy referring to fighter pilots as spit quakers or pilots with balls of fur but those same spitquakers can't seem to get enough of referring to bomber pilots as "fluffs" so why not?  The funnest thing about flying "fluffs" on  "milk runs" is hearing Lazs complain.

Offline Blue Mako

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1295
      • http://www.brauncomustangs.org/BLUEmako.htm
bombs away on new version
« Reply #46 on: May 21, 2002, 10:03:21 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Gypsy Baron
When is it than going to require "skill" to be afighter jock?

 If bombs get dispersed then I think it's only fair that
 the freaking headons get toned WAY down...


GB,
Ever stop to think maybe the fighter pilot might use some skill to avoid a HO?  An even stranger thought: avoiding a HO and using some ACM in the process can give you an immediate advantage in a fight.  A difficult concept to grasp, I know.

Do you really think that lowering realism by putting a deflector shield in front of planes is going to increase dogfighting skills?  I think not.

BM



BTW has anyone stopped to think about the possibilities opening up for Ackstar dweebery?  Think about it: 1 dweeb, 4 buffs flying through a furball, spraying at every fighter that gets within 2k.  Tragic.

[edit] Read through rest of thread and yes, people have considered this.  D'oh!
« Last Edit: May 21, 2002, 10:12:59 PM by Blue Mako »

Offline Blue Mako

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1295
      • http://www.brauncomustangs.org/BLUEmako.htm
bombs away on new version
« Reply #47 on: May 21, 2002, 10:24:27 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Gypsy Baron
I just don't want to have to dick around with this "calibration" scheme...it doesn't add anything worthwile to the "game", IMO.


It only attempts to add a measure of realism, guess that isn't worthwhile to some.

Quote
However, that said, if this 4Xbuff stuff serves to REDUCE the landgrab crap that is the current focal point of the "game" and increases the ACM aspect, then I'm all for it...and that comes from someone who has been predominantly an online buff driver since AW SVGA days...


Taken from the AH website help page:

"Capturing territory through the use of air, land and sea power is the objective of Aces High."

That "landgrab crap" is the focal point of the game because HTC want it to be so.  All of their developments will obviously be intended to further this.  Personally I'm surprised that a dedicated buff driver such as yourself isn't happy with attempts to make your experience more realistic.

Offline Kieran

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4119
bombs away on new version
« Reply #48 on: May 21, 2002, 10:37:41 PM »
Zipity, you did note I offered two sides to the equation? You know, "hooray for those that use the buffs for strat, boo to those that do it to make sure people play the way the buffer wants them to"? Certainly you have seen the boards peppered with people making comments like, "this will end the Spitquake".

Hey, I don't believe "fluffer" is any more fair a comment than "spitquake", but you have to admit the intent of some is to eliminate furballing from the game. These are the people Wotan and I specifically are referring to, not the guys who simply want a viable tool to use in the arena. One thing you can say about Lazs is, however disaffected he is about bombing, he ignores it in game. He isn't looking for ways to ruin it for buff lovers. He may call them names here, but you don't hear his mouth running nonstop on the buffer in game, and you certainly don't see him going to some back field looking for guys making sandwiches with their buffs on autopilot. He won't come after you at any altitude, he simply ignores you. And, as Fatty pointed out, some buffers aren't satisfied to ignore the furballers, they have to make sure furballing doesn't happen.

So, how many furballers want to eliminate buffs from the game? OK, I'll give you Lazs- how many besides that? Now, how many buffers have mentioned ending furballing in the last few days since the announcement of the new buff formations? See it?

Furballer = Lemme alone and let me play.

Buffer = Why dontcha play the way I wantcha to?

Furballer = I wanna kill stuff.

Buffer = WE HAVE TO DEFEND 27 NOW!!!

Furballer = Damn, they knocked down the radar. Oh, well, who needs 'dar.

Buffer = Haha! We knocked your resources out! Enjoy the dark for the next 4 hours!

Furballer = What are resources?

Buffer = I hate this side, no one is ever organized. What a bunch of losers!

Furballer = That fight was the most fun I've had all day. Thanks guys!

Buffer = I'm defecting, you guys are hopeless.

Furballer = Thanks for letting us know you're leaving, since we didn't even know you were here.

Buffer = This game sux! 2 hour flight for what? I don't wanna waste all that time and effort to hit undefended resources, score big points, and return safely. This game needs realism! (Think about this for a few seconds, from an historical perspective).

Furballer = They're hitting our base? MMmm, delivery!

Buffer = All those guys down there ever fly are Nikkis, Spits, and La7s.

Furballer = Hmmm, I've managed a 4:1 in my 190A5, let's try the F6F for a tour...

Enough rambling...

Offline Booky

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 344
bombs away on new version
« Reply #49 on: May 21, 2002, 10:48:41 PM »
I know what planes I will up when I see a bunch of low buffs.  

Can we say Yak-9 and Hurr D  :D

I am also going to try and perfect the bombing at alt, so I have to say that not everyone is going to do the low alt ackstaring you are saying. I personally want to do it like it was done, around 20 to 25k. So what if I miss a few times, it only takes practice to get it right. The good part is that if I miss I don't end up killing a bunch of kids in a school or hospital like it did when they missed in RL. :eek:

Offline Doberman

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 272
bombs away on new version
« Reply #50 on: May 21, 2002, 11:06:52 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Don

Yeah the HO was legitimately used in RL but, not as much as it is in AH.


Says who?  It was pretty much standard operating procedure for US pilots in the Pacific theater.

D

Offline Hooligan

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 889
bombs away on new version
« Reply #51 on: May 22, 2002, 12:19:55 AM »
Sheeesh, the horror of the unknown!

Nobody knows quite how the new buff formations will affect MA play.  Guess what.  Nobody is going to figure it out until we get the release and I doubt HTC will be perfectly happy with the very first cut so some stuff may get adjusted (like how much ordnance it takes to kill a hangar).  Buffs might be much better at taking out fields or much worse.  Personally I hope level bombing is realistic enough that they never sink another moving ship and that they are pretty useless against pinpoint targets.  But what I want and what we end up with in the MA are not necessarily related.  I think I will wait and see what the effects are before I get too disapointed.

Hooligan

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
bombs away on new version
« Reply #52 on: May 22, 2002, 08:31:11 AM »
zip said..... "I do think this may go along way to giving Lazs what he wants, the end of the bomber in AH. After flying for an hour to gain alt, having 4 bomber deaths recorded because you went to the bomb site, leaving your mini-squad undefended may cause bomber pilots to shy away from formations. If that happens, then what you have left is an under-defended bomber that can't hit anything. "

One can allways hope..   I would settle for what hooligan said but zippities vision is heartening.
lazs

Offline Fariz

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1087
      • http://9giap.warriormage.com
bombs away on new version
« Reply #53 on: May 22, 2002, 06:34:12 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
One Fariz mission will exceed the 64 plane limit without defenders even.



May be. We had 45 b26 raid earlier, would be 180 planes in next version :)

Though actually I doubt it will happen, at least very rearly. Usually number of participants are limmited in each mission depending on task, because it is not wise to use 50 people where 10 will do fine.

Fariz