Author Topic: Another setup Idea (Read 633 times)

TheBug · « **on:** August 15, 2002, 02:06:37 PM »

Seeing as how we have a PTO setup running at the moment, I'm not gonna suggest my true desire for a 1943 PTO setup. But how about a 1943 Mighty Eighth setup?? B17, B26, A20, P47-d11, P51-b, Spit V (or IX??) vs 190a's and 109g2 and g6??

Not sure what tools you have for setting up the arena( still very new to AH) but I was also thinking maybe if you kicked up the fuel modifier and really cranked up the AA it might create a better representation of the 1943 European air campaign. Less fuel endurance, to possible force some buffs to fly unescorted and increased AA strength to limit the effectiveness of Jabo raids giving the big buffs a role to play.

Not sure if there's a good map for this, but the planeset sounds good to me. So I figured I'd throw the idea out there.

HFMudd · « **Reply #1 on:** August 15, 2002, 03:21:05 PM »

IMHO you don't have the bomber population to really be able to design a weeks worth of play around it. I would however enjoy the "P47-d11, P51-b, Spit V (or IX??) vs 190a's and 109g2 and g6" portion of this setup.

-ammo- · « **Reply #2 on:** August 15, 2002, 05:06:34 PM »

I'm down with that idea. bring it on.

LÃ¶we · « **Reply #3 on:** August 15, 2002, 05:35:19 PM »

Yep it's been a while since we've had a good 8th AF, RAF Luftwaffe set-up.

Karnak · « **Reply #4 on:** August 15, 2002, 07:25:51 PM »

Add the Mosquito FB.Mk VI to the list and I'm happy.

brady · « **Reply #5 on:** August 15, 2002, 07:57:16 PM »

Well I am outa the rotation for a few weeks since I am up this week, maybe one of the other CT staff members would consider it.

Although Buff's are prety usless curently for base capture, and since you realy nead base capture to get a good battle going uping the AA might be a problem, CT aa is ushaly set at .7 (MA at 1.0)

Wotan · « **Reply #6 on:** August 15, 2002, 08:02:58 PM »

no one will fly bombers in that setup.

unless we upped the amount of damage it takes to destroy a twn object and fighter hangers but even then it would just eliminate base capture as a strategy and end up a 1943 furball arena.

TheBug · « **Reply #7 on:** August 15, 2002, 08:20:52 PM »

Good call on the Mosquito, Karnak, that would be an excellent addition.

I have to politely disagree, with the comment that buffs are useless for base capture. In this setup just consider each LW base as a critical component/factory to their aircraft production. This would be a target that a fighter-bomber would have no chance to destroy. Nor would a group of 3-6 buffs. But a large formation of heavy bombers, dropping on the command of the best qualified bombardier would have the chance to destroy the town to allow capture, thereby crippling some part of LW production. But as in the war not necessarily destroyed on the first mission.

But you are correct that it would depend on people to fly buffs to allow bases to be captured. I know I would gladly form up in a large buff formation, easier to drink beer when in a buff

. But why cater to the furball, I say up the AA and the toughness if people want to furball well then they're gonna furball not much to do about that. But if a group of people chose to form an organized raid with buffs and possibly escort, then at least allow that to have a major impact.

That's just my opinion and I truly welcome and appreciate counterpoints/other ideas.

HFMudd · « **Reply #8 on:** August 16, 2002, 10:01:44 AM »

I guess the problem is that AH has no true "strategic" target in the sense that word was used in WWII bombing campaigns. What I mean by this is there is no target in the game that requires either the range or hitting power of a level bomber. Any target (base, city, refinery, factory) in the game can better be destroyed by a pair of JABO's than by 2, 4 or 6 (depending on the preference of the same pair of pilots) level bombers. Heck, even I have deacked an air field with nothing but the mg's on a 109.

I don't see any way that this could be corrected that would not results in howls of anguish from large portions of the player base either. One could make maps in which the strategic targets are too deep to fly to in a fighter but then nobody would want to fly that far in a bomber either. One could make certain strategic have wicked AA against JABO but a determined pilot could still JABO the edges and work his way in. The AA could be made very tough to kill instead of the one ping mg targets they are now but that might eliminated the ability to base capture altogether.

To be honest, the only way I can see to have "historic" level bombers at all would be for an AI formations of 10+ B-17's to airstart at 20K on the friendly edge of the map and fly straight across to the enemy edge. Each bomber that makes it across would reduce fuel globably for the enemy side by a couple percent. Make the bombers guns the only manable positions on the bombers, allow players to join the bomber guns as they do a field gun, add a system text notification so players know when an enemy is within 5k of the formation and get rid that silly "fire all" button.

My $.02 worth.

TheBug · « **Reply #9 on:** August 16, 2002, 10:13:25 AM »

The setup may not lead to a proper role for the heavies or even bring about their presence. But I would much rather give this setup a try and suffer through the 47d11 vs 190a furballs

then have to have another week of fantasy CT, aka Close Encounters of the Third Reich

keyapaha · « **Reply #10 on:** August 16, 2002, 10:24:45 AM »

speaking of fantasy set ups i would like to see a 1945 usa vs russia setup

have the complete russian planeset vs the p51d p47d25 p47d30 p38l no cv's no bombers no base capture no gv's just good ol' fashioned dog fighting

Nifty · « **Reply #11 on:** August 16, 2002, 10:44:50 AM »

1943 would very much be Spitfire IX. The Spit V entered service in April 1941, and the Spitfire IX entered service in mid 1942. The 60 point perk monster Spit VIX entered service in March '44.

Also, it'd just be the 190A-5 for 1943, but I'm sure Brady woulda made sure of that.

He knows 190s!

MRPLUTO · « **Reply #12 on:** August 16, 2002, 05:34:15 PM »

I believe HiTech wrote that the first match up in the coming Mission Arena would be the 8th Air Force vs. the Luftwaffe.

MRPLUTO VMF-323 ~Death Rattlers~ MAG-33

Wotan · « **Reply #13 on:** August 16, 2002, 05:54:46 PM »

I never said bombers were useless to base capture

I said that unless you up the amount of damage it would take to kill a hanger then jabos would be used exclusively so to encourage bombers you would need to up the amout of damage to town and field objects making bombers more usefull. But that wouldnt bring more bomber pilots into the ct it would just get rid of strat all together.

I never see bombers in the ct, or rarely I should say.

How are you going to do a mighty eighth with no bomber pilots?

TheBug · « **Reply #14 on:** August 16, 2002, 08:28:00 PM »

I never said "Wotan said bombers were useless"

To be honest you're not making any sense, appears to me your only intent is to be combative. First you say because upping the town toughness would eliminate base capture it would turn into a furball, then you go on to say you rarely see bombers in the CT?? Well how did we do Guadalcanal without Vals, Kates, SBDs etc?? General consensus seemed to be one of enjoyment when it came to last weeks setup.

The Mighty Eighth would be the same, even if it turned into a furball. The Eighth Airforce was composed of many fighter groups. The bombers were just the necessary encouragment to get the LW into the air to allow the Mighty Eighth to destroy it. Well in the CT we do not need to encourage the LW to take to the air, or do we??

You're telling me you wouldn't enjoy a P47d11 P51b vs 190A5 190g2/6 match-up?? Who cares what the bombers do

Richtofen Geshwader?, leads me to believe your yanking my chain.