Improving the Bomber Model (suggestion)

[bj229r]

In reality..there WAS a lead bombadier for each group of planes...well-trained bombadiers were few---the guy would holler DROP..and all the planes in his flight would do so--if he missed..they all missed

[Keez]

Originally posted by Karnak
Midnight,

I've never tried the "drop on the leader" like you describe, but based on the above I would expect everyone besides the leader to miss.

I feel like I must defend the "drop on lead" method here. It has been succesfully adapted by our squadron. Every single squadron meeting we use it, and it works perfectly well every single time.

And that is not just when we fly with squadronmates. During our squadron meetings we often post buff missions that are led by us, but free for all to join. We then also always use drop on lead. And even the rookies that fly with us hit spot-on every single time.

In fact, I dare to claim that using "drop on lead" is more effective than everyone dropping all by himself. Much mor effective since only one person has to calibrate. I will illustrate this with two pictures.

This first one is from a Fariz bombraid. Everyone dropped all by himself and many, if not most pilots, were not skilled enough in the use of the bombsight. This was the result.

[Midnight]

Originally posted by Karnak
Midnight,

I'm skeptical of your claims.  They sound a bit exagerated to me.

I have flown in situations like you describe, but the bomber pilots can never quite get the exact same heading and exact same power settings.  Inevitably the formation fragments as soon as people have to go to guns to defend the formation.

I've never tried the "drop on the leader" like you describe, but based on the above I would expect everyone besides the leader to miss.

I am by no means exagerating. Any good bomber squadron can tell you they can do the same thing.

1. Get your formation assembled while still in friendly territory, where the pilots can concentrate on flying.

2. Once the formation is together, the leader calls out heading,  power setting and climb rate (auto-angle climb preffered over auto-speed. Also, the leader CAN NOT fly at full power, otherwise the trailers will never catch up.)

3. The IP (Initial Point) must be planned ahead. For those who don't know, IP is the point at which all bombers should be in TIGHT formation, power settings are given for bomb drop, all bombers go to auto-pilot level and bay doors open.

4. As the leader calibrates, all other bombers can man their guns and make small corrections with rudder input if needed.

5. Leader needs to take into account that some bombers may be a few hundred yards behind. Becuase of this, the leader should drop salvo dead center of target area. If the rest of the bombers have a good formation, the target should be very well covered with bombs.

[Keez]

This here is the result on No9 Squadron AND GUESTS dropping all on Revvins command, like we do every week. I rest my case .

[eskimo2]

I like it.

eskimo

[Esme]

Stracop, in my opinion your suggestion is excellent. You are also the first person to convince me that "Otto"  (automatic defensive fire, like ground flak) isn't necessarily a necessity for buffs.

I would also like to see the pilot of a plane be able to call for a bombardier, if they wanted one; perhaps have it so that when folks make a "join" request that the pilot has the option to select "Gunner only" "Bombardier" (who could also gun) or refuse the request.

As for training people...  after messing around in a bomber with a squad mate the other day, where sometimes I perched myself in the cockpit (I was actually navigating us using paper maps, rather than using the GPS, for those that are curious), it occurred to me to wonder whether netlag would prevent the possibility of allowing some sort of "dual-control trainer" mode altogether.  At the very least, I can see that it's possible to show newbies what a reasonable approach to an airfield for landing is like, by having them join and sit in the cockpit, but it'd be nice if one could allow them to try to land whilst retaining the option to override their control of the plane if they start going too badly wrong.

It'd also be nice if they could see what you're seeing through the bomb sight.

But anyway... damned good suggestion, Stracop!  Only addition I'd make to it is to have the formation used selectable, as the LW didnt fly combat boxes like that. They tended to fly columns, slanted lines or arrowheads  Or... maybe just give the person linking up the option of whether to be stationed left or right, abreast or behind, above, on a level or below the ship they are linking to.  That way any number of different formations could be formed. And you could have people linking to someone who is linked to someone else, so that if a little lag were built into the "follow my leader process", the people further down the links would turn later in progression.

Esme

[steven10]

This is a great idea that should also be implemented to fighters, and fighter escorts. The fighters would fly in packs but disengage the formation when engaging.

Secondly, the bombing formation would return this game to a more realistic role. Instead of everyone flying around like bees, we would have goals.

Attacking:
bombers - destroy enemy ground target
fighters - escort/protect bombers

defending-
fighters - destroy bombers (lighter fighters like 109 could escort 110 attacking bombers)

In my opinion, the main arena right now is a mess of people flying around with the objective of killing only.

[Revvin]

Steven10> It's already being done in the MA by No.9 Sqn RAF at least. Every mission we post has escort and bombers. Every bomber pilot is assigned a formation position, I have a small word doc that I use to position everyone. I've not had a mission yet where the escort has buggered off and left us and they do a great job whilst the bombers lumber on. I would not want to see such a lazy command as to automatically form bombers in perfect formation as squad's like No.9 pride themselves on maintaining formation themselves and dropping on lead as Keez pointed out above.

[maxtor]

Originally posted by StracCop
An idea....,

Okay, I've given this quite a lot of thought and I think I've come up with a solution that solves the two most glaring problems with the bomber model that I've heard with the most frequency: accuracy and vulnerability

As to accuracy, the bombsite is 100% accurate, at any altitude.  I know this, I do it consistently.   You must do two things though:

(1)Set a constant speed and constant altitude.  In this there is no margin for error.   You should set a speed at about 75% 80% power - too low a power your bomber will be decending - tpp high you bomber will never quite equalize at a constant speed in time. (a)

(2) Do a proper calibration, which includes a proper target altitude setting.  TO be sure you have done it right, you should zoom in the map.

(a) You can do this extremely fast,if you take note of the approximate speed your particular bomber travels at a particular throttle settign.  Write it down.   Then when you do a 180, you can use full power or zero  power to get the speed quickly to that pooitn.   (This is how I can do such fast recalibrations for subsequent passes, and still maintain grat accuracy at 20K+ altitudes- which is from where I drop almost every bomb)
accuracy and vulnerability
Overall - Yep, you are vulnerable, but fortunately you get to piclk the situations you put yourself in.

[maxtor]

oops I meant to add as well, to bomb well I don't recommend you use formations.  I fly single bombers.  The formation bomb spread is waaaay too small, largely all you do with the 2 other bombers is blow up the stuff the first one already would have (this is why my hit percentage is so high)

[StracCop]

I understand what you guys are saying but you're actually helping me prove my thesis.  My objective is to get more bomber groups into the air.  

The fact that few (very few) players have managed to attain the level of skill your squad demonstrates attests to the need for change.  If having one squad and a few dedicated strategic bomber is what the new bombing model was designed to foster then fine.  If, however, it was intended to create a more widespread use of strategic bombing then the results have not followed.

One final thing:  I'm not sure that the dweebery you fear will necessarily transpire.  For one thing my idea would still require that bomber pilots get within a certain distance of the leader they wish to join.  I envision it as a loose formation: each group of three in roughly the same heading, altitude (and some minimum alt like 10k could also be required to add some dweeb-prevention difficulty) and some minimal distance away before join can successfully be accomplished.  This alone would improve a players bomber formation flying and, hopefully, limit any dweebery by those who haven't taken the time to acquire even rudimentary bomber piloting skills.  

Meeting up at a predetermined point would likely still be necessary.  The big change that my idea would offer is to allow players to concentrate on defense instead of flying/calibration while at the same time off-loading the bomb release duties to a dedicated member of the flight.  This, I believe, offers the best balance of realism and historical accuracy.  Being forced to get in the bomb site, calibrate, and stay there during the bomb run is akin to having no gunner at all...not very realistic or accurate.

There will always be pilots who will seek to operate such missions manually to meet the challenge of doing it that way and as a means of demonstrating their mastery of the art.  For those who don't wish to travel that route or don't have the necessary time to navigate a long learning curve to appreciate the joy of large-scale strategic bombing, I think an option should be provided.

As I stated earlier, the option you have professed has been available since the bombing model update and few have taken the necessary steps to adapt to it.  Perhaps it is time to adapt the strategic bombing model to the playing habits of the majority of players.  If more large-scale bomber missions are desired by HTC, then this is clearly necessary.

Thanks for the feedback!

David

[Revvin]

We've had members join us whom were very good at formation flying and some that learnt with us. We're always more than happy as a squad to help bomber pilots learn the ropes and the way we fly is not beyond any virtual pilot in Aces High and requires only a little practice to fly formation and to learn how to use the bombsight. You are not going to encourage people to learn to bomb or fly formation by giving them more and more crutches, the only thing you will do is drive out those who learn because they will feel like they are then playing a game that requires no skill.

There are more reasons as to why you don't see so many bombers in the sky in AH anymore apart from dedicated bomber squads like No.9 but that's another topic altogether

[Esme]

Some folks have argued in favour of artificially increasing buff climb rates and loadouts. No, no, NO!  Please, no. :-}  yes, there are aspects of AH that are rather unrealistic, particularly if by "AH" what you have in mind is the MA rather than the basic software itself.   But taking AH even further away from reality is NOT the way to go. What next, artificially increase the speeds for all the speed junkies? Then what's to seperate what is supposed to be a WW2 combat flight sim from a Korean War one?

Please, everyone, be careful to NOT confuse "AH as experienced in the MA" with "AH the software", the program that runs on your computers.  The MA is but ONE of the things that AH is capable of giving you the experience of.  Others include a much more realistic experience in organised games or more realistic arenas. If you start asking for this that or the other thinking ONLY in terms of the MA, then you risk limiting AH in the range of experiences it can offer us - you would, in fact, be taking something OUT of the game.  Deliberately making the FMs fundamentally unrealistic is one such suggestion that would seriously detract from AH.

I have long argued, not just in AH, that the place to tailor to various groups needs is in the arena settings.  You want the possibility of increased rates of climb? OK, but do it by having the FMs scalable, the scaling set by CMs, so that arenas and games can be set up with climb rates as real or unreal as people want.  I want to have no-GPS games? Sure! - just make it an arena setting.


Lots of stuff can be added to increase the realism and also increase the enjoyment for the dedicated bomber pilots/crew amongst us WITHOUT negatively impacting MA dweebery simply by putting in the ability to have it turned on or off (or scaled) as an arena setting.

Remove the underlying reality of the game, and you'll turn AH into just another video game with little longevity.  Improve the underlying reality but with options to tailor stuff via arena settings, and you can cater to more people for much longer, and turn AH into one of the true greats.

Regarding bomber loadouts, we should be able to load either an exact percentage of fuel (up to the limit set by the field state) or have smaller increments (even multiples of 10% up to the field limit would be nice - 5% increments would be better) and take the consequences in terms of aircraft performance and stress if we overload it.  This also means that we need to have realistic modelling of fuel load and consumption for each plane. The endurance of the Ju88, for instance, is grotesquely undermodelled - even without flight test data, that a Ju88 could raid Scapa Flow from Denmark or Norway proves this (try it in a 1:1 modelled terrain in AH!), and the facts and figures regarding Ju88 tankage and range aren't exactly difficult to find.  Also, you might want to look into how many Lancasters actually took 14,000lbs of bombs up to 30,000ft at all, never mind what time of day it was...  Part of the fun of planning a mission properly  is planning the loadout taking what needs doing at target and performance factors into account.  Doesnt need to take long, so long as good performance data is to hand (bit damned difficult if the fuel loads are unrealistic and the fuel burn rate is messed with too much, mind...)

Stracop's idea has a great deal of merit, would allow the unskilled buffer as much opportunity to do something fun as the unskilled fighter dweeb has had for ages in the MA, would NOT force skilled bomber crew to abandon their skills, and I for one would welcome some kind of response from HTC on the suggestion.

My request would be for greater realism in radar and (lack of) navigational aids - oh, and greatly reduce icon range at night, and lets have some moonless DARK nights now and then. Furball enthusiasts will still head for enemy held bases looking for fights and find them. Others might find it FUN to patrol the gaps in the radar looking for buffers like me trying to sneak through.  It's the cat-and-mouse aspect of fighter vs bomber ops that gives enduring pleasure to both. HO'ing armadas of escorted enemy buffs is OK, but a change is nice now and then.  And of course, when it comes to fighter pilots looking for buffs to kill in the MA - well, you KNOW we'll be coming for your bases, don't you?!  What the heck do you think you need radar for to find us?!?!

I move in support of Stracops idea. Then lets get a few others in that make life more fun for buff pilots - trust me, they'll make life more fun for EVERYONE using AH in whatever way.

Esme

[Taiaha]

Once again, esme, I'm enormously impressed with how articulate and reasoned your approach is to issues related to strategic bombing in AH.  Nice point about the 88 as well, that lack of range is a frustration.  I also think Stracops idea has a lot of merit, and now is the time to try something, I think, because since 1.11 came out I've noticed a lot more people flying buffs.  I've got back into it in a serious way myself.  Previously, it was never the bombing that was an issue for me, it was that bizarre transferrable damage problem that was ruining my fun; that seems to have been dealt with (touch wood).  That, and the provision of much larger strat targets (which in turn has vastly improved the utility of the KI67, and the 88; I rarely fly B17s and Lancs anymore.  And as a fighter pilot, I've certainly encountered a lot more buffs recently.  So there seems to be some momentum here, it would be nice to build on it.

[rod367th]

Dave its a good post.

If Hitech does this, it should be in program that bombers in this big formation cannot drop bombs untill 25kplus I would set it at 30k. (as this was the alt bombers bombed at in ww2)

I think your idea would work best in tods or other mission arena's in here. 1 week and every fighter in here would complain. I know I wouldn't attack a 12 ship formation  with 12 guns all firing at same plane. Its hard now for 2 or 3 fighters to kill a formation of 17's let alone 12 in tight.



 

 small reasons why I think its not perfect
 

1. Making 1 12 ship formation be perfect formation takes out the flying of a flying sim. I like the idea if my squad wants to bomb a hq we all have a little work to stay tight.


 

 2.I can see 3 or 4 guys getting formation like this and just flying 1k or 2 k and bombing field or city and acting like a deathstar circling over bases for kills.



3. Can SEE 12 ship formations now Suiciding cv's lol








 and as for example why i think bombing is okay in arena. This is account of 3 trips to take out radar.


Just for example today went to Bishops HQ 3 times  highest was 30k. Bishops lost radar every time.(at least enemy) killed 2 163's a 109 abd a la7, flew home 1 ship. 2nd time 2 kills 3 ships home 3 rd time 2 kills only 1 ship left.This was due to fact at 30k.


 Now later same knight I went to Field 60 from 61  9 k killed a spit smoked 190 going to target. Killed 3/4 city 17 targets first pass. Killed a6m la7 f4u  before a 190 finished off my 3 bombers.  And we not talking newbies in planes half were AK's  Furious was the 190. only reason city was not destoryed was case I was at a alt that bomber shouldn't be at.




   I personally think bombers now are perfect, and close to real life. And I think most know i'll even slow down to let fighters catch me so i can shoot them. (Mostly la7's since la7 is slower than a a6m at 30k plus) I havn't seen many take out my bombers alone. Even with 163's now.


 I think some just to lazy to learn how to bomb, I taught the dumbest guy in our squad in 5 mins. Only takes 5 mins to learn. Have taken many up to learn to bomb. all report that bombing all intened targets now.





 Please don't take this post wrong, I fly 50/50  fighters/bombers maybe more this tod as bomber, As I can climb and get work done. This is not a fighter dweeb wanting easy kills.