Author Topic: Improving the Bomber Model (suggestion)  (Read 1616 times)

Offline StracCop

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 140
      • http://www.digitaldioramas.com/
Improving the Bomber Model (suggestion)
« Reply #120 on: January 27, 2003, 12:44:30 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Imp
targeted airfields to prevent fighters from taking off by destroying the runways, wich we cant do in AH.

Making airstrips destroyable would be much more realistic.

I agree completely.

We had such a feature in Fighter Ace 2 and denying the enemy use of their paved runways was a key component in our missions.  Naturally, they could always take off from the surrounding grassy area - IF their gear was strong enough - and IF they had enough flat ground for them to reach take-off speed.  They could even ride through the craters to reach undamaged stretches of runway - IF they taxi'd very slow.

I would love to see something like that incorporated into the game.  I'm for anything that marries the Aces High experience more closely to the reality experienced during the war.

On a lighter note, the vulch-stat potatos would whine day and night if something like this were enacted.  And that prospect just makes the idea more attractive!  :D

David
« Last Edit: January 27, 2003, 12:47:16 PM by StracCop »

Offline Imp

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 269
Improving the Bomber Model (suggestion)
« Reply #121 on: January 28, 2003, 08:23:55 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by StracCop
On a lighter note, the vulch-stat potatos would whine day and night if something like this were enacted.  And that prospect just makes the idea more attractive!  :D

David


I agree the furballers would whine like never before.
Of course Buffers would tell them its realistic (because it is).
But the furballers wouldnt stop until they changed it back.

I dont think itll happen but I can hope cant I.

Offline yb11

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 118
bombing
« Reply #122 on: January 29, 2003, 08:08:12 AM »
in stead of giveing us 3 buff for bomb runs jest let us put 6 gunners in one buff  thats the way it realy was

Offline Imp

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 269
Improving the Bomber Model (suggestion)
« Reply #123 on: January 29, 2003, 11:55:25 AM »
Thats a good idea yb11.

Offline LePaul

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7988
Improving the Bomber Model (suggestion)
« Reply #124 on: January 29, 2003, 12:37:53 PM »
Excellent thread

I agree with pretty much everything stated.  

Big kudos for the crater damage, which Ive been preaching for ages.  Having a tank roll through a 4,000 pound bomb crater is a bit silly.

Anyone else nothing the buff guns convergences seems REALLY short?

Offline SKurj

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3630
Improving the Bomber Model (suggestion)
« Reply #125 on: January 30, 2003, 12:05:11 AM »
mebbe this has been passed over for the ma...

perhaps tod... or perhaps not at all...

shame not one response from HTC


SKurj

Offline Imp

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 269
Improving the Bomber Model (suggestion)
« Reply #126 on: January 30, 2003, 06:01:32 AM »
Crater damage is problematic because puter has to know about alot of craters. Destroyable airstrips dont need that.

Offline maxtor

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 369
Improving the Bomber Model (suggestion)
« Reply #127 on: January 31, 2003, 12:16:03 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Imp
Crater damage is problematic because puter has to know about alot of craters. Destroyable airstrips dont need that.


the crater thing was a problem in WB3 - I don't remeber what now...but it did have something to do with the server and bandwidth.