Author Topic: #@$#@%#@ paper bombers (Read 519 times)

bj229r · « **on:** October 25, 2002, 07:07:51 AM »

Like it isnt alREADY hard enough to hit stuff of importance with bombers.....as I can tell..takes about 3 rounds from a P51 to blow one up..much less merely damage it. I've had more occasions than I can count where a fighter crawled up low 6 (which should usually make a gunner drool) ....lit him up at 700-800...minimal damage...fighter walks in...blasts away..all 3 buffs just pieces falling to ground. The extra guns from the drones dont help very much..as lethality is so far less..rarely can all 3 planes be brought to bear on a bogey anyhow. I think a lot of fiters prolly have more toughness than 17...sigh

Wilbus · « **Reply #1 on:** October 25, 2002, 07:28:36 AM »

AH suffers from a very old Dammage modell by now IMO, been the same idea ever since it got out.

john9001 · « **Reply #2 on:** October 25, 2002, 02:40:49 PM »

how many times do we have to listen to " I LIT HIM UP , BUT HE DIDN'T DIE" and "HE KILLED ME WITH ONE SHOT" ?

you have zee film , of course. zo zend it to zee peoples at HTC.
zay half vays to deal with zis.

Karnak · « **Reply #3 on:** October 25, 2002, 02:47:02 PM »

As part of our tests of the Mosquito's damage mode, J_A_B and I also tested the B-17G and Lancaster.

Hispano hits on the tail required to remove it:

Bf110G-2: 2
Mosquito Mk VI: 3
Lancaster Mk III: 14
B-17G: 17

Wilbus · « **Reply #4 on:** October 25, 2002, 02:48:57 PM »

14 and 17 hits DAMN much if all in tail, no paper bombers there that's for sure.

Did you test the P38, La7 and F6F????

CHENAULT · « **Reply #5 on:** October 26, 2002, 10:04:54 AM »

Hey Bj29r.....
I saw that you are from Roanoke. Im living in Denver Colorado now, but I grew up in the Star City. I miss it terrably. I lived in Salem, Cave Spring, and North county areas. I know this is silly, but I get a charge out of seeing people from home. Just yesterday, I scared a guy here in CO. He had a Charlottesville sticker on his back window and a UVA licence plate border. At the traffic light, I got out of my car, went up to him ,and introduced myself as a fellow Virginian. Nice fellow too...lol. I normally would not do such a thing in a major metropolitan area like Denver, for fear of getting blown away, but I felt safe in this case. Just wanted to say "too cool" and ~~to a fellow VA:D~~

bj229r · « **Reply #6 on:** October 26, 2002, 06:06:02 PM »

Heh Chenault..actually I live in Bent Mountain...but it's not like anyone knows where THAT is. (like 15 miles south and UP)..and...no..I havent scientifically TESTED all sorts fighters..suffice to say..buffs (I fly 17's vast majority of time) blow WAAAAYYY too fluff'n easy. I assume HT figgered extra guns would offset and keep things somewhat neutral....not case.--its like shootin goons

devious · « **Reply #7 on:** October 27, 2002, 01:43:28 AM »

Blew the tail off a B-17 yesterday, with four hits from a Mk 108. Came in at 400mph from his right side. But that's 3cm grenades.

Innominate · « **Reply #8 on:** October 27, 2002, 10:05:35 AM »

Bombers in AH are most definitly not weak. The problem most commonly seen is the damage carryover from one solid pass on one buff bringing down a whole formation. This happens especially when the buff pilot has a bad connection, but also can when the attacking pilot does. (I believe it's a lag issue, with damage being inflicted to a dead bomber being put onto whatever the pilot is in now)

Nothing comes close to the lanc/b26/b17 for durability.

Quote

Originally posted by Karnak
As part of our tests of the Mosquito's damage mode, J_A_B and I also tested the B-17G and Lancaster.

I'm curious(and too lazy to search for the thread) as to wether the results of your damage test matched mine.

I found that the mosquito is the only fighter to have a tail more durable than any other fighter. Also that it would take a LOT more damage than any other fighter, except it would tend to burn at the point where another fighter would be dead.

bj229r · « **Reply #9 on:** October 27, 2002, 12:57:03 PM »

Heck..im not talkin about tail gettin shot off or somethin so mundane as that... 3 ENTIRE B17's explode in span of 3-5 seconds from attack via dead 6 from 1 plane. They heap weker now, as opposed to before the new-bomber patch, prohibitively so

hazed- · « **Reply #10 on:** October 27, 2002, 07:50:58 PM »

er i shot down 2 b26s with a single pass yesterday and i only hit one of them.

i shot maybe 80 odd ounds from a 190a5 which due to my piss poor shooting hit the middle of the left wing of the lead bomber about 3 times (3 hit sprites) and off came the wing.

looking back to see if i could loop over to hit the 2nd bomber i saw that too had lost the exact same wing at the exact same spot.

got the kill for both when i only hit 1.

thats a bug not the damage model and i suspect this is what is causing so much grief.

I still think we should have reduced lethality in buff guns but huge increases in durability in bombers.

This way we would see long battles with bombers and fighters and basically have longer fun.
The two ends of the scale are :

as a fighter you get a few hits to your machine and seem to lose a vital part and all that climbing to alt is wasted giving the pilot the hump!

as a bomber you get hit a few times on say , your lead bomber and all 3 of your bombers seem to go down in quick succession to what seem like short bursts.

As both players get totally pissed off why not adapt it slightly?

if your a bomber pilot and dont want to die so quick then you have to accept its the same for the poor guy who climbs to alt to defend against you when he'd rather be fighting figthers.
If youre a fighter pilot and want to be able to attack bombers without working for a position you have to accept the bomber pilot/gunner shouldnt have to put up with insta-death of all his planes.

theres a sound basis for having highly durable bombers and many accounts of how tough it was to shoot down attacking fighters as gunners.We have nothing like as difficult a time as a real gunner would due to perfectly clear veiws, no weight whilst moving guns, no freezing temps or slow traverse etc so I think it could be an acceptable compromise in the name of a more enjoyable fight.
It doesnt have to be stupidly unrealistic, just a little different to how we have it.
VOTE LONGER FIGHTS

bj229r · « **Reply #11 on:** October 27, 2002, 09:00:14 PM »

Thats the thing Hazed..they've alREADY reduced gun lethality a LOT in buffs (again..usually 17 in my case) ..AND reduced buff-tuff....buff-pilot has to give on both accounts already..if i had nickel for every la7 I pinged the crap of that still flew on to kill me--..

Innominate · « **Reply #12 on:** October 27, 2002, 10:00:06 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by bj229r
Thats the thing Hazed..they've alREADY reduced gun lethality a LOT in buffs (again..usually 17 in my case) ..AND reduced buff-tuff....buff-pilot has to give on both accounts already..if i had nickel for every la7 I pinged the crap of that still flew on to kill me--..

You're right and wrong.

An individual buff durabilty hasnt changed, nore has the damage or accuracy of the guns.

There are problems though, big ones, which make it seem this way.
[list=1]

The drones guns are 100% worthless unless you have a gunner. The convergance is so close that if they're hitting, you're about to die anyways.
The damage carryover bugs, which have been detailed before. Put enough rounds into the lead buff to kill all three, and all three will die. Since 90% of the time, a buff is killed because of a good solid guns pass, there is often damage to spare, to kill the other buffs.
Three buffs present a MUCH bigger and MUCH less maneuverable target, without having any added firepower.(See above)
The most subtle, is the bias code in 1.10. This is what causes planes to make small warps in the 1.5-1k yard range, as the bias code kicks in the enemy plane's position is instantly fixed to be more accurate. With fighters this can be annoying, but with bombers, where that is the prime range to open fire, it is devastating. (I _assume_ it's the bias code, it could be something else entirely, but the effect is the same)

Soviet · « **Reply #13 on:** October 27, 2002, 10:42:50 PM »

When they fix gun dispersion in the bombers then fine, tuffen them up.

A test was done with a B-17 ON THE GROUND. At 600 yards the tail gun had a dispersion of about 16 feet (in AH it's 2 feet). The waist guns were even worse.

Amboss · « **Reply #14 on:** October 28, 2002, 03:10:08 AM »

I was in a singular Ju88 and shot down a Spit that was spraying me from 500yrds. He took out my flaps, the radiator on one engine and the landing gear. I brought her home and landed the kill just fine.

Yesterday, again in a singular Ju88, I had a little turnfite with a p51 going on. He pinged me 10+ times before disengaging and caused no damage at all.

The Ju88 definetly isn't built from paper.

On another note, I've had this happen before that when you manage to cause massive damage on the lead plane of a buff formation, all three planes die.

-Amboss