Limit C-47 paratrooper jump angles?

[Halo]

While considering HiTech's thread on suicide bombing, I added a related thread that merits its own place here -- why not limit to plus or minus 10 degrees from horizontal flight the C-47 attitude from which its paratroopers can successfully jump?

The angle can vary, but it certainly should not include the near 90-degree pullups many C-47 drivers now use to more precisely (but VERY unrealistically) drop their paratroopers on target.

A similar realistic limitation is placed on torpedo drops, so why not on paratroopers too?  A bunch of paratroopers could never successfully exit a C-47 doing the radical pullups we see all the time in Aces High.

[tgnr2001]

I actually have my drunks sit on the wing just before executing a spiral climb, then they basically just fall off in a nice line.. totally realistic.  

[Shiva]

Originally posted by tgnr2001
I actually have my drunks sit on the wing just before executing a spiral climb, then they basically just fall off in a nice line.. totally realistic.  

Actually, I've seen either footage or photographs of a Russian paratroop unit during WWII climbing out onto the wings of their transport plane so that they could drop all at once.

[hazed-]

I think the way they are dropped hardly affects the outcome.

if it was a way of beating the game then id agree but all i can see wrong with it is it looks a bit silly. It doesnt spoil any other players game.

If captures required 2 level drops of 5 troops and players started to drop all 10 in the vertical to get around it then you'd have a point but it doesnt matter how you drop troops.It amounts to the same thing.There is no short cut or gamey aspect involved.

I think you are merely complaining for the sake of it. Perhaps you enjoy dive bombing in lancasters and when its banned youre going to want to take it out on the goon pilots? ? hehe

[BenDover]

trust the russians to do that

[Pongo]

We should induce motion sickness on the troops too.
Also the jump button should really start a chain of events that takes the troops a bit to prepare. IE green light. stand up hook up. 30 seconds. 10 seconds. Red light. Jump. They all go in 5-7 seconds. straight line only.

Troops cant drop in forests or towns or any water feature.  To do so inflicts 20%-50% and 100% casualties respectivly.
Once on the ground the troops have no icon at all. They will walk up to 3000 yards to a town. . If there is no town within 3000 yards they will set up a all round defence and shoot at enemy planes and vehicles that come within 500 yards of them until they expire in 30 miniutes

[tgnr2001]

Originally posted by Pongo
We should induce motion sickness on the troops too.
Also the jump button should really start a chain of events that takes the troops a bit to prepare. IE green light. stand up hook up. 30 seconds. 10 seconds. Red light. Jump. They all go in 5-7 seconds. straight line only.

Troops cant drop in forests or towns or any water feature.  To do so inflicts 20%-50% and 100% casualties respectivly.
Once on the ground the troops have no icon at all. They will walk up to 3000 yards to a town. . If there is no town within 3000 yards they will set up a all round defence and shoot at enemy planes and vehicles that come within 500 yards of them until they expire in 30 miniutes

 Luv it... that's funny.  Instead of expiring in 30 minutes, maybe they can act as forward observers until killed... perhaps by NME troops dropped into the area... a little hand-to-hand action.  Also, maybe they should yell different things as they jump out of the plane.  If they don't take the town, they could be held as POWs and we can have prisoner exchanges, adding a whole new strategic layer to the game.

[TheCage]

I think what he's trying to say, "fly straight and level for me at 700 ft. so I can have an easy unarmed turkey shoot kill!".  

Time for the armed JU-52.

[Halo]

There certainly is a major effect on dropping paratroopers mostly vertically -- they obviously land much closer together and presumably closer to the target, which means they have a much greater chance of capturing the field than if they were more strung out.

If that wasn't true, why would people hotrod that manuever?  

Have fun with the thread -- jokes are always welcome, but the paratrooper vertical drop has always been the most absurd departure from reality in a game that generally tries to set up fairly realistic WWII aircraft simulation.

[TheCage]

Seriously Halo, it isn't realistic, but it is a necessary maneuver.   If enemy fighters are near the field and I come in at 700 ft. to make a drop, chances are very slim I will never make the drop.    But if I come in and over the field at 50 ft. or less, chances are the fighters will not spot me till it's to late.  
By then I am vertical and have dropped the troops.   Like I said it's not realistic but then again the endless furballs are not realistic either.   Realistically in RL you have X amount of fighters at any one given field.  In this game you have an endless supply so long as the fighter hangers remain up.   In RL you have better defenses at an airbase and not just a few 37mm cannons and a few AI controlled gun emplacements that are so easily taken out.  
In RL if you bomb the runway, nothing takes off.   In RL 1x1000 lb. bomb would take out any hanger on the airfield easily.   In RL British, and Russian planes didn't fight against American planes.  Nor did the Japanese or German planes fight against each other.  What's my point, it's just a game and has nothing to do with real life situations.  
HTC has made IMHO the best fighter sim MPOG out there.   If you really want to see stuff that will really piss you off, go fly Fighter Ace for a while.   If you think the La-7 is fast here, there it flies faster then the speed of sound, and never loses any E in a stall fight.

[Halo]

Good points, TheCage.  I suppose any simulation/game/contest can never be perfect in whatever proximity it attempts to real life.

I totally agree Aces High is fabulous, in fact, the greatest game in the history of the universe.  That includes this bulletin board where the various threads keep trying to make AH the best it can be.

I too use the vertical C-47 drop simply because it is doable, but the point is I don't think it should be doable even though there are many other equally unrealistic game aspects, as you point out very well.  

Likewise I'll sometimes dogfight with bombers, dive bomb with Lancs, vulch shamelessly, kamikaze, or try anything else that the game design allows  It's always an exquisite challenge to balance what the game allows us to do with what all, most, or some players think we ought to refrain from doing.    

I was going to say it isn't fair to criticize players for doing whatever the game design allows them to do, but then I realized that's like saying it isn't fair to criticize people who shoot people with guns inasmuch as the gun design allows that.

Nevertheless, because there always will be new players and players who just want to play and not get into all this game philosophy, the best way to ensure the most level playing field in Aces High will continue to be in game design limitations, not unattainable player consensus.

Aces High evolution is a lot like government legislatures with grassroots proposals going through a long public debate and progessive official approval and implementation or rejection.  Good way to run a world, nation, and game.  

Sorry for the rambling, but I have to occasionally sort through why I don't always get my way either.  Kudos again to HiTech and crew for so brilliantly creating Aces High and keeping it fresh.

[TheCage]

Point well taken Halo.   Here might be a solution to that problem.  Maybe not the best but it's better then nothing.



It's the Russian version of the C-47.   It had one 12.7 mm gun in a dorsal turrent and two 7.62mm guns in two side windows behind the cargo door area.   Most likely wouldn't do a whole lot in the defense department, but then again it just might help get a goon or two into the drop zone.  Since it's a C-47 it wouldn't take much to modify one to become the Li-2.   Most likely it would take much less time then to model a totally new armed transport.
When I flew in WB and flew the JU-52, I got a few good kills in one with the lame guns that plane carried.   It didn't always make alot of difference, but there were times I manage to fight my way in.

[Halo]

I remember the Ju-52 in WB, but to me a .303 or 7.62 is usually worse than having no gun at all because it gives false confidence better applied to more evasiveness and hopes for a manuever kill.

But I definitely like that 12.7mm on top the Li-2.  That might make a difference some time, especially on the deck.  

Thought I knew my aircraft, but never heard of the Li-2 until now, TheCage.  Excellent idea, and ought to be relatively easy for Aces High to adapt from the C-47.

I vote yes on the Li-2!

[Dowding (Work)]

The Li-2 has been asked for several times. Hopefully HTC will get round to it someday. It would be useful for scenarios.

[DREDIOCK]

Want to make it more realistic yet? Have it so if you do a loop in a goon with troops onboard they all die.
Somehow I  dont think paratroopers would have taken too   kindly to suddenly being inverted. Not to mention what it would have done to their bodies that would have been suddenly flopping around the inside fo the plane due to the fact they didnt exactly have seatbelts to hold em in place.

Drediock

Originally posted by Halo
While considering HiTech's thread on suicide bombing, I added a related thread that merits its own place here -- why not limit to plus or minus 10 degrees from horizontal flight the C-47 attitude from which its paratroopers can successfully jump?

The angle can vary, but it certainly should not include the near 90-degree pullups many C-47 drivers now use to more precisely (but VERY unrealistically) drop their paratroopers on target.

A similar realistic limitation is placed on torpedo drops, so why not on paratroopers too?  A bunch of paratroopers could never successfully exit a C-47 doing the radical pullups we see all the time in Aces High.