Author Topic: Level bombing in the v1.09 era (check side arms at the door) (Read 715 times)

-tronski- · « **Reply #30 on:** November 22, 2001, 01:07:00 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by eskimo2:
Bomb accuraccy should mostly be determined by bomber altitude/bomb-air-time.

Perhaps,

My 5 cents: Make the Bomb sight "historical" then bring in the AI gunners.
I fly plenty of Buffs, if you're on the bomb run its almost impossible to bomb, and defend yourself over the target.

Leave the Bomb aiming alone, then no otto.

Buff guns aren't overmodeled. Any competent fighter can take down a buff. I always smile at the ones who try to hit your six in a slow dive!

I figure you want authentic bomb aimers, stay with B-17 II.

Tronsky

[ 11-22-2001: Message edited by: -tronski- ]

Kweassa · « **Reply #31 on:** November 22, 2001, 01:10:00 AM »

This possibility of massive bomber formations can also radically change the atmosphere of air combat, too

. No matter how inaccurate it is, with a flight of 12~16 4-engine buffs raining down bombs upon a single airfield area, you know it's gonna be slaughter.

What will happen if such things become possible? The current trend of "deck alt furball" will become sterile, if not completely obsolete. A field will be easily neutralized IF the buffs can get there(It is currently like that too, except, it isn't exactly easy to kill all resources and hangars with just one~two Lancasters flying over a base.. easily hunted down by a single fighter).

The trend of air combat might flow from current furballs, to massive engagements at much higher altitude. Thus, the furballs would still commence, but this time, it's gonna be the clash of aces, high above.

Sure, La-7s and N1K2s are superb planes under 10k. But what if they would have to engage bombers coming in as a tight group at altitudes of 18k or higher, where they lose their 'edge'? If the engagement alt becomes regularly higher, we'd certainly see some change in preferences of the types of planes people use.

The emphasis in the ways to field capture might change. Currently, it is nothing more than 'who has the most fighters clogged up in a single area'.. I'm guessing it might shift to 'who can escort the bomber groups safely to its destination'. (I can already here the whiners, yelling against these sort of 'historic re-creation's

)

We're still all speculating around what HTC has just simply mentioned in one single interview(

).. but indeed, this concept is very interesting, even just discussing about it

..

Wutz · « **Reply #32 on:** November 22, 2001, 05:47:00 AM »

Kweassa

Great write upp. Some like Historical Accuracy some dont. I like it. And the russian and japanees planes could still be used. If we make the bombing "not so lazer guided as today" there is still use for the Jabo. There could perhaps be a Ship convoy system too ferry supplies, bridges too knock out, AI controlled Panzer (like in FA, where u can send Pz too attack an AF,Base, etc. Then the Ju87G, Hs-129 and Il2 Sturmovik could be realy cool.

Implement the elements of "Strategic Bombing", "Front Line Figthing" , "Panzer Clashes". I know these would mean more A.I controled Vehicle, but this is a Flight Sim, and U can never get a realistic ground/air war, when 99% is here for the Birds. I am sure HTC can make our dreams come true (and it would sure piss of ww2online makers Lol)

lazs1 · « **Reply #33 on:** November 22, 2001, 10:59:00 AM »

We will have to wait and see but.. i believe that any strat that forces people to organize and burn up more than a couple of minutes of online time getting to the fight is doomed to failure.

Most play for fun and for relatively short periods of time. They do not want to come on to devestated resources or fields and have to fly many sectors or wind their way up to 20k or wait in the tower till they can get a flight of 4 or more guys together so that they will then be able to sneak on up to 20k to find a fight that may or may not be there or may or may not be even worth engaging in. Certainly, there are very few who would enjoy an hour or so of taking orders or playing hide and seek.

Now you can realize this or you can continue to live in lala land and come up with more complex and time consuming, fun destroying strat but...

If you have anal strat and fast action all in the same arena then the anal strat guys will be very lonely and whiny ("why is there no cooperation?"). If you have all anal strat to "force" the action crowd to participate or at least ruin their online time... they will simply log off. Nothing in the strat you have mentioned holds any appeal for me and i am pretty average in time online and preference I think so....

What's in it for me?
lazs

[ 11-22-2001: Message edited by: lazs1 ]

Wutz · « **Reply #34 on:** November 22, 2001, 11:07:00 AM »

I know HTC will do what is best for the future of AH. And with so many good online flight sims under development (IL2,WB3 and FA3) I know AH will strive too be number 1.
Both for the player who is there for Fun and the Die Hard ww2 flight simmer.

Rojo · « **Reply #35 on:** November 22, 2001, 08:06:00 PM »

Actualy, this thread doesn't address the strat issue, Lazs, only how the technical aspects of the bomber pulk (or box) might be implemented. Any thoughts on that?

P.S. You used the word "anal" three times in this post...what is it with you and that particular part of the human anatomy, anyway?

[ 11-22-2001: Message edited by: Rojo ]

Staga · « **Reply #36 on:** November 22, 2001, 08:22:00 PM »

Rojo are you sure you wanna know?

Kweassa · « **Reply #37 on:** November 22, 2001, 10:25:00 PM »

I know I[/i] don't wanna know.

Rojo · « **Reply #38 on:** November 22, 2001, 11:01:00 PM »

On second thought...forget I asked

lazs1 · « **Reply #39 on:** November 23, 2001, 11:59:00 AM »

just say my name three times and here i am..

"What will happen if such things become possible? The current trend of "deck alt furball" will become sterile, if not completely obsolete. A field will be easily neutralized IF the buffs can get there(It is currently like that too, except, it isn't exactly easy to kill all resources and hangars with just one~two Lancasters flying over a base.. easily hunted down by a single fighter)."

I believe that this part does indeed address a new and disturbing "strat". I believe it is lala land tho.

Now, simply read that and then my response and it will all come together.

as for the "bomber box"... who can say? we will have to see how the guns work.. how the bombing works... how the targets are affected. I believe tho, that we should be able to ignore the "bomber box" which is really just...ONE LOUSY GUY and still have fun in the sim. Yes, that's right.... I believe that one attention starved and skilless bus driver shouldn't control the gameplay. so sue me.
lazs
lazs

Wutz · « **Reply #40 on:** November 23, 2001, 12:36:00 PM »

Well after all mr Hitech himself Dale"HiTech"Addink said.

SABRE: I’m glad you brought up those trains. You’ve obviously begun fleshing out the strategic system. The trains and the convoys add a tremendous framework. Are there still more major elements that you see to be added to that, or does it have the basic skeleton of what you’re looking for.

HITECH: It’s got the core features, the skeleton of a strat-system. What I’m trying to do is balance the [strategic] bomber aspects with the JABO [or fighter-bomber] aspects. In the end what I want is to incorporate what bombers did well, which was mass area bombing, and not pinpoint bombing. Today, when you look at the previous strategic system, that was real hard to do. What were doing is starting to incorporate a lot of targets in a close area, so that I can start doing things like each bomber pilot fly’s four buffs all at once versus just one bomber. Then that gets enough ordnance load that I can do dispersion bombing techniques. One guy controlling a force of bombers is much more about game play than about realism. Obviously no one [person] flew four bombers, but at the same time there was never [just] one bomber that went out by itself. So it’s a compromise with realism…I want him to control multiple bombers so when he drops a load of ordnance, I can throw in dispersion. He does hit his target because he has enough ordnance dropping on target to do what real area bombing did.

HITECH: The basic emphasis for 1.09 will be bomber enhancements; that’s the core aspect of it. What else gets thrown in there, I don’t know yet, but that’s the core piece we’ll be changing.

So if u dont like the idea off massive bomber attack. Well.... He he he.

Ok There is not just Bomber pilots who have something too look forward too.

HITECH:On ground warfare, what I envision at some point is a first-person shooter run as a secondary item to base capture. What I’m sort of envisioning in the end is something that would run along the lines of a C-47 dropping a spawn point at the [enemy base’s] map room. The map room now is expanded to a full, underground bunker-warfare, first-person shooter. The defender always gets to spawn in the bunker. The attackers, now for the next thirty minutes, they can spawn people in the bunker, and there’s this big, first-person shooter war happening underground to do an actual [base] capture.

Is this man a genius or what....

big (SALUTE) for Dale and his staff.

Seeker · « **Reply #41 on:** November 23, 2001, 12:50:00 PM »

And if you think a furball is "quake with wings"; wait until the FPS guys start turning up.....

Oh well, there goes the neighbour hood.

lazs1 · « **Reply #42 on:** November 23, 2001, 01:44:00 PM »

read what he said any way you like but i get that there won't be any 'pinpoint' bombing. I seriously doubt that HTC will turn the MA into a board (bored) game. I believe that they realize that not everyne wants to participate in a "war" that they may or may not see any results from but will surely be affected by.
lazs

shaunmcl · « **Reply #43 on:** November 25, 2001, 11:58:00 AM »

What happens if 5 or 6 pilots hope into b17s,u have formations off up to 20 or 30 planes.These will be invinccible for even the most hardend 262 pilot. and if these where to fire all at the same time.The amount off tacers and the number of planes will slow the your computer down to zero frames a second.

p.s. the stupid hanger smoke also slows your computer.Somebody fix that

Oosik · « **Reply #44 on:** November 25, 2001, 04:44:00 PM »

Ok my 2 cents -

Instead of 4 bomber formations - Perk them.
2nd B17 costs 5 perk point
3rd B17 costs an additional 10 (15 total)
4th B17 costs an additional 20 (35 total)
5th? B17 costs an additional 40 (75 total)
Up to what ever limit of B17's (or other Bombers) HT sets. Now the DHB group can with 4 pilots (well bomber pilots) can fill the air with massive amounts of fling targets. Just a thought.

0osik