Stop the City Milk Runs

[Halo]

Stop the city milk runs -- put at least two mannable acks on opposite fringes of every city.

[Chairboy]

Milk run = bomber mission?

Fighter folk sure must hate bombers...

[Thunder]

There only "Milk Runs" if you let them get by with it. The question is.... are they at fault for trying to "hit" the city or is the one who allows it to happen? When I see an "Alt Warrior" that flies at 30K for scoring, I don't whine... I simply climb up there in my "fuel efficient slobberdonkey" and chase him across the map until I kill him. The best way to modify this type of behavior is to simply...
"LET YOUR GUNS DO THE TALKING!"

[Rutilant]

City milk run = someone who has alt, (edit) or attacks a city before porking field (i.e. stirring up opposition first), someone who doesnt dive into the furball to release ord on town, or someone who does it with buffs. Basically any action a pilot takes that gets his job done while staying alive, short of dweebery and furballing, because everyone knows a furballer is there till they die. And that a building battler has an intent to leave and play the arena for more than a masive H2H.

[/rant?]

[WhiteHawk]

Well as a buff pilot, I can say, there is absolutely no way of knowing wether an nme will be there to defend the base by the time I get there or not.  I can start my mission to hit an active fight at an airbase, and by the time I get there it may be a milk run, or there may be 15 nme waiting there for me cuz my buds have all been kilt.  But I do agree, stronger auto/mannable defense is a must here.

[lazs2]

yep on these maps... what you see on the dar is never what you see by the time you take that long boring flight to nowhere...

you want crap fights?   invent huge crap maps with fields a sector and a half apart... a sector and a half if your lucky that is.
lazs

[Swoop]

Anyone remember that time in the MA......damn I dont remember the pilots name.  He was a B17 at 30k heading south on isles from hitting the top HQ.  I climbed up there in a G10 and made about 4 passes, just 1 B17 left out of the 3......and he starts pleading on ch1 to be allowed to live.

Then my fuel ran out.  




Made him say on ch1 that he's a dweeb and promise to never, ever fly a B17 over 25k again.  

Ahem.

Then I dead sticked it home.

[MRPLUTO]

I agree that the cities should have some 88 mm guns to protect themselves, and more low level flak positions, too.  

However, with or without them, bombing runs against cities will be "milk runs" only when no one chooses to intercept them, or when the bomber pilot flys at unrealistically high altitudes.


MRPLUTO VMF-323 ~Death Rattlers~ MAG-33

P.S.  Swoop...great story.  He deserved his public humiliation.  That's the best way to deal with alt dweebs.  Shame them.

[Halo]

I should have been more specific.  I don't question bombers at high al on any target.   What I lament is the increasing number of low level attacks on basically defenseless cities, ignoring the area military base which often is too far away to provide support unless gvs or planes are launched.  

Merely strafing the soft city target concentrations causes tremendous damage.  Much easier to capture a city than a base.  

I suppose we need reasons to pay attention to cities, but the idea that an intact nearby military base can be captured simply by pounding a relatively defenseless city seems a bit much.    
I've been on both sides, attacking cities as well as trying to defend them.  Many cities are so vulnerable that one heavy fighter bomber can take them out.  

Even if the wee cities were called villages, how many military locations fall because a nearby civilian faciity is captured?  It isn't like capturing a national capital.

The risk-free pounding from low level aircraft while a fully armed base nearby is ignored and then captured just from attacking the city ... mmmm, that doesn't seem right.

Maybe move the capture point back to the bases?  Or capture the city but not the base until the base is also suppressed?  It's just to easy now to capture cities and their nearby bases.

[Rutilant]

Well, that's why you up and defend it. Base flashed before the nmes get there, see the base flash, and get in the air, kill the goon, and voila, no more problem.

(edit) And, if your country doesn't up to help defend it, it's your COUNTRY's fault, not the attackers.  

"Please, don't take this field untill we can stop you!"

[sling322]

The cities were put in to make base capture a little more difficult.  In the past all you had to do was kill the ack and drop troops on the field.  Now the maproom for the fields has been moved into a city that must be destroyed before you can capture a base.  Its not perfect, but its better than it was.

[Phantom4]

I don't believe he is talking about the towns by bases but THE CITIES.  Kill the Cities and rebuild time is increased dramatically.  There are a strat item and are virtually undefended on all maps.  No nearby bases, no manable acks.

[krazyhorse]

MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO:eek:

[gofaster]

High-speed Typhoon raids and LA-7s divebombing is getting old.

That's why I do my city bombing in P-47s and Corsairs at 10k alt.  It gives the enemy a fighting chance.

And with a gunsight like this <----(look left) the trip is very enjoyable.

[lazs2]

If you simply make the fields harder to kill while leaving them a sector and a half apart with the ability to pork fuel....

You are only going to get more timid "missuns" and crappy gangbang steamroller gameplay.
lazs