Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Citabria on May 29, 2001, 11:05:00 AM
-
its getting abused horribly
please change this gamey aspect of AH
-
Agreed, had 3 suicide bombers on the ground try to take out my tank as I approached the field...(tells self "Self, take out ammo next time!)...was funny seeing them spawn in the hangar, and make a run for the maproom...actually, it wasn't funny considering how much work went into subdueing the field with ground vehicles only!
-
I agree whole heartedly. Stop this stupid nonsense. For those who don't like it..there's always Quake
SwampRat
-
agreed
------------------
Hazed
9./JG54
-
Yes, I agree wholeheartedly. People who do this shameless thing oughta be banned!
<well, except for me anyway (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)>
-
so killing ammo bunkers doesn't disable this anymore?
Every player has the means to disable this. Most would rather come here and complain about it.
AKDejaVu
-
I think Rip was saying he should have disabled them.
I would think that buff guns should work on the ground but not the bombs.
Zippatuh
-
Explain exactly DJVu how AH would be hurt by disabling this obvious inacuracy and foolishness? Honestly, you are right on your point of killin the ammo, but why do you really like this feature of AH? You always resit any post asking for this to be disabled? Surely you wont be the one to fix this issue for HTC, so why be so against it?
BTW plz dont take this the wrong way DJ I just honestly dont understand your very determined resistance to this obvious, logical, and needed fix.
-
Car bombing sucks - please get rid of it.
-
Kill ammo bunkers there only 2 on small field & 4 on medium field. problem solved?
-
Geeb, the yes, that solves the problem if you hit a 'fresh' airfield...but look at this scenario:
An airfield has been getting hit by various squads or players, all it down, maybe a Bomber hangar is up, but hey, ammo is down, so no worries. Here comes the M3, after 1 hour of an amazing battle, good defense by the enemy, excellent "valid" tactics by both sides, it comes down to the M3 riding just seconds from release. Poof! Up goes an ammo bunker, rebuild time 15 minutes is up! Here comes some dweeb outta the hangar that just spoiled the 1 hour of a great struggle for both sides, and some suicide bomber just ruined that experience for 50 others.
-
Explain exactly DJVu how AH would be hurt by disabling this obvious inacuracy and foolishness?
Well.. I'm glad you asked.
This whole "remove carbombing" argument is based on one simple premise... base capture should be made easier.
There should not be a need to destroy the ammo bunkers to ensure a safer base capture... because... technically it is unrealistic to carbomb.
Of course, it is completely realistic to shell all the ack at a base undetected then spawn a vehicle nearby and sneak it in to capture the base.
Every target has risks associated with it. With the VH.. vehicle defense. With the FH... fighter defense. With the BH... bomber defense. If you want to remove those risks... the means are there to do so.
Its not like the ammo bunkers are even difficult to take down.. and they stay down for 30 fricking minutes. Its just that nobody wants to take the time to take them down or that nobody wants to loose the use of ordinance when the base comes back up. So... there is a risk attatched.
I will say this: If a base was being overun and the only way to save it was for someone to sacrifice themselves detonating a bomb on something... it would be done. That much is realistic.
AKDejaVu
-
Up goes an ammo bunker, rebuild time 15 minutes is up
Rebuild time 30 minutes.. same as fuel dumps right? Hangars.. 15 minutes. What happens if one of those pop up? Either you have aircraft there to handle it, or you risk it. It is the exact same with the ammo dumps.
AKDejaVu
-
This is weird...defending car bombing...sheesh <walks away shaking head>
------------------
Lars
***MOL***
Men Of Leisure
-
One thing: Stop calling it f'in car bombing... there are NO CARS in AH.
Geezus, atleast label them correctly dweebs.
-SW
-
Originally posted by AKDejaVu:
Rebuild time 30 minutes.. same as fuel dumps right? Hangars.. 15 minutes. What happens if one of those pop up? Either you have aircraft there to handle it, or you risk it. It is the exact same with the ammo dumps.
AKDejaVu
My scenario is one of "you never know how long its been down"..now, VH pops up, kills M3, valid WW2 tactic (ie. Tank killing troopers about to capture something)....I highly doubt you had B26's standing by rolling out on a runway or field with their intent to dump live ordnance, blowing themselves and their aircraft up..(Rolls eyes at Deja) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
I highly doubt you had B26's standing by rolling out on a runway or field with their intent to dump live ordnance, blowing themselves and their aircraft up..(Rolls eyes at Deja)
And I highly doubt anyone in WWII knew exactly how long something would be down Rip <Rolls eyes in return>. And I do know that if someone attacking a base in WW2 knew that hitting specific targets would make that easier... they damn sure would have hit them. This isn't about ammo bunkers respawning... its about them not being taken out in the first place.
AKDejaVu
-
For once I'm in total agreement with Deja.
On quite a few occasions I've hit ancillary targets such as ammo, troops, fuel etc, primarily because the "big stuff" was already down, to be met with howls of outrage from my own side! "Don't blow up the ammo", they whimper, "we'll need it". (thus attempting to deprive me of my nightly perk point).
Usually half an hour later they're still being car bombed; the saps. I mean, some whiners may have a teensy weensy point when they say a B-17 is hard to kill at 35,000ft in their Macchi's, but I'd imagine even a TBM shouldn't have too much trouble out flying a laden buff sat on the tarmac...
If the hangers' are down, they can't roll. If the ammo's down they can't do any harm.
You need pictures or something?
-
Wooohooo!!!!! pictures pictures pictures pictures pictures pictures pictures pictures pictures pictures pictures pictures pictures pictures pictures
pictures pictures
:-)
-SW
-
Originally posted by AKDejaVu:
And I highly doubt anyone in WWII knew exactly how long something would be down Rip <Rolls eyes in return>. And I do know that if someone attacking a base in WW2 knew that hitting specific targets would make that easier... they damn sure would have hit them. This isn't about ammo bunkers respawning... its about them not being taken out in the first place.
AKDejaVu
I guess my point is this:
The field capture, and destruction of, simulates , I said SIMULATES WW2 "Capture the flag" tactics. What does driving a B26 loaded out of a hangar with bombs simulate?
Like I said, if one is meeting tough resistence, and that ammo bunker comes back up, suicide bombing seems preferable to actually sending aircraft to cap ones field...path of least resistence is inherent in todays world.
-
I believe bombs in AH should have a fusing mechanism such as was standard in iron bombs of the day. All bombs in WWII had fuses that would not allow them to go off (normally) if dropped from a parked A/C. The bomb had to freefall a certain distance before it would arm itself. This was a safety precaution followed by all nations.
If you don't like the realism argument (yes, I know...the AH MA is not realistic in many respects), then how about this point. We disabled buff guns while the A/C is on the ground to prevent what a majority of the community felt was a gameplay-unbalancing issue, i.e. gunning troops and spawning A/C while parked or taxiing. Note: I said a majority of the community (and HTC, of course (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)). I see this issue as no different; rather, it is an extension of the buff-gun-disable we already have and accept. Remember, this is a game, and all features should support gameplay. Base capture is a gameplay artifact, and bears little resemblance to real-life war (at least in the way it's implemented in AH).
------------------
Sabre (a.k.a. Rojo)
-
If this were actually a WWII combat simulation it might just matter.
------------------
When did they put this thing in here and WTF is it for?
-
Sabre, at the time buff guns were disabled, there was no way to disable buffs from spawning. And you do know that this conflicts with any "realism" argument that would be floating around in regards to things... since these guns can fire on the ground.
In some situations, gameplay takes presidence over realism. I believe this is one of them. There has to be risk associated with each target at the field. The risk is well known beforehand and needs to be taken into consideration when playing the game that is field capture. Absolutely nothing about this aspect of AH represents reality in any way.... except when it comes to car-bombing?
The truth is, people are always for what makes it easier for them to capture a base if they are the base-capture types. They'll bring up reality when it suits them and gameplay when reality is against them. They'll get the "I want realism" support when they push reality.. and gamer support when they push gameplay.
I believe that the disabling of buff guns was a good idea because there are people that would rather sit on the runway all day, firing away and simply exiting if hings get hairy than fly a plane. The car-bomber does not sit anywhere for very long and doesn't get any kills without returning to the hangar. He also has to be allowed time to start his engines and roll the 100 yards to the map room.
Its still a very simple aspect of the game. If you want to disable bombs from a field, kill the ammo bunkers. The means to stop it from happening in the first place are readily available.
And I don't believe this tactic to be any more dweeby than having a panzer parked at the vh in case it comes up... or 20 fighters circling overhead to pounce on any fighter that spawns. Its simply a part of the game that people game... as is vulching and spawn point camping.
Its just that the victims of these things get so pissed off when it happens, that they instantly come here to complain... unless they are cit... then they endlessly come here to complain until it is changed (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif).
Whenever car-bombing happens... just think of all they gamey aspects that occured prior to that before getting so accusatory. Something I said 8 months ago in regards to the usual scenario where this complaint pops up:
Check Roster - only x knits on-line
Check Radar - Knits all defending A2
Spawn deisel tank that sneaks to base undected
<Attack base facilities with surface to air weapon>
1 Air support plane shows up
Ditch vehicle in enemy territory
Respawn with troop vehicle after being captured
Complain about how low other team sinks.
How many unrealistic totally gamey things happened prior to the bombs being dropped? Make things realistic in regards to capturing a base and I'll accept any argument in regards to realistic defense.
As it sits right now, the whole base capture scenario is gamey. Either play it or don't... just quit squeaking that your version of how the game aspect should be played is different than someone else's.
Sheesh.. if that doesn't work.. straff an ammo bunker and see just how difficult it is to destroy. See for yourself just how easy the last bullet of that scenario is to avoid... while the defenders have a tough time vs most of the previous aspects.
AKDejaVu
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort:
I highly doubt you had B26's standing by rolling out on a runway or field with their intent to dump live ordnance, blowing themselves and their aircraft up..(Rolls eyes at Deja) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Facts are, they just couldn't do it.
------------------
Lars
***MOL***
Men Of Leisure
-
I've car-bombed, but it really shouldn't be in the game. And it's not even possible in real life.
Why in the world would you wanna defend an impossible tactic deja? (well, I mean other than having to disagree with everybody all the time) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Please make bombing only possible with gear up.
-
I totally agree. This one of the most annoying things in the game (apart from getting shot down all the time (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)).
-
I second the motion.
-
Originally posted by hblair:
I've car-bombed, but it really shouldn't be in the game. And it's not even possible in real life.
Why in the world would you wanna defend an impossible tactic deja? (well, I mean other than having to disagree with everybody all the time) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Please make bombing only possible with gear up.
To back up Deja's point... ok, it's not realistic to runway bomb. Give the bomber gunner positions back the ability to fire on the ground, that IS realistic. Or, give the player the opportunity to run out of the hangar with a rifle and shoot it out with the paratroopers.
Seriously, how realistic is 10 troopers going into a map room as a base takeover? It's not, so why claim that the last ditch defense against it is unrealistic and should be removed?
Deja is right... All players have to do is take out the Ammo bunker OR the bomber hangars and you've removed the runway bomber threat. They take out the VH so panzers and osties won't spawn, why not take out the ammo and BH too? They vulch fighters that try to spawn, how much harder is it to vulch that ammo bunker???
Anyways, it IS gaming the game. It IS rather dweeby. However, it's something that you can prevent 99.9% of the time, so remove it from the game yourself! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) (the collective you, not just hblair!)
-
Hmm? Ok Let them drop bombs on the ground HT after all it happened in real life! Of course they didn't go off because the safety pins weren't removed until close to the target.
So HT all You have to do is figure out is
1)How long dose it take for the pilot to get out of his seat fight or shoot the other at the least 5 crew members who's day it wasn't to die!
2) The odds that the others don't over power or shoot Him first,
3) Provided he made it this far, Climb down in the rack and arm X amount of bombs
4) Run back to the cockpit start a engine and turn on the hyd. pump, Run back open the doors
5) Forget about step 4) and crank the bay doors open by hand "I'm betting starting the eng. is faster?"
6) Run up to the nose charge the panel
7) Figure out how many people were or were not religious in WWII, How long it would take the average of that to say there last preyer?
8)(PUSH) the Button!
9)Clink clang bang thud thump "Damn!" > 10)
10) Oh yea! decide the odds that the bombs dropped 5' to 10' on there side instead of there nose would even go off!
Seems simple to Me (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
(http://null.dk/~ssl/483/dg.gif)
-
I went on this tirade much earlier..They dont seem to be listening.
From a Gameplay perspective it sucks. My guess is that they wont change bomb drops because they have modeled the ammo bunker into their strat modeling.
Little things like what Ripsnort described ruins the immersion factor, and is quite possibly contributing with player burnout and retirement(IMO).
Ping
* All opinions expressed are my own and tend to have nothing to do with reality.
** All opinions expressed have a margin of error fom 0 - 100%.
-
I can see (and, to an extent), understand the frustration engendered by a tactic many of you think is unrealistic. Many of you (us!) seem to think that a ground attack air craft, going between 200-400 MPG on a straffing/jabo run should be immune from ground zero explosions.
What follows is a cut and paste from one of my favorite websites http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/sparkes/prome.htm, (http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/sparkes/prome.htm,)
from a link I believe Funked originaly posted. It's the memoirs of a Hurri pilot in the Burma campaign. This is late war, so the Hurricane in question is the four cannon armed ground attack version, the "Hurribomber". You'll notice in the opening passage the writer commentating about his wing man running foul of a trip wire.
A trip wire, I stress, for an aeroplane.
We all wish for the simulation of realism, for immersion. How should AH, or WB or WWII online portray the following? :
"We arrived over the target area without event and found that the station seemed to have been abandoned so flew down the runway at zero feet to find something to attack. There was nothing but as we broke away Jammy reported that he may have hit a tripwire as his engine was running very "rough". This was not good. To crashland in central Burmah was a pretty poor prospect (we had plenty of information on how the Nip treated pilot prisoners and we still had to get back over the Yoma). I told him to throttle to minimum, go into coarse pitch and tag along.
*******
Just when all hope had gone a single aircraft appeared at about 1,000ft, groaned in and shuddered to a stop. He had hit the trip wire exactly on the prop-boss, broken it and had two or three rounds of the wire to make life difficult for him. It was perfectly ordinary thick, mild steel wire.
He (the Nip) had a full repertoire of tricks. A reconnaissance showed what seemed to be a 'sentry box' on the Sandoway bridge so someone was sent to have a look at it. As soon as the aircraft approached it it blew up. Fortunately the finger on the button delayed long enough or delay in the detonator setting off the charge was just long enough to allow the aircraft to be out of range.
We once went to complete the destruction of a riverboat that had been damaged by 20mm cannon fire and beached the previous evening. Since the riverbanks were high there was only one line of attack: they had half buried some metal drums in the sand, put explosive in the bottom, rocks on top. The whole detonated by remote wire. They usually exploded behind the aircraft but were certainly a deterrent. They looked pretty spectacular when they went up. They also tried to use mortars against overflyers. We had expected them to be sparing on munitions because their lines of communications were so extended but they were lobbing them up as though the supplies were endless."
Please excuse the log post, but I thought this was germaine :-)
-
Give some need and purpose for attacking ammo dumps then this problem should subside naturally. I don't know much about 'what it was like' in WW2. Did they contain ammo and rounds for fighters and high explosive bombs seperately? Or together?
At anyhow, downing an ammo dump effects only buffs.. so far, in common sense, that does not sound much critical in base capture(since under condition when base capture is under progress, one would expect defending fighters to scramble, not buffs). So nobody gave much thought about rolling buffs as car-bombs until someone found out it could be a valid(but, admitably, sort of 'abusive') method for defense.
Drop the ammo bunkers, and make the fighters suffer too.. then base capture would need some more complication, and people would go after them, and thus, no more punitive debates on 'car-bombing' - kamikaze style.
ps) some might actually prefer dropping the ammo and fuel bunkers if this ever happens.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)
-
RipSnort; it simulates the sort of desperate booby-trapping that was quite common during parts of the war to try and slow-down the onslaught of an overpowering enemy. The Germans learned a lot from the Russians on that grounds.
I realise it is somewhat inaccurate in its simulation, but the fact is it IS preventable. Field capture isn't intended to be 'kill 7 acks and sneak in some troops'.