Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: peregrin on September 27, 2004, 02:53:59 PM
-
There's been a few posts lately complaining about level bombers flying low, or dive bombing. I fly bombers fairly often, and usually level bomb at 10,000ft. The reason I don't fly higher is that it takes too long to climb that high. Why would I want to spend 30min to 1hour on a single flight? So, I thought, what would make me fly higher?
Why not allow bombers to start at 15k or 20k? Who wouldn't fly bombers high in that case?
Just a thought.
--Peregrine.
-
not a bad idea! unrealistic but good idea all the same.
to be honest though, i think most people are complaining at bombers bombing from 10 feet, not 10,000.
personally anywhere between 10,000ft and 15,900ft is perfect. (hate that wind layer after 1k)
-
This might be worth a try if hi-alt spawning is limited to one field, say the same field near HQ were 163's are available.
If buffs could spawn at 15K from a forward field it would be too easy for buff missions to quickly spawn and pork every enemy field around.
ra
-
Originally posted by ra
This might be worth a try if hi-alt spawning is limited to one field, say the same field near HQ were 163's are available.
If buffs could spawn at 15K from a forward field it would be too easy for buff missions to quickly spawn and pork every enemy field around.
ra
Maybe not just one field, but perhaps 3-4 sectors behind the forward fields? Though this may take a lot of coding to keep the front lines up to date.
-
make it like that-
if there is an enemey plane lets say closer then 50 miles (remember a sector is 25) then you spawn buffs at 10k.
-
I posted this in the "2 reasons AH2 doesn't work" thread:
Well, maybe it is time to introduce some gameyness to try to get more realistic results.
Say if the nearest enemy base is between 35 and 50 miles away level bombers can airstart at 10,000ft and 180mph indicated airspeed. If the nearest enemy base is more than 50 miles away then level bombers can airstart at 20,000ft, 180mph indicated airspeed.
Is it gamey? Sure is. Will it make the game more realistic? Maybe. It might have a shot. It would certainly increase the number of bombers at altitude.
The bombsite isn't that hard to use. Hitting cities from 22,000ft is a piece of cake. To take out individual hangars I don't go above 14,000ft. I hardly get a lot of practice. It is simply using the calibration routine, holding the marker for more than 15 seconds and not deviating my course by more than 5 degrees after the final calibration.
-
Originally posted by ra
This might be worth a try if hi-alt spawning is limited to one field, say the same field near HQ were 163's are available.
If buffs could spawn at 15K from a forward field it would be too easy for buff missions to quickly spawn and pork every enemy field around.
ra
Spawining from a rear area defeats the purpose. If it takes an hour to use bombers realistically, then why spend the time? if 10k is a realistic enough altitude then that could be the spawing alt. if bombers were at 15k, then defenders would also have to be at 15k. If defenders were at 15k, then escorts would have to be at 15k. If escorts were at 15k, then we would have taken a great big step backward from the horde/vulch/auger strategy.
--Peregrine.
-
Why not have a map with high fields spaced around throughout and have them at 10,000. Those would be bomber bases.
-
all we nead is to dubbel the buffs clime rate like it was in air worror :)
-
10Bears made a map for AH1 of Germany for scenarios which included a field on the western edge from which a plane could launch from 20k. (You had to click on the northeast corner thingy to launch.) However, you started with no airspeed, gear down, and engines off. The first rule is don't panic; just start the engines, raise the gear, and gradually apply power while gently pulling out of a 70-80 degree dive. Repeating, "Whoa boy......easy, easy now...easy...eeeeeeeeeeasy...", is also helpful. It was possible to level out at about 15k without losing any drones.
As long as this can be done only when no enemy plane or vehicle is within, as some suggested, 50 miles, that's fine with me. Karnak put it very well: "...maybe it's time to introduce some gameyness to get more realistic results."
MRPLUTO
-
If this was implemented, the dweebs would simply use it to get past most of the fighters on the way to target. Then they would simply dive on the field and do what they do now.
Make em drop in F6 mode only and make the bomb drop flight conditions realistic. The site is easy to calibrate as well, shouldn't be a problem for anyone. It doesn't fit the Quake mentality I guess though.
-
There are two main reasons in real life why bombers flew high.
1) fuel efficiency
2) survivability
Altitude generally had a hit on accuracy, which is why level buffs usually went after targets which are grouped together over a certain area. Pin-point, precision bombing was next to impossible.
However, in AH most of the targets that actually effect the game are small-scale, tactical targets which need immediate attention and a quick, precision strike to take effect.
The cities and factories effect the game in a very indirect way, and require a certain precise sequence to have effect on the game. While these are in exterior, the best targets for bomber use, they offer no real meaning in terms of game play.
Therefore, people tend to strike the airbase itself - which is laid out with components that immediately effect gameplay: ordnance, fuels, barracks, FHs, VHs, BHs etc..
However, jabo runs provide a much more effective form of destruction against these targets, not to mention survivability and fun. These targets, particularly the hangars which are about the only real viable targets for bombers, respawn within 15 minutes. They need a quick, massive hit. They also immediately effect game play.
This creates a tendency for the 'casual user' who fly bombers, who have no real experience or practice in it, who just think its cool to fly one, but want to do something meaningful in it, to fly suicidal low alt runs again and again and again.
So, a combination of several factors:
1) laziness in part of the gamer(they don't want to take the time to get up to alt)
2) massive inefficiency of buffs against such small-scale tactical targets
3) no penalty or fear of death
4) immediate results can be seen without proper means
5) bases that are grouped close together, which makes fuel efficiency useless
6) weak base defenses: heavy 88mm flak is barely effective and its chance of hitting an approaching bomber is very low. light 20mm/37mm acks are too weak to shoot down buffs.
drives people to misuse the buffs.
This is in fact, not a simple problem. All of the five issues must be addressed at the same time, to see people willingly, and gladly use the bombers as they are supposed to be.
1) laziness should be inhibited by penalties against low-alt bombing
2) buffs need their targets, that effect the game play at a slow rate, but holds very serious results. A strat concept with attritional factor is needed.
3) can't do anything about the fear/death factor
4) penalties against misuse of the bombing system; ie) drops are possible only at the bombardier's position
5) strat target that is located deep inside the country, but has high impact in the game under conditions described at 2)
6) base defenses are strengthened, by implementing 88mm flak batteries around targets which players can control. Very slow rate of fire, but all the flak guns are slaved to the controller of the battery and produces a random burst of flaks, that are grouped towards the general direction the player's aim.
...
Now, imagine those conditions arise in the MA.
There's a large fuel factory deep inside enemy territory. Hitting it again and again, until total tonnage dropped on it exceeds a certain set point, will result in the decerease of available fuel supply at all enemy fields.
The buffs themselves, are optimized for high altitudes, and bomb drops are forced to be done only within the bombardier's position, which levels out the plane. Also, the bombs are armed only when it is calibrated.
Naturally, if the drop altitude is very low, its hard to calibrate stuff. Also, the bomb drop is forced at the bombsight view only, which means no squirming around or lame-prettythang dive bombings.
Also, many targets are surrounded by manned flak batteries, that are too slow firing to kill multiple nimble fighters, but can wreck havoc on a low approaching bomber formation.
...
So under these conditions, will people still think it is a worthy effort to go kamikazeing enemy bases, when it is thoroughly guarded by manned flak batteries, to hit a small sized target that stays down for only couple of hours max...
Or, will they go towards the juicy target just right for the buffs, that significantly effects the gameplay at a seriousness that is much greater than even the HQ? (also, these targets will be at least 25 miles away from the nearest airbase, so defenders can't just simply reup as soon as they die, and catch up with bombers again)
I'm thinking the latter. If we want people to fly bombers right, we need conditions that drives them to fly that way.
-
They will discover the "A20's" 8-500lb bomb load and nose guns. I have flown them NOE and nailed HQ's while the Hoard's gang banged on.
-
Make it physically realistic and let the cards fall where they will. Cards, planes, bombs, whatever. The structural model seems pretty lenient with buffs, but I don't really know-- so if it needs fixing then I say fix it. This is the MA, and gameplay will never be totally realistic with respect to war strategy (nor should it be). Scenarios fill that role more closely. Purpose of MA "strat", OTOH, is to encourage contact and variety of contact between opposing forces.
Some people will like to fly buffs historically, others won't. Beyond physical realism, I don't think we should be forcing flying style in the MA...unless we have a significant game-balance issue to deal with, and even then that should be affected through incentives rather than the physical behavior of the aircraft.
Airstarting buffs will most likely just be gamed like everything else, and we will likely end up no less gamey than now.
As far as the effect of low level buffs on the game balance, to be honest I don't think it is the problem people are making it out to be. Generally these guys are FAR easier to intercept than the hi-alt buffs, which IMO more than balances the fact that they arrive more quickly and can barf with more accuracy.
-
Originally posted by FiLtH
Why not have a map with high fields spaced around throughout and have them at 10,000. Those would be bomber bases.
Bombers Spawning at 10-15K is a silly idea MHO.
And I highly doubt Hightech would implement it.
10 K bases spread around throughout the arena on the other hand isnt a bad idea at all and would probably be doable. These base wouoldl be highly sought after by furballer and landgrabber alike
all it would take is someone to design a map that has them
-
lol screw this everyone should fly same plane 1k max alt same fuel same ammo.
Complain how others play is as dumb as this bbs gets. Whinning how or what others fly is just nonsense. It doesn't take away your game play. And Have never seen some one fly a way that wasn't used in WW2.
Low alt bombing was done by lanc;s and b17s in ww2. If you like i can get story of lanc's buzzing german fields on thier way home from bombruns at night. They would fly low over bases and straffe it run home. they did this most nights on waty home.
If HTC keeps changeing game because a few complain about majority in this game, There will be no one in game soon and whines will be no players. "WE NEED TO CHANGE GAME TO GET MORE PLAYERS" OF COUSRE this will be last whine.
-
Kweassa
I was intially sceptical of your post at first. Them warmed to it as it I went along. The only real problem I see is when the Horde drives deep ihnto your homeland and can weak havok at will to the strat targets.
But There is a definate need for more strat targets, City, Factories etc. Or I shouldl say there is a definate need for those to have more of an impact on gameplay.
AS it stands now there is very little reason to hit strat targets other then to aqquire some easy bomber perks which are also next to usless
Good post
-
During the Q&A Pyro brought this up and mention the time when things change.
Remember a couple years ago, all the folks were whinning about the 30K B17s that could drop with pinpoint accuracy? You could launch bombers go get a bit to eat when they climbed. Then pick a good line up on a small field, pickle off 4 eggs on the first Fighter Hanger, then another 4 on the next one. Then extend make a 180 turn and quickly line up for the final one and drop an entire field.
Hitech answered with the new bombsite.
That was the day Jabo became King for Feild destruction, it also became the time when a low alt run was more effective for the causal bomber pilot. You really dont need to calibrate from real low, just get close and let the eggs go.
I also have several systems to fly AH2 on here at home. I can get pretty accurate on my good system with a $350 flight control system. Funny thing is, I can hardly calibrate using an older system with a first generation sidewinder. If caliberation isnt done well, the margin of error is lager. If I calibrate with that crapy stick, and drop at a low alt, I might hit target.
Often its either newer players or causal bomber pilots up in the bombers on most nights. Do you think most new players have invested in top notch controls yet? Most are using whatever was cheap to try out flying.
Personaly I think rather than having to hold the cross hairs on a spot, if you just held down a key for 3-5 seconds set the calibration would be a better situation. If you make course, alt or speed changes a recalibration would be needed. This might improve the bombing situation some.
Hitech reasoned that if you made a bombsite someplace between maybe we would have Meduim alt bombers.
Anyway, it appears that the bombsite change was single biggest factor in the change in bomber tactics.
-
I fear that a 10k airstart point will result in 10k lanc dive bombers.
why would anyone who is interested in results more than in the sim would level bomb when he can dive and hit better?
strat target will in crease the number of bombers - dive bombers.
I see no good solution at this point.
Bozon
-
I fail to see why anybody would complain about low level bombers ? Is it because it's gamey ? because it's not historical ? because it's effective ? because it's unfair ?
All three sides are able to launch low level bombers, so it's not unfair,
Sure it's effective, so is shooting down the bombers !
Historical ? Is sinking a battleship with a 110 historical ?
Sure it's gamey, but no more so than tiffies suiciding a field,
just live with it
wipass
-
Nah, spawning doesn't give the pilot a sense of effort.
I don't do bomb runs alone. I usually mated up with others and made the climb. During this time we chat, I read, keep an update on whats going on. When we would enter the battle area we'd cut the loose talk and start with serious talk, such as keeping an eye out for fighters and the situation at hand.
For the bufferies to get a real sense of belonging, if there were more sense to the factories then you'd see more dedication.
Heres some thoughts I have for some new factories:
-Ammo Factories - these take care of the major ammo types, such as heavy cannon for fighters. Damaging this would reduce lethal cannon load or completely getting rid of it all together for a predetermined amount of time or until resupplied. Small caliber (7.62, 12.7, .30 cal, .50 cal) would not be affected.
-Supply Factories - these would concern the maintenence of aircraft. This could range from the inability to 'rearm and refuel' to requiring more C-47's to resupply an airfield. Damaging or destroying this factory can affect the AI scripted resupply trains and convoys. Tanks may lose the ability to smoke or the reduced payload of HE or AT rounds.
-Ordance Factories- Damage or destruction of these buildings would limit the use of heavy bombs, leaving the weaker, lighter bombs. Rockets could be reduced in number or none at all.
-Fuel Factories - Damaging or destroying this facility can limit the country-wide or section-wide amount of gasoline even further.
-Aircraft Factories- These facilities would handle the aircraft used for each side, or sector. This could limit or do away with certain planes (P-51, La7, Spit, etc) and certain bombers.
Now notice I said sectors, there could be regional factories, which would mean that there would be an emphasis on protection of a certain front or area. This could be detailed on the clipboard map by circles, zones, or pathways of linked supply. Complete destruction of a factory may not cripple that certain aspect, but hinder a side's cause. These would be defended by an airfield closeby that can up 163's and also ringed by ack.
The reason for having regional factories would encourage the concentration and coordination of fronts, rather than one to concentrate on. Another note is that there would be multiple HQ's, with overlapping radar for their zones. This is so that a handful of guys can keep radar down for an annoyingly long time.
That is what I have as an idea. Be on the lookout for something written up nicely.