Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: cav58d on December 30, 2005, 02:17:29 PM
-
Currently we are not able to up an A-20 when ords is down...On the other hand the IL2 can still be upped when ords is down...The A-20 may not have a cannon like the IL2 but those forward firing .50's in my opinion make the A-20 a very capable attack airplane...Hitech-Is this a bug?
cav
-
great notice cav !!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
-
ord down - shuts down all "bomber" labeled planes. Or to be more exact all planes that have no "no ord" option (but these are all "bombers").
IL2 is labled under the attack category and may be rolled in a clean configuration, A20 is labeled bomber and must load bombs.
Mosquito is also labeled as "attack" even though one may consider it a bomber as well.
Bozon
-
thanks Cav, I knew there was something funny about that a couple of nights ago but I didnt make the connection.
went to a base and all the FH's were down so I usually grab a A20G, but ord was disabled, so no A20G for me either.
-
I believe the D3A can also be selected with no ordnance. Strikes me as odd that the B26, with fixed forward firing guns, has no attack mode, and can't be taken up "clean", but that the sad little D3A, with it's not-quite-awe-inspiring loadout, can be taken up in attack mode.
I wonder if HTC is willing to make some changes regarding these planes- I don't think it would hurt gameplay, and allows players a few more options for base defense, or attack runs.
-
HTC any thoughts?
thanks
cav
-
When ord. is down are SBs' disabled?
-
A-20s are handy when a feild has been capped and is being vulched and those enemy pilots who run out of fuel vulching land on the feild. Up a A-20 and get the little tard then land. Rinse and Repeat.
-
Treat the A20 like a hvy fighter, ie P47, F4u.
Once its light on gas & ord it becomes deadly.
Nose mounted MG's are awesome, just spray & pray.
Yes it needs to be able to roll when ord's are disabled like the Val.
WHICH btw is a very fun plane. Val just takes very very good SA to stay alive in.
If you can sucker fast planes into a canyon fight you can have some real fun. Ping the sucker, then hang out next to a hill or mountain. When he comes slashing in sucker him down into the dirt.
That moment of shock & awe when he realises he's been had by a Val is quite priceless.
-
I think HTC may have disabled it without ords because of that exact reason...I can be used as a deadly fighter....BUT I think the 6 or 8 (whatever #) forward firing MG's is a valid arguement to consider it a guns only attack platform...GV wise without ords the A-20's guns could turret FLAK's, kill m-16's, m3's and m8s to name a few...so HTC what do you think about this subject?
-
The A-20 has never been available when Ords are down, nor any other plane that can not be taken off with no ords. Its not Bomber or Attack scoring related, its purely Ords. An IL-2, for instance, can be upped in either Bomber or Attack mode when Ords are down because you can deselect all ords, while the A-20 can also be Bomber or Attack mode, but it can not up if Ords are down because at the minimum you must take SOME (2x 500lbs I think) Ords. This is not new, it has always been so.
I would also like to see the A-20 available with a zero Ords option.
-
What he is saying Grits, is that an A20 is every bit of an attack A/C as is an IL2 and a whole lot more. Because of that it should be available without bombs, and with ord being down.
And I agree 100%.
-
Got my vote.:aok
-
So Hitech id really like to hear your opinion...Are you worried that the A-20 will be exploited as a fighter??(although the IL2 is exploited at bases with FH's down, or when a vulch is on as a fighter) or do you think there is a possibility to have the A-20 available without ords and used in the .50 cal forward firing attack mode?
thanks
cav
ps HAPPY NEW YEARS EVERYONE and BE SAFE!!!!
-
I think Grits was just referring to Cav's remark that "HTC may have disabled it." FWIW, I don't think it was ever available without ord, either. For whatever reason, if one light bomber/attacker (presumably the breakpoint is those with level bombing sights, and those without?) can be taken up with no ordnance, why not the rest? Why the val, with no ord, and puny guns (not fit for any sort of ground attack except deacking), but not the SBD or Ju-87? Why the Il-2, but not the A-20?
Regardless, I support this idea, if I haven't mentioned that.
-
I don't see a reason why anyone can't up in empty buffs if they want to.
What is the big deal?
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
I think Grits was just referring to Cav's remark that "HTC may have disabled it." FWIW, I don't think it was ever available without ord, either.
Right, I agree the A-20 ought to be able to up empty, I was just pointing out that it is not a bug, nor anything recent, its always been than way.
-
Think the reason it's not available as an attack plane is because it ups with drones. While this isn't a problem while using it as a fighter, drones will just crash, it could be used to build up lots of fighter perks while bombing objects(i think when attack is selected all perks are fighter). I've only been here a little while so i may be wrong about this stuff but I completly agree that A20 should be available with a zero ord loadout with an attack selection but drones should be unavailble when this option is selected.
-
Only the 'Boston" version of the A-20 has drones.
-
Alright, whats the big deal if someone wants to up in B24 formations without bombs onboard? Whats the big deal?
Quite a few people use them as gun platforms anyway, whats the difference?
-
shut up Grits and hub :mad:
-
I only use buffs is:
A. To be used as gunships because I dont know how to bomb
B. Only buffs I use to bomb with is lancasters but I only use it to carpet bomb gvs as its easy to do with 18 eggs.
C. Base defense if they are swarming in and dont want to get ganged in a fighter.
However I only use the il2 as because of the heavy armanent which I feel is a better gun set than the a20. Il2 has those 23mms which are good against gvs and fighters which the a20s 50 cals are not good against gvs.
-
Got my vote for the A20 slick.
-
even an ar 234 can be upped with no ord.
I would love to see A20 able to roll light. :cool:
-
A little off topic but the funniest thing ive done was lure a 109 to chase my 24 towards a mountain top let him close up(rear ball and top turrets out) and just as you get to mountain go vertical drop eggs(must be in semi dive to have speed to pull off loop) but if all goes right your explosions of bombs catch him in thier wake he goes bye bye.
Then real fun to try and keep wings on 24
-
To me the Havoc is a pure attack AC (unlike the Boston which is styled as a level bomber).
I didn't realise there was not an ordless option.............
should be IMO
-
HTC you have had to of read this post by now...I think all of us are waiting to know your thoughts on the subject please
-
Bottom line, the A20 is every bit an attack/bomber as is the IL2. If the IL2 can be taken off with no ord so should the A20 be allowed to do the same.
-
Another arguement in favor of the A-20 without ords is that the airplane does not have a level bomb site...
PS-Xrack or whoever was attacking me to my squad come find me..dont bich at my squad mates...
-
Okay...The JU-88 is "flyable without ords"....HTC please respond with your thoughts on this topic...if the JU-88 can be upped without ords than surely the A-20 should be able to, no?
-
Originally posted by bozon
ord down - shuts down all "bomber" labeled planes. Or to be more exact all planes that have no "no ord" option (but these are all "bombers").
IL2 is labled under the attack category and may be rolled in a clean configuration, A20 is labeled bomber and must load bombs.
Mosquito is also labeled as "attack" even though one may consider it a bomber as well.
Bozon
Erm, not exactly.
The A-20 can be scored either as an Attacker or as a Bomber. The Il-2 can be scored the same. Generally if a aircraft in the Bomber category (FYI, there are only Bombers and Fighters) has forward firing guns it can be scored as an Attacker. The reason that destroying all ordnance disables the A-20 and not the Il-2 is because the A-20 cannot not select bombs. It must take off with bombs in the bombay.
The Mosquito is not a Bomber. The Mosquito can be scoed as a Fighter or as an Attacker. It cannot be scored as a Bomber and it is disabled if the Fighter Hangars are destroyed.
-
As I said, the exact reason is lack of "no ord" option, which only (what HTC considers) bombers, suffer from. I also believe this is intentional and that the original idea was that bombers would not be used as mobile gun positions.
As more planes were added to the game, the categorization became weired. IL2 is a bomber that spawns from the BH, but the mosquito is launched from the FH. A20 purpose is quite simillar to our model mossie, but spawns from the BH. Go figure.
This also means that the mossie has no outside view while IL2 and A20 has it (and if it is supposed to represent multiple crew SA, they all have a crew of 2). Not that I care about it much, but the Mossie is such a pretty planes that it would be nice to see it from the outside on boring long flights.
Bottom line is that there is no clear rule to who should be able to select no ord in the hanger except for HT's whim. Personally, I think there is no good reason why the A20 cannot select "no ord" when IL2 and Mossie can.
Bozon
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Erm, not exactly.
The A-20 can be scored either as an Attacker or as a Bomber. The Il-2 can be scored the same. Generally if a aircraft in the Bomber category (FYI, there are only Bombers and Fighters) has forward firing guns it can be scored as an Attacker. The reason that destroying all ordnance disables the A-20 and not the Il-2 is because the A-20 cannot not select bombs. It must take off with bombs in the bombay.
The Mosquito is not a Bomber. The Mosquito can be scoed as a Fighter or as an Attacker. It cannot be scored as a Bomber and it is disabled if the Fighter Hangars are destroyed.
OMG what?
The Mosquito has a bomb bay. Who is to say that it to should not be able to take off without bombs in the bomb bay? That's the silliest thing I have ever heard. The only reason "it must take off with bombs in the bomb bay is because that's how HT has it setup right now. lol Jeeze
Care to tell me how and why the Mosquito is less of a bomber than the A20? The both have bomb bays, they both have foreward firing guns now. The only thing the A20 has that the mossi doesnt is a tail gun, a tail gun which is about as useful as tits on a bull.
I know the facts, I know how they're all scored and what categories they can be scored under... The argument is to allow the A20, like the Il2, to take off without ord. And it is a very valid argument.
If a bomb bay is what makes a bomber, a bomber then the mossi should be setup the same way as the A20 is now. :aok
-
The mossie should be allowed to spawn from the VH simply because mossies are cool and sexy.
Some mossie footage (http://195.231.246.70/agent/style/besat/Default.aspx?22691) Though this raid went terribly wrong the low level footage is great.
-
Care to tell me how and why the Mosquito is less of a bomber than the A20? The both have bomb bays, they both have foreward firing guns now. The only thing the A20 has that the mossi doesnt is a tail gun, a tail gun which is about as useful as tits on a bull.
The same reason why 110s are considered as a "fighter", or rather a "destroyer(zerst?er)", than a bomber. The same would apply to the Imperial Japanese Ki-45. The Bf110 and the Ki-45 was designed as "heavy fighter" from the start. The Mosquito was conceived as a bomber but was produced, served, and classifed as a fighter. AH's classification of aircraft as bomber/attacker/fighter is entirely US style, but other countries classified their fighters differently.
Could the same be said for the A-20? I think not.
The A-20 is an attacker, not a fighter. HTC didn't arbitrarily classify the Mossy as a fighter/attacker and an A-20 as an attacker/bomber. If the existence of an internal bombbay alone makes the Mossy a bomber, then the Yak-9B would also qualify as a bomber - which, clear is not. Therefore, quitely simply and logically, anything that is not a fighter is tied to the BH, not the FH, and all aircraft tied with the BH requires the existence of ordnance to be airborne. This is the arbitrary part.
So, if people really want A-20s enabled without ordnance, then they should ask all bombers or bomber/attacker class aircraft be able to take off without ord, rather than ask HT to grant a waiver to the A-20 only.
-
I just wish HTC would please respond and give us his views on this before this becomes the longest thread ever =)
-
bozon,
Can you find any missions on which the A-20 flew as a fighter or as fighter escort? The Mosquito FB.Mk VI did both of those with regularity. The mission profiles of the A-20 and Mosquito Mk VI had overlap, but the Mosquito also had a lot of fighter tasks in the missions it flew whereas the A-20 was only an attack bird.
The version of the Mosquito we have is a Fighter-Bomber and was flown by Fighter Command, not Bomber Command.
If you want a quick way to ID a Mossie as fighter or a bomber/PR look at the wind screen. If it is flat then it is a fighter and if it is split in the middle and angled backwards in a shallow V then it is a bomber or PR Mossie. The Mk VI has a flat windscreen.
-
hallllo?????:rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
The same reason why 110s are considered as a "fighter", or rather a "destroyer(zerst?er)", than a bomber. The same would apply to the Imperial Japanese Ki-45. The Bf110 and the Ki-45 was designed as "heavy fighter" from the start. The Mosquito was conceived as a bomber but was produced, served, and classifed as a fighter. AH's classification of aircraft as bomber/attacker/fighter is entirely US style, but other countries classified their fighters differently.
The A-20 is an attacker, not a fighter.
Karnak.....
Can you find any missions on which the A-20 flew as a fighter or as fighter escort? The Mosquito FB.Mk VI did both of those with regularity. The mission profiles of the A-20 and Mosquito Mk VI had overlap, but the Mosquito also had a lot of fighter tasks in the missions it flew whereas the A-20 was only an attack bird.
Im sorry guys you're wrong there.
It was used extensively in a night fighter role over France, Denmark, Holland and Germany until replaced by the Mosquito. The night fighter role of the A20 was developed in response to growing losses of British heavy bombers to German night fighters. The A20s would position themselves around known German night fighter bases and wait for aircraft to return. Then they would intercept them while on approach. It was considered well suited for the roll as a night fighter due to the fact that it had a large enough interior to house the bulky radar equipment of the time.
Yet again the A-20 would prove its worthiness as a Fighter when in late 1943, the 47th Bomber Group consisting of A-20G Havocs was infact reasigned for a period of time to fighter escort, to fly high cover for Allied shipping convoys in the Mediterranean.
The P-70 which was a modified A-20 fitted with an airborne intercept radar and four 20-mm cannon mounted on the belly, was used as an interim night fighter until the P-61 was available. Wow, kinda like what the 110 was used alot for.
The A20 Havoc was used as a fighter-bomber/attack/escort/night fighter just like the mosquito was. The mosquito, replaced much of the A20 Havocs' roll as a fighter escort and any hopes for a continued and refined version of the P-70 early on. Which is why you did not have A20's escorting heavy bombers and providing top cover for shipping lanes to the degree that the Mosquito did.
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
, then the Yak-9B would also qualify as a bomber - which, clear is not.
Yes it was................:p or rather at least a pure attack ac.
to one side.............to me the Havoc was pure attack ac much as (in reality)the FB Mossie was. (Night fighting Mossies to one side)
I still believe we would benefit from a true attack classification
-
Ok, can anyone tell me why it makes a difference if someone ups in a bomber that has eggs or not? Allow anyone to up in buffs if they so desire, does it unbalance the game?
What the heck is the difference?
-
Originally posted by Tilt
Yes it was................:p or rather at least a pure attack ac.
to one side.............to me the Havoc was pure attack ac much as (in reality)the FB Mossie was. (Night fighting Mossies to one side)
I still believe we would benefit from a true attack classification
The A20 did perform Night Fighter ops. \
I am not arguing the facts nor trying to change history.. The mossi did what the A20 could have done if it where not there. The mossie replaced and took over much of the A20's duties as a night fighter early on.
-
I believe the A-20 also performed night-fighter missions in the PTO before the P-61 got there, but I'm not positive.
-
It always happens, the thread goes off on some tangent...
Let's simplify it.
It is proposed that the A-20 should be allowed to up when ord is not available at the field. There is no "no ord" option selectable in the hangar for the A-20.
Arguments pro:
D3A Ju-88 and IL2 can do so, and they are tied to BH as is A-20.
A-20s were used in the attack role, and in the fighter role.
Arguments con:
there don't seem to be any.
FWIW, I agree, there should be a no-ord option available for the A-20. Also, while we're at it, add the underwing rocket option to the list. Real A-20Gs had a rocket option.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
bozon,
Can you find any missions on which the A-20 flew as a fighter or as fighter escort? The Mosquito FB.Mk VI did both of those with regularity. The mission profiles of the A-20 and Mosquito Mk VI had overlap, but the Mosquito also had a lot of fighter tasks in the missions it flew whereas the A-20 was only an attack bird.
The version of the Mosquito we have is a Fighter-Bomber and was flown by Fighter Command, not Bomber Command.
If you want a quick way to ID a Mossie as fighter or a bomber/PR look at the wind screen. If it is flat then it is a fighter and if it is split in the middle and angled backwards in a shallow V then it is a bomber or PR Mossie. The Mk VI has a flat windscreen.
Even easier - Glass nose = B model, solid nose = FB model. (In general).
Seems strange our FB VI can't be scored as a bomber. FB - Fighter/Bomber.
About time they got rid of the exhaust shrouds also.
Think an easy way would be -
If you can up a group of 3 it should only be available under 'bomber' and SHOULD have to carry eggs.
If you can only up as a single should be available under attack or bomber but should not have to carry eggs.
There may be some e.g. Mossie that may be able to be available under all three 'roles'.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Even easier - Glass nose = B model, solid nose = FB model. (In general).
Seems strange our FB VI can't be scored as a bomber. FB - Fighter/Bomber.
I was here with the Mozzie was first released, and it WAS able to be scored fighter or bomber. Great way to farm bomber perks too, setting bomber mode and strafing convoys and strats and stuff, but I digress.
The problem with tagging something with a 'bomber' option, and this was back in AH1 so it may of changed, is that it gives the aircraft access to external view like other bombers. A Mozzie with external view is a VERY hard bird to kill, when the pilot is actually exploiting it.
-
Forget the mossie...thats for another thread please...If we are going to try to get the attention of HTC and show him how serious we are about the A-20 then lets get off topic...HTC....Thoughts???
cav-
-
Hitech..will you please respond?
-
This is a legit post worthy of the boss weighing in. How about it HT?
-
Originally posted by Wolfala
This is a legit post worthy of the boss weighing in. How about it HT?
Come on HTC
-
WOW 4 months and no response??????