Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: MjTalon on February 27, 2008, 12:39:41 PM
-
Ever get tired when your on a 10+ kill streak in your gv? And along comes a pissed gvers than you've killed countless times in a lanc stuka and puts a end too your killing rampage.
Well me and whels were talking on 200 today, and a possible way to fix the lanc stukas/b17s/24s etc is to restrict there launch to medium/large airbases. Yes it might sound silly but look at the positive effects:
-Will force bombers to roll from back bases in the map
-Will dramatically reduce the amount of dive bombing Bombers.
- Actually won't have suicidal Bombers rolling from small bases to pork and bail.
-
I think the rear base idea is a good one.
It will slow the amount of "lanc stuka"ing and wont hurt those of us that attempt actual raids.
-
Fine, if:
-Only big bombers were effected:
-Lanc, B17, B24, B26, Ju88, etc.
-Small(er) bombers were not effected such as:
-Boston3, Stuka, A20, B25 etc
-
I'm all for limiting where bombers can takeoff, as long as we get rid of vehicle spawnpoints. That way we don't get any more tanks parked on runways vulching fighters- you'll be driving 30 miles cross country while the bombers are taking off from 2 sectors back, and you'll still get egged as soon as you get there- the perfect fix.
-
Yeah but rear bases change as the game changes and fields are captured/lost. If you mean only allow heavies to take off from the 3 main bases then you might as well just get rid of the bombers period.
If, however, HTC can write the code that actually only front line bases are effected, and the code can keep up with the base changeovers? Then sure, that would be great. No "real" bomber stick takes off from frontline bases anyways. As long as only bases that nudge up against each other are effected.
But I dont think theres any real way to change things. I do know this however ,when the 20mm flakwagons come out, Im going to pound some Lancstukas. Many of whom bail after dropping anyways.
Im not a GV guy but its a shame their good gameplay can be impacted by somthing as Dweebish as a Lancstuka. Myself I have to much respect for the Lancaster and the impact it had in the war to fly it in such a way.
Oh and the Marauder should be left out too. Its a medium bomber that strafes as well. Just like the B-25. Only the heavies should be affected.
-
Originally posted by SpikesX
Fine, if:
-Only big bombers were effected:
-Lanc, B17, B24, B26, Ju88, etc.
Its funny that you include the Ju88 in that list, as the very reason it only had two engines and was equipped with dive flaps is so that it COULD dive bomb.
-
Originally posted by Motherland
Its funny that you include the Ju88 in that list, as the very reason it only had two engines and was equipped with dive flaps is so that it COULD dive bomb.
Good catch.
-
Was the Boston really a divebomber or ground attack plane (well, variant)?
-
The B-26 and Ju88 are not heavy bombers. Neither should be on that list.
Also, moving heavy bombers to med/lg fields might have a negative consequence as well. They all climb out to 15k+ (leaving the folks at 10k and below unable to intercept)
Another option is they get alt then dive in from higher alt. Perhaps ripping their wings off but not before dropping their bombs all over the intended target.
In general I like the idea (only for 4-engine bombers) but I think it could have side effects.
-
If you really want to stop diving bombing heavy bombers, limit the angle they could drop bombs at. I'm sure there is ample data that indicates what angle a bomber could be at when dropping bombs.
You can also do it through game mechanics by making it so that you can only drop bombs from the bombadier position.
ack-ack
-
Oops...forgot the 88s had dive flaps. :o
The B26 could go either way...what if I put it this way:
If it doesn't have forward facing guns, controllable in the pilot seat, it is a heavy bomber. Excluding the B5N.
-
Easier fix would be to require someone to be in the F6 view to release bombs.
-
Originally posted by stroker71
Easier fix would be to require someone to be in the F6 view to release bombs.
Macros work wonders.
The fix is dive angle.
-
I do not care for the "bombers (or any vehicle) being relegated to specific take-off or spawn areas" idea. As far as the dive angle, I favor whatever was realistic. If the bombers are doing something that they were truly unable to do, then it needs to be fixed.
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
good gameplay can be impacted by somthing as Dweebish as...
Dropping the HQ radar...
Dropping the fighter hangars...
Dropping the VH's in tank town...
Suicide pork missions for ord/radar...
Camping aircraft spawns in GV's...
Camping in general...
This list could continue. All I'll say is welcome to the MA, where someone elses imagination is your worst nightmare...
-
"Its funny that you include the Ju88 in that list, as the very reason it only had two engines and was equipped with dive flaps is so that it COULD dive bomb."
In fact "Stuka" means "Sturzkampfflugzeuguzeug" meaning in practice both Ju87 and Ju88.
Both were equipped with Stuvi divebombing sight and Ju88 was built to endure the tremendous loads of divebombing.
http://www.airwarfare.com/guides/stuvi_guide.htm
Sry, not a highjack, just a bit of info...
-C+
-
Wouldn't bother me a bit. I'm one of the few that has the patience to fly the distance level-bomb with level bombers. If I dive bomb in anything, it's the Jug.
-
Originally posted by Stoney
Dropping the HQ radar...
Dropping the fighter hangars...
Dropping the VH's in tank town...
Suicide pork missions for ord/radar...
Camping aircraft spawns in GV's...
Camping in general...
This list could continue. All I'll say is welcome to the MA, where someone elses imagination is your worst nightmare...
Very true. However I would call "Lancstukaing" a separate issue in its own right. At least tanks "did" kill other tanks and "did" kill aircraft on the ground with their main guns. And every suicide pork mission Ive been on my intent has been to get away, and, ords/dar "were"/"are" high value targets in actual combat. All the rest of the targets you mention are hard targets and fair game. Tho camping is dweebish.
But a Lancaster dive bombing on GVs? You can at least easily live with P-47s and Ponys breaking up your GV mission because they actually did so in real life. I hope AH fixes the angles thing so this kind of play will end. Ive been on a few GV missions busted up by Lancstukas and its pretty sad.
-
Originally posted by MjTalon
Ever get tired when your on a 10+ kill streak in your gv? And along comes a pissed gvers than you've killed countless times in a lanc stuka and puts a end too your killing rampage.
Or, you could stop spawn camping and up an Ostwind.
-
Limiting where bombers take off is not cool, after we take a couple nme bases our bombers are gonna have to fly an hour to get anywhere....
plus simply limiting the angle of attack which bombs could be dropped seems a much simpler fix, though I warn you your gonna be just as mad when ju88's start dive bombing you, because unlike Lancs, they are made for the tactic.:aok
-
Originally posted by Furball
Or, you could stop spawn camping and up an Ostwind.
It's what I would do!
-
Originally posted by Furball
Or, you could stop spawn camping and up an Ostwind.
Actually before you seem that i spawn camp, i actually kill more gvs with my IL2 than killing them on the ground, i just used a example sentence as a reference.
-
The Wirblewind may help combat lancstuka effects.
Let's wait and see.
-
Once again, limiting at what dive angle heavies can release is the fix.
-
i really hope this problem gets addressed. It has gotten to the point were cv's are almost useless. All it takes is 1 or 2 people to dive bomb in a heavy and the cv is dead. I hope this will get addressed as HT has spent some time to make the nice new cvs for us.
-
This is actually a great idea.. and while we are at it.. lets limit the fighter types that can be launched from different bases.. No p38's from small bases.. only one La-7 base per side. Spitfires can only be launched from bases that are loosing the war due to sissyness ect..
-
How about having a friendly or squaddie on station to kill 3 suicidal lancs drivers repeatedly.
If your really that scared of them pork the ord.
-
This topic comes up once a month..
The title should actually be "whaaaa!!! im a gv'er and I dont want to be bothered moving my vehicle in order to prevent a 2 day player from omfgwtfpwning!!!111 me."
The best ones are the ones that include the heading "ive been here for 4 years."
Yet they still havent figured this all out.
-
All jokes/whines/comments comments aside, I highly recommend that tankers take the time to pair up with an Ostwind as it is a highly beneficial relationship. Tanks protect the Ostie and get their GV kills, Ostie protects the tank and gets AC kills. :aok
-
Originally posted by MjTalon
Ever get tired when your on a 10+ kill streak in your gv? And along comes a pissed gvers than you've killed countless times in a lanc stuka and puts a end too your killing rampage.
Well me and whels were talking on 200 today, and a possible way to fix the lanc stukas/b17s/24s etc is to restrict there launch to medium/large airbases. Yes it might sound silly but look at the positive effects:
-Will force bombers to roll from back bases in the map
-Will dramatically reduce the amount of dive bombing Bombers.
- Actually won't have suicidal Bombers rolling from small bases to pork and bail.
I favor making bombers be in level flight to pickle eggs or restricting bomb release to the bombadier's position. Or changing the FM stresses on wings... i.e a high G pullout will rip a lancs wings (or wingtips) off.
I disagree with the LG/MED base premise because it would dramatically reduce the number of buffs in the sky on many maps. Forcing all buffs to take "the long way" to their target would needlessly make ALL bomber flights longer (that alone will discourage many players from upping a bomber) and make it harder to blunt a hoard by dropping their hangers at an adjacent base. As for suicidal porking... If a player wants to halve their perkies by bailing after a drop, that's on him or her. Chances are if a buff flies at low altitude near a hostile base, that buff will die in short order anyway.
I fly buffs and I like to hunt buffs... I never use a heavy bomber to purposely kill GVs.
My 2 cents
AATaLeN
-
I've never used a heavy bomber for dive-bombing (I can barely do it in a Hellcat, let alone a formation of Lancs), however I must admit to using Lancs to kill troublesome GVs / break GV assaults. It's not too fun, but it can be vaguely satisfying, not to mention effective.
With regard to dive-bombing heavy bombers, I think the best solution would be to only allow bombs to be dropped from the bombardier's position. This might also partially eliminate the problem of accidentally dropping your bombs from the pilot's position.
Yossarian
-
I agree on the dive bombing Lancs problem:mad: . But keep in mind that they got enough "small" bombs to wreck your GV mission by level carpet bombing too.:eek:
:aok
-
Originally posted by skyctpn
This topic comes up once a month..
The title should actually be "whaaaa!!! im a gv'er and I dont want to be bothered moving my vehicle in order to prevent a 2 day player from omfgwtfpwning!!!111 me."
The best ones are the ones that include the heading "ive been here for 4 years."
Yet they still havent figured this all out.
Wow. I've got a lot of colorful words for you right now that i won't use.
---------------
This has been a problem that comes up a lot. I agree with both ack-ack and Bronk that fixing the dive angle at which bombs can be released would solve our problems.
-
Originally posted by skyctpn
This is actually a great idea.. and while we are at it.. lets limit the fighter types that can be launched from different bases.. No p38's from small bases.. only one La-7 base per side. Spitfires can only be launched from bases that are loosing the war due to sissyness ect..
Why would you limit P-38's from only small bases?
Why would you limit the La-7 to only 1 base per side?
Looks like the true whiner has been found.
-
Originally posted by skyctpn
This is actually a great idea.. and while we are at it.. lets limit the fighter types that can be launched from different bases.. No p38's from small bases.. only one La-7 base per side. Spitfires can only be launched from bases that are loosing the war due to sissyness ect..
No, no, no. When limits are placed in the game such as these, that's the day I leave. Other than the diving heavy bomber problem and a few other minor points of controversy, overall this has been an enjoyable 3.5 years playing AH. You take the good with the bad, OR YOU TAKE A BREAK.
-
I dont like the whole lancstuka thing, but I understand why it happens. I am rarely the victim of those dorks because I choose carefully where I tank.
Smart Tankers: Pork ords of the bases they intend to hit, and sometimes they pork surrounding base ords to further frustrate enemy intentions to drop ord on GVs and hinder resupply. Another option is bring AAA GVs with and or aircover.
-
you re-re's I was pointing out that if you limit any portion of the game you need to spread it to all players an even balance if you will.. why should fighters or buff drivers be limited due to incompetent gver's?
Im a fighter guy... thats all i enjoy.. I dont like it when buffs kill my fighter hangars but, I kill buffs to prevent this.. if gver's dont like being carpet bombed they should do the same instead of every 6 months making a new topic on why bombers not being flown how they want them to be flown are EVIL!
-
An alternative to the original post would be to reduce the runway length of a short airfield so the heavy bombers couldn't take off, but I don't know whether full flaps would defeat this, or if heavy fighters (I'm thinking heavy P-47s) would be hampered as well.
(Also, perhaps a few trees at the end of a runway might also help :t :t )
Yossarian
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
I'm all for limiting where bombers can takeoff, as long as we get rid of vehicle spawnpoints. That way we don't get any more tanks parked on runways vulching fighters- you'll be driving 30 miles cross country while the bombers are taking off from 2 sectors back, and you'll still get egged as soon as you get there- the perfect fix.
im all for this suggestion, and in real life, there wernt sapwn points, or did the Germans have uber secret portals?
-
The answer to "lancstukas" has already been mentioned in this thread
several times. If a heavy exceeds the maximum dive angle for drop the bombs will
not come out. As well bombs should only be released from the F6 position.
While "real bomber sticks" like rich may get their panties wet at the thought
of spending an extra 20 mins getting to target it certainly doesn't appeal
to me. No thank you on limiting where I can up from.
Until such time as HTC fixes this longstanding issue may i suggest you think
ahead and pork the ord before you roll your gvs.
<S>
-
:huh Since i fly the Stuka, yes the JU87 model, i'm offended that the lanc is being compared to my beloved plane. :cry Maybe we just need to remodel to were bombers can only bomb straight and level, if they fly 2 hrs to cross the map to the HQ to raid then they must fly 2 hrs back in order for any damage to register. No more bomb and bail milkrunners. Oh and yea they have to buy all the beer if they do make it back. :D
-
1) Maybe we just need to remodel to were bombers can only bomb straight and level,
2) if they fly 2 hrs to cross the map to the HQ to raid then they must fly 2 hrs back in order for any damage to register. No more bomb and bail milkrunners.
Part one i will happily agree with the first part but the 2nd part ...well.... i recall similar discussion with the bomb-n-bailers and..what happens if they get shot down when returning to base, does it stll count?
i dont really require an answer cuz we've been through this discussion but feel free to trash my thoughts
-Your Friendly Neighborhood Ian :aok
-
*sigh*
Lets start with historically, low level bombing WAS conducted in heavy bombers to clear enemy troops and vehicles from an area.
While I do agree that there should be limitations on the dive angles from which bombs can be released (as there was IRL) I fail to see why people are getting so hung up on the fact that bombers are used in game in manners that historically they were employed. Pretty much all of the heavies we see in the game did have some diving capability, however they also had maximum allowable release angle (~30°IIRC).
The reason bombs can be released from the pilot position in AH is that IRL bombers has dedicated crewmen to operate each individual weapon system, in AH more often it is the one person doing the lot. It's bad enough we have to endure a constant hammering from enemy aircraft without the benefit of gunners while we drop at high level from the sight, we should be allowed to conduct evasive manoeuvres while we drop at low level to at least attempt to dodge incoming fire.
-
To reply about the bomb and bail idea, i know it'd be hard to code something like that. If he flew over bombed and bailed he'd get nothing, but if he flew back, got engaged by fighter and shot down or bailed it would count. The only way i could see to fix that permanently would be to perk all the bombers, say 5 perks maybe more for the really heavy bombers. I know it's not a perfect solution but who hasn't chased a bomber from the ground to 20-30k only to have him bail as soon as his bombs are gone? Since the game is supposed to be based around air combat where is the combat when as soon as he sees a badguy he bails? This will probably be one of those debates that would divide the fighter guys and bombers guys pretty sharply but, in real life you'd never bail out of an undamaged bomber over enemy territory. Maybe the solution is you can't bail from an undamaged bomber over enemy territory? Just some thoughts.
-
I GV and bomb quite a bit, but have only been playing AH for 10 monthes or so, but heres my .02
Dive bombing heavys-code the dive angle, yes, launch from med/lrg bases only, no.
From a GV perspective, I worry more about A20s, IL2s and B25s, than the lankstucka types. When attacking a base with GVs I am with OLDS, I hit ords first.
-
I have to agree....remember during the war not all plains were available at all bases and in addition the bombers were restricted due to runway length as well!
-
This topic comes up once a month..
The title should actually be "whaaaa!!! im a gv'er and I dont want to be bothered moving my vehicle in order to prevent a 2 day player from omfgwtfpwning!!!111 me."
The best ones are the ones that include the heading "ive been here for 4 years."
Yet they still havent figured this all out.
First off as a regular gver its tough to avoid 42 1000 bombs from a lancstuka carpet bomber that bail after they have used their whole ordnance on one gv then bail after they get u. I have no problems with a jabo plane bombing me its what they were meant to do. Im all for a restriction on a dive bomb angle for heavy bombers. :furious
-
Can I get this straight...you want to RESTRICT the options of folks who want to get revenge on spawncampers? :rolleyes:
(http://www.entertainmentworlds.com/jerkoff.gif)
ROX
-
if you want revenge..get an A-20
-
You cant put an end to Heavy bombers bombing stuka style!
It was historically accurate.
After all 1/10th of 1% of the bombers did it!
:P
-
The Polesti raid was not the only place heavies were used at low level.
I've seen quite a bit of footage where formations of bombers fly over areas at very low levels carpet bombing enemy positions to clear troops and tanks, sometimes they very low indeed.
As to releasing the bombs from the pilots' position I tender this sentence from a thread Karaya posted elsewhere.
Graham immediately salvoed the bombs from the pilot's pedestal while Kamenitsa fought to keep the plane under control.
This was in reference to a B24 that was in trouble and was going down. Judging from some of the footage I've seen of the low level bombing runs in late war Europe the bombsight would have been pretty useless at those altitudes, so I'm hazarding a guess that the bombing here was also "guestimated" from the pilots' position as well.
-
If you really want to stop diving bombing heavy bombers...
Shoot them down.
-
^ what he said...
-
Smokey23 had a great idea to stop the "lanc stukas". close the bombay doors when the plane dips more than a 20 degree angle. I love flying the heavy bombers and really wouldnt approve of restricting them to certain bases, but I dont agree with them divebombing GVs or CVs.