Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Yarbles on July 21, 2008, 07:14:20 AM
-
On saturday after flying 234's I not for the first time said what the game needs is a flight of less highly perked than the 234 Mossie bombers.
The immediate response was what the game needs is perked B29's but without the nuke.
Now its so obvious its almost a reflex. We have loads of Bomber perks but nothing worthwhile to spend them on.
-
Now its so obvious its almost a reflex. We have loads of Bomber perks but nothing worthwhile to spend them on.
I think you just answered your own question there...We DO have so many bomber perks that if something like the B29 were introduced we'd see nothing but B29's for a very, very long time before all those perks were exhausted.
-
A26 lightly to moderately perked depending on ord/guns loadout options.
Seaplanes, I'd spend my bomber perks to be able to fly H8k, PBY, Short Sunderland, etc.
Unique ord, Tallboy, Grand Slam, skipping bombs, parafrags, delayed ord bombs for NOE bombing runs.
I'd pay bomber perks for each gladly if they were reasonable. (no nukes need apply)
There are a lot of things HTC could choose from that would add to the experience, immersion and give us a place to burn some bomber perks. But I know they are busy working away so I try to be patient.
-
I think you just answered your own question there...We DO have so many bomber perks that if something like the B29 were introduced we'd see nothing but B29's for a very, very long time before all those perks were exhausted.
Then perk them at 200 a piece or more until them perks is used up eh
-
Possible perk bombers not yet added to AH:
A-26 Invader
B-29A Superfortress
Mosquito B.Mk XVI
Maybe:
Il-10
Tu-2
-
Mosquito B.Mk XVI
The obvious Choice :aok
-
Mosquito B.Mk XVI
Maybe give the 152's something to do.:D Besides, I wanna see a CV get hit with the "cookie".
-
Maybe give the 152's something to do.:D Besides, I wanna see a CV get hit with the "cookie".
:aok
But in the meantime you have the lancs for that.
-
I think you just answered your own question there...We DO have so many bomber perks that if something like the B29 were introduced we'd see nothing but B29's for a very, very long time before all those perks were exhausted.
Easy solution to the perk inflation
1. perk formations
2. perk certain loadouts
You can still fly the bomber effectively without any perks, or you can easily burn hundreds of perks in suicide formations runs.
-
Easy solution to the perk inflation
1. perk formations
2. perk certain loadouts
You can still fly the bomber effectively without any perks, or you can easily burn hundreds of perks in suicide formations runs.
I like that idea. I'd much rather roll in on one buff instead of three.
-
I if something like the B29 were introduced we'd see nothing but B29's for a very, very long time before all those perks were exhausted.
Would be ok though, doncha think?
-
2. perk certain loadouts
I've always been a huge fan of this idea. Pyro stated a while back that this was a design concept that was planned for implementation. It would be a great way to enhance balance while still allowing the use of nontraditional load-outs and aircraft. It could possibly even be tied to ENY in a creative way to provide more options to the low side and restrict the options available to the high side. I certainly hope the idea of perked load-outs is still on the horizon.
-
Would be ok though, doncha think?
Well, it depends, as has been discussed ad nausea in many B29 wishlist threads, on how they are modelled and implemented. If modelled ultra-realistically and/or insufficiently perked they would be all but invulnerable to prop fighters, heralding in a lengthy dark era of unchecked toolshed-ism. Given the fact that many players have literally hundreds of thousands of bomber perks it could definitely present a serious balance issue for quite a while...
-
Give me up to 5 bombers in a formation. First one free and after that 10 perks each. Perk all the heavy bombers the same because each has advantages.
-
My wish always goes for either special ordnance (like Tallboy or even the Grand slam, or a bounce bomb) or (much more wanted) the V-1 by the batches....
Really, I think that in AHII they'd make a hell of a fun.
Remember them from CFS, and from a games program a long time ago.
Not much use, but good for distraction, and some fun...
(Unlike the RL)
-
I think you just answered your own question there...We DO have so many bomber perks that if something like the B29 were introduced we'd see nothing but B29's for a very, very long time before all those perks were exhausted.
One of the things that has kept cropping up since I joined is people saying that if the 29 was added we would see non-stop waves of them.
Certainly there would be the initial rush to them, just like any other airplane, but if they were perked high enough it wouldnt last. The real dedicated bomber sticks are a small part of the membership and anyone else is only going to lose so many 700 perk formations, while flying their conga line runs at 3,000', before they say "the heck with it" and go back to their Lancs, which hold almost as much ords and can be bomb and bailed out of without a loss.
The 29's would only be "very effective" when dedicated sticks and squads take them high, and even then most of the time they will be no higher then the other heavies.
I fly mostly Jabos now but do keep an eye on the Strat war, which really is "no war" unless dedicated bomber squads are conducting Ops and even that only happens mostly on squad nights. Most of all for the Rooks. We used to have outstanding bomber sticks and nowadays I see almost no-one flying them, including myself.
And one of the things including the 29 into the game, would do for the game, is it would plain get more sticks into bombers more often. Adding more perk bombers , period, would get more sticks into bombers so they can get more perks in order to fly the perked heavies more often. More people in more and better heavies would invigorate the strat war and open the map up.
My preference is for the Soviet TU-2 but I'd also love to see the A-26 and I also think the B-29, perked heavy, would be a fantastic addition to the game. Ever notice that most who are against the 29 being included never fly bombers anyways?
I love the fact AH modeled the AR-234. I flew them the other night and they are an exciting bomber. But they are also a bomber that takes a lot of skill to fly right and they will never fly that often cause they are just not an airplane that makes a big impact in the game.
I think the game needs a perked bomber more then anything else.
-
And what is neede is the mossie bomber formation because;
1) Like the 234 it is fast
2) Unlike the 234 it can land and take off easily and climb which means Shorter Sorties. I think long sorties are what put people off bombing but without height its suicide and height takes time in everything except the Boston which is too slow to survive and does not have th load. I think the mossie could cary maybe 6 x500 which would give serious damge pottential and fast turn around.
-
If bomb loadouts are perked, that will be all we need. I think the six 2k in the Lanc and the four 2k in the B24 should be perked slightly, as well as the 14/1k load from the Lanc. The B17 excels at the lighter bomb load (24/100 and 16/250lb), and few ever really use that loadout.
Two things to think about:
First:
I dont think people really understand or appreciate the dustructive power of three-four flights of Lancasters loaded with 14/1k bombs each. If the teams and players ever got into the groove of using nine Lancs to fly over any base of any size in any kind of decent formation and have their salvo at 14 and their delay at .5 or so so the bombs stretch from one end to the other the game would change... I am very suprised we dont see more of that. That tactic would shorten a lot of base captures.
Second:
I also dont think people understand the usefulness of the lighter bombs. I challenge players to take a B17 loaded with the 24/ 100lb loadout and hit targets of choice. Obviously, busting hangers with that loadout is not what it is best at, but rather raking an enemy base's ack, ord, fuel, dar, etc. Set the salvo at 12 (for two passes) and delay at .5 or so and just watch. Pick your drop alt and have fun. I've done as many as 44 destroyed OBJ against a strat target in just two quick passes via the 100lb bombs.
This is where HTC could step in and give not only each bomber an ENY and OBJ modifier, but give each bomb loadout its own ENY and OBJ modifier score as well. Destroying something with a 100lb bomb shoudl count for more vs destroying the same object with a 1000lb bomb. It isnt any different that destroying a Spit16 with a La7 or P40B. THe La7 gets a few token perks and the P40B would get 8+ if the modifiers are right. Food for thought, I guess.
Oh... and one more thing: YES! Bring on the Mossi B Mk 16!!! :D
-
Well, it depends, as has been discussed ad nausea in many B29 wishlist threads, on how they are modelled and implemented. If modelled ultra-realistically and/or insufficiently perked they would be all but invulnerable to prop fighters,
Why?
-
Possible perk bombers not yet added to AH:
A-26 Invader
B-29A Superfortress
Mosquito B.Mk XVI
Maybe:
Il-10
Tu-2
I like those choices, would definitely fly the A-26 if we had it.
-
We have loads of Bomber perks but nothing worthwhile to spend them on.
Go to the early war arena. Lancs are perked.
-
I think long sorties are what put people off bombing but without height its suicide and height takes time in everything except the Boston which is too slow to survive and does not have th load. I think the mossie could cary maybe 6 x500 which would give serious damge pottential and fast turn around.
The Boston will climb from 0-16,000 feet in one sector, then run along at 315 mph with a full load (4x500 lbs). A formation can take out 25-30% of a city in a single pass, then exit at 325 mph. I've scored almost 250,000 points on a single, multiple target Boston run.
It's also a good dogfighter if need be (it's a modified A-20). It's only real downfall is it's relatively short range and the fact that the interrupters keep the tail guns from firing on a dead six con.
-
Why?
A combination of the popularly published top-speed of ~360 mph (compared to 290 mph for a B24 which already seems very fast in-game if you try to chase one down) and the lead computing sighting equipment which compensated for all factors including relative airspeed. Which if modelled in the game might equate to a training arena style lead-computing site for all its sync'd defensive armament (Yikes!)...Also, the original version had a 20mm cannon and two 50 cals in the tail, which would be a very likely approach angle for a bomber faster than all but the speedier LW rides...
-
A combination of the popularly published top-speed of ~360 mph (compared to 290 mph for a B24 which already seems very fast in-game if you try to chase one down) and the lead computing sighting equipment which compensated for all factors including relative airspeed. Which if modelled in the game might equate to a training arena style lead-computing site for all its sync'd defensive armament (Yikes!)...Also, the original version had a 20mm cannon and two 50 cals in the tail, which would be a very likely approach angle for a bomber faster than all but the speedier LW rides...
Well I'd imagine the wouldn't model the LCS... just a guess. Didn't the 51 have a good one as well that isn't modeled?
-
Well I'd imagine the wouldn't model the LCS... just a guess. Didn't the 51 have a good one as well that isn't modeled?
Well, the sight the P51 had wasn't that great as it had to be micromanaged in the heat of battle. The pilot had to continually adjust the "ring" on the reflector sight to match the diameter of the target's apparent wingspan while trying to take the rate of closure into account in order to crudely calculate for distance (if memory serves it was called the K-14). So, it isn't the 'hands-off' kind of thing the game has in the TA. But, for the time any help was welcome as most fighter pilots tended to under-lead substantially. It wasn't until the Korean-War era that fixed gun platforms got the kind of lead-compensating sight we think of today. Flexible mounts (ie: turrets) got them much sooner.
-
Go to the early war arena. Lancs are perked.
Serious suggestions only please :frown:
-
The Boston will climb from 0-16,000 feet in one sector, then run along at 315 mph with a full load (4x500 lbs). A formation can take out 25-30% of a city in a single pass, then exit at 325 mph. I've scored almost 250,000 points on a single, multiple target Boston run.
It's also a good dogfighter if need be (it's a modified A-20). It's only real downfall is it's relatively short range and the fact that the interrupters keep the tail guns from firing on a dead six con.
Range is the problem and speed as its fast but still catchable the majority of the time. I would rather be exiting that city at 380 mph plus having dropped 6 x 500 lb ;)
-
I know you're gonna hate and kill me for this idea, and I know it's not going to happen, but...
The solution to the immense ammount of perk points everyone has is to perk all the heavies. And to keep the light/mediums free. Anything with four engines (heavies), goes down the perk system with reasonably low perk costs according to it's loadout (say 1 or 2 perks for the B-17, 2-3 for the B-24, 3-4 for the lanc)... twins (B-25s, B-26s, Ki-67s, Boston IIIs, A-20, Ju88...) and singles (Il-2, Stuka, SBD, Kate, Avenger, Val...) stay free.
And the 234 of course, stays perked.
You get to see more early war and lighter bombing aircraft you rarely get to see today (any buff you will find is 90% a B-17, Lanc or B-24), and there will still be a lot of four engined bombers flying here and there because of their reasonably low cost and because most people has a lot of buff points anyway.
I love the idea of seaplanes, too. But don't really know how they could be implemented in the gameplay as it is...maybe making enemy fleets appear on the map of everyone on his country if it's shadowed by a seaplane can be an idea, but of course then there is the question on how hard would that be to implement (without forgetting that big seaplanes are hard to model and probably are very low on the priority list)
-
You have to pay for bombs on fighters using bomber perks. Or atleast pay for the 1000# bomb. Any one know how rare the 1000# bomb was for a fighter...or at all.
-
I doubt we will ever see a B29 for the simple reason that our runways are not long enuff to get one in the air. HTC would have to re-do the runways at bases for this to happen. .....and thats alot of work when you consider how many maps there are.
Helm ...out
-
First:
I dont think people really understand or appreciate the dustructive power of three-four flights of Lancasters loaded with 14/1k bombs each. If the teams and players ever got into the groove of using nine Lancs to fly over any base of any size in any kind of decent formation and have their salvo at 14 and their delay at .5 or so so the bombs stretch from one end to the other the game would change... I am very suprised we dont see more of that. That tactic would shorten a lot of base captures.
A squaddy and I, (Overlag) use Lancs even more effectively. Climb to about 18k, and hover right over the field. We kept a large airfield closed out for about an hour and half (IIRC) with just the two of us. Now, because we're knights, even with no aerial defense for over an hour they STILL didn't take the base, but we pissed some rooks off! :D
-
And what is neede is the mossie bomber formation because;
1) Like the 234 it is fast
2) Unlike the 234 it can land and take off easily and climb which means Shorter Sorties. I think long sorties are what put people off bombing but without height its suicide and height takes time in everything except the Boston which is too slow to survive and does not have th load. I think the mossie could cary maybe 6 x500 which would give serious damge pottential and fast turn around.
I enjoy a good bomber run from time to time and agree that the length of time it takes to do a long bomb run is a deterent to many. I've started to use the 234 because of that, at least the transit times are short. Of course you spend a lot of time slowing down later. If start targets had more/different effect maybe some people would want to spend more time in a bomber. For instance in staed of classed targets like Ammo, Troops, etc there were Manufacturer targets. For instance a strat target produces Spits. If it drops to under 25%, then no Spits can be upped for that country until it gets fixed.
Just something to kick around.
-
IMO, I think the B-29 would completely fail in AHII. Since it would be at low alts as 7-15k for the most part, it would just be a bigger target to shoot at with Manned Ack, 5''s and any person in something other than a Hurri or an A6M at or above those alts.
-
IMO, I think the B-29 would completely fail in AHII. Since it would be at low alts as 7-15k for the most part, it would just be a bigger target to shoot at with Manned Ack, 5''s and any person in something other than a Hurri or an A6M at or above those alts.
You wanna see hell? Overlag, Buffer, myself, and nonsense each with a formation of B-29s. Oh, and talk 999000 into coming along as a gunner. The only fields the Bish/Rooks would be able to fly from are the ones we would ALLOW them.
-
You wanna see hell? Overlag, Buffer, myself, and nonsense each with a formation of B-29s. Oh, and talk 999000 into coming along as a gunner. The only fields the Bish/Rooks would be able to fly from are the ones we would ALLOW them.
Sounds like someone boasting about griefing the poor rooks FH's.
Now that isn't conducive to a fair, even, furball if they cant up fighters now is it? :rolleyes:
-
You wanna see hell? Overlag, Buffer, myself, and nonsense each with a formation of B-29s. Oh, and talk 999000 into coming along as a gunner. The only fields the Bish/Rooks would be able to fly from are the ones we would ALLOW them.
Careful, you'll get H338, Str8flsh, and all the others on YOUR fighter hangars. :rock :t
-
For instance in staed of classed targets like Ammo, Troops, etc there were Manufacturer targets. For instance a strat target produces Spits. If it drops to under 25%, then no Spits can be upped for that country until it gets fixed.
Just something to kick around.
I like it but I would suggest a general effect like Fighter facory with the more its destroyed the higher the eny goes for fighters in that country. It wont happen though as the majority or certainly a sizeable minority are mostly after a furball. Look at all the whingeing we get about eny already.