Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: SpitLead on January 30, 2001, 02:55:00 PM
-
In the interests of playability I believe the time to climb to altitude for bombers needs to be shortened somewhat (i.e. their climb performance improved by 20-25%, even if this is beyond what realism would dictate). I'm not saying that it should be on par with fighters by any stretch. That would skew the playability towards the bombers and is too far from the bounds of realism. Yet, one only has to experience spending 20 minutes or more droning on and on in a B17 or Lancaster to get to 15,000-20,000 feet only to get shot down before they even get a chance to make their run will quickly come to the conclusion to discontinue flying bombers. I think this is one of the reasons you find few people willing to fly bombers. Most people want to get into the fight quickly. That's what the game is all about. Not trying to hold "best rate of climb" for 20 minutes (which IS boring to boot) only to get your bellybutton shot off. Granted, BUFF flying presents its own unique challenges and is not for everyone. However, I think if you improve climb performance, you'll find more people willing to take on the BUFF role which will open up a new dimension of play. It would be interesting to see the statistics of Fighter sorties vs. BUFF sorties (I'd bet it's at least 20 to 1). Anyone else have any thoughts?
-
This is meant to be a simulation - deviations from reality are one thing, but biasing the game too far towards playability might spoil the experience.
-
NO. At present if you meet a B-17 or Lanc at 30k+ you might mutter about the dweeb meister driving it (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) , but at least you can appreciate the fact they worked to get there.
We already have super simplfied bombing, please leave the Buff A/C performance alone. what next airstarts in the interest of faster play?
-
"Most people want to get into the fight quickly. That's what the game is all about."
I disagree.
-
I can appreciate all of your points. ANY adjustment would need to be a balanced one and not skew the playability too much. Let's face the fact we already have a certain amount of playability built in (lest we forget real bomber missions were 8 hrs long or longer). I'm just advocating a "tweak" to allow BUFF drivers to get to altitude quicker and therefore on target a little quicker. I could spend 1-1/2 hrs flying a BUFF and only get 3 sorties in as opposed to most fighter sorties where I could get an easy dozen or more in. It's no wonder people don't want to fly BUFF missions. Spare time is a rare commodity these days. I don't know about you but I can barely find the time to play the game let alone dink around for 1-1/2 hrs. to fly 3 BUFF sorties. Sure you can appreciate it seeing the guy at 30,000 ft. But what's going thru his mind after he's spent 30 minutes getting there and now he's spiraling down as a burning hunk of metal after you've shot him down? That will make him think twice about spending that kind of time on a BUFF mission.
JimBear - hmmmm, airstarts. Now That idea has merit ;-) he he he
-
"This is meant to be a simulation - deviations from reality are one thing, but biasing the game too far towards playability might spoil the experience"
yet we still have bombs that can be dropped from 40k into a shotglass without any difficulty.
-
Buffs already have the advantage over fighters in the MA. They can out perform fighters at alt (25k+) in everything but speed. They have more range on the defensive guns (50's) and they have the range to fly past most fighters fuel loads. Couple this with a super simplified super accurate bombing capability there is no reason to give them any more advantages.
If you make them climb as fast as a fighter to 20k they will practically be untouchable.
Mav
-
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!!!!!
POINTS, PERKS, SUPERPLANES AND NOW YA WANT TO WARP TO ALTITUDE??
OK, I will take some pills and try to be a bit more reasonable.....
no no no no no no no no no no.
------------------
When did they put this thing in here and WTF is it for?
-
Obviously, you guys are all fighter jocks and don't have the same appreciation for BUFF missions (help me out you BUFF pilots). I'm NOT saying make the climb rate as fast as a fighter. If you believe the AH published climb rates let's assume a typical fighter can climb at an AVG. 3000 fpm with WEP(recognizing that climb performance drops as altitude increases but I'm trying to keep this example simple for the sake of argument). At that rate, the typical fighter will reach 20K in 6-7 min. Even if you improve the time to climb of a bomber from 30 min. to only 20 min. how much of an advantage is THAT? It's still FAR slower than any fighter. After 20K feet the improved climb performance can drop off. To be successful, any BUFF driver worth his salt will reach altitude in friendly terrrtory well BEFORE their Bomb Run IP before any enemy fighter has a chance to intercept them. So, what little advantage they might gain basically has no impact on engagements. How many bombers do you ever engage at 25K feet??? I would say VERY few because it takes too darn long to get there and nobody wants to spend the time. Why do you think you can drop a bomb in a shot glass from 40K feet? Playability. No one would bother with bombers if your success hit rate was 5-10% which was probably typical for most daylight bomb raids and that's with TRAINED bombardiers mind you. Even though this is a simulation based on reality there's an ever present level of playability that must be there.
OK, I'll get off my soap box :-)
-
Here's a suggestion to avoid the long climbs. I have used the very same tactic.
I take off from the high terrain base, each country has one, and then climb to 10 or 15k. I fly, bomb and fight from that altitude.
Mav
-
Mav,
That's not a bad idea. I've done that once. The only drawback is if that base is far away from the intended target then once again it's a long row to hoe...
-
Obviously you make incorrect assumptions SpitLead, not all who responded are fighter pilots.
Long boring climbs give Bomber Pilots lotsa time to mow the lawn and do other stuff....but I don't, I usually drag out War & Peace and read a couple chapters.
I think AH has way too many gameplay concessions for all involved already and having bombers be given this advantage is not a good idea.
AND
All of the above is simply my opinion and may, and probably should, be totally disregarded.
And please stop calling them buffs!
This is WWII not the fifties-2001.
------------------
When did they put this thing in here and WTF is it for?
-
I fly Buffs.
I do not want to spend less time climbing, if that was the real thing.
If you want to climb faster, take Jabo.
Instead of warp climb, how about setting a right Norden sight, instead of the Super-Duper-Mega-Insta-Accu-Sight that we have now? How about improving navigation skills to make those "boring to the boot" long flights?. Just for the sake of a nice planned waypointed route for a buff ride?. The GPS is enough help (too much, IMO, but...oh well).
This is a sim. It has Gameplay concessions, but is a sim, as it is nowadays. If you want to play a game, there is other flavours outside. But we (the sim lovers) have no alternative. This is THE BEST, and the closest to the real thing, if we are to judge by the opinions of real pilots among us, that our money can buy. That's why my money is here.
Cheers,
Pepe
-
bleah.. these bombers actually climbs already something like that 20-25% faster than should
-
SpitLead,
I used to fly buffs alot, but have all but stopped largly for the reasons you have mentioned.
It's a gameplay problem either way.
Air starts make sense, except capping a field for capture would become... weird.
1 12K bomber only base per country might be OK.
eskimo
-
Do what the rest of us do when climbing out in a buff, the dishes or the laundry (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Eagler
-
I vote NO to increasing the ROC. It wouldn't only change the time to altitude, it would also change the performance over target. Imagine the whines from fighter pilots trying to intercept a buff that climbed away from them -- no matter how small the performance change.
We already have elevated fields that reduce the time to altitude, without changing bomber performance. Seems like a good solution.
-
No, thanks. Actually we have loaded buffs climbing almost like fighters. Try to catch a B17 with a 190A-8.
-
You are of course free to bomb from any alt you like. The assumption here is that a 9k buff is not servivable. That is incorrect. A 20k buff is more servivable but a B26 at 8-10k is a very survivable plane.
Do you want the Lanc to have the climb ability of the B26? That would be silly.
I think the loss of flavour that would be incurred by your proposed game play change would be severe.
PS
I see lots of bombers up. But you are right if the Lanc or B17 could climb 3500 fpm we would see lots more of them.
-
Fishu, can you document your claim that AH bombers climb faster than they should?
Unlike many here I do not dig into performance data much but if someone else does I usually read it.
I notice that if I set the auto climb on a B17 with 50 fuel and 6K bombs at about 165 it climbs approx 750 feet per minute and that this rate declines the higher I get.
I have no clue if this is correct but when I was interested in B17-2 The Mighty Fiasco, one of the guys in our BG said that B17s climb about that speed.
I would appreciate any enlightenment concerning the climb rate from anyone who has some to offer.
------------------
When did they put this thing in here and WTF is it for?
-
Originally posted by Sunchaser:
Fishu, can you document your claim that AH bombers climb faster than they should?
Unlike many here I do not dig into performance data much but if someone else does I usually read it.
I notice that if I set the auto climb on a B17 with 50 fuel and 6K bombs at about 165 it climbs approx 750 feet per minute and that this rate declines the higher I get.
I have no clue if this is correct but when I was interested in B17-2 The Mighty Fiasco, one of the guys in our BG said that B17s climb about that speed.
I would appreciate any enlightenment concerning the climb rate from anyone who has some to offer.
Thats just at lower altitude
At higher altitudes it climbs faster than should
B-17 II isnt that much of a fiasco, runs fine and doesnt bother me when I have it for bomber flights, not for fighter fights.
(hih, I want B-17 from that game, there it climbs like a fighter after takeoff)
-
Originally posted by Sunchaser:
Fishu, can you document your claim that AH bombers climb faster than they should?
yes. B-17 engines overheated fast if used at 100% setting. So they could not climb for 30 minutes with 100% power.
So here the buffs climb faster than in real life.
-
Obviously, I'm in the minority on this issue. The fighter jockeys have spoken. In the spirit of democracy, I withdraw my suggestion.
-
spitlead, there are raised fields in your home island. Take off from one, get to 12k alt (from 8-15 mins depending on bomber) using near-stall climbing speed, then set climb speed to a tactical climb (aka, 200 or so) and point your bomber to your target.
Once you get to safe alt (23k) level and watch that baby get speed. From there on, depending on what your target is, it may be some 20 minutes more.
Ive been flying bombers a lot lately, and I do agree that it takes a long time to fly to target in a decent alt (without being an alt monkey at 30k), but heck, it IS a bomber you are flying, not a fighter.
However it would be good if there were BOMBER BASES in the home islands. Say, 10k fields with ack and 1 vh and 3 bh's. Nothing more.
That way if the home island is in danger, you wont have fighters upping from it with such a great alt advantage. Buffs would take off but still require time to get to 20k, and if home island is in trouble that means incoming fighters would already be near those alts or in nearby fields/fleets.
It would also cut down travel time for buffs. the hardest and most boring flight time is the one getting to 10k, after that most people either decide to go at it at 10k or alt monkey.
Any thoughts on this HT? bomber bases in the home islands?
-
Originally posted by SpitLead:
The fighter jockeys have spoken
AFAIK Sunchaser is a dedicated buff driver.
But I can be wrong.
-
Splitlead
The number of buffs in the MA is decent now.. Shorten their climb to altitude.. and guess what... all of a sudden there are alot more of them, and at even higher altitudes (due to shorter time to climb of course)
I think the bomber vs fighter numbers are at a balance right now. Of course if we reduce the effectiveness of the bombs so that 1 lanc can't close 1 field, that might work +)
As it is 2 lancs can close your HQ, right now it takes them something like 1 hr to reach 30k, if they could climb to 30k in 30 minutes... all of a sudden Aces would become pork warrior... No thanx
SKurj
-
Originally posted by SpitLead:
Obviously, I'm in the minority on this issue. The fighter jockeys have spoken. In the spirit of democracy, I withdraw my suggestion.
Democrocy usually involves debate last time I checked.
I fly bombers 18% of sorties you do so about 11% I dont consider myself a bomber jock so I doubt you should.
Dont withdraw your sugestion just defend it or admit it was lame...
-
You have heard of Alt-X I assume...the plane will maintain a good climb rate without you...
-
Kinda funny how it seems that he didnt even read your last post Sunchaser....
Sunchaser is not a "fighter jock"...in fact, he is far from it. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) I would be tempted to say that I am a better fighter pilot than he is and he has been around a lot longer than I have. But most of that is because of the damn Hellcat....I just cant keep myself outta that plane (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) Before this version came out I was one of those dedicated bomber and goon pilots and flew many missions on Sunchaser's wing, so I can say with complete certainty that he is not a "fighter jock."
If you dont like the climbout time then dont be an alt-monkey. I rarely ever go over 21k in a B17 or Lancaster when I am in a bomber sortie. Heck its even lower when I am in a B26....I usually bomb from around 10-15k in a B26. I dont think it takes all that long to get up that high
-
Dammit Sling, now my secret is out for all to see!
Yeah, I am about as far as one can get from being a fighter jock.
All that twistin' and turnin' stuff gets me dizzy.
Fishu, stop trying to defend B17- whatever it ended up being called and read my post....look for the part that says "this rate declines the higher I get."
RAM, you ain't fishu....are ya?
And look up the meaning of the word document....and buffs.
AND, for anyone who cares, reduce MP to 45 or do any Rpm reduction to save the engines and the climb rate drops accordingly.
AND, WTF is this quoting the article you are replying to?
If you are replying most would figure that you at least read a couple of the words you are replying too, although quite often it is evident that some people do not or they do not understand what they read.
------------------
When did they put this thing in here and WTF is it for?
-
What did he say?
I understood one part, but I can guarantee that I am another person than RAM, because I don't speak spanish at all...
-
Pongo, I've tried the Alt-x to hold climb. It won't maintain a lock. I've tried re-calibrating my joystick 5 times and nothing has helped.
And, I thought this WAS a debate and I HAVE defended my position. It's clear to me few (if anyone) agrees with this suggestion. So, why beat myself up? I made a case (a pretty damn good one I thought) and defended it.
Sunchaser - please accept my apology for lumping you in with the "fighter jockeys". HOW could I be so inconsiderate :-)
My intention was that the majority of responses (I assumed) were from fighter drivers or at least from fighter points of view. I don't consider myself to be a fighter jockey OR bomber pilot. I'm just trying to make the game more playable from a bomber pilots position(IMHO) even though I'm only flying 1 of 10 missions in a bomber.
You almost HAVE to be an alt. monkey to survive in a B17 or Lancaster (a lanc especially with no ball turret and a pathetic amount of ammo in the tail gun). Otherwise you're just a big tastey treat to be mauled by multiple fighters over the target. The other day I climbed to 30K (that's a first for me) in a Lanc and STILL had 3 fighters chasing me!
And who CARES if we call bombers, BUFFS. It's just a common term for bomber. Everyone knows what we're talking about and it takes fewer letters to type...
-
Only one other suggestion for ya SPitlead....get some friends. Find another bomber driver to wing with ya or get some escort. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
SpitLead.
Your servivablity rate could be much inproved. I dont know what exactly is happening but I would say try intercepting buffs a bit and you will see what things make it tough from the fighters side.
As the buff driver...
Take your time...Dont plow into a group of cons make em chase you. Drop your nose for speed. You dont need to be above him you want him behind you so that his closing speed is minimized.
What you can get away with as far as aggressivness as a buff pilot depends greatly on the quality of your opponent.
Use your rudder to get good down shots in the planes without a belly turret.
Set your bomber gun convergence to max.
Use the F3 key and dar to tune your SA. If you see a threatening con. turn away .. if he starts to follow. drop your nose a little and hit shift x to maintain that dive...the b26 can be very heard to catch this way..
When approaching a target, really consider if you want to keep climbing...the shorter time to target might be much more usefull then the extra alt.
Get your auto climb working...
-
An air start would be another option.... but I like what we have.
<S>IC
Iculus CO
576(Bomber) Sqn-RAF
(http://home.earthlink.net/~ryanridge/5765.jpg)
ryanridge@earthlink.net