Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Belial on February 01, 2009, 04:32:45 PM
-
Ok when i'm bored one of my favorite thing's to do is join someone as a gunner. I just wish you could attach more than 1 gunner at a time, 5 gunners firing at once in a b-17 would be wicked cool! ;)
-
I think they used to have this, it was removed because people would up a buff and get 11 gunners and go deathstar an airfield.
-
I think they used to have this, it was removed because people would up a buff and get 11 gunners and go deathstar an airfield.
No, never had multiple gunners here. HT says the choices are autogunners and 1 attached gunner or no auto and multiple gunners.
-
No, never had multiple gunners here. HT says the choices are autogunners and 1 attached gunner or no auto and multiple gunners.
Was it in AH1, AW, or WB or something? I could have sworn that they had it somewhere and took it out.
-
Was it in AH1, AW, or WB or something? I could have sworn that they had it somewhere and took it out.
AW
-
I could see how they would argue against it because you have so much firepower, but it would make the game more fun. And isnt the game about flying with your buddys and having fun doing it?
-
I could see how they would argue against it because you have so much firepower, but it would make the game more fun.
Like I said, according to HT, the argument isn't about "firepower", it is about how vulnerable ungunned bombers can be. Because you have to chose between 1 gunner per position (means if you can't get a gunner...you are undefended) or what we have now. You can't have it both ways.
And isnt the game about flying with your buddys and having fun doing it?
No, actually, the game is about combat and having fun doing it. :)
-
AW
I knew it was one of those. :lol
Belial, the game also has to do with wingman tactics...not entirely stuffing your plane full of people and flying around in a buff all day.
-
I could see how they would argue against it because you have so much firepower.
Naw, having all guns locked together as they are is far more deadly than 5 dweebs all trying to aim at you would ever be.
-
Until you put 5 999000's in those guns....
:O
-
Until you put 5 999000's in those guns....
:O
...who told you about our cloning experiments....
-
I dont know flying around in a guys plan eating pizza and drinkin beer waitin for a fight Bs'ing sounds fun to me. Oh and by the way multiple gunners is more realistic, real life didnt have drone gunners lobbing bullets.
-
I dont know flying around in a guys plan eating pizza and drinkin beer waitin for a fight Bs'ing sounds fun to me. Oh and by the way multiple gunners is more realistic, real life didnt have drone gunners lobbing bullets.
CLUE ENCLOSED: AH isn't reality....:)
-
Would be too overpowering IMO. I up and buzz around a furball in 17s sometime, and by myself manage to get home after downing 3 or 4 planes...can't imagine what it would be like with 6 individual gunners
-
I say if you decide to have more than 1 gunner, your 3rd person view is disabled. That view is enabled on bombers because you technically have gunners in all locations that could talk to the pilot. With a gunner on every position, you would have them reporting to you.
This would be really fun in my opinion, would be really challenging for fighters as well.
-
Exactly it would be like hmm....being in real bombers with your squadron shooting with you...sounds like a good to me, everyone working together to accomplish a bombing run.
-
I heard somewhere that they haven't done it because of lag issues. I could also be going crazy, so...
-
Instead of having individual gunners for all positions, how about just assigning a single gunner to each drone?
That way you could have 2 gunners (with you gunning your own lead-plane) each with their 'own' aircraft.
I guess that should work?
-
I heard somewhere that they haven't done it because of lag issues. I could also be going crazy, so...
True, its been said and proven, 6 guys so close together can create lag.
I'd like this idea. it be funny watching 6 newbs trying to communicate saying check 6, no 12, no check 3, and then shooting at me, and missing 90% of the time.
-FYB
-
True, its been said and proven, 6 guys so close together can create lag.
I'd like this idea. it be funny watching 6 newbs trying to communicate saying check 6, no 12, no check 3, and then shooting at me, and missing 90% of the time.
-FYB
What happens if the bombers get shot down and those "noobs" laugh and say lets do it again, and become good gunners who had fun?
-
What happens if the bombers get shot down and those "noobs" laugh and say lets do it again, and become good gunners who had fun?
Then they've passed the age of 18 :)
-
What happens if the bombers get shot down and those "noobs" laugh and say lets do it again, and become good gunners who had fun?
It's rather a moot point considering this is a feature we'll never have in AH for the reason NB pointed out and for the lag/warp issues that would result.
ack-ack
-
I think they used to have this, it was removed because people would up a buff and get 11 gunners and go deathstar an airfield.
AW had the Deathstars and they were never removed from the game.
ack-ack
-
Great for the bomber pilots who can't hit the "4" key.
I need more gunners like I need more bad manners.
-
I gun for myself just fine. Just ask some that go after my Ki67's and meet the 20mm.
-
AW had the Deathstars and they were never removed from the game.
ack-ack
Also, in AW, without a gunner or gunners, you had no gunner. It's easier to just gun for yourself than to find a gunner every time you want one.
wrongway
-
I would love for this to happen, better this than 20 (or so) lazer guided .50s from 3 B17s all converging right on me. :O :lol
-
i think you guys are missing the point, it isnt to make the bomber "deadlier" it is to encourage teamwork and a sense of realism of a bomber crew :lol
-
I would love for this to happen, better this than 20 (or so) lazer guided .50s from 3 B17s all converging right on me. :O :lol
They don't converge on you. The guns from a single bomber fire in parallel to each other. Each bomber's parallel streams of fire converge with the other two bombers parallel streams of fire at 500 yards or so.
-
i think you guys are missing the point, it isnt to make the bomber "deadlier" it is to encourage teamwork and a sense of realism of a bomber crew :lol
Actually, you are missing the point. HT has said that the choices are gun yourself with 1 possible gunner added or you can't gun yourself and can have a full load of gunners. :rofl
-
They don't converge on you. The guns from a single bomber fire in parallel to each other. Each bomber's parallel streams of fire converge with the other two bombers parallel streams of fire at 500 yards or so.
AH is non-Euclidean?
-
AH is non-Euclidean?
This is what I mean:
(sorry about the bitmaps, but I needed to keep the images precise)
This is how most people seem to think bomber guns in AH work. This is wrong:
(http://members.arstechnica.com/x/karnak/Not.bmp)
This is how they actually work:
(http://members.arstechnica.com/x/karnak/Yes.bmp)
-
...and while you're at it, remove the warping drones from the game.
-
Was it in AH1, AW, or WB or something? I could have sworn that they had it somewhere and took it out.
Someone already answered but in AW we had a lot of fun in a fully manned buff and having that option now would be another element of game play worth having.
-
AH is non-Euclidean?
In addition to Karnak's images:
(http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d64/fuzeman/Bomberguns.jpg)
(picture by Fuzeman)
-
I was actually just making a jab at Karnak saying the streams were "parallel" and that they converge in the same sentence.
Otherwise, great illustrations for new players to learn from. Thanks.
Edit: I just noticed Karnak said the guns on a single bomber fire parallel streams, not that each bombers stream is parallel to the other bomber's stream. So, I was in error. Seriously now, is this true? The guns on a single bomber do not converge?
-
Wedge,
That is correct.
-
Technically, there would be a convergence point, albeit a slight one, given that different gun positions are just that - different gun positions. A top turret and a ball turret, for example, would have the height of the fuselage difference between them. With both turrets firing at a co-level target, one would be firing upward, one downward, with the convergence point being at the target, correct?
J
-
Technically, there would be a convergence point, albeit a slight one, given that different gun positions are just that - different gun positions. A top turret and a ball turret, for example, would have the height of the fuselage difference between them. With both turrets firing at a co-level target, one would be firing upward, one downward, with the convergence point being at the target, correct?
J
No, not correct. The guns do not point at the target. Look at my illustrations again.
-
Then what the hell is the sense of having linked guns, aside from wasting ammo?
-
Then what the hell is the sense of having linked guns, aside from wasting ammo?
It looks really cool!! :)
-
Then what the hell is the sense of having linked guns, aside from wasting ammo?
Besides the obvious function of allowing you 3 chances to hit instead of one when you fire at ranges past convergence?
-
Then what the hell is the sense of having linked guns, aside from wasting ammo?
It is a shotgun effect. It increases your odds of scoring hits.
-
They don't converge on you. The guns from a single bomber fire in parallel to each other. Each bomber's parallel streams of fire converge with the other two bombers parallel streams of fire at 500 yards or so.
Yessir i know this, I should have worded that more correctly, as when i am in my own bombers i can see that the cross at 500 yards or so. What i mean is that with every available gun still firing in your direction, nothing but bad things can happen for an attacking fighter. In WW2 many bombers could not fire their guns in fear of hitting a friendly Buff. This is where real life compares to the game i guess.