Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: SEraider on February 23, 2011, 10:46:01 AM
-
I know this sounds inflamitory but hear me out.....
Bombers don't create the damage; bombs do. Just the fact you can take 4 - 4,000lbs cookies in a 29, 8 - 2,000 and bunches of 1,000lbs and 40 500lbs means its the ord loadout is where the value is at. This is a mamouth amount of ord for for one plane and its formations.
Don't get me wrong - I absolutely love flying the B-29 and plan to fly it more. That being said, HiTech spent much time making other bombers for all of us and we hardly see other bombers other than 24's, 17's, lancs and maybe the occational KI-67. Why don't we take smaller bombers? Economy of scale with loadouts, plain and simple.
Bomb Loadouts need to be perked, especially above 500lbs. This would smooth out the use of bombers and ordance pairity in the game and recognize the destructive power of bombs above 500lbs. Especially since HITECH made calibration a lot easier since I started this game.
I know this is an entirely new way of looking at things but I think this is the right way to go.
-
+1 well thought out, (shakes head) I cant believe I am agreeing raider
-
I know this is an entirely new way of looking at things
No, it isn't. In fact, it's actually quite an old one :P
-
Perk ord has been a wish for many a year.
-
Perk ord has been a wish for many a year.
No, it isn't. In fact, it's actually quite an old one
I remember that I brought it up a year ago but I don't know anybody else that brought it up. If they did, I applaud that person.
Maybe this is worth discussing again.
-
I remember that I brought it up a year ago but I don't know anybody else that brought it up. If they did, I applaud that person.
Thank you :D
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,264677.0.html
And I was not the only, or even first one. A future perked ords system was even mentioned by HTC.
-
Thank you :D
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,264677.0.html
And I was not the only, or even first one. A future perked ords system was even mentioned by HTC.
Well I'll say this, you have clout with HTC and they would listen to you and not to me regretably. Maybe now with the addition of the 29, this idea could someday soon become a reality for the best of the game.
There are a lot of bombers that HTC made for us and simply not used but this could change things. :salute
-
The B-29 is fantastic above 20K but which bomber isn't? The thing is, I don't have the luxury of time to spend it climbing to a safe alt which I'm sure is the case with the majority of players. Plus I find it much more enjoyable to fly my bombers just low enough to engage enemy cons then I do flying it all alone in the heavens (Remember AH is a combat flight simulator after all).
The B-29 without the fire control computer isn't worth 100 perks per unit and needs to be significantly lowered.
Does this post deserve a +1?
-
The B-29 is fantastic above 20K but which bomber isn't? The thing is, I don't have the luxury of time to spend it climbing to a safe alt which I'm sure is the case with the majority of players, plus I find it much more enjoyable to fly my bombers just low enough to engage enemy cons then I do flying it all alone in the heavens (Remember AH is a combat flight simulator and not just a flight simulator).
The B-29 without the fire control computer isn't worth 100 a unit and needs to be significantly lowered.
Does this post deserve a +1?
+0.9 Out of spite. ;)
-
The B-29 is fantastic above 20K but which bomber isn't? The thing is, I don't have the luxury of time to spend it climbing to a safe alt which I'm sure is the case with the majority of players. Plus I find it much more enjoyable to fly my bombers just low enough to engage enemy cons then I do flying it all alone in the heavens (Remember AH is a combat flight simulator after all).
The B-29 without the fire control computer isn't worth 100 perks per unit and needs to be significantly lowered.
Does this post deserve a +1?
+1 although I think they should completely unperk the B29 and perk the ords heavily. (maybe leave the light 12k package unperked)
Given it's durability gremlins, it's just a fast Betty.
-
The B-29 is fantastic above 20K but which bomber isn't? The thing is, I don't have the luxury of time to spend it climbing to a safe alt which I'm sure is the case with the majority of players. Plus I find it much more enjoyable to fly my bombers just low enough to engage enemy cons then I do flying it all alone in the heavens (Remember AH is a combat flight simulator after all).
The B-29 without the fire control computer isn't worth 100 perks per unit and needs to be significantly lowered.
Does this post deserve a +1?
not from me... because I'm undecided on this. The perk price is either too high or quite right depending on how you intend to use it. You can put the emphasis on combat and come in fairly low, where the vulnerability of the engines will make that price you are paying for it fairly high.
But on the other hand - A player can (and often will) chose to take it really high, and then you have a very difficult to stop bomber that (yes, much more difficult than any other) that can bring obscene amounts of bombs to about any place on the maop. This feature alone is is absolutely demanding a big price tag.
-
Its still (relatively) difficult to bomb at 35k.
-
Bomb Loadouts need to be perked, especially above 500lbs. This would smooth out the use of bombers and ordance pairity in the game and recognize the destructive power of bombs above 500lbs. Especially since HITECH made calibration a lot easier since I started this game.
How would this work, exactly?
Right now, the perk cost of a plane is not 'spent' if one lands successfully.
How would the perked ord be landed successfully? Would the perk cost of the ord load be recovered if the sortie ends on the runway?
-
Its still (relatively) difficult to bomb at 35k.
Towns and strat targets are as easy to hit from 35 as from 15k. Hangars are just a tad more difficult to see, and that can be balanced by increasing the salvo...which is no problem if you got 40x500lbs.
-
How would this work, exactly?
Right now, the perk cost of a plane is not 'spent' if one lands successfully.
How would the perked ord be landed successfully? Would the perk cost of the ord load be recovered if the sortie ends on the runway?
You don't get them back id assume.
-
A perk on bombs over 500 lbs would be great for fighters. As for bombers, what about the Stuka? It would need an exemption from the perked ords idea. And the SBD too.
-
I am kind of on the fence for this issue. My thought is just adjust ENY on any aircraft that tips the balance to far one way or another. I don't think that the size of the bomb really matters. I really think it is the pilot's accuracy and plane capability that defines whether ordnance is unbalancing gameplay in the arena. Still scratching my head and thinking about it... :headscratch:
-
Just to throw it into the mix, how about a split perk, 50 per plane, but a ceiling of 22k, or the 100 per with no ceiling.
Yesterday I was a gunner in the 29 as well as being shot at by one. In both positions, I didn't like the guns. :cry
-
The views aren't very good from the guns, lots of blind spots.
-
The views aren't very good from the guns, lots of blind spots.
In real life, the B-29 had a fire control computer which ment you didn't have to lead the guns, just put the plane in the crosshairs and the computer would calculate lead/bullet drop.
-
In real life, the B-29 had a fire control computer which ment you didn't have to lead the guns, just put the plane in the crosshairs and the computer would calculate lead/bullet drop.
Well that's all fine and dandy till you can't see the plane to get the cross hairs onto it. Too many blind spots and the rear gun just doesn't look under the plane well enough.
-
not from me... because I'm undecided on this. The perk price is either too high or quite right depending on how you intend to use it. You can put the emphasis on combat and come in fairly low, where the vulnerability of the engines will make that price you are paying for it fairly high.
But on the other hand - A player can (and often will) chose to take it really high, and then you have a very difficult to stop bomber that (yes, much more difficult than any other) that can bring obscene amounts of bombs to about any place on the maop. This feature alone is is absolutely demanding a big price tag.
The bomb load is the elephant in the room here and I highly doubt we'll get a perk ord system any time soon.
-
+1 well thought out, (shakes head) I cant believe I am agreeing raider
Damn it Dodger, honestly man! His head, just look at the size of his friggin head now :O
JUGgler
-
As I said in the other thread, there is literally no reason to fly at reasonable altitudes in a bomber within the MA. There is an easy bomb site, no varying wind layers, no cloud layers and very few people fly above 20k routinely. The bomber pilots can 'laser designate' all their targets from 30k and have no accuracy issues what-so-ever.
-
The bomber pilots can 'laser designate' all their targets from 30k and have no accuracy issues what-so-ever.
You have obviously never seen my Lancaster landscaping service... :rofl
-
As I said in the other thread, there is literally no reason to fly at reasonable altitudes in a bomber within the MA. There is an easy bomb site, no varying wind layers, no cloud layers and very few people fly above 20k routinely. The bomber pilots can 'laser designate' all their targets from 30k and have no accuracy issues what-so-ever.
Wrooooooong. I'll send you my film of me bombing from 17k in a B29 last night, my setup was perfect, my speeds were spot on, and I still ended up missing 50% of the time. Don't even ask how many bombs I wasted when I bombed from 20k. :uhoh :D
The higher and faster you fly leads to a greater error percentage when dropping. Being 1mph off when calibrating at 20+k and 300mph can send your bombs as far as 200-300 feet off target.
Now on to perked loadouts, this idea has merit but let me ask one question. I'm a newbie that just joined the game and I want to fly a B17. How am I going to do it if all my bombs are perked?
-
Now on to perked loadouts, this idea has merit but let me ask one question. I'm a newbie that just joined the game and I want to fly a B17. How am I going to do it if all my bombs are perked?
i believe the premise is the heavier loadouts would be perked...or the heavier bombs maybe (?)
-
Now on to perked loadouts, this idea has merit but let me ask one question. I'm a newbie that just joined the game and I want to fly a B17. How am I going to do it if all my bombs are perked?
You may read the proposal given in the link I provided in my 1st post in this thread for a perked ords variant that deals with this. ;)
(In a nutshell: smaller bombs are always free in heavy bombers, and heavy bombs carried by fighters are much more perked than when carried by light bombers like Ju-87, TBM and so on)
-
The higher and faster you fly leads to a greater error percentage when dropping. Being 1mph off when calibrating at 20+k and 300mph can send your bombs as far as 200-300 feet off target.
It's called to short of a flight to get a stable speed. Other heavies you need a sector to get a stable speed. B29 you're most likely going to a longer time too, but still applies.
-
Nothing should be perked over 200, regardless of eny. No bomber should be worth over 100 (for a formation), regardless of eny.
I have advocated in the past that formations should only cost what the base airframe is worth. I agree with all counterpoints to this notion in principle. What it boils down to is time. I would say, 150-200 of the 5000 (my guess, no bashing allowed on my guess dammit) players, have enough bomber perkies to afford flying this ride and losing more than a set or two. Were I to lose a formation of B-29s, it would take me 3-5 months, depending on my mood, to round up enough perkies for another B-29 sortie. I just can't let myself believe that HTC created a airframe to be used by the bulk of players 3-4 times a year (if they lose it). (yeah yeah, dont get shot down....right.)
We all pay $xx.xx a month, regardless of how many hours we play. The perk incentives impact on those who spend more time online is much less than their counterparts who play on weekends. This is unsatisfactory because it benefits a specific set of clients, not the entire base of customers, who again, all pay the same amount.
My understanding is the perk system balances the planes capabilities against other aircraft. This with the ENY provide a balance to promote more competetive fighting and to discourage folks from massing to one country with the intent of capturing the planet. I cannot see/understand how limiting the access to bombers, to this extent, changes the game play as signficantly as with fighters. It discourages the use of the airframe. I have no kidding, only killed one flight of mossie 16s since they were introduced, the only flight I have seen. The bulk of the bombers I see are lancs/24s/17s. Would it make that significant of a difference to see a B-29 or AR-234 or Mossie 16 in similar numbers? I think not.
If the bombers were actually able to shape the fight in a strategic sense, then yes, because of the speed and load some should have to be perked, but they don't. A B29, regardless of the fact it can drop 40K of ords is still not going to drop an entire town in one pass. So, what epic game play changing capabilities do these bombers bring. I suggest none.
I can fly a 262 all day long and not worry about being shot down, if I am smart. Not the case with bombers. Those mossie 16s I shot down, I trailed in a TA-152 until they got short on gas and tried to descend after chasing them for 5 or so sectors. In a 262, I would be in the bar before that 152 got into my sector.
Thoughts?
-
*snip*
Very reasonable argumentation :old:
-
Wrooooooong. I'll send you my film of me bombing from 17k in a B29 last night, my setup was perfect, my speeds were spot on, and I still ended up missing 50% of the time. Don't even ask how many bombs I wasted when I bombed from 20k. :uhoh :D
The higher and faster you fly leads to a greater error percentage when dropping. Being 1mph off when calibrating at 20+k and 300mph can send your bombs as far as 200-300 feet off target.
Now on to perked loadouts, this idea has merit but let me ask one question. I'm a newbie that just joined the game and I want to fly a B17. How am I going to do it if all my bombs are perked?
SIR <S> Maybe you just need a bit of practice. I dropped from 30k all the way up to 37k. I calibrated and kept my calibrated speed and landed 36,000 points, hitting everything I aimed at.
-
SIR <S> Maybe you just need a bit of practice. I dropped from 30k all the way up to 37k. I calibrated and kept my calibrated speed and landed 36,000 points, hitting everything I aimed at.
I landed 49,700 in a lanc once (sadly I missed once)... the lanc is not perked.
-
Nothing should be perked over 200, regardless of eny. No bomber should be worth over 100 (for a formation), regardless of eny.
I have advocated in the past that formations should only cost what the base airframe is worth. I agree with all counterpoints to this notion in principle. What it boils down to is time. I would say, 150-200 of the 5000 (my guess, no bashing allowed on my guess dammit) players, have enough bomber perkies to afford flying this ride and losing more than a set or two. Were I to lose a formation of B-29s, it would take me 3-5 months, depending on my mood, to round up enough perkies for another B-29 sortie. I just can't let myself believe that HTC created a airframe to be used by the bulk of players 3-4 times a year (if they lose it). (yeah yeah, dont get shot down....right.)
We all pay $xx.xx a month, regardless of how many hours we play. The perk incentives impact on those who spend more time online is much less than their counterparts who play on weekends. This is unsatisfactory because it benefits a specific set of clients, not the entire base of customers, who again, all pay the same amount.
My understanding is the perk system balances the planes capabilities against other aircraft. This with the ENY provide a balance to promote more competetive fighting and to discourage folks from massing to one country with the intent of capturing the planet. I cannot see/understand how limiting the access to bombers, to this extent, changes the game play as signficantly as with fighters. It discourages the use of the airframe. I have no kidding, only killed one flight of mossie 16s since they were introduced, the only flight I have seen. The bulk of the bombers I see are lancs/24s/17s. Would it make that significant of a difference to see a B-29 or AR-234 or Mossie 16 in similar numbers? I think not.
If the bombers were actually able to shape the fight in a strategic sense, then yes, because of the speed and load some should have to be perked, but they don't. A B29, regardless of the fact it can drop 40K of ords is still not going to drop an entire town in one pass. So, what epic game play changing capabilities do these bombers bring. I suggest none.
I can fly a 262 all day long and not worry about being shot down, if I am smart. Not the case with bombers. Those mossie 16s I shot down, I trailed in a TA-152 until they got short on gas and tried to descend after chasing them for 5 or so sectors. In a 262, I would be in the bar before that 152 got into my sector.
Thoughts?
Win.
-
I disagree with the specifics - 200 points or a bit more for a B-29 formation. You can slip past any danger in a 262 thanks to speed, but a slower 262 wouldn't have 5 regiments' worth of defensive firepower. Unless the B-29's flammability isn't a bug, I don't think 100 perks is enough for something so fast and well defended.
Don't want to die to bombers? Don't attack them straight and level from dead-six. Don't want to lose your 262? Don't knife-fight props. Don't want to lose your B-29? Don't fly it far below top speed or below 30k or so.
-
Don't want to die to bombers? Don't attack them straight and level from dead-six. Don't want to lose your 262? Don't knife-fight props. Don't want to lose your B-29? Don't fly it far below top speed or below 30k or so.
Moot, common sense can get you hung around here... :aok
-
Moot,
It takes what, 40 mins to get the B-29 up to 30K and top speed? Doesn't sound fun to me.
Next please.
-
I landed 49,700 in a lanc once (sadly I missed once)... the lanc is not perked.
My B29 Sortie was one single plane, no escort, (because I am cheap).
-
My B29 Sortie was one single plane, no escort, (because I am cheap).
/hug
I've played AH for 6 years, I wouldn't of had enough bomber perks to take up a set of B-29's if I didn't get my 1000 perk reward from HTC. :D
-
I disagree with the specifics - 200 points or a bit more for a B-29 formation. You can slip past any danger in a 262 thanks to speed, but a slower 262 wouldn't have 5 regiments' worth of defensive firepower. Unless the B-29's flammability isn't a bug, I don't think 100 perks is enough for something so fast and well defended.
Don't want to die to bombers? Don't attack them straight and level from dead-six. Don't want to lose your 262? Don't knife-fight props. Don't want to lose your B-29? Don't fly it far below top speed or below 30k or so.
Moot, you are missing my point bud. All I am saying is the impact bombers have overall is less than fighters. This diminished impact merits lowering the cost. That is all.
For the record I lose my 262s to augers 90% of the time fighting on the deck (my choice) or to a HO, which I would do to a 262 given the opportunity.
-
Moot, common sense can get you hung around here... :aok
Bah... missed the point too. :cheers:
-
SIR <S> Maybe you just need a bit of practice. I dropped from 30k all the way up to 37k. I calibrated and kept my calibrated speed and landed 36,000 points, hitting everything I aimed at.
I've been flying bombers in this game for 10 years, I'm not going to get any better. ;)
Actually I do need practice, I was joking with my squaddies last night that I rarely fly bombers over 15k so I'm a bit rusty on high alt bombing. My main point was that at high speeds and high altitudes it only takes a small error to throw the bombs off target, at lower alts it's more forgiving.
-
Damn it Dodger, honestly man! His head, just look at the size of his friggin head now :O
JUGgler
It's big man! :D
When I get off a work in a bit, I will address all your responses collectively.
-
Moot,
It takes what, 40 mins to get the B-29 up to 30K and top speed? Doesn't sound fun to me.
Next please.
So what? I don't see how that's an excuse for a free B-29, if the fire issue isn't a bug. 300 perks for a B-29 formation sounds fair to me. 100 is way too low.
All I am saying is the impact bombers have overall is less than fighters.
I don't see how. I'm ready to change my mind, given some evidence. I was/am arguing specifically with Dirtdart's post.
-
I didn't ask for a free B-29.
-
So what? I don't see how that's an excuse for a free B-29, if the fire issue isn't a bug. 300 perks for a B-29 formation sounds fair to me. 100 is way too low.
Why, what is significant about 100 vice 300? Just curious where you are getting your numbers. I came up with 100 by guessing that the average bomber sortie yields 10 perks. If I fly 10 missions successfully, should I not be entitled to the hottest ride in the game. 300 means I have to fly 30 missions at 1 hourish per mission, which is literally over a solid day of flying to get into the hot ride. A bit much in my estimation. The juice is not worth the squeeze.
-
Not to mention the B29 bursts into the flames if you fart near it. The threat of fire from light MG bursts makes that 100 perk per plane a bit much. Last night I had 2 squaddies lose all of their buff perks in 1 sortie because their bombers got lit on fire.
It should be perked pretty high, however, the fact that it burns so easily makes me think that it should be more like 75-80 PPP instead of 100.
-
Why, what is significant about 100 vice 300? Just curious where you are getting your numbers. I came up with 100 by guessing that the average bomber sortie yields 10 perks.
The same way you'd argue the spit14's got too high a perk right now. And that point difference is milder.
If I fly 10 missions successfully, should I not be entitled to the hottest ride in the game. 300 means I have to fly 30 missions at 1 hourish per mission, which is literally over a solid day of flying to get into the hot ride. A bit much in my estimation. The juice is not worth the squeeze.
So the 262 in your opinion should cost 100 perks at the very most? I'd agree 300 is excessive and 100 more like it, if the fire issue's not a bug.
-
The same way you'd argue the spit14's got too high a perk right now. And that point difference is milder.So the 262 in your opinion should cost 100 perks at the very most? I'd agree 300 is excessive and 100 more like it, if the fire issue's not a bug.
I said "nothing should be perked over 200"....alluding to the 262. I remember seeing 300+perk costs depending on ENY, there should be a cap is all I mean by that. 200 would restrict their use enough to make the point that ENY is already making. Hell, can you even take one up because of ENY when the perk hits the ceiling, I don't know.
One your second point, what are your thoughts on perk cost single v formation?
-
-1
that is all
-
thread makes sense , :aok
-
Dirtdart,
I think ENY perk multiplier is as it should be. If the country is so buried in unfair odds, adding Me262 and other performance crutches that aren't correspondingly expensive is not right.
Yes, IIRC past a certain point you are flat out denied rides below a certain ENY.
Also don't see anything wrong with single/formation price. Three times the plane/ord/guns, three times the cost.
-
I disagree with the specifics - 200 points or a bit more for a B-29 formation. You can slip past any danger in a 262 thanks to speed, but a slower 262 wouldn't have 5 regiments' worth of defensive firepower. Unless the B-29's flammability isn't a bug, I don't think 100 perks is enough for something so fast and well defended.
Don't want to die to bombers? Don't attack them straight and level from dead-six. Don't want to lose your 262? Don't knife-fight props. Don't want to lose your B-29? Don't fly it far below top speed or below 30k or so.
Exactly. :aok
If there was no perk the 29 it would be the next noe lanc stuka, which a 29 was never intended as its sole purpose in life. High and Fast baby.........
-
Exactly. :aok
If there was no perk the 29 it would be the next noe lanc stuka, which a 29 was never intended as its sole purpose in life. High and Fast baby.........
Yup, missing the point as well to my point.
Here is the point:
Bombers in general do not have the impact on gameplay that some of the perked fighters have. If you fly a tempest or 262 correctly, it is extremely difficult to kill you, this is illustrated by those airframes having high KD. None of the perked bombers give you that advantage, to the extent you would perk them at a rate higher than a 262 (formation). They just dont have the impact on game play to merit such high perk costs.
-
If you fly a B-29 correctly it should be pretty difficult to kill you. Not only that, but if you succeed in not being killed, or at least only after bombs away, you can close at least one airfield. What other perk plane is capable of this? None by any measure.
This is starting to sound like a re-hash of the old toolsheder debate. "Bombers closing airfields is no big deal"
-
Lol. How long does it take to turn a formation of 29s around at 40k.....
-
Well now I have to try it for myself. Even if you haven't said anything unbelievable, I can't just take your word for it that the B-29 is so incompetent that it doesn't deserve perking. And since I'm not about to install the game again, I guess this argument's done. I didn't miss your point, I disagree with it. The only way I could agree would be if the fires aren't a bug.
-
I just climbed up to 27k in the lwb, bombed 3 town and am RTB right now.
I took off with 117 minutes, and currently have 34 minutes and another 150 miles back to base
-
2000 bomber perks for N00K! Stop procrastinating HTC. I wantz it nowz!!! :furious
-
2000 bomber perks for N00K! Stop procrastinating HTC. I wantz it nowz!!! :furious
they said its never gonna happen. so save your breath.
-
I 'm going to try to remember what I've read here and respond in a way to some of it.
I haven't seen the B-29 yet but I think it might be worth comparing it to the other perk bombers in the game. I've only had a chance to fly the level bombing Mossie once and thought it was a nice addition and worth the perk price but I spent over a year flying the AR-234 in formation as my exclusive bomber ride.
With the 234 I'd always bomb from 16,500 feet at full speed (about 415 mph). I was accurate from that alt on any target and with the old strat system I could take out well over half of a city strat with 3x500 kg bombs per plane. Under the old scoring system (not the name in lights system) that was about 450-500,000 points per sortie. I haven't been flying bombers in about a year now so I don't know what the conversion rates are.
A typical mission was 45 minutes and over a year to year and a half and hundreds of missions I lost one, maybe two 234's to enemy fighters; usually 262's and I killed a couple of them myself. Mostly I waved and said bye-bye as I rtb'd at around 550 mph.
Turning a formation of 234's at 415 mph was never a problem. Cut throttle after the drop, start a slow turn and, as speed bled off, complete the turn and throttle back up. If I needed a second pass I'd lift the nose while completing the turn then drop it again to get speed, calibrate and drop. Not a problem.
And all of this for a perk price of 65-70 perks per plane or about 200/sortie. With the load-out the 29 carries it makes me wonder if it's not perked too low? If not it must have some serious flaws.
-
I landed 17k damage, now I'm gonna fly a lanc and try to do the same thing.
-
With the load-out the 29 carries it makes me wonder if it's not perked too low? If not it must have some serious flaws.
I wouldn't call it flaws - Some traits & circumstances do limit the efficiency / impact on game compared to those one may have expected. It's vulnerability to fire and the perk price combined have the effect that most B-29 will climb pretty high. This takes a lot of time. The sheer amount of bombs is often overkill for all tactical purposes, just doubling the load isn't exactly doubling the impact on a battle (see Lancs vs B-17s). If you take the 40x1000 options, you can easily run out of fuel before you run out of bombs.
-
I landed 17k damage, now I'm gonna fly a lanc and try to do the same thing.
Almost any bomber in game can land way more than that... most without even trying hard. You can land 24K in a Ki-67, a B-17 is good for 33k or 50k, depending on loadout & mission length
-
It was a single plane
-
Well now I have to try it for myself. Even if you haven't said anything unbelievable, I can't just take your word for it that the B-29 is so incompetent that it doesn't deserve perking. And since I'm not about to install the game again, I guess this argument's done. I didn't miss your point, I disagree with it. The only way I could agree would be if the fires aren't a bug.
Fair enough <S>. I don't think the bomber is incompetent. I just don't think that it's overall impact will change the game dynamic sufficiently to merit it's current cost.
-
I actually think many are missing something. AH does not have engine fires. It has fuel fires. That has been no indication from HTC in the update notes that the modeling of AH has changed and that the engines in planes can now catch fire.
So I'll wait for the patches and see if HTC decideds that there is an issue or not. If they say there is no issue with the hardness of the self sealing fuel tank areas, then so be it. After than the 29 may become a more usable option for the MA.
-
I actually think many are missing something. AH does not have engine fires. It has fuel fires. That has been no indication from HTC in the update notes that the modeling of AH has changed and that the engines in planes can now catch fire.
So I'll wait for the patches and see if HTC decideds that there is an issue or not. If they say there is no issue with the hardness of the self sealing fuel tank areas, then so be it. After than the 29 may become a more usable option for the MA.
I sense anecdotal evidence oozing from the peanut gallery. The P-61 using all of it's ammo to shoot down a B29 should be good. Especially considering by the time those planes got back to their bases of origin they had very little fuel left. :old:
-
I know this sounds inflamitory but hear me out.....
Bombers don't create the damage; bombs do. Just the fact you can take 4 - 4,000lbs cookies in a 29, 8 - 2,000 and bunches of 1,000lbs and 40 500lbs means its the ord loadout is where the value is at. This is a mamouth amount of ord for for one plane and its formations.
Don't get me wrong - I absolutely love flying the B-29 and plan to fly it more. That being said, HiTech spent much time making other bombers for all of us and we hardly see other bombers other than 24's, 17's, lancs and maybe the occational KI-67. Why don't we take smaller bombers? Economy of scale with loadouts, plain and simple.
Bomb Loadouts need to be perked, especially above 500lbs. This would smooth out the use of bombers and ordance pairity in the game and recognize the destructive power of bombs above 500lbs. Especially since HITECH made calibration a lot easier since I started this game.
I know this is an entirely new way of looking at things but I think this is the right way to go.
I like this idea. :aok
-
How would this work, exactly?
Right now, the perk cost of a plane is not 'spent' if one lands successfully.
How would the perked ord be landed successfully? Would the perk cost of the ord load be recovered if the sortie ends on the runway?
That is a very good question that I am still think about. There has to be an equitable trade-off. Maybe a 2-tiered system? Cost A if landed successfully or B if lost? Or just cost A when used.
Think of it as use lesser bombers with lesser load-outs to save up. Then buy it on heaver bombers.
Bombing in this game compared to what it was is pretty easy now and you can earn perks pretty quick now.
-
NOTE: I have yet to figure out how to do tables. THey look write during the edit, then don't align when posted. hopefully you can follow until I get it sorted. Thanks :salute
How about a Plane-perk number: because planes are faster, tougher, more heavily armed than one another, this number would characterizes those attributes with higher being better.
And...
a Bomb-perk number which is scaled with Bomb load.
See the following tables…….
Plane perk number
Plane Plane-perk
A-20 0
B-17 1
B-24 2
Lancaster 2
Ki-67 0
B-29 4
Bomb Perk number
Bomb Load Bomb-perk
0 0
1000 0
2000 0
4000 1
6000 1
8000 1
10000 2
12000 2
14000 2
16000 4
18000 4
20000 4
The Perks required for each incremental bomb load are the product of the two numbers……
Bomb perks per incremental Bomb Load
Plane 0 1000 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000
A-20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
B-17 0 0 0 1 1 1 2 2 2 4 4 4
B-24 0 0 0 2 2 2 4 4 4 8 8 8
Lanc 0 0 0 2 2 2 4 4 4 8 8 8
Ki-67 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
B-29 0 0 0 4 4 4 8 8 8 16 16 16
The total perks per Bomb load by plane are the sum of the values across the rows as the load increases and are shown in the next table…..
Total Perk Points per Bomb Load by Plane
Plane 0 1000 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000
A-20 0 0 0 0
B-17 0 0 0 1 2
B-24 0 0 0 2 4 6
Lanc 0 0 0 2 4 6 10 14 18
Ki-67 0 0 0
B-29 0 0 0 4 8 12 20 28 36 52 68 84
I picked values for bomb-perk and plane-perks to illustrate the point of how required perks could vary with both plane type and bomb load. I'm not recommending these exact values, this is just a starting point to discuss the method.
If you land the plane successfully you get all of your perks back. If you don't you lose them, just like today.
-
Vink,
Lay out all your table items. Take each item and put it in TD /TD tags, spaces removed inside those tags. Take each row and put it in TR /TR tags. Take the whole table and put it in TABLE /TABLE tags.
Set the column positions with the first line in a table, by adding spaces after each item inside the td tags, to push each following column to the right. Every row should automatically show its items correctly lined up in their columns.
-
Vink,
Lay out all your table items. Take each item and put it in TD /TD tags, spaces removed inside those tags. Take each row and put it in TR /TR tags. Take the whole table and put it in TABLE /TABLE tags.
Set the column positions with the first line in a table, by adding spaces after each item inside the td tags, to push each following column to the right. Every row should automatically show its items correctly lined up in their columns.
Thanks Moot. This is a bit better.
How about a Plane-perk number: because planes are faster, tougher, more heavily armed than one another, this number would characterizes those attributes with higher being better.
And...
a Bomb-perk number, which is scaled with Bomb load.
See the following tables…….
Plane perk number
| Plane | Plane-perk |
| A-20 | 0 |
| B-17 | 1 |
| B-24 | 2 |
| Lancaster | 2 |
| Ki-67 | 0 |
| B-29 | 4 |
Bomb Perk number
| Bomb Load | Bomb-perk |
| 0 | 0 |
| 1000 | 0 |
| 2000 | 0 |
| 4000 | 1 |
| 6000 | 1 |
| 8000 | 1 |
| 10000 | 2 |
| 12000 | 2 |
| 14000 | 2 |
| 16000 | 4 |
| 18000 | 4 |
| 20000 | 4 |
The total perks per Bomb load by plane are the sum of the values across the rows as the load increases and are shown in the next table…..
Total Perk Points per Bomb Load by Plane
| Plane | 0 | 1000 | 2000 | 4000 | 6000 | 8000 | 10000 | 12000 | 14000 | 16000 | 18000 | 20000 |
| A-20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| B-17 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| B-24 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 6 |
| Lancaster | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 10 | 14 | 18 |
| Ki-67 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| B-29 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 8 | 12 | 20 | 28 | 36 | 52 | 68 | 84 |
I picked values for bomb-perk and plane perks to illustrate the point of how required perks could vary with both plane type and bomb load.
If you land the plan successfully you get all of your perks back. If you don't you lose them, just like today.
-
Thanks Moot. This is a bit better.
How about a Plane-perk number: because planes are faster, tougher, more heavily armed than one another, this number would characterizes those attributes with higher being better.
And...
a Bomb-perk number, which is scaled with Bomb load.
See the following tables…….
That is a pretty reasonable start for this idea. I wonder if HTC would even consider this or something similar.
-
That is a pretty reasonable start for this idea. I wonder if HTC would even consider this or something similar.
I don't think it would be all rosey like you think with this. You'd also be forced to perk attack load outs. Then we'd move onto the fact noobs couldn't fly the 'super bombers' because they don't have the perks. More over, if we're perking planes like such, why not add the same idea to Fighters?
Why not perk the formations? As it works now... You'd pay about 100 for a B29, and 300 for 3. This means loosing a single drone is 100 perks, the guy flying his Lancs loses Nothing atm for his formation. The same works with the Mossie's. Pay per plane, the formation costs more. The code is already there in theory.
-
Wrooooooong. I'll send you my film of me bombing from 17k in a B29 last night, my setup was perfect, my speeds were spot on, and I still ended up missing 50% of the time.
B-29 airspeed indicator in the bombadier's position was out of calibration.
http://www.hitechcreations.com/Flight-Sim/Flight-Simulator-Download/aces-high-version-223-patch-1-information-page.html
I've seen B17s, B24s and Lancs do it all the time. Now, let's get back to this argument. :devil
-
I have always understood a perked ordnance system to be specialty loadout type items (Fritz X, dam busters, tallboy, etc.). Which I wholeheartedly supported. Perking ordnance just to perk it, is a horrible idea.
-
I don't think it would be all rosey like you think with this. You'd also be forced to perk attack load outs.
I don't think you would have to. We only perk 3 bombers now. We're just saying the perks values for these bombers could be lowered if lower bomb loads were chosen. So while I applied it to a lot of bombers, the numbers could be adjusted to only affecting 'perk' worthy plane/load combinations. I doubt many of the Attack load/planes would qualify, if they don't now. They could if there was value in it, but they wouldn't have to.
Then we'd move onto the fact noobs couldn't fly the 'super bombers' because they don't have the perks.
Noobs can't fly them under the current system, and won't be able to for a very long time. In the new system they'd get to the minumum perk level much quicker than getting to the current non-varying number.
More over, if we're perking planes like such, why not add the same idea to Fighters?
Again that could be done but I'm not sure there's a case for making that change.
Why not perk the formations? As it works now... You'd pay about 100 for a B29, and 300 for 3. This means loosing a single drone is 100 perks, the guy flying his Lancs loses Nothing atm for his formation. The same works with the Mossie's. Pay per plane, the formation costs more. The code is already there in theory.
I think factoring in single vs formation would be a good idea too
-
I have always understood a perked ordnance system to be specialty loadout type items (Fritz X, dam busters, tallboy, etc.). Which I wholeheartedly supported. Perking ordnance just to perk it, is a horrible idea.
we're not perking it just to perk it. I'd be against that too. This a way to get the required perk lower when not loaded up to the hilt. The idea being that a B-29 with 2000lbs of bombs probably isn't worthy because the lethality is so reduced. Just a way to more folks in them.
-
we're not perking it just to perk it. I'd be against that too. This a way to get the required perk lower when not loaded up to the hilt. The idea being that a B-29 with 2000lbs of bombs probably isn't worthy because the lethality is so reduced. Just a way to more folks in them.
Excuse me for being slow on the uptake here... Just so I understand that this whole discussion is about trying to lower the Perk of a B-29 by using a lesser bombload? So why are other bombers included in the discussion? :headscratch:
-
Excuse me for being slow on the uptake here... Just so I understand that this whole discussion is about trying to lower the Perk of a B-29 by using a lesser bombload? So why are other bombers included in the discussion? :headscratch:
:salute Hey your not slow, I'm probably writing this up crappy.
To the point, lancs are perked, and B-29, and Arados are Perked. I think B-24s are perked too. Wouldn't it be fun to fly and gun those at low to medium altitudes? If you took away the huge bomb loads, [Arado's speed would probably keep it perked] the threat to the enemy [lethality] would be so reduced, there would be no need to perk it. The game balance wouldn't change if folks were flying around in lancs, or B29s with a 1000lbs of bombs in them. With more access and lower risk of perk point loss, they would get more air time, which would be more fun for all.
...assuming you believe it would be more fun for all. I think it probably would.