Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: olds442 on February 27, 2011, 02:31:03 PM
-
can we get the perks higher on the 163 they are used like battery rams now and u cant go to strats with out seeing 5 to 6
so they should make it to like 150 perks i mean they out turn a 262 and are faster only problem with them is there fuel and landing so pls up there perks
-
This issue will resolve itself over time. The Komet is pricey enough that ramming with them will burn perkies out of peoples' banks. Once their perk balance is sufficiently reduced, the behavior will stop.
I'm betting that it is more a matter of people with little experience in the 163 accidentally ramming, not on purpose.
Besides, doesn't the 163 cost more then a B29 drone anyway? Seems like a net loss for the side ramming with 163s.
-
it can only fly for 5 minutes at 100% fuel and full throttle, and only has 120 cannon rounds. You can't perk it much if any higher. It's supposed to be good at killing you while you try to bomb strats, and that's what it does.
-
One of the biggest travesties in AH, along with main tank guns killing aircraft and dive bombing Lancs/B24's/B17's, etc, are the dog-fighter/suicidal 163's.
I vote to up their perk price to 200. Nothing comes close to what it can do. The range is much farther than 5 minutes of fuel, just ask the gamers who use it as if they were playing X-Wing.
-
-1
This is why:
it can only fly for 5 minutes at 100% fuel and full throttle, and only has 120 cannon rounds. You can't perk it much if any higher. It's supposed to be good at killing you while you try to bomb strats, and that's what it does.
-
If you're close enough to be bombing strats or HQ, you probably need a little something to hand you your arse. The 163 is this "something." If people want to collide, let them, it is their loss of perks anyway.
-
One of the biggest travesties in AH, along with main tank guns killing aircraft and dive bombing Lancs/B24's/B17's, etc, are the dog-fighter/suicidal 163's.
I have to point out that has come to light that the original specifics for the Lancaster project included dive-bombing from a 30-degree angle.
The Lanc-Stuka was by design after all.
-
One of the biggest travesties in AH, along with main tank guns killing aircraft and dive bombing Lancs/B24's/B17's, etc, are the dog-fighter/suicidal 163's.
I vote to up their perk price to 200. Nothing comes close to what it can do. The range is much farther than 5 minutes of fuel, just ask the gamers who use it as if they were playing X-Wing.
Dogfights Season 2 Episode 17 shows a dogfighting 163 with a mossy.
-
I have to point out that has come to light that the original specifics for the Lancaster project included dive-bombing from a 30-degree angle.
The Lanc-Stuka was by design after all.
Original project specifics and actual implementation are 2 different things, and I read 15 degree angle, not 30. The Ju88 is the only "heavy" bomber in AH that should be doing any of that stuff, in theory, it even has the dive breaks.
-
Dogfights Season 2 Episode 17 shows a dogfighting 163 with a mossy.
Didn't see that episode. I'm not much of a TV watcher besides. I guess if that showed a 163 doing circles around the Mossi and shutting off its engine and gliding in behind a Mossi then it is legit, eh??? :rolleyes:
-
Didn't see that episode. I'm not much of a TV watcher besides. I guess if that showed a 163 doing circles around the Mossi and shutting off its engine and gliding in behind a Mossi then it is legit, eh??? :rolleyes:
Don't remember the specifics, some circling was involved though. Need to watch it again. It's called Secret Weapons.
-
it can only fly for 5 minutes at 100% fuel and full throttle, and only has 120 cannon rounds. You can't perk it much if any higher. It's supposed to be good at killing you while you try to bomb strats, and that's what it does.
yeah but it rockets up to 30k in less than 2 minutes.
anyways...back on topic...
-1 for the idea 163's are fine at the current price
-
Mossie VS 163
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eq8hatVSKd4&feature=related
-
One of the biggest travesties in AH, along with main tank guns killing aircraft and dive bombing Lancs/B24's/B17's, etc, are the dog-fighter/suicidal 163's.
I vote to up their perk price to 200. Nothing comes close to what it can do. The range is much farther than 5 minutes of fuel, just ask the gamers who use it as if they were playing X-Wing.
Hmmm. Lancs were designed for low angle dive bomb usage. 24's and 17's, I'll agree are tardly.
If people wish to fly directly at a 75mm gun or higher, at low angles of attack.... I don't see the travesty of shooting them. Do you think fighters strafed tanks into the bore of their guns in the war? Seriously? I mean, the Yamato was documented with firing it's 18" main battery at attacking US planes...shooting HE in front of planes has been used before, IRL. It could stand to be reasoned that some grizzled tanker shot a round or two at planes. I mean they came up with cannister shot after the war for exactly that.
And the 163... it is a fighter. Its' range and use in AH is identical to performance in real life. The nozzle issues and volatile fuel is not modeled, but the rest is. Read up on attack profiles they used. They did not fly through under power, in most cases. And yes, they could dogfight.
If they bother you so much, they have about a sector range from a single base on the entire map. Give yourself a cookie and don't fly there, OK? It makes me laugh every time a bunch of clueless folks fly to the 163 base and CAP it. How much stupid can you fit into one area?
-
-1
While the ramming can be annoying, it will happen. For those who up the 163 rarely or are upping it for the first time, a miscalculation in their attack run will generally do one of three things; 1) Compress, 2) Collide, or 3) Miss.
-
I gotshot down by a 163 :cry
Didn't you want the perk price on the B-29 lowered?
I sense a pattern here.
Me Me Me Me Me.
wrongway
-
Hmmm. Lancs were designed for low angle dive bomb usage. 24's and 17's, I'll agree are tardly.
If people wish to fly directly at a 75mm gun or higher, at low angles of attack.... I don't see the travesty of shooting them. Do you think fighters strafed tanks into the bore of their guns in the war? Seriously? I mean, the Yamato was documented with firing it's 18" main battery at attacking US planes...shooting HE in front of planes has been used before, IRL. It could stand to be reasoned that some grizzled tanker shot a round or two at planes. I mean they came up with cannister shot after the war for exactly that.
And the 163... it is a fighter. Its' range and use in AH is identical to performance in real life. The nozzle issues and volatile fuel is not modeled, but the rest is. Read up on attack profiles they used. They did not fly through under power, in most cases. And yes, they could dogfight.
If they bother you so much, they have about a sector range from a single base on the entire map. Give yourself a cookie and don't fly there, OK? It makes me laugh every time a bunch of clueless folks fly to the 163 base and CAP it. How much stupid can you fit into one area?
I'll guarantee that tank destroying aircraft didnt worry about the main gun of a tank, but rather the AA/pintle gun, or the nearby AA, or enemy fighter. Tankers didnt stop their tank, traverse the turret and wait for the enemy plane to come back, they were focused on ground targets. Canister shot from a tank for AA work??? Please... I'd like to read about that. Source?
I've just double checked w sources and both say (just as my memory served me correctly),that the 163 was designed with intercepting bombers as the purpose. They didnt launch into the air to hunt down fighters, they launched to shoot down bombers. Sure, the Mossi dog-fight was legit, no argument there. I searched and found it on YT, but to have 163's 4 sectors away from their field gaming the game just gets annoying. I usually go elsewhere, I try not to feed the bears. :)
FWIW, I've not ever CAP'ed a 163 field. I've just taken out fuel tanks to reduce their fuel to %75 max, funny how they stop uppin' for awhile.
-
Didn't you want the perk price on the B-29 lowered?
I sense a pattern here.
Me Me Me Me Me.
wrongway
did want now that it can take 303 hits im fine with its perk
-
did want now that it can take 303 hits im fine with its perk
Translate.
-
did want now that it can take 303 hits im fine with its perk
I found the perfect avatar for you, "I R shortbus"
-
-1
While the ramming can be annoying, it will happen. For those who up the 163 rarely or are upping it for the first time, a miscalculation in their attack run will generally do one of three things; 1) Compress, 2) Collide, or 3) Miss.
Yep. That sucker gets up to speed in a hurry. Most people are used to attacking buffs with much slower prop planes and misjudge the closure rate with the 163. Nobody would intentionally ram a bomber (and lose the perks) when it's way easier to just blow them up.
The 163 is uber, but typically only has enough ammo (and fuel) for one bomber formation. A high value target like the HQ should be protected and not easily destroyed by one player. Bring friends.
IIRC, most of the time HQ gets clobbered is because either; the arena is sparsely populated or it is some NOE Lancs from whichever country that just can't get enough steamrolling that day.
-
I found the perfect avatar for you, "I R shortbus"
i found the perfect one for you
"i like trolling cause it makes me look cool.... RIGHT GUYS YA"
-
Tankers didnt stop their tank, traverse the turret and wait for the enemy plane to come back, they were focused on ground targets.
From page 3 of this link. (http://english.iremember.ru/tankers/17-dmitriy-loza.html) (and hopefully the translator works because the original site is Russian).
- The Sherman had an antiaircraft machine gun Browning M2 .50 caliber. Did you use it often?
- I don't know why, but one shipment of tanks arrived with machine guns, and another without them. We used this machine gun against both aircraft and ground targets. We used it less frequently against air targets because the Germans were not fools. They bombed either from altitude or from a steep dive. The machine gun was good to 400-600 meters in the vertical. The Germans would drop their bombs from say, 800 meters or higher. He dropped his bomb and departed quickly. Try to shoot the bastard down! So yes, we used it, but it was not very effective. We even used our main gun against aircraft. We placed the tank on the upslope of a hill and fired. But our general impression of the machine gun was good. These machine guns were of great use to us in the war with Japan, against kamikazes. We fired them so much that they got red hot and began to cook off. To this day I have a piece of shrapnel in my head from an antiaircraft machine gun.
-
i found the perfect one for you
"i like trolling cause it makes me look cool.... RIGHT GUYS YA"
Good one...not really :old:
-
Never seen so much whining about ramming 163s....
In fact it's hardly ever happened to me in all the years of AH flight. Ever. In any version of AH. I recall maybe once or twice it has ever personally happened to me while I was strat bombing. More often they'll blow me up, set me on fire, and so forth. If they actually RAM me chances were I took no damage.
Now, I have done a few accidental rams in 163s before, but every time it's been to no detriment of the bombers. More than likely I'm shooting them as I accidentally ram them, and the BULLETS do the damage.
Due to the lag difference and the different locations of different planes on their own front-end displays, it is nearly impossible to intentionally RAM an enemy bomber -- and if you devoted the time to try it you have no guarantee you'd do any damage to the bomber when you rammed it.
Foolish request. A not-so-common whine in disguise. -1000.
-
Good one...not really :old:
He thinks anyone who disagrees is a troll.
-
He thinks anyone who disagrees is a troll.
:lol so true
-
Original project specifics and actual implementation are 2 different things, and I read 15 degree angle, not 30.
46 (iv) Bomb clearance angles:
Dive .. .. .. 30°
Climb .. .. .. 20°
Bank .. .. .. 10° (with S.B.C 25°)
:)
... and -1, 163 perk is fine.
-
Good one...not really :old:
lay off him a little. he's actually a really good team player and pilot in game.
olds <S>
bud the 163 wont be perked higher because of it only has 4 mins of fuel. and a low amount of cannon rounds. plus its a hard jet to properly fly. so usually only the most experianced of players ever get kills in it. others will use up there 4 mins of fuel buzzing past the bombers trying to get a shot on them but cant cus they dont know how to fly it right (out of all the 163's that attacked me. none have shot me down. i was even in a b25 over the city once. got attacked by 2 163s. i dodged there shots by simply banking to the left/right whenever they tried to make a dive on me.)
if your in buffs and youve allready droped bombs. keep the 163 in your sights and instead of trying to gun him down. outmanuever him. use your rudder to kick some hard turns out of the 163s line of fire. the rocket is usually going too fast to make a quick path adjustment. so pretty much if you can bank correctly on each pass it makes on you for 4 mins. then you'll be safe.
you can do the same thing with drones too. just make sure to pay attenchian to how far your banking away from your drones so they dont blow up.
if you still have your bombs, then the buff will bank about the same way the 163 can at high speeds lol (heavy buffS) so in that case, the only thing you can really do is gun it out or hope its a fool behind the controls and not a vet.
hope ive been some help <S>
-
keep the 163 in your sights and instead of trying to gun him down. outmanuever him. use your rudder to kick some hard turns out of the 163s line of fire. the rocket is usually going too fast to make a quick path adjustment.
thats actually very good advice :aok
-
Never seen so much whining about ramming 163s....
In fact it's hardly ever happened to me in all the years of AH flight. Ever. In any version of AH. I recall maybe once or twice it has ever personally happened to me while I was strat bombing. More often they'll blow me up, set me on fire, and so forth. If they actually RAM me chances were I took no damage.
Now, I have done a few accidental rams in 163s before, but every time it's been to no detriment of the bombers. More than likely I'm shooting them as I accidentally ram them, and the BULLETS do the damage.
Due to the lag difference and the different locations of different planes on their own front-end displays, it is nearly impossible to intentionally RAM an enemy bomber -- and if you devoted the time to try it you have no guarantee you'd do any damage to the bomber when you rammed it.
Foolish request. A not-so-common whine in disguise. -1000.
I agree. Sounds like someone inexperienced in a 163 locked up going to fast and rammed him once or twice and he thinks somehow that is a valid "tactic",,,,, I don't know of any fellas that would up a 163 and take the "chance" at ramming someone for a kill, just not worth it.
-
if your in buffs and youve allready droped bombs. keep the 163 in your sights and instead of trying to gun him down. outmanuever him. use your rudder to kick some hard turns out of the 163s line of fire. the rocket is usually going too fast to make a quick path adjustment. so pretty much if you can bank correctly on each pass it makes on you for 4 mins. then you'll be safe.
you can do the same thing with drones too. just make sure to pay attenchian to how far your banking away from your drones so they dont blow up.
if you still have your bombs, then the buff will bank about the same way the 163 can at high speeds lol (heavy buffS) so in that case, the only thing you can really do is gun it out or hope its a fool behind the controls and not a vet.
hope ive been some help <S>
well its good your not trolling him, and im not trolling you but that one part on keeping him out of the sights is a good idea.
the 163 moves so fast that if someone banks hard to the left/right the good ol' rocketbutt will have already zoomed past you and maybe (if your lucky) you will have gotten a shot at him and hes gonna be missing half a wing. this usually works for me but i guess were all different when it comes to killing a 163
-
I agree. Sounds like someone inexperienced in a 163 locked up going to fast and rammed him once or twice and he thinks somehow that is a valid "tactic",,,,, I don't know of any fellas that would up a 163 and take the "chance" at ramming someone for a kill, just not worth it.
you just found one :D i never really cared too much for perks except to waste them foolishly by rolling scissors in 163s and 262s vs enemy prop planes (surprise, both the 163 and 262 can rolling scissor quite well with flaps down) :aok
-
Just do away with the 163's.....don't need them in this game at all. Never did anything to speek of in the real war (8 kills total) :bolt:
-
He thinks anyone who disagrees is a troll.
up he is calling me "the shortbus" but i guess thats fine
oh fbwildcat you are the shortbus i shoulnt here you say anything back because its ok
:oh and thank you guys that did not troll and <S>
-
-1 the 163 is a fun little side show, where else will you get a ride that compresses goin up :D
JUGgler