Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: MK-84 on July 25, 2011, 12:24:25 PM
-
After reading post after post of complaints about heavy bombers (especially the lanc) being used to unfairly bomb GVs I decided it was time to show some data. ESPECIALLY since I have not seen one piece of factual data in ANY post, all just being opinions, and speculations.
But it sure seems like there is alot of complaints about dive bombing lancs, maybe there is something to this.
These are current statistics for the current late war arena for aircraft performance against GVs
I included our our three non-perked heavies the B17, B24, and Lancaster. I included two dedicated attack aircraft, the IL2 and the A20 so we can compare how well these aircraft perform
Plane GV kills Total Kills GV Kill Ratio to aircraft % Killed By GV Total Losses % Loss to GV GV Kill/Death ratio
Lancaster 1180 2865 41% 1224 12686 9.6% 0.96
B17 275 3620 7.50% 424 9527 4.0% 0.64
B24 300 2753 10.10% 309 7978 3.8% 0.97
A20 2785 3929 70.90% 1987 2848 70.0% 1.40
IL2 1832 2197 83.34% 1147 1953 58.7% 1.60
As you can see that out of the heavies the lancaster truly is used far more against gv's as opposed to the B17 and B24 with 41% of its kills being vehicles. Only 9.6% of it's losses were from GVs, however its GV Kill/Death ratio is still less than 1 at .96 and it gets severely pwned compared with...
.....the A20 and IL2. These are uses almost exclusively against ground targets with 70.9 and 83.34 or their credited kills going against GV's. They fair much better against them as will with a K/D ratio at 1.4 and 1.6 respectfully.
To add my .02, with the posts about the dreaded "lancstuka" it seems that you tankers out there should be more concerned with dedicated attack aircraft, both the A20 and the IL2 have a favorable K/D ratio and both have destroyed significantly more vehicles than the Lancaster has. Further more GV's have a slightly better K/D against them. In short if a Lancaster attacks your tank, you have a much better chance against that then a "true" attack aircraft.
-
Oh I almost forgot
Myth plausible :aok
-
After reading post after post of complaints about heavy bombers (especially the lanc) being used to unfairly bomb GVs I decided it was time to show some data. ESPECIALLY since I have not seen one piece of factual data in ANY post, all just being opinions, and speculations.
Yes, nobody has ever provided any data on that matter.... :rofl
-
if the 17 held 14 1000lbs bombs it would be used more often too I imagine.
The reality is, where are the actually WWII stats that show Lancasters killing GVs..
-
I should have added, except for luche :rolleyes:
havent seen anything as of late though, whats your take?
-
if the 17 held 14 1000lbs bombs it would be used more often too I imagine.
The reality is, where are the actually WWII stats that show Lancasters killing GVs..
This has nothing to do with actual WWII stats. :lol
These are AH2 stats
-
The reality is, where are the actually WWII stats that show Lancasters killing GVs..
Hate to break it to you, but this is NOT a WWII simulator.
-
if the 17 held 14 1000lbs bombs it would be used more often too I imagine.
The reality is, where are the actually WWII stats that show Lancasters killing GVs..
07/18/44 05:45 - 1,056 Halifax and Lancaster bombers flew at 3,000 feet and dropped bombs on the tank positions of the 21st Panzer Division which resulted in the 22nd Panzer Regiment and the III/503rd Heavy Panzer Battalion being knocked temporarily out of action. The resulting bombing of the German tank positions left tanks over turned, destroyed out right and some were later found abandoned in bomb craters.
Results of the bombing:
(http://www.wargames.co.uk/Pending/Archive/March04/tiger1.jpg)
(http://bkpforums.com/phpUpload/2/panther_upside_down.jpg)
(http://bkpforums.com/phpUpload/2/tiger2_upside_down.jpg)
Enjoy.
ack-ack
-
Hate to break it to you, but this is NOT a WWII simulator.
Every plane and GV in this game is based on planes from WWII. It is my understanding, from reading past BBS Threads, they are supposedly modeled as close as possible to their performance during that time. Seems it can go either way. As some can say, "you can't have your cake and eat it to". :bolt:
Fred
Edit: Sorry, forgot about the exception of the three or four WWI planes.
-
I think most people's complaint about lancs bombing GV's is that with the payload the lanc can carry plus the 3 plane formation; it doesn't take much skill to destroy a GV with the lanc. People get more irritated if their death was brought about by what they see as "easy mode". The Il2 and A20 (and the other dive bombers/Jabo planes) take more skill and work to destroy a small target on the ground like a GV, the lancs can just salvo a handfull of 1000lb bombs onto the general area of a GV and still fly away with the kill, AND still have enough bombs left over to repeat the process 3 or 4 more times.
To sum up, it sucks getting bombed when in a GV, it sucks more when bombed in a GV by a gamey or easy method.
Ack-ack, nice pictures. Hadn't seen those before. :aok
-
I think most people's complaint about lancs bombing GV's is that with the payload the lanc can carry plus the 3 plane formation; it doesn't take much skill to destroy a GV with the lanc. People get more irritated if their death was brought about by what they see as "easy mode". The Il2 and A20 (and the other dive bombers/Jabo planes) take more skill and work to destroy a small target on the ground like a GV, the lancs can just salvo a handfull of 1000lb bombs onto the general area of a GV and still fly away with the kill, AND still have enough bombs left over to repeat the process 3 or 4 more times.
To sum up, it sucks getting bombed when in a GV, it sucks more when bombed in a GV by a gamey or easy method.
Ack-ack, nice pictures. Hadn't seen those before. :aok
The stats seem to show that the lanc does not fly away with the kill
-
he might not make it back to land the kills, true. That doesn't mean the lanc pilot wont have enough time over a GV battle to empty his bomb bay, or destroy several GVs. I'm sure the super brave bomb-n-bail brigade has a small effect on the lanc's stats against GVs also.
I'm just trying to offer up an explination as to why people seem to complain more about lancs bombing GVs than the other ord capable planes; especially since the stats you provided show that the lanc is not the top GV killing ride.
-
I get more aggravated with one shot kills than I do with bombing. I think the point people are trying to make is in the game(that uses wwii modeled equipment) if a gv battle is raging on out at a spawn point it most likely is a gv furball and the GVers there would like to be left to play. Unfortunately like the aircraft furball, some ones always looking to spoil the fun and drop the hangers.
-
I am insulted! You left my favorite airborne tank killer the Huricane II-D out! :frown:
-
I'm not a gv'er and I don't have an issue with lancs bombing gvs, but I do find it silly when I see lanc's dive bombing. For some reason their wings don't break like the other heavy bombers :headscratch:
-
Tell me kind sir, how does the statistic "Years in Service during the War" play into your data?
A BUNCH OF REASONABLE STATISTICS
-
07/18/44 05:45 - 1,056 Halifax and Lancaster bombers flew at 3,000 feet and dropped bombs on the tank positions of the 21st Panzer Division which resulted in the 22nd Panzer Regiment and the III/503rd Heavy Panzer Battalion being knocked temporarily out of action. The resulting bombing of the German tank positions left tanks over turned, destroyed out right and some were later found abandoned in bomb craters.
Results of the bombing:
(http://www.wargames.co.uk/Pending/Archive/March04/tiger1.jpg)
(http://bkpforums.com/phpUpload/2/panther_upside_down.jpg)
(http://bkpforums.com/phpUpload/2/tiger2_upside_down.jpg)
Enjoy.
ack-ack
that's 1,042 bombers akak. not 3 like in the game.
semp
-
havent seen anything as of late though, whats your take?
My take is still the same as of 6 months ago as been documented in my AH stats 2010 link ;) Since then, nothing much has changed. There is still much more talk about "Lancstukas" than actual Lancstukas.
And while the ratio of GV to air kills by the Lancs is interesting, it's not very telling by itself. If you want to see the impact of the Lanc has on the GV's you have to look at it from the GV perspective - how many tanks are being killed by Lancasters compared to all other means? If we do that, we see that Lancasters are only responsible vor a very small percentage of all tank kills. Usually between 3% and 4% of all GV kills by planes are made by Lancs (current data), and planes do account for only about 10-15% of tank kills anyway.
I'm not a gv'er and I don't have an issue with lancs bombing gvs, but I do find it silly when I see lanc's dive bombing. For some reason their wings don't break like the other heavy bombers :headscratch:
For some odd reason I never see Lancs going "Stuka" at all. All I see is them dropping bombs from level flight or a very shallow (and not very fast) dive - which shouldn't be much of a problem.
This reminds me a bit of all that talk about Spit 16's accelerating while going straight up that was so prevalent for about 2-3 years ;)
-
that's 1,042 bombers akak. not 3 like in the game.
It was just operational restrictions that prevented them from doing that. Having an unlimited supply of planes, with no risk of real death and a very different, and very confined battle environment, we are free to use any plane in very silly way. Different combat environment breeds different tactics. Hurricane D's and Il-2's do fly their attacks on tanks totally different in AH than in WW2 too.
-
Tell me kind sir, how does the statistic "Years in Service during the War" play into your data?
I'm not certain what the question is?
-
The data on Lancstukas K/D is skewed. Many times they simply bomb and bail, they arent about to fly all the way back to an airbase. Ive seen them do it even while defending an airbase. :D So some GV ends up getting a 3 ringer just for being near the B&B'er crash sight.
-
The Lancaster served about 75% longer than the American heavies..... It would be easy to correlate your K/D data to that difference in time served.
I'm not certain what the question is?
-
The Lancaster served about 75% longer than the American heavies..... It would be easy to correlate your K/D data to that difference in time served.
No it wouldn't. These numbers are from our game, LW this current month
-
:lol
You've been talking about the game this whole time and not RL....... :headscratch: Well fart me, forget what I said. :bolt:
:lol
No it wouldn't. These numbers are from our game, LW this current month
-
Just another way to put things into perspective:
Last tour, 0.3% of all Panzer IV that had been killed suffered their fate by the hands of a Lancaster pilot. Yes, that's 3 out of 1000. ;)
-
Just another way to put things into perspective:
Last tour, 0.3% of all Panzer IV that had been killed suffered their fate by the hands of a Lancaster pilot. Yes, that's 3 out of 1000. ;)
I once was accused of egging GVs with a 109 k4!.... Its amazing what duct tape can hold!
-
that's 1,042 bombers akak. not 3 like in the game.
semp
It doesn't matter...it does not invalidate the fact that Lancasters, along with other heavy bombers were used to bomb tanks in real life. Nice try though, better luck next time.
ack-ack
-
All I see is them dropping bombs from level flight or a very shallow (and not very fast) dive - which shouldn't be much of a problem.
You're right, it wasn't a problem at all as Lancasters were also used in the shallow dive bombing role.
ack-ack
-
The OP's statistics are backwards. I think he has a bright future in politics as he is doing very well on using statistics to lie.
The percentage of a bomber's kills that are GVs, particularly when the bomber in question has a very hard time killing other aircraft, tells us literally nothing useful.
The statistic he should have been showing is what percentage of GVs were destroyed by said bomber, but that doesn't serve his desire. There has been a lot of utter hyperbole spread on this forum over the last few days by people who GV a lot and to listen to them talk about aircraft ruining the tank game you'd think that aircraft were getting at least 50% of the kills on GV, probably more like 66% or 75%.
-
Updated with the HurriIID by request. Note Snailman(42), NekoNabe(32), waystin2(25), and ZEKE31st(19) make up 50% of the total kills.
Plane GV kills Total Kills GV Kill Ratio to aircraft % Killed By GV Total Losses % Loss to GV GV Kill/Death ratio
Lancaster 1180 2865 41% 1224 12686 9.6% 0.96
B17 275 3620 7.50% 424 9527 4.0% 0.64
B24 300 2753 10.10% 309 7978 3.8% 0.97
A20 2785 3929 70.90% 1987 2848 70.0% 1.40
IL2 1832 2197 83.34% 1147 1953 58.7% 1.60
HurriIID 237 374 63% 285 659 43% 0.83
-
The OP's statistics are backwards. I think he has a bright future in politics as he is doing very well on using statistics to lie.
The percentage of a bomber's kills that are GVs, particularly when the bomber in question has a very hard time killing other aircraft, tells us literally nothing useful.
The statistic he should have been showing is what percentage of GVs were destroyed by said bomber, but that doesn't serve his desire. There has been a lot of utter hyperbole spread on this forum over the last few days by people who GV a lot and to listen to them talk about aircraft ruining the tank game you'd think that aircraft were getting at least 50% of the kills on GV, probably more like 66% or 75%.
According to luche .3% of all panzerIV's were destroyed by lancs last tour. Is that what you mean?
-
According to luche .3% of all panzerIV's were destroyed by lancs last tour. Is that what you mean?
Yes, that is the relevant number. It takes it from being an apparent epidemic to being 3 out of 1000 Panzer IV deaths. I would guess that perk tanks likely have a higher percentage of losses to aircraft than the Panzer IV though, simply because people stuck in Panzer IVs, T-34/76s and M4A3(75)s will at times resort to coming back with a Typhoon or what have you out of frustration.
-
Yes, that is the relevant number. It takes it from being an apparent epidemic to being 3 out of 1000 Panzer IV deaths. I would guess that perk tanks likely have a higher percentage of losses to aircraft than the Panzer IV though, simply because people stuck in Panzer IVs, T-34/76s and M4A3(75)s will at times resort to coming back with a Typhoon or what have you out of frustration.
I never said it was an epidemic, if anything it appears to be the opposite, although compared with the other heavy bombers there is at least some merit to the concept
-
I would guess that perk tanks likely have a higher percentage of losses to aircraft than the Panzer IV though, simply because people stuck in Panzer IVs, T-34/76s and M4A3(75)s will at times resort to coming back with a Typhoon or what have you out of frustration.
While about 9% of Panzer IV had been killed by planes, it's about 18% for the Tiger. But then you also almost never see Tigers upping again & again to break a camped spawn.
While the whole "Lancstuka" discussion is compeltely out of proportion, the GV vs Plane issue withing gameplay is a bit too complex to be reduced to simple numbers only.
-
This is the most retarded use of statistics I have ever seen.
-
Most Panzer's are killed by a perk tank..... That particular perk tank is killed most, by Panzers.......
Stats don't lie.
This is the most retarded use of statistics I have ever seen.
-
This is the most retarded use of statistics I have ever seen.
Why?
-
Why?
Why? Because you are using these numbers to support an argument about "lancstukas"
It gives no such information on how the bomber was used. Did it egg a vh and kill uppers from 20k? Did it dive bomb?
What did it do to get these kills?
-
Why? Because you are using these numbers to support an argument about "lancstukas"
It gives no such information on how the bomber was used. Did it egg a vh and kill uppers from 20k? Did it dive bomb?
What did it do to get these kills?
At no point did I say it supported it, or did not. I stated that while the lancaster does seem to be used to directly bomb GV's in in ways that say, a b17 or b24 does not, there are much greater threats to GV's from the air. The A20 and the IL2 are prime examples. Did you actually read all of this? I'm pretty sure I already said this.
-
For some odd reason I never see Lancs going "Stuka" at all. All I see is them dropping bombs from level flight or a very shallow (and not very fast) dive - which shouldn't be much of a problem.
This reminds me a bit of all that talk about Spit 16's accelerating while going straight up that was so prevalent for about 2-3 years ;)
In the book 'The Dam Busters', by Paul Brickhill, there multiple instances of Lancs being used in high angel diving attacks.
617 were struggling to find a way to mark targets at night for precision bombing (they were going to be dropping the 6000lb Tallboys, though they did not know it). They had tried Pathfinders but they were not able to pin point the target well enough for the work 617 was expected to do. And when they tried to mark from 5k with flares, it was found that they bounced and skidded too far off target.
It was "Micky" Martin who first came up with the idea to dive-bomb targets to accurately mark. .He was RTB after a practise bombing flight. He had a few practise bombs left, when he spotted a patch of seaweed. Always ready to spice up his flying (as per book) he winged over and dove at the patch. He released the bomb and pulled up. It was a direct hit. Upon landing he raced to the C.O.s office (Leonard Cheshire) saying he had figured it out.
They then proceeded to use this tactic on targets all over Germany & France. A flare force would drop at 5-8k to light the area. Then Cheshire and Martin would dive from 5k then pull up at low over the target. Later they used Mossies and P51s as Lancs where big targets for the flak. Saying that, they never lost a Lanc in the marking group (I think it?s been a while sense I read the book).
-
I think luche means by going "stuka" he means helldiving, something I'm pretty sure a Lanc can not do.
-
I think luche means by going "stuka" he means helldiving, something I'm pretty sure a Lanc can not do.
yes, lancs may not have dived 10k to hit a target yet a high angel dive for a few 1000ft at low speed was possible. If you try both in the game one will snap your wings off and the other will let you land bombs on target almost everytime.
I only brought it up to supports Luches post. If lances could do high angel short dives, then the shallow dives most use in game are fine. and as AKAK posted they did get used to attack tanks.
-
This is the most retarded use of statistics I have ever seen.
cos ur retarded.... where's the telly tubbies??? :neener:
FYI i :O jamdive
:rofl :rofl :rofl
one way to test it.. ask a commercial pilot... cos the lancs characteristics are very similar to today's commercial airliner in my opinion... weight load and all... maybe they have some insights into this issue... whether it is possible or not..
-
I agree that this use of statistics misses the point
A group of GV's are advancing on a town/base and a single opfor pilot ups a Lanc (Or any heavy level platform) and makes repetitive quick hops doing the F3 dive bomb thing...
HT really needs to disable level bombers from being able to bomb below a certain alt and not dropping from the bomb sight
These "lanca stuka" guys give real bombers a bad rap and contribute nothing to the game play
:bolt:
-
It doesn't matter...it does not invalidate the fact that Lancasters, along with other heavy bombers were used to bomb tanks in real life. Nice try though, better luck next time.
ack-ack
it does matter, how many tanks were destroyed on that day? hundreds? thousands? a few? sending over 1k lancs to bomb gv's doesnt mean they went in individually and hunted down individual tanks one by one, like you try to compare to the game. most likely on that day they were assigned an area and they dropped bombs on that area tanks or no tanks.
semp
-
it does matter, how many tanks were destroyed on that day? hundreds? thousands? a few? sending over 1k lancs to bomb gv's doesnt mean they went in individually and hunted down individual tanks one by one, like you try to compare to the game. most likely on that day they were assigned an area and they dropped bombs on that area tanks or no tanks.
semp
Enough tanks that two panzer regiments were knocked out of the battle until they were able to get enough men, tanks and other vehicles to get back into fighting shape.
sending over 1k lancs to bomb gv's doesnt mean they went in individually and hunted down individual tanks one by one, like you try to compare to the game. most likely on that day they were assigned an area and they dropped bombs on that area tanks or no tanks.
semp
The Lancasters and Halifax bombers were sent over Normandy that early morning to specifically bomb the tanks, vehicles, artillery and men of the 21st Panzer Division, along with the steelworks at Colombelles and the town of Cagny. This was to soften German positions so the British could break out of the Normandy beaches and capture Caen. The tanks in the images I posted were a result of being on the receiving end of the bombs specifically dropped to blow them up, it wasn't a case of the 21st PD being bombed because they just happened to have the bad luck to be in a spot the bombers were carpet bombing.
You didn't like the answer to infowar's question about real life stats of Lancasters bombing tanks during the war, so you're trying twist things around to prove your point. The problem is it doesn't matter if in real life if Lancasters hunted individual tanks and bombed them all that matters is that contrary to the prevalent belief that Lancasters were never used in this fashion, there were indeed used to carpet bomb tanks.
Lancasters and Halifax bombers weren't the only ones to have fun, USAAF B-17s, B-24s, B-26s, B-25s, A-26s, A-20s all took part in similiar missions to support the US break out from the Normandy beaches, this time under Operation Cobra. The USAAF and RAF also flew similiar missions during the attempt to destroy the German army in the Falaise pocket, carpet bombing German positions around the clock.
ack-ack
-
akak of course bombers were used to bomb tank positions. bombers were used in any roll you can think of. they were used to bomb outhouses too. jeeps, tents, dogs, whatever. but bombers were not as accurate as in the game. had they been as accurate, they would've sent about 4 to cause the same amount of damage as the 1,042 did.
fact is bombers were used to bomb positions not individual targets. they bombed a large area with lots of bombers, so yes 1042 bombers with thousands of bombs falling over a few square mile area would have hit something. his position is single bombers targeting individual gv's were close to none. you can twist his words around if you want.
semp
-
guncrasher,
People bombing tanks with heavy bombers in AH aren't using the bombsight, they are using dead reckoning and are anything but accurate.
-
akak of course bombers were used to bomb tank positions. bombers were used in any roll you can think of. they were used to bomb outhouses too. jeeps, tents, dogs, whatever. but bombers were not as accurate as in the game. had they been as accurate, they would've sent about 4 to cause the same amount of damage as the 1,042 did.
fact is bombers were used to bomb positions not individual targets. they bombed a large area with lots of bombers, so yes 1042 bombers with thousands of bombs falling over a few square mile area would have hit something. his position is single bombers targeting individual gv's were close to none. you can twist his words around if you want.
semp
We simply don't put that many together in the game.
In game if there were 1000 tanks attacking a position I'm sure there would be many more than 1 lanc.
-
I love a thread that tries to dictate how to play or not to play aces high.
-1
-
I love a thread that tries to dictate how to play or not to play aces high.
-1
The threat started as a list of stats and an observation :confused:
-
Lusche, do we need to inform your wife that you've been spending your freetime running around with a new stat cruncher on the forums now?
-
Lol the American LEVEL bombing preceding Cobra killed more Americans then it did Germans. Two things allowed the breakout, 1 is that the Germans were convinced the main threat was to Caen. 2nd a huge artillery bombardment and combined arms attack is what allowed the breakout into favorable terrain.
Even Operation Goodwoocouldn'tnt really be called a success, other then tieing down German forces. What small success the lancs had "Level Bombing" at 3,000' was either repaired oreinforceded by the Huns quickly. The American "LEVEL BOMBING" from much higher alsdidn'tnt hurt the enemy much. The Brits lost far more tanks then the Germans.
Even the heavy bombers preceding Falaise killed many Canadians and Polish soldiers. Really the coordination of heavy "LEVEL" bomber use in these attacks were heavily flawed.
To bad they didn't didnt have Lancstukas. :D
-
Lol the American LEVEL bombing preceding Cobra killed more Americans then it did Germans.
I would like to know your source for this.
Not saying you're wrong, both of the Cobra bombings hit friendly forces, but I've just never see the claim that more Americans were killed than Germans.
- oldman
-
I would like to know your source for this.
Not saying you're wrong, both of the Cobra bombings hit friendly forces, but I've just never see the claim that more Americans were killed than Germans.
- oldman
Three days in a row where the bombs were all dropped on our own Lines would lead one to assume more friendlies were killed then enemy. The red smoke shells we shot to I.D. the German lines drifted back right over the 30'th division and the bombers dropped quite accuratly right on our own troops. Its common knowledge it was one of the most screwball OPs in the war.
-
Lol the American LEVEL bombing preceding Cobra killed more Americans then it did Germans. Two things allowed the breakout, 1 is that the Germans were convinced the main threat was to Caen. 2nd a huge artillery bombardment and combined arms attack is what allowed the breakout into favorable terrain.
Gee...Rich you haven't changed at all have ya, still short on the facts or in this case lack of facts...
The pre-attack bombardment carried out on 07/24/44 resulted in 25 US soldiers being killed by their own bombs. During the main attack on 07/25/44, inaccurate bombing by the 8th AF led to the friendly fire deaths of 111 US soldiers. Now compare this to the over 10,000 German soldiers killed and could you really say with a straight face that your claim that the USAAF killed more Americans than Germans during Operation Cobra is accurate?
Even Operation Goodwoocouldn'tnt really be called a success, other then tieing down German forces. What small success the lancs had "Level Bombing" at 3,000' was either repaired oreinforceded by the Huns quickly. The American "LEVEL BOMBING" from much higher alsdidn'tnt hurt the enemy much. The Brits lost far more tanks then the Germans.
Even the heavy bombers preceding Falaise killed many Canadians and Polish soldiers. Really the coordination of heavy "LEVEL" bomber use in these attacks were heavily flawed.
To bad they didn't didnt have Lancstukas. :D
I don't think anyone in this thread claimed that Operation Goodwood was a success, there has been a raging debate since whether or not it was a planned offensive by the British to break out of the Normandy beach head and capture Caen or as a diversionary attack in support of the US planned break out by drawing German panzer units away from the American lines. Germany had identified the British and the Canadians as their most powerful threat on Normandy and rushed most of their panzer units to deal with the British and Canadians, leaving a skeleton force to face the Americans. But I digress as that wasn't the point of my bringing up Operation Cobra, Goodwood or the Falaise pocket, it was to show that yes, during the war heavy bombers were in fact used to bomb tanks and other armored vehicles.
ack-ack
-
I like akak's logic. hey a German parachuted into England, so you can say, Germany invaded England.
akak, if somebody says that bombers in the war did not bomb gv's like in the game. it's mean to be bombers did not hunt down individual tanks in the war and had a 1 bomb 1 kill record. but rather they brought 100's and 100's of bombers to bomb an area and hoped they got some tanks. which of course if you drop thousands of bombs in an area that you know has tanks you will destroy some.
in ww2 the bombers were not used in the same manner as they are used here in the game. you can bring all kinds of records, but in reality 100's and 1000's of bombers were used to drop bombs over a large area and prayed that they hit something.
:salute :bolt:
semp
-
Here you can clearly see a Lancaster dive-carpetbomb an M-8.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=veWyTy5JD2M
-
Here you can clearly see a Lancaster dive-carpetbomb an M-8.
No I can't, because there is copyrighted music in it ;)
-
If anyone think the British or US were stupid enough to have their heavy bombers float just above the tree top hunting gv's in multiple passes they are absolutely insane.
Bombers may have carpet bombed an area known to have enemy troops and vehicles, but heavy bombers did it from high above the target area.
Bomber, especially heavy bombers *should* have some type of restriction on them. It cant really be altitude because I can show you that B24D's dropped 100lb bombs in the PTO as low as 800ft (level). Speed really doesnt effect the low alt bomb tard stuff. Only the "bomb drop in F6 mode only" restriction can work. That is arbitrary to HTC's wishes.
-
I love it when pointy click spawncamp killers whine about being bombed.
-
If anyone think the British or US were stupid enough to have their heavy bombers float just above the tree top hunting gv's in multiple passes they are absolutely insane.
Bombers may have carpet bombed an area known to have enemy troops and vehicles, but heavy bombers did it from high above the target area.
Bomber, especially heavy bombers *should* have some type of restriction on them. It cant really be altitude because I can show you that B24D's dropped 100lb bombs in the PTO as low as 800ft (level). Speed really doesnt effect the low alt bomb tard stuff. Only the "bomb drop in F6 mode only" restriction can work. That is arbitrary to HTC's wishes.
This type of reasoning will certainly lead to several things:
-Me 262 unavailable unless a huge formation of allied bombers are approaching at 30k
-Panzer 5 and both flavors of the Tiger will inevitably break down or run out of gas
-Stukas will be highly effective
-No more Jug tail slides
-No ammo counters
-Reasonable radar deck
-Proximity fuses on 5" disabled when shooting at allied aircraft
Feel free to add onto this list.
-
This type of reasoning will certainly lead to several things:
-Me 262 unavailable unless a huge formation of allied bombers are approaching at 30k
-Panzer 5 and both flavors of the Tiger will inevitably break down or run out of gas
-Stukas will be highly effective
-No more Jug tail slides
-No ammo counters
-Reasonable radar deck
-Proximity fuses on 5" disabled when shooting at allied aircraft
Feel free to add onto this list.
Apple.... meet Orange. I'm speaking of a blatant abuse of a plane, aside from your 262 example you speak of arbitrary game play issues. FWIW, I think a few things on that list are worthy of implementing.
-
Apple.... meet Orange. I'm speaking of a blatant abuse of a plane, aside from your 262 example you speak of arbitrary game play issues. FWIW, I think a few things on that list are worthy of implementing.
Correction.
Game play issues that I choose to let slide because they don't really matter and there is a counter strategy to every possible contingency.
-
Correction.
Game play issues that I choose to let slide because they don't really matter and there is a counter strategy to every possible contingency.
... which may or may not involve the blatant abuse of a non-arbitrary platform in the game. ;)
-
Gee...Rich you haven't changed at all have ya, still short on the facts or in this case lack of facts...
The pre-attack bombardment carried out on 07/24/44 resulted in 25 US soldiers being killed by their own bombs. During the main attack on 07/25/44, inaccurate bombing by the 8th AF led to the friendly fire deaths of 111 US soldiers. Now compare this to the over 10,000 German soldiers killed and could you really say with a straight face that your claim that the USAAF killed more Americans than Germans during Operation Cobra is accurate?
I don't think anyone in this thread claimed that Operation Goodwood was a success, there has been a raging debate since whether or not it was a planned offensive by the British to break out of the Normandy beach head and capture Caen or as a diversionary attack in support of the US planned break out by drawing German panzer units away from the American lines. Germany had identified the British and the Canadians as their most powerful threat on Normandy and rushed most of their panzer units to deal with the British and Canadians, leaving a skeleton force to face the Americans. But I digress as that wasn't the point of my bringing up Operation Cobra, Goodwood or the Falaise pocket, it was to show that yes, during the war heavy bombers were in fact used to bomb tanks and other armored vehicles.
ack-ack
You havnt changed much either. Show me one credible source that lists the number of German troops killed by the three bombing raids. To say 10,000 were killed is rediculous, even the most used number of 1,000 isnt even credible due to one of the most intense artillery barrages of the war preceding the attack, and, also the use of Jabos to accurately dive bomb and strafe German positions. Nobody knows how many Germans died by the screwd up heavy bomber campaign preceding Cobra cause a blowed up German could have been blowed up by other means. Here are the very words of Ike when he returned Britain to Britian after witnessing this debacle Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower, the Allied supreme commander, had crossed the English Channel to Normandy for the day, only to return to his headquarters in England that evening, dejected and uncerCobrasut COBRAAca,!a,,cs success, but determined never to use heavy bombers in support of ground troops again.
http://www.army.mil/article/42658/_quot_Operation_COBRA_and_the_Breakout_at_Normandy__quot_/
Cobra worked cause the Germans thought the main thrust was centered at Caen and they concentrated a majority of their defenses there. Even the Germans stunned by the Cobra barrages quickly regrouped they were simply over-ran by superior forces using standard combined arms penetration and envelope tactics.
-
... which may or may not involve the blatant abuse of a non-arbitrary platform in the game. ;)
Aces High has taught me to live with abuse
-
You havnt changed much either. Show me one credible source that lists the number of German troops killed by the three bombing raids.
Show me one credible source that claims more Allied soldiers were killed than Germans by friendly Allied bombing, oh wait you can't because again, less than 200 US soldiers were killed by friendly bombs (already cited that source). So, are you saying Richie Boy that less than 200 Germans were killed during the bombing phases of Operations Cobra and Goodwood? Care to list those sources?
ack-ack
-
Does anyone have any film of the "Lankstuka" in action?
Certainly if this were a real problem there would be film.
-
Does anyone have any film of the "Lankstuka" in action?
Certainly if this were a real problem there would be film.
Every Lancaster I have seen carpet bombing GVs in AH has either been level or in a shallow dive. I have never seen one doing anything even approaching a 30 degree dive.
-
Does anyone have any film of the "Lankstuka" in action?
Certainly if this were a real problem there would be film.
I posted some earlier in the thread
-
I posted some earlier in the thread
Well, someone needs to post a video of them actually dive-bombing in a Lancaster...
I can not post myself because the wings seem to have a problem with falling off.
low level, yes, shallow dive, yes..."stuka," not so much :lol
-
You havnt changed much either. Show me one credible source that lists the number of German troops killed by the three bombing raids. To say 10,000 were killed is rediculous, even the most used number of 1,000 isnt even credible due to one of the most intense artillery barrages of the war preceding the attack, and, also the use of Jabos to accurately dive bomb and strafe German positions. Nobody knows how many Germans died by the screwd up heavy bomber campaign preceding Cobra cause a blowed up German could have been blowed up by other means. Here are the very words of Ike when he returned Britain to Britian after witnessing this debacle http://www.army.mil/article/42658/_quot_Operation_COBRA_and_the_Breakout_at_Normandy__quot_/
Cobra worked cause the Germans thought the main thrust was centered at Caen and they concentrated a majority of their defenses there. Even the Germans stunned by the Cobra barrages quickly regrouped they were simply over-ran by superior forces using standard combined arms penetration and envelope tactics.
Hate to break it to ya Rich and not getting between this wanking match, but AKAK's claims are correct, one of the cases was a brutal accident where B-17's main bombardier accidently dropped his bombs and the rest of the bombers followed - thus was one of the few friendly fire incidents I know with over 100 casualties. I'd have to go find the source some where, but I do remember this case was an honest mistake, and lucky only 100+ were killed.
-
Well, someone needs to post a video of them actually dive-bombing in a Lancaster...
I can not post myself because the wings seem to have a problem with falling off.
low level, yes, shallow dive, yes..."stuka," not so much :lol
I think it was ment as to degrade the people using Lancs as a Stuka to bomb tanks. Normally I see them come in a shallow dive and salvo 1 x 14 times.
First 10 miss and last 4 always hit.
-
Hate to break it to ya Rich and not getting between this wanking match, but AKAK's claims are correct, one of the cases was a brutal accident where B-17's main bombardier accidently dropped his bombs and the rest of the bombers followed - thus was one of the few friendly fire incidents I know with over 100 casualties. I'd have to go find the source some where, but I do remember this case was an honest mistake, and lucky only 100+ were killed.
Thing is tho neither one of you can point anyone to a credible source listing, either the amount of German killed by the level bombing preceding Cobra, or any credible source saying it was anywhere a success, "causewasn'tasnt", tho Cobra itself was. Both the 24 July drop and 25 July drops landed mostly on American forces. Since we know how many Yanks were killed by the three failed drops, and dont know how many Germans, it would lead one to believe more Yanks were killed. Most of all since the entire 30'th Division witnessed the drops landing right on top of them. http://www.aero-web.org/history/wwii/d-day/12.htm
It all went do badly it killed the attacks LT General Chief of Staff and causeSupremeurpeme Commander Allied forces, who was in France at the time, to say "never again". Soon commanders learned to follow-up air strikes with artillery barrages so that friendly infantry and armor forces could close with the demoralized enemy before he recovered and redeployed. Within six weeks after the Normandy landing, air and land forces were so confident of working together that fighter-bombers routinely operated as close as 300 yards to American forces. This was not true, unfortunately, of strategic bomber operations, as the strikes of late July and August clearly indicated.
http://www.aero-web.org/history/wwii/d-day/12.htm
It no doubt caused a stunning effect on the Huns and disrupted their command and control, but if they were stunned more then our own troops who got bombed we'll never know. And was it the level bombing, the Jabos precise strikes, or the artillery barrage that stunned them most ? History also records how the Germans rebounded swiftly even using the craters from the bombing as defensive positions and keeping the initial Yank advance to a very slow crawl. It was the commitment of a massive armored pincer that allowed the breakout followed by an entire Corp, all accompanied by complete air dominance. And they were up against a poorly manned and already beaten up remenant of a German force that could only be called a "Corp" on paper. Opposing Collins was the German LXXXIV Corps, which had experienced heavy fighting and had many understrength units, such as the Panzer Lehr Division, which could muster only 3,200 troops along a 3-mile front.
http://www.americanmilitaryhistorymsw.com/blog/472745-operation-cobra-2531-july-1944/
I dont see what the point of this discussion is. Is anyone seriously saying Level bombing by heavy bombers was a successful tactic in WW-2 to take out German panzer formations ? Is all this some weak attempt to justify Lanc dive bombingivebombing in the game as "Historically correct"? Is anyone actually saying Cobra succeeded not by the Hun being fooled by the Caen deception but instead by the inaccurate level bombing by strategic bombers on 24/25 July ? Or "not" by the massive advantage of an American force in Jabos/fighters, artillery, armor, infantry, mobility, and logistics ? LOL, We had 170,000 artillery shells available to fire onto the Huns in the initial attack itself. We had well over 2,000 tanks compared to the Germans having 190. Their best armor already deployed at Caen.
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/operation_cobra.htm
Was this use of heavies reasonable in 1944 ? Was it executed well ? Was it worth it ? Was it needed for Cobra itself to succeed ? Did it do more damage to an already beaten up German army, undermanned with poor moral, or to the Yank army that by far already outgunned its enemy ? http://isme.tamu.edu/JSCOPE00/CaI'mfano00.html
Im pretty much done with this. I cant discuss things with people who make no effort to support their conclusions. Most of all with a simpleton who likes to follow people around a forum playing obstructionist.
-
Every Lancaster I have seen carpet bombing GVs in AH has either been level or in a shallow dive. I have never seen one doing anything even approaching a 30 degree dive.
I don't know if this 30 degrees or not but I dove as steep as I could without ripping the wings off. :D :t
(http://i455.photobucket.com/albums/qq278/GenBeef/Dweeb1.png)
I will get a Tigger II with my Supah Stuka some day.
-
That looks like 10-20 degrees to me, Beefcake.
-
not exactly "dive bombing" :headscratch:
-
just take away GV-icons for 4-engined bombers - SOLVED
-
Hate to break it to you, but this is NOT a WWII simulator.
Well it sure as heck ain't no Viet-Nam war simulator :confused:
-
Furballers vs bnz'ers. Simmers vs. gamers. Landgrabbers vs. furballers. Buffs vs. fighters. Arenas vs. arenas. A2G vs. A2A. Chess-piecers vs. migrants.
But tankers vs. buffs???
Just remember your place in the food chain!! :D
-
Well it sure as heck ain't no Viet-Nam war simulator :confused:
A WW2 simulator would SIMULATE the experience of a pilot, going through training, formup, long missions with no rest, seconds of excitement, following historic WW2 profiles, matching historic WW2 missions. You would be stuck in a small selection of planes most of the war and progress through it as if you personally were a real WW2 pilot.
This is not a WW2 simulator. It is a combat simulator. We have the weapons of WW2, and we use those weapons in our own ways. Sometimes they overlap with historical uses, and sometimes they do not.
-
Ok I just did this in the MA a few minutes ago. Would this be considered dive bombing or do I need to get a steeper angle?
(http://i455.photobucket.com/albums/qq278/GenBeef/Dweeb3-1.png)
:D
-
You need a much steeper angle to be dive bombing, in my opinion. That is a pretty good slope bombing run though.
-
Single 500 lb bomb from a single B-26:
(http://i343.photobucket.com/albums/o460/caldera_08/AH2%20screenshots/b26-1.png)
(http://i343.photobucket.com/albums/o460/caldera_08/AH2%20screenshots/b26-3.png)
(http://i343.photobucket.com/albums/o460/caldera_08/AH2%20screenshots/b26-2.png)