Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: caldera on August 19, 2012, 10:13:26 AM
-
Having encountered 36k B-17s bombing radars recently (I didn't even know B-17s were perked! :huh), it seems to me that avoiding the fight is what some bomber "score enthusiasts" are all about. Not asking them to hold still and die, but 36k? Come on.
How about a 5mph wind layer at 30k and above?
The wind would slowly change direction like a clock, say a full revolution every two hours to keep things fair.
Planes could still fly at absurd heights if they wanted to be Nancy-boys, but it would be harder to bomb with impunity from up there.
-
I would like to see wind layers every 5k feet, starting at 15k. Currently, there is no reason to bomb at lower altitude and being able to plink small structures at 25k+ is absurd.
-
36k! Even as a former Rook, that would be considered quite high.
Maybe anything that high, just disable gravity and let the plane float
into outerspace.
Coogan
-
-1 and I mean NO!
We dont have enough players as is and now you want to run off the bomber guys? Not smart.
-
Some wind or, better yet, cloud layers would add to the game.
-
or, better yet, cloud layers would add to the game.
You are not bombing often from high altitudes I guess ... ;)
-
How about you just climb up and shoot them down?
Maybe the original poster indeed climbed up 30,000 feet only got killed by b17 gunners?
I don't have any problem killing anything below 90,000 feet and bagged 4 of my 5 b29s this tour at over 36,000 feet.
The sim already has EZ mode spiffs with remote spawns (yet some people still can't be bothered to tank that one mile to an enemy base).
-
Well historically the 17's max alt was around 36k. So is it wrong for some to take it to that alt? However, I do think that if there was a way to incorporate a way of limiting going above a planes max ceiling level then I am for it. I mean the performance of the plane at or near its max ceiling had to be affected in some way. Dont know if it can be done but I am sure if it could HTC would fix it. However, dont blame someone for taking the time to fly that high. Remember the golden saying "altitude is safety".
BigKev
-
Well historically the 17's max alt was around 36k. So is it wrong for some to take it to that alt? However, I do think that if there was a way to incorporate a way of limiting going above a planes max ceiling level then I am for it. I mean the performance of the plane at or near its max ceiling had to be affected in some way. Dont know if it can be done but I am sure if it could HTC would fix it. However, dont blame someone for taking the time to fly that high. Remember the golden saying "altitude is safety".
BigKev
big kev we already have this implemented into the game ever takin a Lancaster up to its service ceilling?????that would be about 28k after 28k it has an almost level climbrate at about 50ft/min I know this cause one of my squaddies a while back when we were on a bomber run in 17s at 30k he was in a Lanc and could not climb past 29k so the performance for these bombers and fighters seem to be right on the money now granted a lanc without bombs will climb to about 32k and quit is still quiet in impersive I think and also when your in the pony D if you've ever watched the manifold pressure it will go down at about 12k I think it is then it will go back up to full at like 17k or something and the samething at 25k and higher
-
Some wind or, better yet, cloud layers would add to the game.
The bright cloud layer we have now is quite ridiculous and keeps most bombers below 15k already. The clouds look great from the ground (some say so anyway) but add another layer of difficulty in seeing lower cons and attacking bombers that have chosen to fly just below them.
Personally I would prefer the big puffy clouds like RoF has or none at all.
-
The bright cloud layer we have now is quite ridiculous and keeps most bombers below 15k already. The clouds look great from the ground (some say so anyway) but add another layer of difficulty in seeing lower cons and attacking bombers that have chosen to fly just below them.
Good!
Do you see a problem with this?
-
I wish HTC would implement wind at a constant speed from 5 to 15 mph and have the direction rotate around the map just as they do with the sun. Every 15 mins have it change in direction by 45°.
Why not? It would make bombing less accurate and more like it was in WWII, meaning a true carpet bomb would be needed for the high altitude bombing runs.
-
Good!
Do you see a problem with this?
Yes and its an obvious problem if you ever spent time attacking bombers at that altitude you might understand what that is.
I understand that the cloud layer is realistic and that thin layers of cloud at that altitude occur frequently. I just wish they would be distributed a little more randomly and act more like clouds (move).
Asking for wind layers though is attempting to change the game to force people to interact more directly with a single style of play. I am against that just like I am against limiting fuel and for the same reasons.
-
Asking for wind layers though is attempting to change the game to force people to interact more directly with a single style of play.
No, wind and cloud layers make accuracy decrease the higher you decide to fly. Sure, the bombers can still fly at 35k but they may not be able to pickle two bombs per hanger or they might opt for saturation bombing (towns and cities).
-
Asking for wind layers though is attempting to change the game to force people to interact more directly with a single style of play.
More like forcing them to interact at all, instead of avoiding it. How many different styles of play could they possibly be interacting with at 36k?
-
No, it's forcing them down because you won't climb to them.
I enjoy the planning it takes to intercept bombers at high altitude and have even gotten buffs at 21k feet with a ju87g.
It's a non-issue if you choose the right plane and interception tactic.
-
Hurrah! Yes bring in the Jet Stream! :aok
-
No, it's forcing them down because you won't climb to them.
I enjoy the planning it takes to intercept bombers at high altitude and have even gotten buffs at 21k feet with a ju87g.
It's a non-issue if you choose the right plane and interception tactic.
As usual, you blather on about your uber high alt skillz and presume nobody else is cool enough to climb as high as you do.
(http://i343.photobucket.com/albums/o460/caldera_08/36k.png)
With leet high alt skills like yours, I would have expected thousands of kills for the time you have invested:
(http://i343.photobucket.com/albums/o460/caldera_08/asspac-1.jpg)
(http://i343.photobucket.com/albums/o460/caldera_08/asspac-2.jpg)
Consider yourself on the ignore list and have a nice day. :)
-
A legend in his own mind.
:rofl
-
LOL at using stats to determine ability.
I've left a chute logged in for an entire day at enemy strats to determine strat rebuild times and about 50% of my high altitude missions are away from keyboard resulting in me returning to find I had run out of fuel and crashed.
I have also stopped going after any high buffs other than B29s to focus instead on thier escorts who strangely snuggle up to the buffs instead of chasing away interceptors.
Again......you are trying to force your gameplay style on all when most of my dealings with you involve you diving a 163 out of proximity kill range so you can bail because you upped it expecting buffs but instead ran into me in a fighter.
Embrace the realism instead of looking for a short cut by suggesting the sim depart from realism for your own needs.
I'll find the film of your cowardly 163 bail if you want.
-
Embrace the realism instead of looking for a short cut by suggesting the sim depart from realism for your own needs.
Not at all, I just want a little realism; the higher you fly, the less accurate you will be. I am in NO way suggesting they have a wind layer that prevents them from flying that high.
Is that unreasonable?
-
I'll find the film of your cowardly 163 bail if you want.
As they say "film, or it never happened"
-
Not at all, I just want a little realism; the higher you fly, the less accurate you will be. I am in NO way suggesting they have a wind layer that prevents them from flying that high.
Is that unreasonable?
It's not unreasonable at all as long as there are also times that there is no wind and that the wind data would be able to be found using the same tools as used in the war.
-
That is reasonable, as long as the complex bomb site is used to compensate for the sheer.
-
Just like the telescopic tank gunsights, I'd like to see accurate magnification and fov modelled for the bomb sights. That would add some inaccuracy as bombing altitude increases.
-
It's not unreasonable at all as long as there are also times that there is no wind and that the wind data would be able to be found using the same tools as used in the war.
That is reasonable, as long as the complex bomb site is used to compensate for the sheer.
I find this reasonable, as well. There should be a trade-off. The higher one flies to avoid interception, the more difficult it should be to bomb.
When I started playing bombing runs in the MA got very boring, in short order, with the way the bombsight currently works. The biggest issue right now is getting the proper course before going to the scope, depending upon what toolshed you want to eradicate so there aren't any last-minute changes in speed or heading. Otherwise, it is pretty much point and shoot. The only "real" excitement is fighting-off interceptors.
-
B-17s never bombed at 36k. They could barely break 30 with any kind of bombload, and that was pushing it. To have any bomber flying at 36k as smooth as glass is retarded.
I'd like to see bombers squirrel around, and fishtail pretty badly at alts like that. They were almost impossible to hold steady. B-24 pilots couldn't even fly at 30k, because the risk of them flipping on their back without warning was very high. They couldn't hold formations, either. They had to loosen up drastically because they were all fighting their planes so hard they would ram into somebody else and take out a whole formation.
Solution isn't necessarily wind, or clouds. It's add in the problems inherrent with flying that high: Make the drones scatter so the bombs don't hit the same aim point (more for carpet bombing than hitting a hangar or anything), and make them dip, bob, and fishtail even when on autopilot. Kind of like the squirrely nature of the G4M Betty when you adjust its heading while on autopilot.
-
In here we have the bomber perfectly stable at 35k, shooting your oil 1.5K away, and the fighter struggling to just fly straight :)
-
I find this reasonable, as well. There should be a trade-off. The higher one flies to avoid interception, the more difficult it should be to bomb.
When I started playing bombing runs in the MA got very boring, in short order, with the way the bombsight currently works. The biggest issue right now is getting the proper course before going to the scope, depending upon what toolshed you want to eradicate so there aren't any last-minute changes in speed or heading. Otherwise, it is pretty much point and shoot. The only "real" excitement is fighting-off interceptors.
von get in to a b29 climb to 30k and see if you can hit a hangar with only 3 500s from each plane then tell me what happens plz...............
-
Please do not make the buff pilots easier to kill.
Please do not make the buff pilots have a harder time hitting their targets.
Please do not drive away those who enjoy a high alt bomb run.
Please make 999000's plane have his name on the Icon when he is an enemy, instead of his plane type.
-
von get in to a b29 climb to 30k and see if you can hit a hangar with only 3 500s from each plane then tell me what happens plz...............
Inductive Fallacy
Premise 1: Having just arrived in Ohio, I saw a white squirrel.
Conclusion: All Ohio Squirrels are white.
(While there are many, many squirrels in Ohio, the white ones are very rare).
That is only because there are 3 bombs in the load-out. Simple math will tell you that it is not possible due to the spread of 3 bombs from that alt. unless, of course, the AH world is flat, in which case it may be indeed possible.
Trying to use one example to prove the rule is fallacious.
-
it is possible I have done it before in a B17 at 32k it only takes 3k of ords to kill a hangar von but if you must try it with 5 bombs it is still none the less very time comsuming because you are not accurate enough at that high alt in a b29
oh and by the way von I am with one of the best bomber squads in the game so you ain't pulling the wool over my eyes so to speak
-
The easy solution is to make the town centers worthless as far as bombing points are concerned.
-
it is possible I have done it before in a B17 at 32k it only takes 3k of ords to kill a hangar von but if you must try it with 5 bombs it is still none the less very time comsuming because you are not accurate enough at that high alt in a b29
oh and by the way von I am with one of the best bomber squads in the game so you ain't pulling the wool over my eyes so to speak
You keep using one particular aircraft to cultivate your whole argument. What point exactly are you trying to prove?
Congratulations to you and your bomber squad. Your ranking and $1 may still bag you a cup of coffee. Am I to assume that because the folks you associate yourself with possibly exhibit a modicum of skill in bombing that you, yourself are also an authority on it by osmosis?
Pulling the wool over your eyes? :headscratch:
-
I see no need to change things. I still run a B17 missions here & there at various altitudes, and usually provoke a good fight up high. Sometimes we get obliterated, sometimes we manage to survive. Damn good fun. :cool:
-
I see no need to change things. I still run a B17 missions here & there at various altitudes, and usually provoke a good fight up high. Sometimes we get obliterated, sometimes we manage to survive. Damn good fun. :cool:
You are a good Egg and are an exception to the rule.
:salute
-
I never went after 20k+ buffs. It takes about 6 mins only to climb up, not talking about catching up a 290mph bomber, then when youre struggling to get into firing position, they can shoot you from 1.5k out, taking out your only oil (blinded, limited time) or radiator (youre a glider in 30 secs). Also, if you would like to reach any success, you have to build up a large speed difference, you have to climb at least 5-6k higher, only to face 3*12 guns shooting at you.
It just dont worth my time. Some people like flying alone, they are the ones in bombers at 36k. I cant get why they are paying when they can get the same experience in offline mode.
Make the people want to interact with each other please.
-
If you make the town centers worthless as far as points, a far higher percentage of buffs overhead will be bombing things like hangars and other field assets which would help thier country in the taking of fields instead of the opposite effect the milkrunners have now.
I've actually upped fighters with bombs and hit the town centers ahead of the milkrunners to which I receive whines on PM.
-
If you make the town centers worthless as far as points, a far higher percentage of buffs overhead will be bombing things like hangars and other field assets which would help thier country in the taking of fields instead of the opposite effect the milkrunners have now.
I'd rather have them milkrun towns... bombers like the B17 and Lancaster were designed to strike larger areas and not pinpoint hangers at an airfield as if they were using JDAMs.
Not everything in Aces High is about winning the war.
-
True.......some fly specifically to pad score.
-
von the B29 does not bomb on target above 20k this is the only plane I know of to have this type of...............can't think of the word but where you put your crosshairs when you drop even if your zeroed out on climb rate on your e6b and calibrated right on the money the bombs WILL not land where you put your cross hairs at
-
von the B29 does not bomb on target above 20k this is the only plane I know of to have this type of...............can't think of the word but where you put your crosshairs when you drop even if your zeroed out on climb rate on your e6b and calibrated right on the money the bombs WILL not land where you put your cross hairs at
The error is known and constant. Whilst the AH b29 bomb aimer may have to add a delay count on the release I can assure you that from 35k I/he can drop ord into any pickle barrel you care to name.
The score mungering milk runners ac of choice is the single b29 with full 2000lb load out running repeated missions to town centres at 30 to 35k.
-
500s work better wether in a single or formation I know cause I only fly a single and can drop a medium base FH hangars from 30k with a single 29 and 40 500s