Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Citabria on May 28, 2013, 06:21:03 AM
-
been flying the TBM a little bit. was wondering why it does not have the formation option as it is a level bomber with similar payload to the g4m.
-
been flying the TBM a little bit. was wondering why it does not have the formation option as it is a level bomber with similar payload to the g4m.
Can carrier aeroplanes even have formations? :headscratch:
-
No, all carrier planes flew solo at all times.
-
No, all carrier planes flew solo at all times.
:uhoh :headscratch:
-
:uhoh :headscratch:
it was a silly answer to a silly question...
-
it was a silly answer to a silly question...
Talking about in Aces High on take offs from CVs, silly. :)
-
Talking about in Aces High on take offs from CVs, silly. :)
<big crayon> go through the list of aeroplanes in a cv hangar and see which ones have the option for formations...silly. you will have the silly answer to your silly quesion.
-
<big crayon> go through the list of aeroplanes in a cv hangar and see which ones have the option for formations...silly. you will have the silly answer to your silly quesion.
But don't you see, silly... That is the point to my rhetorical question. Are formations even possible on a CV... in terms of how Aces High is coded? :)
Is such a thing even possible without serious programming involved? :headscratch:
(http://spacetobe.me/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/hand-drawn-crayon-smiley-face-600x4001.jpg)
-
But don't you see, silly... That is the point to my rhetorical question. Are formations even possible on a CV... in terms of how Aces High is coded? :)
Is such a thing even possible without serious programming involved? :headscratch:
(http://spacetobe.me/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/hand-drawn-crayon-smiley-face-600x4001.jpg)
the only time formations were enabled is when the B25C was enabled on the cv's a couple years ago(along with the p39D)
-
But don't you see, silly... That is the point to my rhetorical question. Are formations even possible on a CV... in terms of how Aces High is coded? :)
Is such a thing even possible without serious programming involved? :headscratch:
(http://spacetobe.me/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/hand-drawn-crayon-smiley-face-600x4001.jpg)
use of the word "rhetorical" would insinuate you have no real question which would seek an answer, and that is obviously not the case. formations would be possible and it would not require "serious programming" in the manner that you think. the coding for formations already exists, it could be applied to aircraft such as the tbm, with the proper programming adjustments for what would be involved in allowing a 3 plane formation to take off from the deck of carriers in ah.
maybe it's a good thing you fly spits...
(http://www.tonyrogers.com/humor/images/short_bus_air.jpg)
-
use of the word "rhetorical" would insinuate you have no real question which would seek an answer, and that is obviously not the case. formations would be possible and it would not require "serious programming" in the manner that you think. the coding for formations already exists, it could be applied to aircraft such as the tbm, with the proper programming adjustments for what would be involved in allowing a 3 plane formation to take off from the deck of carriers in ah.
maybe it's a good thing you fly spits...
(http://www.tonyrogers.com/humor/images/short_bus_air.jpg)
I stand corrected. :aok
-
been flying the TBM a little bit. was wondering why it does not have the formation option as it is a level bomber with similar payload to the g4m.
G4M isn't carrier launched.
-
G4M isn't carrier launched.
:rofl he didn't say it was...he was comparing the payloads and the fact that both are level bombers, nothing more.
-
:rofl he didn't say it was...he was comparing the payloads and the fact that both are level bombers, nothing more.
And apparently forgetting that the G4M isn't carrier launched.
-
use of the word "rhetorical" would insinuate you have no real question which would seek an answer, and that is obviously not the case. formations would be possible and it would not require "serious programming" in the manner that you think. the coding for formations already exists, it could be applied to aircraft such as the tbm, with the proper programming adjustments for what would be involved in allowing a 3 plane formation to take off from the deck of carriers in ah.
maybe it's a good thing you fly spits...
(http://www.tonyrogers.com/humor/images/short_bus_air.jpg)
:rofl :rofl :rofl
that's good! :aok
-
:rofl :rofl :rofl
that's good! :aok
Actually, kind of sad, if you know someone afflicted like this... or worthy of pride, depending on your perspective.
:salute
-
Actually, kind of sad, if you know someone afflicted like this... or worthy of pride, depending on your perspective.
:salute
we all actually know someone afflicted in such manner...uses the handle midway.
-
I pretty sure they did fly in formation in the war....
.to honest im wondering why they never added formation tbms and kates in the game
-
I pretty sure they did fly in formation in the war....
.to honest im wondering why they never added formation tbms and kates in the game
Probably because they're carrier birds. :D
(http://www.legalpradvice.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Broken-Record.jpg)
-
it was a silly answer to a silly question...
And your series of anti-Midway posts contributes to this thread in what way exactly??
MH
-
Perhaps the question is how historical would it be to have carrier bombers attack (rather than just travel to the target) in formation? If a particular carrier bomber did so historically, then presumably the game should reflect it. Did some of the Kates at Pearl Harbor attack as level bombers?
MH
-
<snip>Did some of the Kates at Pearl Harbor attack as level bombers?
To answer my own question, after checking a few reference books, yes they did, and in both attack waves. So perhaps Kates, Avengers, and their like should be allowed formations.
MH
-
To answer my own question, after checking a few reference books, yes they did, and in both attack waves. So perhaps Kates, Avengers, and their like should be allowed formations.
MH
Drone formations? :headscratch:
-
And your series of anti-Midway posts contributes to this thread in what way exactly??
MH
evidently enough to get your panties somewhat wadded up...what is your point?
-
use of the word "rhetorical" would insinuate you have no real question which would seek an answer, and that is obviously not the case. formations would be possible and it would not require "serious programming" in the manner that you think. the coding for formations already exists, it could be applied to aircraft such as the tbm, with the proper programming adjustments for what would be involved in allowing a 3 plane formation to take off from the deck of carriers in ah.
maybe it's a good thing you fly spits...
(http://www.tonyrogers.com/humor/images/short_bus_air.jpg)
I spit my 2nd beer up on this one.. lol
-
evidently enough to get your panties somewhat wadded up...what is your point?
My point is that your juvenile vendetta has no place here. Take it off line. Hope that's clear enough for you.
MH
-
(http://i1271.photobucket.com/albums/jj639/Mark_Allen_M/42-Sixteen16TBM-3EsofScoutingSquadronTwenty-ThreeVS-23inflightformationoutofSanDiego_zpsf71c00b9.jpg)
(http://home.comcast.net/~ivorjeffreys/TBFformation.jpg)
(http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6121/5931679236_a70aeb2541_z.jpg)
(http://air.blastmagazine.com/files/2012/08/TBM_VT-90_CV-6_Jan1945.jpg)
(http://i1337.photobucket.com/albums/o679/Mark_Allen_M3/Formations/TBM-3EsofScoutingPlaneSquadronTwenty-ThreeVS-23nearSanDiegoflyinginanelevenplaneformation_zpscb67eda1.jpg)
(http://i1337.photobucket.com/albums/o679/Mark_Allen_M3/TBM-352sandF6F-5sofAttackTrainingUnitFourHundredATU400andATU-401flyingoverNASKingsville_zps65cfc4b0.jpg)
(http://i1271.photobucket.com/albums/jj639/Mark_Allen_M/41-TBM-3EAvengerswithAttackSquadronEighteenAVA-18AonaMidshipmanTrainingFlightintheMediterranean_zpsd2d57104.jpg)
-
Whats underneath those TBM wings?
-
Radar or ASW pods, I reckon.
-
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/38/TBMs_and_SB2Cs_dropping_bombs.jpg)
-
Guess now we need to ask the question: if carrier launched bombers that actually flew in formation for bombing attacks, could we not have the drone formations enabled as well in the hangar? I would also suspect it to be for bombsight enabled bombers only as well.
And if so, we should make this a wishlist submission. :rolleyes:
Just stating the obvious. :D
-
Neither the TBM nor Kate flew the large mass formations the 17s, 24s or 29s did. I've always figured
the formation ability was to facilitate large formations without requiring a huge number of players.
-
On a related topic I don't get why the Arado 234 has formations and the B-25H does not? If the strafer B-25C can have formations then so should the B-25H yes? :headscratch:
-
On a related topic I don't get why the Arado 234 has formations and the B-25H does not? If the strafer B-25C can have formations then so should the B-25H yes? :headscratch:
It's likely due to the fact that the C has a glass nose/level bombing option. The H has no such.
I'd rather HTC figure out how to disallow formations for the C strafer.
-
Radar or ASW pods, I reckon.
wrong! Thier midway containment pods :old:
-
I'm intrigued be being able to launch rockets from a formation of TBM's
-
They tried allowing TBM formations. But whenever they stayed on course 091 for more then 30 miles or so. The entire flight would simply disappear
-
They tried allowing TBM formations. But whenever they stayed on course 091 for more then 30 miles or so. The entire flight would simply disappear
Was that on the Bermuda map?
-
They tried allowing TBM formations. But whenever they stayed on course 091 for more then 30 miles or so. The entire flight would simply disappear
I guess they needed to triangulate thier position better.
-
My point is that your juvenile vendetta has no place here. Take it off line. Hope that's clear enough for you.
MH
am i supposed to feign fear? i don't recall you being the one paying my bills, signing my paycheck or having any other significance.
-
Guess now we need to ask the question: if carrier launched bombers that actually flew in formation for bombing attacks, could we not have the drone formations enabled as well in the hangar? I would also suspect it to be for bombsight enabled bombers only as well.
And if so, we should make this a wishlist submission. :rolleyes:
Just stating the obvious. :D
formations were common with multi-plane flights. if having the capability of level bombing is the qualification needed in ah, then the tbm would definitely fit. getting a flight of 3 on the deck of the current carrier model would be a bit much.
-
formations were common with multi-plane flights. if being a having the capability of level bombing is the qualification needed in ah, then the tbm would definitely fit. getting a flight of 3 on the deck of the current carrier model would be a bit much.
b25's used to hang off the stern :rofl
-
They tried allowing TBM formations. But whenever they stayed on course 091 for more then 30 miles or so. The entire flight would simply disappear
Oh no they just turned up in a Steven Spielberg movie :noid
-
I'd like to see formations off carriers.
Along these lines, I've wondered how hard it would be to do dive bomber formations.
In the painting the SBD's have their dive brakes open. So, if there were a formation with two drones, as soon as you open your dive brakes the drones fall into trail, as in landing formation. Push over to dive and they follow within a specified low speed range (not full throttle!). Release your bomb, a timer starts calculating to let the second one release at about the same point, and then the third.
(http://www.brooksart.com/Firsthit.jpg)
Just wondering...
-
I'd like to see formations off carriers.
Along these lines, I've wondered how hard it would be to do dive bomber formations.
In the painting the SBD's have their dive brakes open. So, if there were a formation with two drones, as soon as you open your dive brakes the drones fall into trail, as in landing formation. Push over to dive and they follow within a specified low speed range (not full throttle!). Release your bomb, a timer starts calculating to let the second one release at about the same point, and then the third.
Just wondering...
:aok
-
I'd like to see formations off carriers.
Along these lines, I've wondered how hard it would be to do dive bomber formations.
In the painting the SBD's have their dive brakes open. So, if there were a formation with two drones, as soon as you open your dive brakes the drones fall into trail, as in landing formation. Push over to dive and they follow within a specified low speed range (not full throttle!). Release your bomb, a timer starts calculating to let the second one release at about the same point, and then the third.
(http://www.brooksart.com/Firsthit.jpg)
Just wondering...
Depending on what you're dive bombing, you may not want them released to hit the same point. A carrier or cruiser, for instance, may require release at a point that would hit 20 or so yards 'up' from the previous point. On the other hand, we're already probably talking about an effort in coding that may be more effort than it's worth, what with the formation launch from the CV without glitches and so. On the other other hand, if you're three handed, it would be one step closer to a mass AI environment where the server has more fun than the rest of us put together. ;)
-
Depending on what you're dive bombing, you may not want them released to hit the same point. A carrier or cruiser, for instance, may require release at a point that would hit 20 or so yards 'up' from the previous point. On the other hand, we're already probably talking about an effort in coding that may be more effort than it's worth, what with the formation launch from the CV without glitches and so. On the other other hand, if you're three handed, it would be one step closer to a mass AI environment where the server has more fun than the rest of us put together. ;)
You can extend or decrease the time by setting salvo ;)
-
You can extend or decrease the time by setting salvo ;)
Are you interpreting for the other poster that 'same point' means that? Because we don't have trailing drones for dive bombing yet. ;)
-
Are you interpreting for the other poster that 'same point' means that? Because we don't have trailing drones for dive bombing yet. ;)
Yes, I am continuing on his thoughts, if you could set your drop timings by SALVO you would be able to set to "0" = drop same point, set to "2" = drop 2 seconds further than first release.
-
:aok
only time I use the dive breaks is to force an overshoot :t
-
Has anyone given thought to the vulnerability of the TBM, SBD, Val or the Kate (especially the Kate) as a formation plane? The 17 and 24 are bristling with gun positions. The TBM has 2 other than it's forward firing fixed fifties. The Kate and SBD have one, with the SBD having limited fixed forward and the Kate none. And the D3A would be much like the SBD. Those formations would be a fairly easy 'three for one.' Without the formations, they at least have decent maneuverability on their side. Sure, they could ditch the drones .... but if that ends up a common circumstance I go back to the worth of coding.
-
pretty sure the main focus is on the tbm, none of the others. as the op pointed out, it has a bomb sight for level bombing, which could presumably put it in a similar category as a b25c (glass nose vs strafer). pick one option and you get formations enabled, pick another and you don't. with the tbm, it would probably make sense to allow formations only with the biggest bomb available to it in the hangar.
-
use of the word "rhetorical" would insinuate you have no real question which would seek an answer, and that is obviously not the case. formations would be possible and it would not require "serious programming" in the manner that you think. the coding for formations already exists, it could be applied to aircraft such as the tbm, with the proper programming adjustments for what would be involved in allowing a 3 plane formation to take off from the deck of carriers in ah.
maybe it's a good thing you fly spits...
(http://www.tonyrogers.com/humor/images/short_bus_air.jpg)
:lol
-
pretty sure the main focus is on the tbm, none of the others. as the op pointed out, it has a bomb sight for level bombing, which could presumably put it in a similar category as a b25c (glass nose vs strafer). pick one option and you get formations enabled, pick another and you don't. with the tbm, it would probably make sense to allow formations only with the biggest bomb available to it in the hangar.
I see options available on all three variants of the B-25C.
(http://i1197.photobucket.com/albums/aa433/arloguh03/ahss87_zpse76cc7fa.png)
(http://i1197.photobucket.com/albums/aa433/arloguh03/ahss88_zps063c2802.png)
And why add the complexity of making formations only available to it's largest bomb? The JU-88s have it available to all load outs, including torps. So do the Japanese bombers.
Here's the bombsight on the Kate:
(http://i1197.photobucket.com/albums/aa433/arloguh03/ahss89_zpscf493dde.png)
-
If Tbms get formations, 2 of the planes will be my bait :t
after which the killer shall be hunted down and destroyed
-
If Tbms get formations, 2 of the planes will be my bait :t
after which the killer shall be hunted down and destroyed
Meh. Your attacker will send your lead plane down in flames and you'll forget how to switch
to a drone while he puts a couple of bullets in each of them and gets an economical three kills. :D
-
It's likely due to the fact that the C has a glass nose/level bombing option. The H has no such.
I'd rather HTC figure out how to disallow formations for the C strafer.
Does using the strafing nose eliminate the use of the bombsite in game? If not, then I'll give you a +100.
I'm tired of making gun runs on B-25Cs in FSO, and getting peppered by 24 .50s after I pass by a formation.
Edit, just saw your last post. Maybe the glass nose strafer needs to also have its bombsite removed.
-
They tried allowing TBM formations. But whenever they stayed on course 091 for more then 30 miles or so. The entire flight would simply disappear
:rofl :rofl Well played.
-
:headscratch: i may have been looking at the b25h and thinking b25c...could have swore the strafer didn't allow formations.
it's not a matter of complexity Arlo, it's actually a matter of simplification. limited choices makes it easier for choices to be made. think about the actual role of the tbm (may as well consider the b5n too) versus typical bombers. the ju88 wasn't designed with the capacity for dive bombing, so comparing it with a tbm or b5n is a bit of a stretch don't you think?
-
Does using the strafing nose eliminate the use of the bombsite in game? If not, then I'll give you a +100.
I'm tired of making gun runs on B-25Cs in FSO, and getting peppered by 24 .50s after I pass by a formation.
Edit, just saw your last post. Maybe the glass nose strafer needs to also have its bombsite removed.
The solid nosed versions of the B-25 don't have bombsites but there's a way to emulate one, somewhat:
(http://i1197.photobucket.com/albums/aa433/arloguh03/ahss98_zpsa1f12fa8.png)
At an alt of about 6k and a speed of about 210 ias ....
(http://i1197.photobucket.com/albums/aa433/arloguh03/ahss99_zps3d531123.png)
Get in chase mode and align with your target
(http://i1197.photobucket.com/albums/aa433/arloguh03/ahss100_zps08493a3e.png)
Zoom your chase mode all the way out and as far 'up' as you can - the drop area will be approximately the closest third from the top of the screen
(http://i1197.photobucket.com/albums/aa433/arloguh03/ahss101_zps3171dfcf.png)
This leaves plenty of ammo for some serious strafing if one is careful and the enemy is preoccupied
The glass nosed B-25C isn't a strafer.
(http://i1197.photobucket.com/albums/aa433/arloguh03/ahss111_zps519ce0bb.png)
(http://i1197.photobucket.com/albums/aa433/arloguh03/ahss112_zps88cea637.png)
(http://i1197.photobucket.com/albums/aa433/arloguh03/ahss113_zps685b8114.png)
(http://i1197.photobucket.com/albums/aa433/arloguh03/ahss114_zpsd3cbceb9.png)
-
:headscratch: i may have been looking at the b25h and thinking b25c...could have swore the strafer didn't allow formations.
it's not a matter of complexity Arlo, it's actually a matter of simplification. limited choices makes it easier for choices to be made. think about the actual role of the tbm (may as well consider the b5n too) versus typical bombers. the ju88 wasn't designed with the capacity for dive bombing, so comparing it with a tbm or b5n is a bit of a stretch don't you think?
I see you've caught up with the part of the thread that progressed to dive-bombing.
I've played devil's advocate on both sides, here. But when it comes down to it, I don't
see much need to give TBMs or Kates the drone formation option. Players can form
up and drop .... or dive. :)
-
Then allow formations of storches :banana:
-
Then allow formations of storches :banana:
Off aircraft carriers. :rolleyes: :O :rock :x
-
Off aircraft carriers. :rolleyes: :O :rock :x
STOL gone uber!!+100
-
the ju88 wasn't designed with the capacity for dive bombing, so comparing it with a tbm or b5n is a bit of a stretch don't you think?
Yes it was.
ack-ack
-
Yes it was.
ack-ack
I'd like to see formations off carriers.
Along these lines, I've wondered how hard it would be to do dive bomber formations.
In the painting the SBD's have their dive brakes open. So, if there were a formation with two drones, as soon as you open your dive brakes the drones fall into trail, as in landing formation. Push over to dive and they follow within a specified low speed range (not full throttle!). Release your bomb, a timer starts calculating to let the second one release at about the same point, and then the third.
<Quoted Image Removed>
Just wondering...
;)
-
I've seen footage of US dive bombers in a finger formation and when they get over the target, they would peel off and dive at the target. Japanese would often use the Vic formation for their attacks. In another thread about this, there were some pictures posted of Vals dive bombing in a Vic formation and what was left of some Kates also in a Vic formation on a torpedo run. I can't recall the name of the USN ace, but there was one that scored multiple kills when he got behind and dove on a group of Kates diving in Vic formation on a target.
I wonder if TBMs making their torpedo runs would be in a finger formation when making their runs?
Would be really cool if in these cases the formation would be different between the Japanese and USN planes but that would probably be a little too much coding, not hard but extra coding that could be spent on something else, like a P-38H.
ack-ack
-
H would be cool but it would maybe perked due to the ability to carry 1600lb eggs
And maybe we get the 51H, Hi alt 109's, and Sb2c
-
H would be cool but it would maybe perked due to the ability to carry 1600lb eggs
And maybe we get the 51H, Hi alt 109's, and Sb2c
Why would the H be perked? All P-38s had the same bomb load capabilities, so the H is no different in that regards to any of the other Lightnings. It would be like having the G with WEP. The P-51H never saw any combat in any war.
ack-ack
-
I've seen footage of US dive bombers in a finger formation and when they get over the target, they would peel off and dive at the target. Japanese would often use the Vic formation for their attacks. In another thread about this, there were some pictures posted of Vals dive bombing in a Vic formation and what was left of some Kates also in a Vic formation on a torpedo run. I can't recall the name of the USN ace, but there was one that scored multiple kills when he got behind and dove on a group of Kates diving in Vic formation on a target.
I wonder if TBMs making their torpedo runs would be in a finger formation when making their runs?
Would be really cool if in these cases the formation would be different between the Japanese and USN planes but that would probably be a little too much coding, not hard but extra coding that could be spent on something else, like a P-38H.
ack-ack
This thread is about the ability to peel off? That sounds like a fist full of coding to me, too.
How'd you like all the pics of the TBMs in formation that I posted? :)
-
Why would the H be perked? All P-38s had the same bomb load capabilities, so the H is no different in that regards to any of the other Lightnings. It would be like having the G with WEP. The P-51H never saw any combat in any war.
ack-ack
I'm not sure what the last sentence meant, Ack. :headscratch:
-
Why would the H be perked? All P-38s had the same bomb load capabilities, so the H is no different in that regards to any of the other Lightnings. It would be like having the G with WEP. The P-51H never saw any combat in any war.
ack-ack
:eek:
Then explain how the H is different? Only thing I see is getting to 20K in 6-7 minutes(which I love that idea), and having a top speed of 404mph, and more powerful engines, and having an M2 cannon.
-
Not a dumb question. However, great answers.
-
:eek:
Then explain how the H is different? Only thing I see is getting to 20K in 6-7 minutes(which I love that idea), and having a top speed of 404mph, and more powerful engines, and having an M2 cannon.
Think of it as an evolutionary step between the early P-38s (F,G) and the later P-38s (J,L), like the P-51B we have compared to the P-51D. On second thought, are you maybe referring to the test bed P-38K and confused it with the H?
ack-ack
-
No. I specifacally googles P-38H.
And looked for a site focasing on the H and compared.
By all means correct where I'm wrong
-
here ya go Zacherof...no pictures but, good info
http://www.historyofwar.org/subject_air_P38.html (http://www.historyofwar.org/subject_air_P38.html)
*edit* this one has pictures...
http://www.wwiivehicles.com/usa/aircraft/fighter/lockheed-p-38-lightning.asp (http://www.wwiivehicles.com/usa/aircraft/fighter/lockheed-p-38-lightning.asp)
-
Ack-ack you were right. For some reason I thought the H was produced after the L. Total whoops moment.
Great site gyrene :aok
-
I'm not sure what the last sentence meant, Ack. :headscratch:
Was replying to Zach's mentioning his wish to get the P-51H added eventually.
ack-ack
-
Was replying to Zach's mentioning his wish to get the P-51H added eventually.
ack-ack
to be honest I'd care less if it was added. Still a bunch of higher proirities.