Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: earl1937 on August 17, 2013, 01:28:37 PM
-
:bhead I know that I brough this subject up months ago, but I think it is worth repeating again! Bombers were designed to do one thing and one thing only: "To force one countries will on another country"! They were and are designed to do only one specific thing, destroy objects on the ground
I have never understood the reasoning behind requiring a bomber pilot to capture bases, deliever supplies and gosh knows what else in order to score a low ranking in Aces High! I have been rewarded with a base capture 2 times in 3 years, because I spend all my time posting and leading missions, so the guys in my squad can enjoy the game more, without having to do all the mission planning requirements: What type of bomber, what support a/c, fighters and such, how much fuel needed, bomb load out, what altitude to attack target and and which angle to approach target to achieve the maximum damage in one pass, not to mention knowing which pilot can hit a hangar and which can't.
Bomber ranking ought to be based on damage inflicted on enemy!
I realize then you would have a horde of bombers flying around, trying to score maximum points per tour, but think of all those big fat bombers to shoot at! LOL
-
Well, being a bomber jock myself, I suspect one of the resons the necessity for field captures as vital to a low score is to motivate people to fly goons.
I don't think it would be a good idea to reward the 30K+ bombers the best bomber rank if they never have to get down and dirty. The best fighter or GV scores can't be obtained without ever being within range of the enemy's guns. Well, ok, I suppose if you were fortunate enough to kill all your prey from their unprotected 6.. but you still have to get close enough to shoot them.
Besides, seems that, as CO, I was flying the goon an awful lot..
-
I won't comment at the OP wish at the moment, but this
I don't think it would be a good idea to reward the 30K+ bombers the best bomber rank if they never have to get down and dirty.
...is already the case. Apart from the goon base capture, the key to a supreme bomber score is to milk towns exclusively , which is frequently done from the safety of a very high altitude. And unlike strat missions, enemy fighters come rarely after you during a 30k town milk run and you encounter no flak.
-
Maybe make a base taker category, instead of having captures dominate who has high gv and bomber scores.
There are ppl who do a lot of waiting to capture the base rather than doing anything toward the capture, idk what to do about that, but it can be irritating.
I can't even begin to count the amount of times someone jumps over and gets the base flashing by upping an LVT before the town is WF and thus ruins the possibility for capture all because they wanted to be first in...
-
I won't comment at the OP wish at the moment, but this
...is already the case. Apart from the goon base capture, the key to a supreme bomber score is to milk towns exclusively , which is frequently done from the safety of a very high altitude. And unlike strat missions, enemy fighters come rarely after you during a 30k town milk run and you encounter no flak.
Yeah, I know what you mean, although it is fun to bag 20,000 points on a bomber mission.
I used to think that you should get more points if you landed your bomber after it suffered combat damage. It would reward those who 'got dirty'. However, the drawback with that is if you did run a mission where you were low ( say, 10k or below ) and your escorts were particularly adept at keeping the red guys off of you, you'd be virtually penalized.
-
Yeah, I know what you mean, although it is fun to bag 20,000 points on a bomber mission.
I used to think that you should get more points if you landed your bomber after it suffered combat damage. It would reward those who 'got dirty'. However, the drawback with that is if you did run a mission where you were low ( say, 10k or below ) and your escorts were particularly adept at keeping the red guys off of you, you'd be virtually penalized.
:O you get escorts? I wonder what that's like.
-
I realize then you would have a horde of bombers flying around, trying to score maximum points per tour, but think of all those big fat bombers to shoot at! LOL
When I first started that's exactly how it was. Factories were spread out over the map instead of in one strategic position. One "genius" in particular suggested that he had worked closely with Hitech to come up with the latest style of play, which is bombing towns. Instead of making factories the primary target for points the towns became more important. In fact, the factories seem to be designed to make it impossible to get good bomb strikes, and so towns are also the easiest for bombers to score well.
I was against the change then, and nothing has changed since. However, if you want to improve your score you have no choice but to bomb undefended towns. If you feel bad about that you can call ahead and tell them you're coming I guess.
-
If you feel bad about that you can call ahead and tell them you're coming I guess.
Pamphlet loadouts!! Yes!! :aok :aok :aok :aok
-
Maybe make a base taker category, instead of having captures dominate who has high gv and bomber scores.
There are ppl who do a lot of waiting to capture the base rather than doing anything toward the capture, idk what to do about that, but it can be irritating.
I can't even begin to count the amount of times someone jumps over and gets the base flashing by upping an LVT before the town is WF and thus ruins the possibility for capture all because they wanted to be first in...
:salute Amen!
-
How about adding a Damage/Hour score category? That would penalize the high alt fraidy cats somewhat.
-
How about adding a Damage/Time score category? That would penalize the high alt fraidy cats somewhat.
Anyone doing proper long range bombing runs ont he strats would be even more penalized with that change, while 1/2 sector NOE bomb'n'bail will gets some might boost, score wise.
-
Anyone doing proper long range bombing runs ont he strats would be even more penalized with that change, while 1/2 sector NOE bomb'n'bail will gets some might boost, score wise.
Penalized perhaps, if all you do is Strat runs. The NOE bomber's score will be hurt in the damage/death category. The score system should not just reward players who bomb towns from the stratosphere. Maybe make Strat buildings have a much higher point value than town buildings.
Edited the rest, due to not really knowing what I'm talking about. Maybe I should retroactively remove all my posts. :)
-
The NOE bomber's score will be hurt in the damage/death category. The score system should not just reward players who bomb towns from the stratosphere.
Yes, the damage/category will hurt their scores, but it already did before so that doesn't change. While with the introduction of damage/time they will get a big boost, so for them it's nothing but an overall boost to their scores.
Penalized perhaps, if all you do is Strat runs.
Not even if it's all you do. Strat runs already put quite some toll on your score by giving you less overall score points and in particular much less damage hit% compared to town busting. I don't think it would be good to penalize that sort of sorties even more compared to short ranged town smashing missions.
And by the way, high alt town milkruns are still quicker to do than most regular high alt strat runs.
I think if the Damage/Death category was replaced with Damage/Hour, there would be much less timidity involved in bombing.
Hooray for bomb'n'bail ! Who cares for returning to base, planning your mission or fight your way back home! Just bail, get a new plane, boost your score!
-
Is this about late night bombing or prime time bombing?
Making the town the bombing score focus would go along with Hitech trying to make capture objects the combat generators and primary sources of reward in the game. Our game by definition has no mechanism to use strategic bombing as a force multiplier to strategically bring one of the other countries to it's knees and loose the war as a result. The amount of effort to bring the strat to 0% by design helps to preclude that other than as a rare community event.
So do you want more score for milk runs, or the game changed to include true strategic force multiplier war win objects so you don't have to be tied to attacking capture objects designed to create combat as a result?
Bomber fans have been trying to argue with Hitech for years that this game's combat for combat's sake format should be changed. So ultimately bombers can decide the outcome of the war win with the push of a button, if the fighter community ignores them at their peril because that was the kind of strategic tool bombers were in WW2. It's also why these kinds of wishes and subsequent conversations get murky trying to tiptoe around that concept.
Hitech,
Please change the game so strategic bombing is a force to contend with, and elevated to it's proper function as a force multiplier to arbitrate the end of each map win by the press of a button.
-
You might as well ask for what you really want, yes? Current map win percentages as they are, plus a requirement for all factories and the city to be down by at least ##%, and the final button push would be the bombing of HQ.
That would very nicely reproduce the events of real war, force people to defend the factories and HQ both, and perhaps the furballers would be the ones that log off rather than the tank drivers.
Forcing people to do things, anything, is never good for business.
-
You might as well ask for what you really want, yes? Current map win percentages as they are, plus a requirement for all factories and the city to be down by at least ##%, and the final button push would be the bombing of HQ.
That would very nicely reproduce the events of real war, force people to defend the factories and HQ both, and perhaps the furballers would be the ones that log off rather than the tank drivers.
Forcing people to do things, anything, is never good for business.
This thread seems to be about bomber scoring not winning the war requirements.
-
This thread seems to be about bomber scoring not winning the war requirements.
Some people can read War and Peace and come away thinking it's a simple adventure story. Others can read the ingredients on a chewing gum wrapper and unlock the secrets of the universe.
Which are you? (I was answering bustr)
-
I won't comment at the OP wish at the moment, but this
...is already the case. Apart from the goon base capture, the key to a supreme bomber score is to milk towns exclusively , which is frequently done from the safety of a very high altitude. And unlike strat missions, enemy fighters come rarely after you during a 30k town milk run and you encounter no flak.
:airplane: I have never "milk" run bombers since I have been in this game! Maybe I ought to start, but I had rather not! I might drop a salvo or two on a town RTB after a bomb run somewhere after we captured a base and I didn't need to use them.
All I am saying is just this: There should be a way to reward people who fly bombers, like myself, 95% of the time! Maybe combine the hangar scores in one category and the town buildings in another, with a combine score, with the hangars and vehicles having more damage points awarded than just buildings. That would discourage town "milk" running. I just think requiring other game scores on bombers is not an accurate picture of what a bomber pilot can do!!
-
I made another thread about this, but nobody replied to it. Here were my thoughts:
Is there a way to change the way damage points are awarded to change up the way bombers are used? I was thinking something like this for each of the following types of targets:
Strats: you don't get too many points for hitting the strats. Upping the amount of damage awarded would cause more people to go hit them, I think. Perhaps there could be some sort of multiplier, wherein the percent of the particular target you destroy increases the amount of damage points given. Say someone drops 72% of the radar factory, perhaps the damage could be multiplied by the percentage over 50 reached: if you do 10,000 damage, you are awarded 12,200 damage points, and so on.
Towns: same as above, but with an inverse effect as well to disincentivize milk running.
Bases: you don't really get anything for dropping hangars and the other various base targets. These should be more worthwhile.
Thoughts? :salute
It's not super elegant, but I thought it might be a solution of sorts.
-
I made another thread about this, but nobody replied to it. Here were my thoughts:
Is there a way to change the way damage points are awarded to change up the way bombers are used? I was thinking something like this for each of the following types of targets:
Strats: you don't get too many points for hitting the strats. Upping the amount of damage awarded would cause more people to go hit them, I think. Perhaps there could be some sort of multiplier, wherein the percent of the particular target you destroy increases the amount of damage points given. Say someone drops 72% of the radar factory, perhaps the damage could be multiplied by the percentage over 50 reached: if you do 10,000 damage, you are awarded 12,200 damage points, and so on.
Towns: same as above, but with an inverse effect as well to disincentivize milk running.
Bases: you don't really get anything for dropping hangars and the other various base targets. These should be more worthwhile.
Thoughts? :salute
It's not super elegant, but I thought it might be a solution of sorts.
:airplane: You make some good points, but I would be for scoring more damage points for a hangar kill, than say, 10 buildings, because the hangar is much more important than a town building. I don't meant to slight town buildings, but heck, you can shoot them down with a "wireb", but don't think it can kill a hangar! Not sure about that, because I don't know much about GV scoring and such.
-
Over the years I have become sympathetic to bomber only players after flying bombers a few times.
If all bomber pilots subscribed to the idea that each capture object is a mini war. Then there would be no problem for them. Fighters cannot easily duplicate the over whelming ability to effect the outcome of capturing an object by the press of a button.
As was true in real life is true in this game. Fighter pilots and bomber pilots have different personalities and motivations. This means the expected rewards for them paying their $14.95 is different. As with GV so to bombers in this game have grown into institutions as strong as the original core of fighter fans. Keeping bomber pilots entertained and rewarded is as important as fighter pilots and GV commanders. Hitech's child has grown up and it is multi talented young man.
-
Pamphlet loadouts!! Yes!! :aok :aok :aok :aok
microwavable burritos
-
:airplane: You make some good points, but I would be for scoring more damage points for a hangar kill, than say, 10 buildings, because the hangar is much more important than a town building. I don't meant to slight town buildings, but heck, you can shoot them down with a "wireb", but don't think it can kill a hangar! Not sure about that, because I don't know much about GV scoring and such.
I agree, and sorry if that wasn't made clear by my post. Hangars, radar towers, bunkers, and other base objects, as well as the strat objects, should be worth more than they currently are, and the towns should be worth less.
-
As a new player, I'm still figuring what alters my score and I notice that flying into a furball in B24s and killing enemy fighters, protecting other bombers, or killing CVs all night, does little to your score, while guys who are bombing fresh towns alone, with no enemies around are getting higher scores, they are also ruining it for the team, because sections of town then pop when the CV has arrived and is trying to take the town. Seems you have to learn the scoring to increase the bomber scoring, I would agree.
-
You could always wish for the flack towers from the strats to be added around the towns with painfully accurate puffy ack. Wish for the solid reinforced concrete structure to take 2-3 1000lb bombs to destroy, or equivalent tank rounds. Then bombing the towns would carry the same flack risks ETO bombers faced even on milk runs. Tanks could be given a pass and only aircraft trigger the AI in the flack towers at 3000ft like from CV groups. It would probably never turn into something that GVers would defend from enemy GV's to keep the town able to defend itself from bombers and jabo though.
Would certainty make them one of the most serious targets to destroy before doing anything from the air to an airfield. But, the unintended consequence would be the furballing whack A mole standoffs we enjoy called ack hugging a Capped field. Would no longer be possible other than as a result of a full on assault of the field during an NOE hoard capture attempt. It would be similar to parking a CV group at a town where the answer to it's defensive fire is 30 NOE players all looking to kill the AI ack first. Then vulch the field.
For every change made to this game, so many unintended changes to how players ultimately address them. Like Clausewitz said: "No plan survives contact with the enemy."
-
Now there's an egregious misinterpretation of an idea if there ever was one.