Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Vudoo on September 06, 2013, 01:44:11 AM
-
In WW2 just because the bombardier went on the bombscope didn't mean the gunners stopped defending their bomber. In Aces High unfortunately it does. Go onto the scope, no guns and you are a sitting duck. I would like see to a modification whereby if you are on the scope, the bombers guns go to auto-guns to maintain some form of defense during the bomb run.
-
I don't think the bombers in AH are in need of better defense, they are already much harder to kill than in real life
-
You can always make another pass. Stay in the guns and defend yourself, then turn around. It's really that easy. Or have an escort. Or have a friend gun for you.
No to "otto."
-
-1
-
In WW2 just because the bombardier went on the bombscope didn't mean the gunners stopped defending their bomber.
They also didn't have the ability for one pilot flying three planes at ones or firing a dozen different guns on different planes at once all by himself... ;)
-
All valid points. Disregard my dumb idea.
-
:
I don't think the bombers in AH are in need of better defense, they are already much harder to kill than in real life
I agree' If bombers were this hard to shoot down then the allies would not have had to spend time and money to develop the P-51 to escort bombers deep into Germany and the bomber fleets would have shoot down the entire Luftwaffe by 1943.
-
All valid points. Disregard my dumb idea.
no one said it was a dumb idea, it just is not what is needed in AH at the moment :aok
-
The RL loss rates of bombers totally dwarf in comparison to their loss rate in AH.
Even the Black Thusday, though suffering horrendous losses, had still most of it's planes returning to England. A comparable bomber raid in AH meeting the same resolute defense would be wiped out, literally.
The last big enemy buff mission I ran into was on compello. About 10 or so formations of B-17s, with themain group flying in perfect tight formation at 'only' (for AH) 22k at typical AH speeds, this time well covered by (mostly) 47 and 51 escorts at about 30k.
Not one single bomber ever reached the strats, not one. If they had flown at typical RL speeds than AH MA speeds, they would most probably not even have survived crossing the coastline.
Imagine what would happen to buffs in AH if fighter pilots would stop simply insisting on attacking from plain 6 o clock, which 9 out of 10 will invariably do. ;)
-
The RL loss rates of bombers totally dwarf in comparison to their loss rate in AH.
Even the Black Thusday, though suffering horrendous losses, had still most of it's planes returning to England. A comparable bomber raid in AH meeting the same resolute defense would be wiped out, literally.
The last big enemy buff mission I ran into was on compello. About 10 or so formations of B-17s, with themain group flying in perfect tight formation at 'only' (for AH) 22k at typical AH speeds, this time well covered by (mostly) 47 and 51 escorts at about 30k.
Not one single bomber ever reached the strats, not one. If they had flown at typical RL speeds than AH MA speeds, they would most probably not even have survived crossing the coastline.
Imagine what would happen to buffs in AH if fighter pilots would stop simply insisting on attacking from plain 6 o clock, which 9 out of 10 will invariably do. ;)
Was that after the 'wingman link' patch?
-
-1
MILLION
-
Was that after the 'wingman link' patch?
Yes.
-
Yes.
You should have had 27 bombers shooting at you (if not 30).
-
Can't follow you...
-
The last big enemy buff mission I ran into was on compello. About 10 or so formations of B-17s, with themain group flying in perfect tight formation at 'only' (for AH) 22k at typical AH speeds, this time well covered by (mostly) 47 and 51 escorts at about 30k.
10 or so formations x 9 on 'wingman link' = at least nine players manning guns + escorts = none of them making it to target?
-
10 or so formations x 9 on 'wingman link' = at least nine players manning guns + escorts = none of them making it to target?
Not hard to imagine. Bombers are pretty much free kills if you're not stupid about your attack pattern.
-
10 or so formations x 9 on 'wingman link' = at least nine players manning guns + escorts = none of them making it to target?
Not all of them had been in one single formation, as I mentioned in my post. I can't recall the exact number of players, the planes were mainly flying in two distinct formations (but still quite close to each other) of about 4-6 players each and maybe 3-4 stragglers at the time I came across them. So it might be even more than 9 formations...
The majority of Knight interceptors were tail chasing them (as usually they didn't fly an intercept course), but despite this, they were indeed all wiped out. Flying at 22k only made it easy for interceptors to get to alt, catch up and to set up attack runs with relative ease.
And this was not an exceptionally unlucky noob raid either. any non-29 buff raid not utilizing massive levels of escorts or very high (27k+) altitudes will be smashed going 3-5 sectors into enemy territory - if there is any notable opposition. Been there, done that a lot of time.
I have even seen several 30k B-29 raids suffering much more than 50% losses, though they almost make it to the target at least.
-
For comparison: The Black Thursday Schweinfurt raid had (according to Wikipedia) 77 B-17 lost out of 291.
On a reasonable AH scale that would mean 10 player (30 bomber) strat raid in the MA would lose only about 8 planes total. That would be considered a very lucky mission, even when not flying at RL speeds and alts...
-
.otto b- 0.5 b+ 4 b++ 4 rt 0 rg D12
-
I don't disagrre with the OP idea..... I just understand the counter to auto-gunners.... Perhaps a middle road can be established....
While in bombardier position and in scope; only a single gun on any one of your aircraft can be AI-manned at a given time. THis allows for some notification to the player that they are being attacked at the same time giving MINIMAL defence while in the scope... I think what the OP is looking for is a little security in the scope. I khnow the feeling of simply waiting for the bullet sounds as my cross hairs draw near the target...
What can't be implemented is generic AI gunners.... NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO :bhead Fighter pilots whines would be heard from 30K down to the deck...
But what about a single gun? Whichever has the closest shot on an enemy which is in it's firing arc will take small bursts. Again, this would have to be limited by way of amount of ammo expended or accuracy of AI gunner as to not give an advantage to a single human player but rather give them a small bread crumb.
I'd like to see this implemented in such a way that AI gunners don't get kills on fighters unless the fighter refuses to break off a sustained attack on the formation at close range. I'd like to see this system provide harrassing fire at fighters whilst simultanioulsly notifiyng the player in the scope that he/she is being attacked and SHOULD man his/her guns....
I get where you're coming from but you have to be careful not to tip the balance scale, it ISNT fair that a bomber somehow has more automation than a fighter simply because "the bomber has more little men in them"... But Fighter bullies, it also isn't fair that the jobs of many on a bomber must be done by a lone controller, and if the controller (player) isn't in a given position, that position is non-existent....
My $.02 :aok
-
I don't think the bombers in AH are in need of better defense, they are already much harder to kill than in real life
That's like claiming ack is far more lethal in game than it was in real life, which is a fallacy.
ack-ack
-
That's like claiming ack is far more lethal in game than it was in real life, which is a fallacy.
ack-ack
So true.. :cry
I don't disagrre with the OP idea..... I just understand the counter to auto-gunners.... Perhaps a middle road can be established....
While in bombardier position and in scope; only a single gun on any one of your aircraft can be AI-manned at a given time. THis allows for some notification to the player that they are being attacked at the same time giving MINIMAL defence while in the scope... I think what the OP is looking for is a little security in the scope. I khnow the feeling of simply waiting for the bullet sounds as my cross hairs draw near the target...
What can't be implemented is generic AI gunners.... NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO :bhead Fighter pilots whines would be heard from 30K down to the deck...
But what about a single gun? Whichever has the closest shot on an enemy which is in it's firing arc will take small bursts. Again, this would have to be limited by way of amount of ammo expended or accuracy of AI gunner as to not give an advantage to a single human player but rather give them a small bread crumb.
I'd like to see this implemented in such a way that AI gunners don't get kills on fighters unless the fighter refuses to break off a sustained attack on the formation at close range. I'd like to see this system provide harrassing fire at fighters whilst simultanioulsly notifiyng the player in the scope that he/she is being attacked and SHOULD man his/her guns....
I get where you're coming from but you have to be careful not to tip the balance scale, it ISNT fair that a bomber somehow has more automation than a fighter simply because "the bomber has more little men in them"... But Fighter bullies, it also isn't fair that the jobs of many on a bomber must be done by a lone controller, and if the controller (player) isn't in a given position, that position is non-existent....
My $.02 :aok
That... sounds reasonable to me. Having been on both sides of that situation, you simply hang high 4-5 o clock on the enemy bombers until they drop (did it yesterday on a formation of b26s). While they are dropping or starting to go over the target you start your attack run. Most of the time I hear the first bombs starting to fall as the bomber loses it's wing.
I see no issue with what Dubious has added. +1
Tinkles
<<S>>
-
Bad gunners will just fly their entire missions in the scope if the AI gives any chance of survival at all. It would just be abused.
-
Bad gunners will just fly their entire missions in the scope if the AI gives any chance of survival at all. It would just be abused.
Then that makes them even easier prey. :aok
Tinkles
<<S>>
-
Lusche, you also have to consider relative sizes of the bombers vs the fighters attacking and those escorting. In WW2 for example, you had many hundreds of bombers filling an entire sky and MAYBE on a good day 100 fighters attacking them, and throw in about a 1:4 escort ratio for the bombers. Imagine your MA sortie you described with only about 1 or 2 attackers and only 2 escorts. The mission would have done far better.
Not to mention probably most of the AH bomber losses are related to or directly attributed to NOE runs, base steamrolling, or suicide-bombing GVs (not to mention bomb-and-bailers).
Try comparing more of an FSO or scenario setting and its results to WW2. These bombers are faster, higher, better defended, and overall harder to chase and kill on a stat per stat basis.
-
Lusche, you also have to consider relative sizes of the bombers vs the fighters attacking and those escorting. In WW2 for example, you had many hundreds of bombers filling an entire sky and MAYBE on a good day 100 fighters attacking them, and throw in about a 1:4 escort ratio for the bombers. Imagine your MA sortie you described with only about 1 or 2 attackers and only 2 escorts. The mission would have done far better.
Not the Black Thursday raid I was talking about, which had many more interceptors than bombers, and no escorts past the border at all. I was specifically referring to that and other similar "small scale" raids with bad or catastrophic losses.
Not to mention probably most of the AH bomber losses are related to or directly attributed to NOE runs, base steamrolling, or suicide-bombing GVs (not to mention bomb-and-bailers).
I had not mentioned any overall loss rate. I had written about altutide level bombing as a comment on statements like this one
If bombers were this hard to shoot down then the allies would not have had to spend time and money to develop the P-51 to escort bombers deep into Germany and the bomber fleets would have shoot down the entire Luftwaffe by 1943.
-
i woulkd love though to see auto-guns or AI gunners inb Bf-110, Me-410, il-2, Stuka and in general in every single or twin engine bomber or fighter bomber with a rear gunner ofcourse that doesnt have the formation option
-
My $.02 :aok
You threw your 2 cents in but only get a penny for your thoughts.... 50% loss on your hard earned cash
-
+1 on AI gunners - if - the players killed by AI guns don't count as kills for the bomber pilot.
-
I wouldn't care at all if the OP's wish was granted- it's quite logical.
Me: one fragile 7300 lb plane with two guns (of those that can do any damage to the buffs at all).
Bomber pilot: three 48,000 lb very difficult to damage planes with a total of 36 point and click guns firing at me.
I don't like that math, so I ignore bombers. So go ahead, make bombers harder to destroy... by all means.
(And please don't tell me I'm stupid and don't know how to attack bombers- that may be true, but I watch other people try and the vast majority go down in flames after getting at most one out of three of the bomber pilot's planes.)
-
In WW2 just because the bombardier went on the bombscope didn't mean the gunners stopped defending their bomber. In Aces High unfortunately it does. Go onto the scope, no guns and you are a sitting duck. I would like see to a modification whereby if you are on the scope, the bombers guns go to auto-guns to maintain some form of defense during the bomb run.
in ww2 if you died that was basically it. you werent allowed to respawn a few seconds later. in aces high the gunner can still defend the airplane if you go into the "bombscope". just make sure you bring a gunner, if you dont have a gunner then guess what you have to gun for yourself.
semp
-
The idea is not dumb, but it misses the point of this MMO game. We need as little AI as possible. This is a social game and just as many fighter players fly as wingmen, bomber players can/should fly as pilot+gunner.
These days, with the advent of drones and .wingman auto pilot, there is less and less incentive to bring a gunner. Why would you bring a gunner when you can bring 3 more bombers with their 18k bombs and 30 0.5 guns (in the 3 formation). These 2 extra "strikes" or "lives" by the drones and the complete redundancy of formation-flying competence offered by the .wingman command, have ruined this aspect of the game.
So, bring a wingman and sacrifice a drone while in F6 view.
Remember, you have 3 lives per sortie, so 0.3 K/D ratio in a bomber is like 1.0 K/D in a fighter.
-
Actually given the way we dial in bomb release calibration I would prefer we could pre dial bomb release. Requiring the ac to maintain speed and alt and then have such bomb release whilst the player was in the turrets.
In this way interceptors do not know and have little idea when the player is setting up the bomb release point.
-
+1 on AI gunners - if - the players killed by AI guns don't count as kills for the bomber pilot.
+1 on this compromise. Auto-guns only active while the pilot is in the bomb sight and any kills made by the auto-guns do not count as kills for the pilot.
If nothing else the auto-guns would give the bomber pilot warning to get out of the bomb sight and fight!
-
That's little consolation to the people shot down by perfect-aiming programs (essentially, aimbots for a lack of better term).
For AI gunners to be an even remote possibility, you'd have to code them to work as WW2 gunners did -- don't even think of firing until 500 yards, don't even fire until less than 300 yards (often times the slipstream going past the bombers made gunning past 150 yards a total waste of ammo, according to a number of US "heavy" gunners), only fire in short bursts, and give up easily when you get a few pings -- then claim it as a kill.
-
That's little consolation to the people shot down by perfect-aiming programs (essentially, aimbots for a lack of better term).
For AI gunners to be an even remote possibility, you'd have to code them to work as WW2 gunners did -- don't even think of firing until 500 yards, don't even fire until less than 300 yards (often times the slipstream going past the bombers made gunning past 150 yards a total waste of ammo, according to a number of US "heavy" gunners), only fire in short bursts, and give up easily when you get a few pings -- then claim it as a kill.
I tend to agree. MH
-
Someone posted an idea a while back about the salvo of bombs continuing to drop after jumping to guns. I liked that one and it would be pretty difficult if not impossible to destroy 2 hangars or all the barracks in a single run on a vehicle field for example with the automatic salvo and delay.
-
+1 on this compromise. Auto-guns only active while the pilot is in the bomb sight and any kills made by the auto-guns do not count as kills for the pilot.
If nothing else the auto-guns would give the bomber pilot warning to get out of the bomb sight and fight!
Kills count only as assists? my thought for this was just a harassment of incoming interceptors, this way a fighter pilot can't get a buff boner when he realizes there's no one manning the bomber guns... :devil
..you know the kind... where the dead 6'O clock position looks sooooo good when no tracers are coming from the buff.... :banana:
-
Ever thought that the system could be abused? Like going to F6 when attacked and let the perfect gunner AI do the job?
-
They already get 3 bombers, they already get zero wind to interfere with bomb accuracy.
Why don't they just get to take our f&%#king wallets and car keys while they're at it?
-
wow, tell me how you really feel without providing any solutions. :devil
.... give me your car keys... :O
-
The solution is to let bomber pilots gun for themselves or get a friendly to gun for them. Which is exactly what we have now so we don't need a solution.
-
The solution is to let bomber pilots gun for themselves or get a friendly to gun for them. Which is exactly what we have now so we don't need a solution.
This makes me want to bomb and bail.
-
Such an illogical statement.
If you've bombed, you MADE it without being shot down. You can now rtb safely and gun for yourself.
You're trying to twist it around but it just doesn't compare.
-
In WW2 just because the bombardier went on the bombscope didn't mean the gunners stopped defending their bomber. In Aces High unfortunately it does. Go onto the scope, no guns and you are a sitting duck. I would like see to a modification whereby if you are on the scope, the bombers guns go to auto-guns to maintain some form of defense during the bomb run.
+1
-
I don't think the bombers in AH are in need of better defense, they are already much harder to kill than in real life
I think you have a false impression of real life.
-
The idea is not dumb, but it misses the point of this MMO game. We need as little AI as possible. This is a social game and just as many fighter players fly as wingmen, bomber players can/should fly as pilot+gunner.
These days, with the advent of drones and .wingman auto pilot, there is less and less incentive to bring a gunner. Why would you bring a gunner when you can bring 3 more bombers with their 18k bombs and 30 0.5 guns (in the 3 formation). These 2 extra "strikes" or "lives" by the drones and the complete redundancy of formation-flying competence offered by the .wingman command, have ruined this aspect of the game.
So, bring a wingman and sacrifice a drone while in F6 view.
Remember, you have 3 lives per sortie, so 0.3 K/D ratio in a bomber is like 1.0 K/D in a fighter.
What does the social aspect of this game have to do with anything? You arent actually in the same "location" during ANY aspect of this game, you are linked by the internet. So, if you are a lonely fellow, then perhaps you should just dial up your BFF and ask him to keep you company for the ride.
-
in ww2 if you died that was basically it. you werent allowed to respawn a few seconds later. in aces high the gunner can still defend the airplane if you go into the "bombscope". just make sure you bring a gunner, if you dont have a gunner then guess what you have to gun for yourself.
semp
Says the guy who has on plenty of occasions hounded others for comparing this "game" to the real war.
It's a game remember.
And considering that I've heard the MA population is dropping these days, REQUIRING gunners in order to provide any real security to a single players bombers, is a bad waste of potential game action.
I want to combat real players in fighters or tanks. I do not want to see a poorly populated arena because of an idiotic notion that AI gunners is not as realistic as one guy firing all guns at a single target.
I could give a watermelon less if it is AI or a real person shooting at me from a bomber or FOR me from a bomber. This is a FLYING game and AI is a population multiplier, something it has ALWAYS needed.
Tell me, before joining this game, how many players ever had the thought "I want to find a game where I can ride on a long boring site seeing flight to gun for a ww2 bomber." It's a novel idea, but as you apparently have failed to see for the last 15 years, it's not catching on in popularity.
-
'This is a FLYING game and AI is a population multiplier, something it has ALWAYS needed.'
"So, if you are a lonely fellow, then perhaps you should just dial up your BFF and ask him to keep you company for the ride.'
Someone's feeling feisty enough to take on the world.
;) :lol
-
Says the guy who has on plenty of occasions hounded others for comparing this "game" to the real war.
It's a game remember.
I was responding to the op statement.
In WW2 just because the bombardier went on the bombscope didn't mean the gunners stopped defending their bomber. In Aces High unfortunately it does. Go onto the scope, no guns and you are a sitting duck. I would like see to a modification whereby if you are on the scope, the bombers guns go to auto-guns to maintain some form of defense during the bomb run.
And considering that I've heard the MA population is dropping these days, REQUIRING gunners in order to provide any real security to a single players bombers, is a bad waste of potential game action.
I want to combat real players in fighters or tanks. I do not want to see a poorly populated arena because of an idiotic notion that AI gunners is not as realistic as one guy firing all guns at a single target.
dude since I joined 6 or 7 years ago we hardly had anybody that wanted to gun. and guess what bombers still made it back to base just like they do now. I have had gunners in my bomber perhaps 10 or 20 times since I joined aces high 7 years ago. and today I can still bomb and fight my way in and out if needed just like it was when I started.
semp
-
I was responding to the op statement.
And I was pointing out the fact that your standards for what's best for the game (defined as "what semp wants") changes to suit your thread bashing.
dude since I joined 6 or 7 years ago we hardly had anybody that wanted to gun.
Hence the idea for AI gunners.
and today I can still bomb and fight my way in and out if needed just like it was when I started.
Yea, I'm sure you fly right through hordes of fighters unscathed.
-
And I was pointing out the fact that your standards for what's best for the game (defined as "what semp wants") changes to suit your thread bashing.
Hence the idea for AI gunners.
Yea, I'm sure you fly right through hordes of fighters unscathed.
It sounds like you are saying you wish to be able to fly through hordes untouched so you can knock out the fighter hangers, is that why you are being so aggressive? All I can see is how AI gunners will only lead to abuse. If the whines are loud now, wait for that to happen. If any bomber dudes think they should be able to fly through a horde unscathed are seriously deluded. Just say "no" to death stars in any fashion or form.
:rolleyes:
-
It sounds like you are saying you wish to be able to fly through hordes untouched
I sounds like you don't comprehend the English language.
so you can knock out the fighter hangers, is that why you are being so aggressive?
I don't fly bombers and reading the unnecessarily obnoxious posts by the people I responded to should have been a clue as to why I "was so aggressive." So it also sounds like your skills of deduction aren't too keen either.
All I can see is how AI gunners will only lead to abuse.
It also sounds like you don't have a lick of common sense.
If any bomber dudes think they should be able to fly through a horde unscathed are seriously deluded. Just say "no" to death stars in any fashion or form.
No one ever suggested such a thing. If this retarded gibberish is the most intelligent argument/post you can come up with, then you would do your camp a favor if you abandoned their cause.
If you need further demonstration of my "aggressiveness," continue coming at me as if you know me or have a superior point of view.
-
muzik, you are really a great player and i really respect you. but gunning your way in and out of a drop is 1/2 the fun. there's no need for AI gunners anymore than I need for somebody to aim for me with this pos ch craperstick I own. fighting your way in and out of situations is what makes this game fun. be in in a fighter or a bomber, it doesnt matter. the fun is having the opportunity to get to shoot at something that can shoot back at ya.
semp
-
Many of the returning bombers where scrapped on the heavy raids, some landed at other than their own, almost all got damaged.
In JG26 war diary's, encounters with Lancasters/Halifaxes daytime spelled death to the British bombers, unable to defend them-self with puny .303s
One raid in 1944 ended with 17 killed Halifaxes/Lancasters without one loss to the squad.
My buff-kills are 90% below 15k, 30% are Ack-stars taking off from contested bases.
Some suggestions for thought: Maybe some 4-engined buffs should be able to withstand more damage than today.
3-plane groups should be extended to 5 planes. Auto-takeoff 10k from uncontested rear bases with 4-engined bombers.
They should not be able to kill a fighter at 1.5k out from 3 or 9 o'clock, but 6-800 yards.
1k should be absolutely maximum for 6 o'clock kills. High 12 attacks should be maxed out to 800 as well.
This should be a more realistic approach, together forcing to bomb with bomb-sight.
Also if a gunner get killed in one bomber, the other 2 should be able to fire, German pilots normally aimed for gunners with their MGs on approach from astern.
For comparison: The Black Thursday Schweinfurt raid had (according to Wikipedia) 77 B-17 lost out of 291.
On a reasonable AH scale that would mean 10 player (30 bomber) strat raid in the MA would lose only about 8 planes total. That would be considered a very lucky mission, even when not flying at RL speeds and alts...
-
muzik, you are really a great player and i really respect you. but gunning your way in and out of a drop is 1/2 the fun. there's no need for AI gunners anymore than I need for somebody to aim for me with this pos ch craperstick I own. fighting your way in and out of situations is what makes this game fun. be in in a fighter or a bomber, it doesnt matter. the fun is having the opportunity to get to shoot at something that can shoot back at ya.
semp
Thanks for saying so Semp. I apologize for snapping at you, but I have become a little disenchanted with the way you respond to some posts these days on top of the other bashing that went on.
I completely agree that gunning can be a blast at times, but it has never been and never will be a hugely popular activity. It is a novelty of the game, nothing more.
No one suggested you couldn't continue to gun for yourself. Hitech could just as easily program it so that you can hop into any position and kick the AI out the window as long as you want. He could even do it in a way that would allow you to choose from the current system (all guns at one target), AI guns in every seat but the one you occupy or all AI.
And there is a need for it. Just as I said in another thread on this subject, there are many reasons why AI would benefit the game starting with the OPs reason, it's impossible to defend and bomb at the same time. This game doesn't need any more reasons to force players to fly another 20 minutes like someone suggested earlier "just turn around and make another pass." :rolleyes: Which by the way increases the already huge odds the bombers will be a complete loss and leads to next reason.
Most people quit playing games when they realize they can't win. It can take some people years to acquire even decent gunnery and we have new players coming to this game to fly ww2 aircraft. So they come to the game and get their tulips chewed up trying to learn fighters. Then they take a break to fly bombers just to find out they are nothing but food for fighters because they cant defend the aircraft.
Learning the game, the tactics and the flying skills is ENOUGH of a challenge for new players. FORCING the added challenge of learning to gun is ridiculously unnecessary.
Third, as I said already. This game has NEVER had what I would consider too many players in the arenas. And although the very few players that are taken out of the game because they are off gunning for bombers has never been significant, it is still a needless drain on actual combat in the game. If they are doing it for the fun of it, then that's FANTASTIC. Every time a player is having fun, that's good for the game. If it is more chore than fun, then it's a detriment.
Finding other players to gun, especially decent gunners is rare. Especially difficult for a new player who likely makes the mistake of asking a "dumb question" in a room full of people who don't know him.
How bout the "everyone's avoiding combat these days" I keep hearing? Could it be that perhaps the game loses a percentage of action because bombers won't fly straight to targets knowing they are so helpless that they have no choice? Maybe if bombers had a higher survival rate, you might see more daring missions that would be willing to trade some losses to avoid needlessly LONG and boring runs.
Bombers in ww2 werent as helpless as they are in AH and they flew straight through enemy fighters and flack. Our bombers have no incentive to be that daring, because the fuel burn/target distances don't encourage it, the chance of success discourages it and the time lost for a suicide mission is not what people are willing to accept just to be shot down.
Maybe if bombers were more likely to fly through the opposition instead of avoiding it, more interceptors would attract more escorts and result in more fighting. NOTHING about the current system is good for the game, not the least of which is the "realism" point of view.
Wow, I forgot probably the biggest problem with the current system. The inability to defend more than one side of your formation at a time.
-
Musik,
experience shows that AI in online games is never a good thing. It should be added only if there is no other option.
Bombers should not expect to survive a flight through a bunch of red fighters, just as a loaded fighter-bomber shouldn't and doesn't. Even the top fighters with ace pilots in them are not likely to survive without support of friendlies. Real life bomber survival rates are irrelevant, just as the fighter survival rates that are extremely low compared to real life are irrelevant.
Bombers already have many concessions and simplifications built into them in order to improve survivability and make them easier for new players: the fly faster than in real life (operationally), the guns are much more effective, external views for improved SA, the bomb calibration and aiming is ridiculous, and you get 3 often which means you get 3 "strikes". These are all just fine. If you do have a friend out there, or join a mission, you do not even need to be able to keep formation thanks to the .wingman auto-formation. With auto acks, the latter options means that you can join formation, have AI gunners on, go AFK which the leader does the flying and AI does the gunning and return in 20 minutes to click the bomb release.
So what kind of AI will you get? if it is too good, nobody will man the guns in his own plane. If they are not good enough, then what is the point in having them? The balance line is very thin. Should they only fire from short distances as in real life? Does AI means that the bomber player does not need to scan the skies and just read a book on the way to target till he hears the AI guns firing?
What does the social aspect of this game have to do with anything? You arent actually in the same "location" during ANY aspect of this game, you are linked by the internet. So, if you are a lonely fellow, then perhaps you should just dial up your BFF and ask him to keep you company for the ride.
When I get lonely I call my BFF and we do "my little pony" coloring books.
In AH everyone outside my squadron is an enemy. Unfortunately, some enemies that are marked in green are protected by the "kill shooter".
-
experience shows that AI in online games is never a good thing. It should be added only if there is no other option.
Please tell me what "experience" you are referring to. A study? Statistics?
Bombers should not expect to survive a flight through a bunch of red fighters
:huh
Really? What do you base this on? Are you saying that paying subscribers should accept 100% casualty rates?
just as a loaded fighter-bomber shouldn't and doesn't. Even the top fighters with ace pilots in them are not likely to survive without support of friendlies.
Pure hyperbole and completely off subject aside from being wrong.
Real life bomber survival rates are irrelevant
So you are saying that when people come looking for a ww2 flight sim to play that they don't expect there to be some reasonable correlation with the war the game depicts?
Bombers already have many concessions and simplifications built into them in order to improve survivability and make them easier for new players:
This false assumption is obviously the source of your mistaken beliefs.
the fly faster than in real life (operationally),
Yes and so do fighters in AH = Advantage mitigated. All aircraft in game are modeled with historically accurate speed capabilities.
the guns are much more effective
Really? Want to ask Htc about that? Maybe you are referring to the fact that multiple guns converge on a single spot. In case you didn't understand how that works, that can also be a disadvantage. Multiple gunners with different skill levels don't shoot at the same spot for the enemy to fly around.
external views for improved SA
External views for bombers are because in RL the pilot had hundreds of sets of eyes watching out for him. If you don't like F3 mode, then perhaps you should ask Htc for an audio warning system that can alert players to incoming fighters then ask to remove F3 in the MA. You wont get it though, because that view also provides information that was provided by the extra eyes.
the bomb calibration and aiming is ridiculous
I don't know what the actual bomb calibration and aiming systems were like, and I really don't care all that much. I'm all for more realistic processes in the game, but not to the point at which it turns players away. Anyhow this has NOTHING TO DO WITH GUNNERS or survivability.
and you get 3 often which means you get 3 "strikes".
So you think that Htc decided to add the 2 drones to give players 3 strikes? I don't think that was all there was to it. Maybe not any of it. I think it was to add slightly more realistic bombing capability and experience in game. Anyhow, this barely increases the odds for unskilled new players who often have no clue about convergence or gunnery.
you do not even need to be able to keep formation thanks to the .wingman auto-formation.
So? What's your problem with this? You think that players should have to navigate at the same time as they fight off enemy fighters? If so why?
With auto acks, the latter options means that you can join formation, have AI gunners on, go AFK which the leader does the flying and AI does the gunning and return in 20 minutes to click the bomb release...
...Does AI means that the bomber player does not need to scan the skies and just read a book on the way to target till he hears the AI guns firing?
And? Again, what's your problem with this? If I put my fighter on auto climb to take a toejam does it chap your ass? Do you wish to control my every action in my home?
I don't care!!!!!! I would rather have a FUN fight with auto pilot drones than zoom in on defenseless unmanned aircraft for free kills. AND this might be a shocker for you, but ALL HONEST and HONORABLE players would agree with me. Are your fighting skills and morals SO pathetic that you would rather enjoy killing defenseless AFK pilots?
So what kind of AI will you get? if it is too good, nobody will man the guns in his own plane. If they are not good enough, then what is the point in having them? The balance line is very thin.
Wow, you might have learned a lesson in life there. Yes, the balance line is almost ALWAYS thin.
-
I realize Bozon didn't start his post by stroking your ego like Semp did, therefore preemptively mollifying your childish nature a bit, but he isn't going out of his way to be offensive because he can't handle a difference of opinion without getting irrationally pizzy .... like .... well .... you ... moo-sick
24 plane formations. Pffffft.
-
Muzik,
You are just shooting in all direction in a mad rage. I almost feel sorry for you. Even the things I said that are good you jump to defend. I cannot have a discussion with you.
Less BBS wars, more dogfighting is in order.
-
I realize Bozon didn't start his post by stroking your ego like Semp did, therefore preemptively mollifying your childish nature a bit, but he isn't going out of his way to be offensive because he can't handle a difference of opinion without getting irrationally pizzy .... like .... well .... you ... moo-sick
24 plane formations. Pffffft.
How you going to get a psych degree when you suck so bad at it? You confuse "handling a difference of opinion" with my distaste for thread bashing trolls. All of them, the overt ones who just come in swinging and the spineless covert ones who have pic fetishes, well... like you.
I responded to each and every one of those posts by "mirroring" their tones. Have you learned that word in the ACME Psych School yet?
What have you responded to in this thread? Why is it you are here again? Have you even commented on the OP once pic boy?
No, You just had an insecurity itch in your panties and decided to hump my ankle. I got news for you, no matter what they told you, it's not always a good idea to express yourself. It can be TOO revealing. Now we can all see what an insecure little girl you are.
So the real question now is this, which deep seated need is driving your behavior more, your desire to hump my ankle or a rematch in a two month old thread? Me thinks both. Bring it on pic boy.
Muzik,
You are just shooting in all direction in a mad rage. I almost feel sorry for you. Even the things I said that are good you jump to defend. I cannot have a discussion with you.
Less BBS wars, more dogfighting is in order.
Don't lie, you can't continue because you realized how uninformed you were.
Accepting when you are wrong and living up to it has a much healthier effect on your character than cliche'ish attempts at talking down to others on your way out the door.
-
Gunners just need to do a better job, from my experience facing 999000, we really don't need mobile death stars since it can already be done.
I used to be an extremely good gunner myself, its far to easy to learn to track fighters and hit them at crazy ranges with hardly any effort what so ever.
-
Gunners just need to do a better job, from my experience facing 999000, we really don't need mobile death stars since it can already be done.
I used to be an extremely good gunner myself, its far to easy to learn to track fighters and hit them at crazy ranges with hardly any effort what so ever.
Is that why so many others shoot like 999000?
-
Is that why so many others shoot like 999000?
Not everyone is at the top of their game, however the old saying goes "practice makes perfect". Just because you do fly only bombers, doesn't mean you will be an amazing gunner, to each of his own. Imagine if it was so easy everyone could be as good as 999? Then nobody would target bombers because they would be blasted out of the sky before getting close. I will only agree bombers could use better protection IF they have to fly at cruise speed only and fly at a specific alt, not this 30k with B-17s doing full speed crap we have in game.
Also the bombsite would need to be more accurate, bombs should not be pinpoint accuracy at 30k either. Fix the speed which bombers fly and the accuracy, then we can talk about firepower being adjusted for it.
However its not going to happen because the system we have now is just fine, buffs defend themselves just fine.
-
I responded to each and every one of those posts by "mirroring" their tones. Have you learned that word in the ACME Psych School yet?
Mmmmmno. You went 'musik' on them. Let me explain. You related to the OP's wish, personally.
You took rejection of it, personally. You reacted on a personal level and not a logical one. Your M.O.
(modus operandi - the term is used to describe someone's habits) is to lash out irrationally (much
like you are doing now). You feel 'justified' because you take any sort of response that is not complete
and utter appreciation and total agreement as a personal attack on your 'character' and therefore think
you were 'reacting in turn.' You were not. Your behavior on the forum is childish and inane (silly, foolish,
stupid, fatuous, idiotic, ridiculous, ludicrous, absurd, senseless, asinine, frivolous, vapid). All the skill possible
in our favorite cartoon flying game can't mask that.
Like others, I feel sorry for you ... but not to the point where I won't call you on your behavior when it
happens. In any thread about anything.
You need help. Think of this as my contribution towards such. :salute
By the way .... now that you actually have something to lash back at, feel free. Then compare it (and whatever
justification you feel) to your previous posts and the posts you were responding to. Look (I mean really look)
for the differences. :aok
-
Mmmmmno. You went 'musik' on them. Let me explain. You related to the OP's wish, personally.
You took rejection of it, personally. You reacted on a personal level and not a logical one. Your M.O.
(modus operandi - the term is used to describe someone's habits) is to lash out irrationally (much
like you are doing now). You feel 'justified' because you take any sort of response that is not complete
and utter appreciation and total agreement as a personal attack on your 'character' and therefore think
you were 'reacting in turn.' You were not. Your behavior on the forum is childish and inane (silly, foolish,
stupid, fatuous, idiotic, ridiculous, ludicrous, absurd, senseless, asinine, frivolous, vapid). All the skill possible
in our favorite cartoon flying game can't mask that.
Like others, I feel sorry for you ... but not to the point where I won't call you on your behavior when it
happens. In any thread about anything.
You need help. Think of this as my contribution towards such. :aok
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR5i0CZ_qclZvNavES-eR8kUSzjgrwovJKkyJ7ySA-cOs1kY9A0)
-
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR5i0CZ_qclZvNavES-eR8kUSzjgrwovJKkyJ7ySA-cOs1kY9A0)
(http://media.screened.com/uploads/0/45/536153-pee_wee_herman1_super.jpg)
;)
-
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR5i0CZ_qclZvNavES-eR8kUSzjgrwovJKkyJ7ySA-cOs1kY9A0)
(http://media.screened.com/uploads/0/45/536153-pee_wee_herman1_super.jpg)
;)
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-NYsUVTUaoJs/TnU-N-cuoWI/AAAAAAAAAyg/ydK9IsiY9_A/s1600/paul+reubens+mugshot.jpg)
-
I think the exposure's a little off (ptp).
-
I think it's a good point. I'm 90% bomber pilot in AH and I found it unrealistic to watch a formation of 10 pilots swerve from an attack like a school of fish, all in perfect formation, like an airshow display team. I'm kinda glad the wingman mode is not perfect and that only some people use it, it's more like an option than an advantage. I don't have a problem with bombsight not activating autoguns as well, it makes it challenging and gives reasons to go-around and make second runs. If enemy fighters did their homework and are attacking the bombers when they are in the bombsight, then the fighters should be rewarded with a fight from a player, I think it's not realistic, but it is fair.
-
No need for Auto Guns! Introducing the new improved B-17WW!
(http://i295.photobucket.com/albums/mm134/waystin2/B17WW.jpg) (http://s295.photobucket.com/user/waystin2/media/B17WW.jpg.html)
-
No need for Auto Guns! Introducing the new improved B-17WW!
(http://i295.photobucket.com/albums/mm134/waystin2/B17WW.jpg) (http://s295.photobucket.com/user/waystin2/media/B17WW.jpg.html)
:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
semp
-
Not everyone is at the top of their game, however the old saying goes "practice makes perfect". Just because you do fly only bombers, doesn't mean you will be an amazing gunner, to each of his own. Imagine if it was so easy everyone could be as good as 999? Then nobody would target bombers because they would be blasted out of the sky before getting close. I will only agree bombers could use better protection IF they have to fly at cruise speed only and fly at a specific alt, not this 30k with B-17s doing full speed crap we have in game.
Also the bombsite would need to be more accurate, bombs should not be pinpoint accuracy at 30k either. Fix the speed which bombers fly and the accuracy, then we can talk about firepower being adjusted for it.
However its not going to happen because the system we have now is just fine, buffs defend themselves just fine.
Maybe not everyone is at the top of their game because as interesting as gunning from bombers is, it's not high on the list of things to do in this game.
Personally, I have little interest in gunning from bombers at all. Even if auto gunners were implemented that had slightly less accuracy or effectiveness as the average bomber pilot gunning for himself I would take that chance. That doesn't mean I don't want the option to gun, it means I want the choice to do it or not. Especially if fighters are coming at me from all directions.
Even with an extra gunner on-board, there is no way to "fairly" defend against multiple attackers from multiple directions.
Something else I forgot about the current system, when the aircraft you occupy explodes, many times the attacker has time enough to move positions and fire on the drones before you respawn in the other aircraft. The current system is not good for the game at all.
If bombers get their cruise speeds restricted, don't you think the fighters would too? And I'm all for historic alt restrictions or more to the point, performance restrictions. Bombing accuracy adjustments too.
-
Mmmmmno. You went 'musik' on them. Let me explain. You related to the OP's wish, personally.
You took rejection of it, personally. You reacted on a personal level and not a logical one. Your M.O.
(modus operandi - the term is used to describe someone's habits) is to lash out irrationally (much
like you are doing now). You feel 'justified' because you take any sort of response that is not complete
and utter appreciation and total agreement as a personal attack on your 'character' and therefore think
you were 'reacting in turn.' You were not. Your behavior on the forum is childish and inane (silly, foolish,
stupid, fatuous, idiotic, ridiculous, ludicrous, absurd, senseless, asinine, frivolous, vapid). All the skill possible
in our favorite cartoon flying game can't mask that.
Like others, I feel sorry for you ... but not to the point where I won't call you on your behavior when it
happens. In any thread about anything.
You need help. Think of this as my contribution towards such. :salute
By the way .... now that you actually have something to lash back at, feel free. Then compare it (and whatever
justification you feel) to your previous posts and the posts you were responding to. Look (I mean really look)
for the differences. :aok
No, let me explain. Twits with pics don't explain things to me. You can't even make a point without the copy and paste function. As evidenced by the blabbering drivel above.
And yes I am well aware of what M.O. means. I learned in the 70's when it was all the rage in TV detective series. Now TV detectives laugh when someone uses it.
You did get one thing right though, I will need help surgically removing you from my ankle it seems. Radiation or chemo. Whatever it takes.
-
No, let me explain. Twits with pics don't explain things to me. You can't even make a point without the copy and paste function. As evidenced by the blabbering drivel above.
And yes I am well aware of what M.O. means. I learned in the 70's when it was all the rage in TV detective series. Now TV detectives laugh when someone uses it.
You did get one thing right though, I will need help surgically removing you from my ankle it seems. Radiation or chemo. Whatever it takes.
No. It's not me, hissy-boy. If it was, then you'd just have this sort of issue with me and me alone.
Hissy on. :D
-
If anyone wishes to see how auto gunners would work I suggest you try the AvA arena. There are AI fighters and bombers in there now and sometimes Missions are run with a lot of AI. I tried attacking some AI bombers and got shredded almost instantly.
-
If anyone wishes to see how auto gunners would work I suggest you try the AvA arena. There are AI fighters and bombers in there now and sometimes Missions are run with a lot of AI. I tried attacking some AI bombers and got shredded almost instantly.
After flying in this arena with AI gunners enabled. I may need to restructure my earlier comment.... Not recant it, just modify it. I stated that I think there should be some form of AI gunners enabled on MA buffs... Having experienced full AI gunners, I now agree that this is NOT the answer.
Those AI boys REALLY know there calculus and would need to be "dumbed" down a bit to be a valid supplement to a busy pilot/bomber. Otherwise, I will submit that AI gunner as is, are simply too powerful.
I'm not giving up on AI gunning for buffs, but it certainly would need some work to be acceptable.
GREAT TIME IN THE AVA this week guys!
-
Those AI boys REALLY know their calculus and would need to be "dumbed" down a bit to be a valid supplement to a busy pilot/bomber.
I agree. Even if the auto guns went off at 1k and missed they would give the bomber pilot a warning to get out of his bomb sight and fight. Or, the auto guns could record zero damage but ping the attacking plane, that way the attacker wouldn't know if he was facing auto or manned guns and would behave more normally during his attack. It is that dead zone of no defense when you are in your bomb sight that needs to be eliminated somehow.
-
No. It's not me, hissy-boy. If it was, then you'd just have this sort of issue with me and me alone.
Hissy on. :D
You are the only one humping my ankle....
Has your epiphany hit yet?
-
You are the only one humping my ankle....
Has your epiphany hit yet?
You're mistaking a slap upside your head in this thread over you lashing
out at the whole world for an ankle-hump. Epiphany that. ;)
(http://24.media.tumblr.com/c0b45739d901b2cc8d3e9865ac319231/tumblr_mn8n37kvoe1srkbtqo1_500.gif)
-
Greetings,
I haven't 'flown' in a while, so I have a question. I have read we have a Wingman option now. Cool. If we can 'slave' one set of buffs to the flight route of another, could the lead set of buffs drop bombs for the any linked formation? If so, there is only one pilot in the scope.
Regards,
-
Greetings,
I haven't 'flown' in a while, so I have a question. I have read we have a Wingman option now. Cool. If we can 'slave' one set of buffs to the flight route of another, could the lead set of buffs drop bombs for the any linked formation? If so, there is only one pilot in the scope.
Regards,
Pretty much. Yes. :aok