Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Tank-Ace on January 24, 2014, 02:22:02 PM
-
So, the thread about the Spitfire's range got me thinking about fuel burn and it's effects on the game.
After about half an hour of meandering over the mental landscape, I thought about different fuel burn multipliers for different classes of aircraft.
Would it be possible to make bombers with a separate fuel burn multiplier? I mean as it is, fuel is pretty much a non-issue for bombers, when in real life, a lightened pay load was often taken so that a greater range could be achieved. Say, increase bomber fuel burn multiplier to 3.0, make fuel a bit more of a concern for bomber pilots.
Might not be too bad if they even had to throttle back a bit to make it to more distant targets.
-
Fuel burn settings is arena only, not by plane.
ack-ack
-
I know. But I was just wondering if it would be possible to split that into two different settings, one for bombers, one for fighters. I mean I would imagine its possible, given that bombers are already differentiated from fighters in the code, since their availability is tied to a different set of hangers than are fighters and vehicles.
-
-50
One set of planes don't need magically longer-lasting fuel than another...
-
I'm curious why we train in an arena that has a different fuel burn multiplier than all but the Dueling Arena.
Also.....I feel the dueling arena would benefit from having the 2.0 fuel burn so we don't have late war gas hogs tearing around for half an hour on 25% fuel because it seems any issues with flight modeling fidelity seem to show up more often at super light fuel loads.
Fuel management is a part of air combat.
-
-50
One set of planes don't need magically longer-lasting fuel than another...
Quite debatable.
Many fighters have a pretty short range, relatively speaking. 75%-100% fuel is probably standard for the 109's, 190's, Spit 's, Typhoon, F4U's, Ki-84, N1K2, Yak's and La's. Basically the US Pursuit fighters and A6M/Ki-43 are the only fighters that have a useful flight duration on 25-50% fuel. So most fighters already run 75 -100%.
Bombers, on the other hand, are able to run 25% fuel for every tactical mission, which is probably 70% of bomber sorties. Fuel just isn't a concern for them, they don't even have to fly at cruise speed for strat runs.
They probably still won't have to throttle back anyway. It just means taking 50% instead of 25% for these short little hops. Hell, the ones that run low alt can probably still take 25%.
-
Fuel burn settings is arena only, not by plane.
ack-ack
*nudge*... me163 ... *nudge nudge*
-
*nudge*... me163 ... *nudge nudge*
The Me 163 doesn't have a special fuel burn rate set specifically for that plane. It's limited by the fuel rate burn set by the arena settings.
ack-ack
-
The Me 163 doesn't have a special fuel burn rate set specifically for that plane. It's limited by the fuel rate burn set by the arena settings.
ack-ack
Me 163 fuel burn rate is hardcoded and can't be tweaked by arena settings
-
Ki-84 is fine on 50% fuel. Not sure about the N1K2-J.
Ta152, Me410 and Mossie also don't need full fuel. Bf110s might get by on 50% as well.
One thing to note is that bumping the bomber fuel burn to 3x would impact things like the Boston Mk III and Ju88A-4 to a much larger degree than it would things like the Lancaster and B-17G. Not to mention the B5N2, D3A1, Ju87D-3, SBD-5 and TBM-3. Tu-2 looks to have a fairly short range for a bomber as well.
-
Is our fuel burn modeled to real world range at Mil Power or real world time to altitude?
-
Is our fuel burn modeled to real world range at Mil Power or real world time to altitude?
Neither. The engines simply burn twice as much fuel as they would in reality, more or less based on the accuracy of the model, at whatever power setting and altitude they are being run at. Changes to range, endurance and such are simply the organic results of the base change.
-
Me 163 fuel burn rate is hardcoded and can't be tweaked by arena settings
Did not know that. Thought it was tied to the arena settings like all other planes.
ack-ack
-
I vote to increase the burn rate to 2.25 or maybe even 2.5, then code that DT's are not allowed unless 100% fuel is taken, then make it so when enough fuel tanks are destroyed on a field the max fuel able to be taken is 50% instead of the current 75%. Bring fuel in to the strategic element like ammo is.
... oh wait... that wasn't the question. Sorry. ;)
I seem to have the answer to a question no one asked (at least in this thread). :D
I say keep the burn modifier the same for all aircraft regardless of class. Though not much, it does add in some strategic elements to AH. There is a reason we don't see Typhoons as escort fighters and in long range jabo missions. :aok
-
Bostons would be worthless. One to two sectors out they'd have to turn for home or else make it to their target then bomb and bail.
-
Bombers, on the other hand, are able to run 25% fuel for every tactical mission, which is probably 70% of bomber sorties. Fuel just isn't a concern for them, they don't even have to fly at cruise speed for strat runs.
Depends on how you fly I guess. I quite often take 75% in B-17s if going deep, more than once have been concerned about fuel and I use a reduced power setting for cruise. Fuel burn rate is fine as it is.
-
I vote to increase the burn rate to 2.25 or maybe even 2.5, then code that DT's are not allowed unless 100% fuel is taken, then make it so when enough fuel tanks are destroyed on a field the max fuel able to be taken is 50% instead of the current 75%. Bring fuel in to the strategic element like ammo is.
... oh wait... that wasn't the question. Sorry. ;)
I seem to have the answer to a question no one asked (at least in this thread). :D
I say keep the burn modifier the same for all aircraft regardless of class. Though not much, it does add in some strategic elements to AH. There is a reason we don't see Typhoons as escort fighters and in long range jabo missions. :aok
This is a horrible idea.
There are already far too many ways to avoid combat in Aces High, this will just make the problem worse.
-
I'm curious why we train in an arena that has a different fuel burn multiplier than all but the Dueling Arena
Fuel management is a part of air combat.
I could set the fuel burn to any setting but the simple fact is at a 1 fuel burn you have more time to spend training,your plane stays heavier longer so you get used to flying heavy for a longer time.
All that setting the fuel burn to 2 in the TA would accomplish is more time would be spent refueling and taking off and less time would be spent training. This is not the first time you've brought this up,if you think it's so important to train at a fuel burn of 2,by all means setup Icepac's custom training arena and train all the guys who show up on fuel management.
:salute
-
MA fuel burn is acceptable as it is.
I'm not sure about the Me163 though. I'm not sure what it's MA fuel burn rate is, is it currently 2.0?
-
MA fuel burn is acceptable as it is.
I'm not sure about the Me163 though. I'm not sure what it's MA fuel burn rate is, is it currently 2.0?
Hard coded at 1.0. It would otherwise be useless.
-
One thing to note is that bumping the bomber fuel burn to 3x would impact things like the Boston Mk III and Ju88A-4 to a much larger degree than it would things like the Lancaster and B-17G. Not to mention the B5N2, D3A1, Ju87D-3, SBD-5 and TBM-3. Tu-2 looks to have a fairly short range for a bomber as well.
Boston, Ju-88, and Ju-87 would be a concern, I'm not so sure about the others, given their typical mission profile. The potential for trouble is there, I'm just not sure you would ever run into it in the MA.
-
I could set the fuel burn to any setting but the simple fact is at a 1 fuel burn you have more time to spend training,your plane stays heavier longer so you get used to flying heavy for a longer time.
Your plane stays light for a longer time as well.
-
This is a horrible idea.
There are already far too many ways to avoid combat in Aces High, this will just make the problem worse.
This would not facilitate what you're speaking of. Instead of taking of the knee jerk La7, perhaps the P47x or other such plane with a decent internal fuel capacity. I'm not suggesting shutting the door on being able to up any plane.
As far as the Boston being "worthless" if the burn rate goes to 2.25, ask yourself just how often the Boston is used to begin with.
-
This would not facilitate what you're speaking of. Instead of taking of the knee jerk La7, perhaps the P47x or other such plane with a decent internal fuel capacity. I'm not suggesting shutting the door on being able to up any plane.
If only the P-51 had short range as well, we might see some variation in the typical dweeb's plane choice :devil.
As far as the Boston being "worthless" if the burn rate goes to 2.25, ask yourself just how often the Boston is used to begin with.
Not only that, but look at it's typical mission profile. Its always used as a short-range, high-speed tactical bomber.
-
Tu-2S would likely be hit as well, and it will see more use than the Boston III.
-
Tu-2S would likely be hit as well, and it will see more use than the Boston III.
Maybe. Its got no formation, and no F3 mode. Gonna be hard to see GV's, and it won't level bomb so well.
-
Maybe. Its got no formation, and no F3 mode. Gonna be hard to see GV's, and it won't level bomb so well.
Why do you think it won't have formations or F3 mode?
Ah. It has been released.
Well, we'll see how it ends up. The Mosquito Mk VI was a bomber with F3 capability and flying out of bomber hangars when released. Formations didn't exist back then.
-
Why do you think it won't have formations or F3 mode?
Ah. It has been released.
Well, we'll see how it ends up. The Mosquito Mk VI was a bomber with F3 capability and flying out of bomber hangars when released. Formations didn't exist back then.
And so it will have formations:
This is an OOOPPPS, I should be able to enable them online.
Dale
-
Perk it at 2.
6k of ord, 310mph on the deck, dogfights like a 110, and has 20mm cannons. And with F3 mode. The damn thing is TOO good to not be perked lightly to control useage.
-
Perk it at 2.
6k of ord, 310mph on the deck, dogfights like a 110, and has 20mm cannons. And with F3 mode. The damn thing is TOO good to not be perked lightly to control useage.
That sounds like the subject for a new wish thread. :p
-
That sounds like the subject for a new wish thread. :p
Hush you :noid.
-
Maybe. Its got no formation, and no F3 mode. Gonna be hard to see GV's, and it won't level bomb so well.
TU now has formations.
Yes it will. Hey,..I go with what I am told. Initially, that is what I was told. Hitech clarified it with Pyro and it is supposed to have formations.
We enabled it in the server. All you have to do, from the TOWER", is type the following dot command.
.plane 134 0 0 3
and it will give you formations for the TU-2S.
-
Your plane stays light for a longer time as well.
I understand what you are trying to say and if a player wants to train with 1/4 tank of fuel then that on them.however I usually tell the players I'm working with to put a certain amount of fuel in,usually 1 hours worth at a minimun as thats the length of the lesson.
You can spin it anyway you want but the fuel burn at 1 will allow more time flying and less time wasted.
As I said if it's so important to you make a custom arena and set the burn rate to whatever you like but as long as I'm a trainer the burn rate will stay at 1 in the TA.
:salute