Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: SpinMan on December 09, 2015, 12:16:43 PM
-
An old rant but none the less, ive noticed HT is closely monitoring the forums, very pleased to see, thank you! So i feel that this post will actually be heard by those that can affect change if they so choose.
Bomber defensive lethality, we all have our opinions on this. I am one of many people that this sim and the sims before it thrive as well as they do....the enthusiast! There are many who see it as a video game, I for one do it for the close reality and the attempt to feel 1/1000th of what it was like in war time to be in a ww2 aircraft pitting your skills to stay alive and defend the world as we cherish it. The graffix are fantastic, best of any with the same playability. With that being said I would respectfully ask is there anything that can be done with the buff defence gun lethality. Now lets assume here that im not a dead six straight n level shooter. That should ward off 90% of the your doing it wrongers! The reason I ask is because we were in the throws of attempting a base take, a great fun fight, lots of excellent sticks defending furiously and then it starts. Wave after wave of 17's begin to up for close base defence! Now if the aircraft was capable of such feats downing multiple fighters each due to some fine gunnery notwithstanding, then there would never have been a need for the invention of fighter aircraft to beginwith. My gripe is one guy being able to fly the bombers in formations of three and manning every gun! My suggestion is if you want that type of lethality from bomber guns is have players join in gunnery positions! If you dont want to be vulnerable and easy pickings fly from a further base and grab bomber alt with defensive fighter cover or just grab higher. Why do we pander to this videogamey style of exploit? One guy manning one gun controlling three tail gunner positions im ok with but having every turret that can focus on your fighter being controlled by one guy is not the realism I look for! Certainly using bombers as close base defence isnt a tactic im aware of in the real war time that existed. Could we address this issue High Tec? At least water it down a bit, all i see is selling out on the "best ww2 simulator" statemeant and going for "really good" until people who find it tough to learn to fly something else for the task at hand.
Flame on😳
Salute fellow enthusiasts!
Spin
-
I thought the B-17 was conceived as a flying gunship that could also bomb ships? Designed for defense then used offensively in Europe?
The bomber gun modeling is not an exploit. You can't expect every bomber pilot to find enough gunners to fill a formation. It's a game design choice, not realism vs unreal. Flying unmanned bombers isn't realism.
The other issue is gunnery. It's good you're avoiding the "dead" 6 but it may be possible to improve your attacks. I also wonder if you find the guns too effective when you fly bombers, that would be a stronger argument. :aok
-
I think the guns being linked is a reasonable compromise. It doesn't force bomber pilots to have to find gunners before they can launch, and it gives them a reasonable chance of survival. The only defense they have is their guns, particularly at low altitude.
Under 25k, I feel bombers vs a single fighter have about the same chance of survival. If there's a skill disparity, it usually goes to the pilot.
Wiley.
-
The "base is under attack". Lets scamble the bombers was a war cry heard by no man ever:). How about making the gunnery positions die easier when you strafe em! Many a time you dont take down a buff first pass. :bhead
-
Hey Spin cut Noturd some slack. He was protecting his score. :D
-
The "base is under attack". Lets scamble the bombers was a war cry heard by no man ever:). How about making the gunnery positions die easier when you strafe em! Many a time you dont take down a buff first pass. :bhead
If you're not taking down a bomber more or less every pass if they're on the deck, if you're flying anything with 6x50 or more, or cannons, respectfully your approach could be improved.
EDIT: Ugh. That came across a bit more "Git gud" than I meant it. What I mean is, I don't think whittling a bomber down through multiple passes should be what they balance the gunnery towards. If they do it that way, the bombers are essentially defenseless against someone who's decent at attacking bombers. As it stands now, a bomber with good gunnery has a fair chance against a single opponent. Against multiple opponents, the bomber should be meat because he can only attack one target at a time.
Wiley.
-
Is it fair that I get a fragile plane with two guns to go against the bomber pilot who get three lives, three planes that absorb much damage, and 36 point-and-shoot guns?
Whenever this topic comes up there are multiple posts of "you're doing it wrong, I have no trouble". I find that funny as the majority of people I watch attack bombers go down in flames and the bombers keep plodding along. I guess the majority of AH'ers are "doing it wrong".
-
I really do find that these bombers are a bit over modeled. B26 and the b25 guns are way over modeled I think. Sometimes I will shoot a b25 and he is spinning away going down then I break away and I'm still being able to get shot when I'm not even in the angle of his guns. Kinda wierd I think. Just saying......
-
I guess the majority of AH'ers are "doing it wrong".
Honestly, yes. I see about 2/3 or 3/4 of the people who attack bombers attack from behind the 8/4 lines with relatively little closing speed. Against any bomber pilot with a clue that should be a death sentence, and it usually is.
Wiley.
-
Honestly, yes. I see about 2/3 or 3/4 of the people who attack bombers attack from behind the 8/4 lines with relatively little closing speed. Against any bomber pilot with a clue that should be a death sentence, and it usually is.
Wiley.
Perhaps because at alt it is hard to have much closing speed at all unless you're in the "proper" fighter and therefore all attacks devolve into 8 to 4. I've encounter bombers are altitudes so high I could not even make a pass, let alone a successful one (granted I'm using the "wrong" plane, a Spit IX).
-
I am one of those that often gets shot down when I'm attacking bombers. And I can tell you it's definitely my own fault.
-
Perhaps because at alt it is hard to have much closing speed at all unless you're in the "proper" fighter and therefore all attacks devolve into 8 to 4. I've encounter bombers are altitudes so high I could not even make a pass, let alone a successful one (granted I'm using the "wrong" plane, a Spit IX).
Above 20-25k is a completely different conversation, and one I don't feel I'm qualified to say what's realistic and isn't. Bombers flown properly above 25k have a ton of advantage even against the "right plane". Whether that's right or wrong, I can't say but I do know it's frustrating.
For the situation the OP was talking about, I think your Spit IX should be knocking down one bomber per pass pretty consistently if you're starting from alt/with E. If you're not, you shouldn't be expecting to dominate him because you're not in your optimum situation, which means he should have more of a chance.
Wiley.
-
If you weaken the bombers you will disturb the delicate balance that exists between frustration and glee. No one except the odd masochist or uber marksman would fly bombers if you were to nerf their guns. Your frustration is balanced by the gunships glee. If you've ever flown 2 hours to get to the strats to be done in by a me163 in two passes you will understand the flip side.
As for who has the advantage between bombers and fighters, fighters always do. They are the ones initiating the attack, they can leave at any time, they dictate the fight.
-
So....is this a complaint about people upping AC to defend the base as well??? :O With the threads about the manned guns... :noid
As for OP; OP doesn't seem to fly bombers very often or if he does, it just "short hops". Do a full tour in 17's/24's/29's, flying nothing but those and hitting strats that are deep in enemy territory. Restrict yourself to 20-25k as well.
Wonder what excuse(s) you are going to come up with not to do this. :headscratch:
-
If you're not taking down a bomber more or less every pass if they're on the deck, if you're flying anything with 6x50 or more, or cannons, respectfully your approach could be improved.
Bombers on the deck are very dangerous to attack, because there is a good chance of augering if you have a good amount of closing speed. Taking away the vertical attack greatly increases the chance the attacker will end up out of energy and behind the bomber.
-
Bombers on the deck are very dangerous to attack, because there is a good chance of augering if you have a good amount of closing speed. Taking away the vertical attack greatly increases the chance the attacker will end up out of energy and behind the bomber.
Beam attacks pretty much negate that though.
Wiley.
-
Bombers on the deck are very dangerous to attack, because there is a good chance of augering if you have a good amount of closing speed. Taking away the vertical attack greatly increases the chance the attacker will end up out of energy and behind the bomber.
I agree... Not having some space under a bomber makes it much harder to get a clean pass without becoming a dirt dart.
Bombers 3-15K are easy pick'ns, and nerfing their guns would be a mistake IMHO. If I see bombers upping for base defense, I always coordinate with someone else. Two on one makes for dead bombers.
-
Beam attacks pretty much negate that though.
Wiley.
Much harder to do and then repeat when the bombers are on the deck. You aren't building enough speed in the shallow dive, which you will need to regain alt for each subsequent pass.
-
Much harder to do and then repeat when the bombers are on the deck. You aren't building enough speed in the shallow dive, which you will need to regain alt for each subsequent pass.
You just need to take a little more time to reset than if the ground wasn't there. It's a factor, but it doesn't make it impossible.
Wiley.
-
You just need to take a little more time to reset than if the ground wasn't there. It's a factor, but it doesn't make it impossible.
Wiley.
Not impossible but as I said, much more difficult. Harder shot to make and reduced closing speed, coupled with a predictable egress path, puts the fighter much more at risk. That's why people who gunship aren't afraid to fly them on the deck.
-
An old rant but none the less, ive noticed HT is closely monitoring the forums, very pleased to see, thank you! So i feel that this post will actually be heard by those that can affect change if they so choose.
Bomber defensive lethality, we all have our opinions on this. I am one of many people that this sim and the sims before it thrive as well as they do....the enthusiast! There are many who see it as a video game, I for one do it for the close reality and the attempt to feel 1/1000th of what it was like in war time to be in a ww2 aircraft pitting your skills to stay alive and defend the world as we cherish it. The graffix are fantastic, best of any with the same playability. With that being said I would respectfully ask is there anything that can be done with the buff defence gun lethality. Now lets assume here that im not a dead six straight n level shooter. That should ward off 90% of the your doing it wrongers! The reason I ask is because we were in the throws of attempting a base take, a great fun fight, lots of excellent sticks defending furiously and then it starts. Wave after wave of 17's begin to up for close base defence! Now if the aircraft was capable of such feats downing multiple fighters each due to some fine gunnery notwithstanding, then there would never have been a need for the invention of fighter aircraft to beginwith. My gripe is one guy being able to fly the bombers in formations of three and manning every gun! My suggestion is if you want that type of lethality from bomber guns is have players join in gunnery positions! If you dont want to be vulnerable and easy pickings fly from a further base and grab bomber alt with defensive fighter cover or just grab higher. Why do we pander to this videogamey style of exploit? One guy manning one gun controlling three tail gunner positions im ok with but having every turret that can focus on your fighter being controlled by one guy is not the realism I look for! Certainly using bombers as close base defence isnt a tactic im aware of in the real war time that existed. Could we address this issue High Tec? At least water it down a bit, all i see is selling out on the "best ww2 simulator" statemeant and going for "really good" until people who find it tough to learn to fly something else for the task at hand.
Flame on😳
Salute fellow enthusiasts!
Spin
I think the bolded/underlined parts are the real issue here. With B17s turnin and a burning on the deck dropping as many fighters as they can only to reup instantly to do it over and over again can really cause issues with a base capture.
As stated, if it was a valid tactic we would have to be ok with it it, but here it is just another instance of "gaming the game".
As for flying at alt, ya, Im guessing the OP is doing it wrong if he cant take out a set of buffs. Like Wiley said, MOST people are doing it wrong. Just fly a few thousand feet away from a set of bufs as you work to get ahead of them. Watch all the guys that come in from behind and get wasted.
-
Not impossible but as I said, much more difficult. Harder shot to make and reduced closing speed, coupled with a predictable egress path, puts the fighter much more at risk. That's why people who gunship aren't afraid to fly them on the deck.
I'll grant you the point on the harder shot and reduced closing speed as compared to an ideal situation at alt. The predictable egress path is partly a result of impatience on the part of the fighter pilot though. While it's true that the ground takes away half of your options, you can still work to make a difficult solution on the way out.
Wiley.
-
Alotta great points! Having a 20k plus box of buffs should be hard to take down your going into "their element". 109's were bomber killers, granted the cannon replaces the 6 50's, ive raked buffs with TEMPS, Tiffs, Chogs and seen them fly off. So to say you should take them out each pass is a low percentile probability. Dont get me wrong ive seeming tapped buffs and set em alight or clipped off a wingtip or they have blown....possibly previously damaged. To get into effective KILL range your in the danger zone yourself. The bomber kill records vs fighters in here way out shine the real stats from history...showing the obvious imbalance. Pandering to the "if we make it harder guys wint fly em". Dont nerf em, balance them a bit. The fact they can and are being used as close base defence is imho gameing the game. Thank you they were the perfect words from what im trying to point out. Exploit perhaps is a poor choice. So much time and energy and money is spent on making this as realistic as possible and then we detune things that we have control over like killjng gunnery positions to make the next pass less dangerous than the first if you fail to put enough sustained lead into the exact same panel of metal from 400 plus yds doing 300 plus mph. Buffs should be dangerous but also on the otherside a poorly planned buff upping should result in the same as a poorly planned dead 6 approach. Dont make it so easy to "game the game".
Spin
-
What you're essentially saying, Spin, is that the bombers should be balanced against a poor attack rather than a decent one. How do you do that without making them completely helpless against a decent attack?
Wiley.
-
Im pointing out that bombers being used for close base defence is unrealistic. The reason they are being used in this manner is gaming the game. Im so gonna overuse that comment:). Low buffs shouldnt have even a nearly equal chance of survival, many many multiple attacks usually ends with one of three fighters surving to finish off a flight It happens alot!
-
SpinMan with respect, If you have some specific way that you want bombers to be changed say it. Your being vague. Also I'd assert that bomber to fighter deaths are really about skill and patience not lopsided armament. If on a base take the bombers are distracting, all your team has to do is destroy the extremely fragile ammo bunkers.
-
Pemb,
1) Ability to kill gunner positions on buffs, I understand that its possible though I have not yet seen it to be the case and I dont fly buffs so have never experienced the loss of a gun position. Its not unrealistic to add that realism to a game so much has been put into making it realistic! Ill turn this around in fact explain to my why gunners cant be killed to make your next pass less risky? its easier to turret a flak than it is to kill a gunner. Not realistic.
2) Have gunnery positions on bombers only fire from an occupied position, I'll meet ya half way here and say if the pilot/bombadier/gunner, since currently one man can do it all, not so realistic, can only fire the guns from the position hes currently in from all three buffs...ie if hes in the tail he may only fire all the tail guns not every gun the software can see you from unless those positions are occupied by another person who joined your buff as was the case in AW, it worked very well there. DeathStars were a force to be reconned with!
If ya wanna turn and burn a flight of buffs for close base defence fill it up with guys im good with that.
3) Id like TWO cup holders in the 38 one simply isnt enough, I like to chase my beers with a shot!
Spin
-
Ability to kill gunner positions on buffs, I understand that its possible though I have not yet seen it to be the case and I dont fly buffs so have never experienced the loss of a gun position.
You should try it and fly them regularly for a while. I guarantee you some of your assumptions, opinions and conclusions will change after that. For example you'd know that you can easily lose your guns...
;)
-
your right I should, however for the purpose of this opinion I need to stay fighter side:) ive been plucked outat the sky abeam by 17's in a 262 closing at near compression below 10k, granted thats a one off but I dont hit buffs that often when in a 262 nor fly within half a sector of a fleet for the same reason. watching a good gunner plow through several fighters and toddle off smoking with little else wrong tells me there is imbalance. Just a little tweak:) comon its xmas:) with the new Eye candy looking at the pics and vids posted by FLS im thinking I will forget about this tiny little thing while drooling over the simply fantastic graffix! SA may go for a crap as I admire all the nice shading and those clouds!!!!
Spin
-
As Lusche said, you can't properly assess bomber lethality unless you both fly them and attack them. Pilot skill is a big factor. :aok
-
Don't forget that AH is modeling a formation that had 21 guys manning those guns (not counting the radiomen since that gun isn't included in the game). The game lets the pilot man them all because otherwise it would be a formation with 30 guns unmanned at any given time which would be that much less realistic. You're never going to get enough gunners to even half fill one plane, much less 3, because most players enjoy piloting a lot more than gunning. And because of parallax, unless the fighter is straight and level dead on the buffs' 6 at close to the same speed, all those guns manned by one person from one position are less effective than they'd be if there were 21 gunners.
-
Why can a buff .50 caliber from a ventral gun of a b17 hit you at 1.5k out frm the side (and even cripple you) when your same .50 cal can't reach them ????
-
Bombers are full of gameplay concessions that I have come to live with. AH is a game after all and real life bombers sucked really bad.
The biggest dweebery multiplier is the 3 plane formation. With the laser guided bombing accuracy, the drones are not needed in order to improve carpet-bombing statistics. They are there for defence and to give the player, often a noob, 3 strikes in order to reduce his frustration. However, the increased payload per player and 36 synchronized guns allow a ton of stupid uses for bombers - because drones are free and totally expendable to the player. He only needs to land 1 to get "successful landing" and his name in lights in the text buffer.
90% of the dweebery can be prevented or significantly reduced in effectiveness if the two drones were lightly perked (lead bomber for free). Bomb and bail, ack-stars, suicide CV attackers, lancstukas - all would be a costly endeavor if the player does them as a habit with drones. At the same time, bomber perks are cheap and easy to harvest, you get them back if you protect your drones and land, and even if one runs out of perks he can still roll single bombers (gasp :eek:) like we did for many years in AH and the 'other games'. Even a noob in non-dweeb activity should be able to afford a 1 perk-per-drone running cost.
PERK THE DRONES ALREADY!
-
When was the last time you saw a bomber mission?
-
Why can a buff .50 caliber from a ventral gun of a b17 hit you at 1.5k out frm the side (and even cripple you) when your same .50 cal can't reach them ????
Some factors onfluencing gunnery ranges:
1.
"1.5k" ain't exactly 1.5k. It's a range from 1250 to 1750 yards. The former can be (depending on circumstances, see following points) just within range, the latter one is not. So at one time you can get hit at 1.5k, while the other time you can't hit your enemy at what seems to be the same range by icon distance shown
2.
Due to lag, the distances two players are apart on their respective screens can be remarkably different. (And especially at close ranges, the angles can & will be too, which has an effect on which cuns can actualkly shoot at you).
3.
Movement vector of the involved parties
The subjective range can be varying depending on if you are shooting at an enemy flying away from your bullets or flying towards them. (Trying to find the threads where HT posted on this thing)
4.
Different kind of '0.50cals'?
Sometimes players in German planes refer to their 13mm guns as '0.50cals', but in fact those were less powerful round sin RL. I had never tested if this actually translated into a shorter range in AH, but it should do so.
-
Maybe someone can tell me if you can inflict damage with US .50 cal with a figter at 1.5k range icon (no closure), I never managed to do that myself.
The very few times I fly bombers I had no problem smoking an engine of a fighter at 1k range with 7.7mm in a Ju88, trying that with a 7.7mm fighter would be futile against any target.
-
Whenever ET37 is on :aok
When was the last time you saw a bomber mission?
-
Go offline or TA, and use the .target command to find out how the max distances differ depending on which direction you are shooting to relative to your movement vector. You will find some significant differences.
What I forgot to mention: Altitude is also a factor.
-
Why do we pander to this videogamey style of exploit?
Because AH is a videogamey ~game~, played by gamers. It's a game, it's a game, it's a game. Those simulation enthusiasts among us who realize this, end up having much more "fun" in AH, uhm... or leave.
-
There are many who see it as a video game, I for one do it for the close reality and the attempt to feel 1/1000th of what it was like in war time to be in a ww2 aircraft pitting your skills to stay alive and defend the world as we cherish it.
It is a video game... not even close to any fraction of reality in the MA's (Exceptions may be the shapes of the planes and vehicles).
The only thing you sacrifice is time and money.
This is my opinion, and nothing more... enough said.
X :salute
-
You should try it and fly them regularly for a while. I guarantee you some of your assumptions, opinions and conclusions will change after that. For example you'd know that you can easily lose your guns...
;)
Always a voice of reason :cheers:
-
I see a lot of complaints using the word 'difficult" when describing attacking buffs. Yes, it is, when you have no patience or are just plain doing it wrong. I know, you said you didn't want someone to tell you that you are doing it wrong, that does not make it untrue.
It is my goal when attacking buffs to kill all 3 of them without taking a ping. I enjoy flying hours long missions with multiple re-arms, especially when I am defending a heavily attacked strat area. 50% of the time I can make this happen, no pings, therefore no damage and good to re-arm. I'm not better than anyone here but I am much more patient. I also have a lot of practice. Combine patience with practice and you get a lethal combination that only a few elite buff guys can survive.
This subject comes up from time to time and it is always a fairly new guy, or at least an unpracticed buff killer that suggests it. Seasoned buff killers do not have this complaint and once you become a proficient buff killer I don't think you will want anything changed because then it would simply be too easy.
Once again, I attack from the High 1:00 or high 11:00, looking out the side window until the buff is about to pass in front of my guns. Line it up early so you are absolutely neutral stick so your cannons or mg's are sending out a dense stream of lead for them to fly through. Aim for the wing root or an engine. For very high buffs, (above 26,000), I make my first pass on the engine of the lead. If that is smoking after my pass, I leave that one alone because when that engine fails, his entire formation must slow down. Yes, it takes awhile for that engine to quit but it also takes awhile to get back in position in your fighter at high alts for your next pass. There is that patience thingy again........
Also, some days are better than other days. You just have to go with the flow, realize you can't be perfect often, and keep hammering away, patiently.
I have but one wish on this subject, allow a buff pilot to choose between a formation, or the ability to fully man the guns with real players without a formation. Ok maybe one more wish.....a message that says "XXXXXX has bailed all 3 of his Lancaster's. (OK, OK, maybe not)
-
...Forgive the ignorant here...
But would it be possible to say only have the gunner position that is occupied (plus either drone's identical position) firing in a 1:1 ratio, with all remaining "non-manned" guns firing every fifth round?
*In chin gun, all chin guns fire as user fires. All remaining guns within field of view arc, fire every 5th round*
This might reduce the lazer-beam affect, but still go so far as telling a bomber pilot, "You're f-ed, that brewster will kill you at 20k..."
just a bit of whimsy to be refuted/corrected... :aok
-
I see a lot of complaints using the word 'difficult" when describing attacking buffs. Yes, it is, when you have no patience or are just plain doing it wrong. I know, you said you didn't want someone to tell you that you are doing it wrong, that does not make it untrue.
It is my goal when attacking buffs to kill all 3 of them without taking a ping. I enjoy flying hours long missions with multiple re-arms, especially when I am defending a heavily attacked strat area. 50% of the time I can make this happen, no pings, therefore no damage and good to re-arm. I'm not better than anyone here but I am much more patient. I also have a lot of practice. Combine patience with practice and you get a lethal combination that only a few elite buff guys can survive.
This subject comes up from time to time and it is always a fairly new guy, or at least an unpracticed buff killer that suggests it. Seasoned buff killers do not have this complaint and once you become a proficient buff killer I don't think you will want anything changed because then it would simply be too easy.
Once again, I attack from the High 1:00 or high 11:00, looking out the side window until the buff is about to pass in front of my guns. Line it up early so you are absolutely neutral stick so your cannons or mg's are sending out a dense stream of lead for them to fly through. Aim for the wing root or an engine. For very high buffs, (above 26,000), I make my first pass on the engine of the lead. If that is smoking after my pass, I leave that one alone because when that engine fails, his entire formation must slow down. Yes, it takes awhile for that engine to quit but it also takes awhile to get back in position in your fighter at high alts for your next pass. There is that patience thingy again........
Also, some days are better than other days. You just have to go with the flow, realize you can't be perfect often, and keep hammering away, patiently.
I have but one wish on this subject, allow a buff pilot to choose between a formation, or the ability to fully man the guns with real players without a formation. Ok maybe one more wish.....a message that says "XXXXXX has bailed all 3 of his Lancaster's. (OK, OK, maybe not)
Pilots like this push the envelope and make these types of engagements incredible. When im dialed in it makes for a great fight. When I am not I stand no chance against Zoney, snail, wiley, and the other greats!
Only 29's are OP that is why they are perked. Scary what a set of 29's can do in the right hands :noid
-
Bombers are generally pretty easy to take down when you set yourself up correctly. Last I checked, my record vs bombers was somewhere near 30:1. While I occasionally think the bomber guns are rediculously accurate and much more effective than those on the fighters, I also don't think they need to be messed with. Buffs would become extinct in the MA if you nerfed them and I don't want to see that.
-
3.
Movement vector of the involved parties
The subjective range can be varying depending on if you are shooting at an enemy flying away from your bullets or flying towards them. (Trying to find the threads where HT posted on this thing)
The simplistic example would be shooting from dead six with no closure at 300mph exactly 1500 yards away. Suppose the bullet can travel 1500 yards then vanishes. Suppose for rough illustration, the .50 averages about 1000 yards per second over the distance. The fine details of reality would be slightly different because the bullets would slow down as they travel, the plane getting closer means the bullet wouldn't actually be in the air for exactly 1.5 seconds, and the exact numbers would be slightly different, but the principle is the same.
The bullet leaves the tailgun and travels the 1500 yards in 1.5 seconds. In that time, the fighter is headed towards the bullet at 440fps. So in that 1.5 seconds, the fighter actually gets 660 feet, or 220 yards closer to the bullet. The fighter could actually be 1720 yards away from the muzzle when the bullet left it, and still get hit.
The reverse applies as well. The same bullet leaves the trailing fighter and travels 1500 yards in 1.5 seconds. In that time, the bomber has flown 660 feet further away. That means the bomber would have to have been 1280 yards or closer, or the bullet is going to disappear.
Wiley.
-
The bullet leaves the tailgun and travels the 1500 yards in 1.5 seconds. In that time, the fighter is headed towards the bullet at 440fps. So in that 1.5 seconds, the fighter actually gets 660 feet, or 220 yards closer to the bullet. The fighter could actually be 1720 yards away from the muzzle when the bullet left it, and still get hit.
Wiley.
This is why it is so easy to pluck the wings off fighters from 1.5k in 29's.
-
Bombers are generally pretty easy to take down when you set yourself up correctly. Last I checked, my record vs bombers was somewhere near 30:1. While I occasionally think the bomber guns are rediculously accurate and much more effective than those on the fighters, I also don't think they need to be messed with. Buffs would become extinct in the MA if you nerfed them and I don't want to see that.
In AW many a night squads would get together and fill up a bunch of buffs and fly for hours bombing and occupying all positions....it was great fun...an experience not focused on here! New players would flock to announcement that a 17 is looking for gunners please join! Alter the dynamics of bombers and people will quit imho wouldnt happen, on the contrary I believe it would enhance the experience of flying buffs. Scrambling a set for a big furball base defence is annoying, base defenders flying through a box as though it was an airborn flak panzer. Buffs Biggest defence is altitude second fighter support and third are his guns. Having a convergence of all guns to one players fireing point is also annoying. Put a wall of lead up not a lethal condenced pointof fire by all guns. What I want to see is not a game but an authentic sim, AH is so close in many other aspects and looking at the new Alpha its going to get better! I the product as advertised:)). "Welcome to the best Ww2/Ww1 flight experience with the best combat simulator". Says so right on the box:))
Spin
-
Oh and ro clarify I am fairly proficient at killing buffs when im patient there is alot less risk granted. The only time I get frustrated is when you get the golden BB which is the lethal shot where as my previous suggestions would reduce.
-
Killing bombers is, IMHO, pitifully easy. Bombers are actually one of the worst aircraft to defend a field with. The whole purpose of taking up a large plane like that is to soak up your ammo. The problem is that people see a bomber and they aim at a bomber size target. Aim at the pilot (soon you will have to kill the copilot also). My kill ratio against bombers is probably close to 1500:1 (might be a slight exaggeration), which should not serve as a metric to go by because I prefer killing bombers because of my weak eyesight and old-man hands (shaky).
-
In AW many a night squads would get together and fill up a bunch of buffs and fly for hours bombing and occupying all positions....it was great fun...an experience not focused on here! New players would flock to announcement that a 17 is looking for gunners please join! Alter the dynamics of bombers and people will quit imho wouldnt happen, on the contrary I believe it would enhance the experience of flying buffs.
These days there are hardly enough players in the arena most of the time to get you a single gunner, not speaking of a full compliment of gunners.
Scrambling a set for a big furball base defence is annoying, base defenders flying through a box as though it was an airborn flak panzer. Buffs biggest defence is altitude second fighter support and third are his guns.
And that's exactly how it is in AH as well. Altitude, escorts, guns - in this order. Unless something has dramatically changed in the last 2 weeks, bombers upping to defend a base are a rarity. And mostly a product of desperation, or a much above average bomber pilot having some fun. Which may easily distort the perception, as the average buff pilot would simply die without effect.
Having a convergence of all guns to one players firing point is also annoying. Put a wall of lead up not a lethal condenced pointof fire by all guns.
Not that all guns converge at a fixed point 500yds away. For long range shots (which is what folk complain about the most), the individual guns are shooting all over the place if you add up convergence issue and dispersion.
Against a well planned attack (which is mostly just a matter of choice on the fighter pilots side, and less one of skill level), bombers are mostly helpless at 20k or lower. Only above that the fighter pilots skill is going to be tested, the more the higher it goes.
It's mostly just the choice of most fighter pilots not to spend additional 1-5 minutes to get into position.
The last 3 years I spent the majority of my AH gametime flying bombers. Most fighters trying to intercept me invariably tried to do so from the dead 6 position. In most cases they could have easily opted for something different, they never did. They tried to slug it out, hoping for maybe one kill before they go down. Each time I saw someone continue to climb and overtaking me I knew I was in DEEP trouble.
-
I guess what I dont understand is the complaint of buffs defending a base. It's a quick fix just pork the ords....
If an attacking team leaves the ords up it has no excuse :neener:
B-17's are incredible at defending a base in the right hands. Of course it is gaming the game. It is also great gun practice :salute
-
The simplistic example would be shooting from dead six with no closure at 300mph exactly 1500 yards away. Suppose the bullet can travel 1500 yards then vanishes.
If bullets travel a fixed absoloute distance then this gives a big advatage to the bomber. If they travel a fixed time, the bomber still has a little advantage, but not that significant.
Relative to each other (fighter - bomber) the bullets come out at the same speed and need to cover 1500 yards. The problem looks symmetric. However! because the bullet max flight distance is relative to the ground, we have to look at the speeds relative to the ground - the plane's bullet adds the plane 300 mph to its ground speed, while the bomber bullet subtracts 300 mph from its ground speed and is slower relative to the ground. The result is that the fighter bullets covers its 1500 ground yards quicker and is removed from the game, while the bomber bullets still travels - it covered less ground distance, but the same fraction of the relative fighter-bomber 1500 yards as the fighter round did, except that the bomber round is still in the game and continues to travel and hit the fighter.
If on the other hand the bullets are removed from the game after a fixed time (instead of fixed absolute distance) then the fighter and bomber bullets will be removed together and if the bomber bullets can reach the fighter, so can the opposite - almost.
The "almost" comes from the wind resistance. The air is stationary and relative to the air, the forward traveling fighter round is faster (adds 300 mph) and suffers more drag, than the slower backward traveling bomber round. In the fighter--bomber frame of reference, the fighter is shooting upwind and the bomber is shooting down wind, which breaks the symmetry. So, the bomber still gains a little extra reach and hits a bit harder than the fighter. The wind effect exists anyway and adds even more to the advantage of the bomber in the case of "absolute flight distance".
I believe that in the game bullets travel a given ground distance and not a given flight time. This is a bit unfair towards the fighter, but I am sure that there are technical reasons why it is implemented in this way.
-
It's a fixed life time of the bullets. But the difference is do to drag.
Simple case, Muzzle vel is 300 mph.
Both planes are traveling 300 MPH.
Gunner shoots back and his bullet is traveling 0 relative to the ground and hence no drag and hence covers longer distance relative to the target behind him vs shooting stationary.
Fighter shooting forward, his bullet is now traveling 600 mph relative to the ground. Hence his bullet has increased drag and is slowing relative to the bomber.
Also remember drag is a Velocity Squared function. So this is not a minor effect.
HiTech
-
The drag magnifies the effect, but regardless if it's a fixed distance or a fixed amount of time, for that amount of time as the bullet is in flight, the fighter is closing on the bomber's bullets, and the bomber is moving away from the fighter's bullets. That means the bomber still has a substantial range advantage.
Wiley.
-
It's a fixed life time of the bullets. But the difference is do to drag.
Simple case, Muzzle vel is 300 mph.
Both planes are traveling 300 MPH.
Gunner shoots back and his bullet is traveling 0 relative to the ground and hence no drag and hence covers longer distance relative to the target behind him vs shooting stationary.
Fighter shooting forward, his bullet is now traveling 600 mph relative to the ground. Hence his bullet has increased drag and is slowing relative to the bomber.
Also remember drag is a Velocity Squared function. So this is not a minor effect.
HiTech
Thanks. I was always told it was a fixed travel distance. Fixed time makes more sense.
-
The drag magnifies the effect, but regardless if it's a fixed distance or a fixed amount of time, for that amount of time as the bullet is in flight, the fighter is closing on the bomber's bullets, and the bomber is moving away from the fighter's bullets. That means the bomber still has a substantial range advantage.
Wiley.
Nope with out drag, there would be no difference between the fighter or the bomber.
Your forgetting that that when you are using the terms closing and moving away. Also has effected the speed of the bullet .
Say bullets muzzle are 1000 mph. and planes 300 mph.
The bombers bullets are traveling 700 relative to the ground and 1300 for the fighter.
And the bomber is flying away from the bullets of the fighter at 300 mph hence those 1300 mph bullets are closing on him at the original 1000 mph.
And visa verse for the fighter.
HiTech
-
Nope with out drag, there would be no difference between the fighter or the bomber.
Your forgetting that that when you are using the terms closing and moving away. Also has effected the speed of the bullet .
Say bullets muzzle are 1000 mph. and planes 300 mph.
The bombers bullets are traveling 700 relative to the ground and 1300 for the fighter.
And the bomber is flying away from the bullets of the fighter at 300 mph hence those 1300 mph bullets are closing on him at the original 1000 mph.
And visa verse for the fighter.
HiTech
Ugh. Yup. Got it. Thanks for the explanation.
Wiley.
-
Drag Shmag, I want to know what time it is inside bullet #2 relative to the pendulum on the other plane.
-
Oh and ro clarify I am fairly proficient at killing buffs when im patient there is alot less risk granted. The only time I get frustrated is when you get the golden BB which is the lethal shot where as my previous suggestions would reduce.
Last tour,
B17 k/d .43
B24 k/d .32
TU2 k/d .30
Lancs k/d .23
Doesn't look like any buff is all that lethal.
-
Don't those K/D include bomber pilots who were pinged by someone then bail or do something dumb later? (Not every bomber pilot bothers to fly all the way home.)
-
Last tour,
B17 k/d .43
B24 k/d .32
TU2 k/d .30
Lancs k/d .23
Doesn't look like any buff is all that lethal.
nice one Fugi :cheers:
I think most of us who have been around awhile can agree buffs are fine right where they are.
-
Last tour,
B17 k/d .43
B24 k/d .32
TU2 k/d .30
Lancs k/d .23
Doesn't look like any buff is all that lethal.
Multiply by 3. A bomber pilot that does not land is 3 deaths.
Then take into account the huge number of deaths that are due to suicides and bomb&bails.
Then consider that bombers have a large population of noobs that will hold a K/D well below 1 if you put them in a Fighter. A noob in a bomber stands a chance to hurt a veteran player, while a noob in a Fighter stands next to no chance and takes a lot less ammo to kill.
The aove stats say that bombers are equal to fighters in player vs player sent to the tower.
-
My only problem with Buff's lethal blow is flying and shooting from F3. I don't mind the using the F3 view, just not flying or shooting from F3.
-
My only problem with Buff's lethal blow is flying and shooting from F3. I don't mind the using the F3 view, just not flying or shooting from F3.
I agree 100% :old: