Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Wanker on May 08, 2002, 10:21:30 AM
-
After spending over two hours last night to earn one lousy bomber perk point, I'm beginning to wonder if it's worthwhile to even attempt to buff in the MA anymore.
It takes 60 bomber perks to get to fly the lowest perked bomber, the AR-234. I currently have 9.62 bomber perks. I've been buffing for over 6 years in WB and AH combined, so while I'm not the best buffer by far, I at least know my way around them and am fairly competent. But when you consider the amount of time an average bomber sortie takes compared to a fighter sortie, accruing bomber perks take a much longer time compared to fighter perks.
And when you consider that a buff is easy meat for all but the most inexperienced of fighter pilots, once a buff pilot encounters an enemy fighter, he/she has about an 80% chance of dying shortly thereafter.
HTC, IMO, caved in to the "Anti-buff" crowd like Lazs and his ilk by moving the strat targets 40 miles behind the front lines, and changing the configuration of the airfields so that buffers have to spend an inordinate amount of time over a field, increasing the exposure time for buffers.
Fine. I can live with that. But at the very least, I would like to ask HTC to bump up the ENY values for all buffs to something more equitable, that would allow the buffers to accrue points at relatively the same rate at which fighter points accrue. Either that or how about reducing the AR234's perk value to 20, or something more fair. At the rate I'm going, it'll take me another 6 months to get 60 bomber perks. If I were to go for just fighter perks in that same time, I know I could get three times that many points in the same amount of time.
How about throwing the bomber fans a bone or two?
-
Bomber perkies are easy to get, especially if you shoot down an aircraft. Any sortie in a bomber where you shoot down a couple and bomb at least something should get you 5-6 perkies. If you take up a TBM with bombs and rockets, getting 3 or 4 perkies should be easy without shooting anything down.
Unless it's part of a mission or some large organized effort, I don't take the 40-50 minutes to get to 20K. Why bother when a hanger pops in 15 minutes? Just grab a B26 or a Ki-67 and climb out of ack range.
Tour 27 I had 103 kills in bombers and got killed 47 times.
-
If really want perk points for 234, grab a goon. I think you get 12.5 perks for successfully dropping & then landing troops. 5 trips of that & you have the perks.
-
Resupplying fields also gets you a bunch o perkies. When bombing try to get multiple targets with 1 bomb, that is a 4k bomb will get you a bunch of city buildings and some perks.
-
Thanks for the tips, guys. How many perkies for dropping re-supply for a field?
I don't like the idea of having to use a C-47 to get all my buff perkies. Why can't I get 12 perkies for spending 90 mins on a long range Lanc mission to bomb a country's infratructure? Isn't that helping the war effort as much as dropping troops? And considering how much time you spend in enemy airspace when on one of those missions, you'd think the perk awards would be higher.
How about an increase perk award for time spent in enemy airspace, or the length of the flight? Seems to me that the award should be in alignment with the amount of exposure to hostile airspace.
-
you cant be giving perks out just for flying in enemy air-space. if that were the case people would just grab a tbm or somethin and go fly around untill they had enough perks to do something.
i like the bomber perk system as it is
-
you can just not in a b17 or lanc. up a ju88 and bomb something.
HT didnt cave into anything. Where was hq prior to the strat?or the factories? they werent frontline. Buffs are less likely to live now because of all the fighters. The current fronts are small and it makes tactical fluffing tough.
You need to kill as much stuff as possible per bomb. Killing 3 fhs in a lanc aint gonna earn many perks. Thats a good thing. It encourages perk farmers to go after true strat targets. If you up within 25 miles of your bomb target chances are you will get killed anyway. Buffing in every game takes patience. I think its boring as you obviously do. Its not very hard either. Every give a thought to the 28k lanc that has flown over 300 miles to get shot down before he drops? :)
Try the ki67 its fast and with the 20m tail gun you are more likely to get a kill then in any other. I have over 1000 buff perks. I would gladly give them all to you. I fly buffs no more then 3 hours per tour but usually get 2 or 3 field captures. Try droping on the twns you will kill more stuff that way.
-
you cant be giving perks out just for flying in enemy air-space. if that were the case people would just grab a tbm or somethin and go fly around untill they had enough perks to do something.
That's not what I meant, pimpjoe. I don't think anyone should get perkies for simply flying into enemy airspace. But I do think that if I took a JU-88 40 miles behind enemy lines, hit a bunch of strat targets and managed to rtb safely, that I should be awarded more points than for flying 5 miles in a C47, dropping resupply at a friendly base then then going back home.
. I have over 1000 buff perks. I would gladly give them all to you.
And I would gladly accept them. I have no pride! :D
-
you can earn up to about 6 perks for flying resupply. The number of perks is based on how many damaged objects u supply.
SKurj
-
And I would gladly accept them. I have no pride!
That's absolutely true! You should have seen banana's behavior at the Con last year:eek: Thankfully, the nightmares have finally tapered off and I no longer hear the voices that used to...what? Oh yeah, okay. The little voice told me to shut up and get to the point. I agree that bomber perks are too hard to earn by bombing, or that the Ar234 is too expensive. As for the strat target issue, I think that implementation of the bomber enhancements HiTech has eluded to should make their effectiveness against strat targets much higher, as well as their survivability. At the same time, the addition of dispersion will make them less of a direct threat to bases (though not the towns at bases).
-
Model accurate bombsights, then up the OBJ value to 100 or something... atleast the perk points will be earned then.
-SW
-
yeah, what wulfe said. Get rid of one sight fits all altitude/speed laser sights. ;)
-
I would love a bombsight that accurately (As much as possible) models the real thing. Anything that adds realism to the game is a huge plus in my opinion.
Although, I must admit, I fear the adjustments that would be needed on a real bombsight, while trying to fend off enemy interceptors. If and when such a bombsight is implimented, I think you will see many more Bombers taking gunners up with them on their missions. I know I'd be one of them.
I'm all for it!
-
Just adding the WB style "green light" that requires some seconds of straight and level flight for the bomb sight to stabilize would help. At least it would make the "Jink-n-Plink" a bit more difficult.
I'd also like to see more weather to make buffing less of a sure thing.
And require some kind of navigation -- without the NAVSTAR "You Are Here" GPS map.
And maybe add engine management for buff drivers. They have plenty of time and tend to be the anal engineering type anyway.
OTOH, I am not in favor of reducing buffing to carpet bombing for strat points. I think we play a multiplayer sim to directly affect other players. If I am not going to evoke a "WTG!", or "DAMNIT!", in some corner of the planet, I'm not going to bother.
But, I digress....
-
Originally posted by AKSWulfe
Model accurate bombsights, then up the OBJ value to 100 or something... atleast the perk points will be earned then.
-SW
Yep yep
fluff drivers have already been given too many bones
-
Yes yes and please DONT PAINT anymore engine performance gages into the art. Make them functional gages. Thanks
MuadDib of Dune
-
I seem to get plenty of buff percs by upping a goon and resupplying a field then landing. The last sortie I did this I received 4.00 percs.
Kuben
-
The reason WB can make the accuracy gauge in bomber sights work is that WB buffs have Otto, the fearsome automatic gunner.
I don't think this would work well in AH because AH buff drivers need to 1. Fly plane, 2. Man the turrets, and 3. Drop bombs. If they cannot jump between bomb sights and turrets, it'll be a slaughterhouse.
I expect most of the people who cheer that are fighter pilots.
-
A C47 is not a buff. Sorry, it's not.
Can anyone out there give me one good reason to not award more buff perkies to someone who goes deep into enemy territory to bomb strat targets. I'm not talking about the guys who take a buff 5 miles to pork the FH's.
Give me one good reason and I'll shut up.
And "Just to piss you off, banana" doesn't count! ;)
Thanks!
-
chairboy they have to do that now. Only except fer hitting the bomb release button real quick it may force them to stay in guns until the threat is eliminated.
Most folks kill fluffs ez enough while the fluffer in his bomb site anyway.
Fluffers have f3 view, all the norton would do is make them while in the bombsite actually line up a bit longer. If they hit f3 and see nme fighters nearby well then that wouldnt be a good time to try to aim the bomb drop.
We dont need otto. I fly fighters and get atleast 2 join requests a day while flying. It shouldn't be to hard to pick up a gunner.
Lets get to make fluffing some what of a challenge. Right now by far its the silliest aspect of AH.
Well night and windlayers would be tied fer 1st fluffing would be a real close 3rd.
-
Hi banana
Just try upping a Lancaster or Ju88 for your sorties. Both accumulate perk points very easily; you can often get 3-7 perk points in a single Lancaster sortie. Although I don't fly buffs as much as I used to, I still enjoy taking one up... perhaps when you're feeling lazy or something nice for a change! :)
Regards
-
Bombers are already overmodeled. You want HTC to artificially inflate their importance even more? If you wanna BUFF and live you need to get large formations with lots of escorts. All the tools to do this are in the game, it's up to the BUFF advocates to make it happen instead of just griping about it.
-
No, he's right.
There is very little motivation to fly a buff now, or need for all that matters. Its faster to grab a heavy 38 or P-47 and go bomb something. Its also much more rewarding perkwise. Buffs ARE easier because of the laserguided Norden though.
IMO, if the buffs got more perks per target hit (say, if a buff kills 1 hangar he should get 5 perks for it). Objects in the game should take more K to destroy. A single fighter shouldnt be able to bring down a hangar on his own.. fuel tanks, ammo, barracks, radar, yes.. but not hangars. Make each hangar eat 4k of damage that way only a buff can single-handedly bring it down... AND it will also prevent a SINGLE buff from plastering an entire small base on its own (a lanc with full load can close a small field on his own! :( )
BUT buffs should also give more perks for shooting THEM down. Each fighter should get at least 2 perks for every buff you shoot. Make it balanced, make buffs be important to shoot down and important to fly.
-
In WW2 dive bombing was much more effective than level bombing in destroying point targets (e.g. hangars, gun emplacements, command and control facilities). No contest. Level bombers were useful mainly for destroying large industrial complexes and urban centers. In an arena like ours, populated with point targets which don't require the long range of a BUFF, dive bombers and fighter-bombers SHOULD be more effective than level bombers. Especially considering their quicker response time and vastly reduced escort requirements.
-
Originally posted by funkedup
Level bombers were useful mainly for destroying large industrial complexes and urban centers.
Which makes me wonder... why then can anything with a gun larger than a .303 waste a town?? Just so the fighters can effect a capture easier??? :confused:
-
Alpo there is plenty of gun cam footage of Thunderbolts and the like blowing the crap out of small towns in Europe. Brick and wood did not going to slow down .50 cal very much.
-
Oh I don't doubt that a fighter could shoot the crap out of a building or two. I'm just wondering (with all the anti-buff dialog going on), is super easy town killing just a "gamey" concession for the fighters :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by banana
After spending over two hours last night to earn one lousy bomber perk point, I'm beginning to wonder if it's worthwhile to even attempt to buff in the MA anymore.
It's not. Stop. Now.
-
banana
If ya want to get your bomber perkies up quick, just take a B17 up with 25-50% gas. Get about 27-30k in a safe area and then head to a target. Most likely you'll get at least a couple goobs to saddle up on your six, you waste'em with ease and proceed to target, you've already got about 5 perks too. Use the 500lbs bomb loadout and pop the ammo/fuel/barracks/radar and towns... more perks. If ya die..oh well, if not... more perks. It's time consuming but after 10 runs you'll have plenty of perks. As long as you don't get EXTREMELY stupid in your AR-234, your buff perkies will keep climbing.
-
In no particular order (bearing in mind I'm primarily abomber pilot)...
1. Allowing only 1 gunner aboard just isnt good enough, the ability to have 2 (or more,if appropriate) would be good both to allow defence against attacks from more than one direction, and also just in case the volunteer gunner you've picked up seems to come from the planet Zog where looking for and shooting at enemy fighters isnt a required attribute of bomber gunners (happens now and then). If you get one of those aboard, ypu're better off having no gunner aboard at all, but at least if there were 2 slots you'd increase your chances of having 1 competent gunner aboard.
2. Otto in WB has hardly been fearsome, AND it is fully CM-adjustable. Personally, I'd be glad to see Otto in AH, even if his accuracy is deliberately set low, because when solo I could fly evasives knowing that my attacker has SOME chance of getting hit by defensive fire. As is, I can pilot or gun - and whilst I can throw the plane about somewhat from gunner position, I cant fly proper evasives, just turn left and right. And I easily lose all sense of which way the plane is pointing from the gunner position. If in the pilots seat, I fly a pattern, as did real pilots, which puts me back on course every now and then (eg: down and left, up and right, own and right, up and left - overall, you stay on track for target. Try doing THAT from gunner positions)
3. Effectiveness of MGS seems overmodelled to me, at least in the MA, and the bomber toughness generally undermodelled (scratch that - MOST planes are undermodelled for toughness, so far as I can tell, at least if the MA settings are anything to go by - which I do not expect them to be, being more interested in more "serious" flying).
4. One of the biggest probems for a person flying a bomber solo is not being able to scan the airspace around you effectively enough. If you've a good gunner aboard, that helps tremendously (conversely, if the gunner is of the "just messing about" variety, you might a well rtb, bail out or auger), but a sizable fraction of the times I've been killed in a bomber, I simply have not seen my attacker at all. In a fighter that may be realistic, in a bomber it is not. I'd vote for having Otto in Ah in an instant even if he were never allowed to fire a shot, just so he could tell me if he can see anything nearby so I have a chance to jump to a gun to defend myself.
5. When I've spotted fighters coming, I've nearly always been able to make a fight of it, and have often killed 2-3 fighters before getting knocked out of the sky myself - drop that to 1-2 fighters when flying anything other than a 4-engined bomber. This I do by making use of the ability to bank and turn the bomber from gunner position. In a Ju88, B26 or Ki67, the extent to which one can do this may be credible, but I have some doubts as to whether being able to do this QUITE so hard in a B17 or Lancaster is realistic.
6. I'm able to kill attacking fighters that readily because they almost always attack from behind, which is just plain stupid. That way makes their closing speed lower, giving me plenty of time to draw a bead on them. It makes their angular velocity low, making it easier to hit them, even a long way out. Learn to make HO (head-on) attacks against bombers, folks!
The best attack Ive seen against me thus far was an F6F which, judging by what I saw from a Lanc tailgun, was approaching from underneath and zoomclimbed to attack my belly - but then carried on to complete a halfloop right in front of my tail guns, rather than turning and coming ack for a second pass from where I couldnt shoot.
7. I suspect the lamentably poor standard of attacks against bombers has a lot to do with why they aren't set to survive as much damage as they would in real life. I'd rather have tougher bombers more or less forcing people to learn to attack properly. (an attack from dead ahead means a greater closing speed, means more punch behind your guns guys, putting it in simple terms). What is ironic is that against fighters, the situation is reversed - far too many HOing enemy fighters when they should be trying to get onto their 6. In both cases, using the wrong kind of attack simply makes you more vulnerable to enemy fire.
8. I want bombing accuracy to get worse the higher the altitude over target that drop is made from. I'd also like to see better modeling of bomb sights (including at least two types; gyro-stabilised vector sights and tachometric, with a choise of which to use in appropriate planes). And more clouds!
9. And MUCH lower icon ranges at night! As for fighter types, give them an incentive to fly prper night-fighter types in the MA by allowing such types (only) to use airborne intercept radar. Heck, even failing a simulation of that, make it so that only night-fighters and people on the ground can see dots on the GPS map. Thatd work.
10. JABOing needs to be decreased in effectiveness and/or tons-on-target implemented. At the moment, those village-sized gatherings of buildings are representing towns and cities. Strategically, their importance is that of large towns and huge cities. Looked at that way, it is utterly ludicrous that a few fighters armed with nothing more than .5cal bullets and 20mm cannon can level one in minutes.
However, if the effects of tons-on-target area is included in the scheme of things, then those village-sized groups could have AN effect that JABOs can happily go for whilst the bombers do ther tons-on-target area thing and handle the rest, keeping both buffers and fighter pilots happy.
In short, you have to look at the overall picture when considering this, guys; is a village-sized group of buildings standing is for a village or a city> Consider that when thinking about what you mean by "realism" here, and say how you're thinking about it, else we're all talking at cross-purposes.
11. Radar needs to be seriously looked at.
- should we be able to see anything at all outside of the range of our own countries radar?
- should dots EVER be visible on radar once airbore (possble exception: nightfighters)?
12. GPS needs to be looked at
- ability for CM's to turn GPS OFF for scenario games
- addition of some kind of dot command (usable only by defined plane types?) which will give a somewhat inaccurate position fix after a certain delay (the degree of innacuracy and teh delay being variable within limits set by CMs)
- addition of some radio nav aids? Suggestions: ability for CMs to set either a planes home base as a beacon, or defined sites as having a beacon, and for pilots to be able to get a fix on the bearing to their home field or such beacon sites as the CMs define. Possible ability to turn on range from beacon reports (also somewhat inaccurate_
The home base beacon idea would mean that everyone would always know which direction to fly to return to the field they took off from. The other suggestions would allow simulation of most forms of radio navigation/bombing aids used in WW2 (apart from air-to-ground radar used in some bombers very late in the war). Modelling ECM could be more difficult (one step at a time!), but for scenario games, CM's could fake it by messing with the beacons.
Of course, people taking the trouble to know the performance of their planes, acquire accurate paper maps and accurate timepieces would benefit by being able to navigate reasonably well without radio navaids at all, and in sme circumstances,more accurately than with radio avaids - as in real life. But NO-ONE need fear becoming entirely lost with tese ideas in place, unless the CMs set things extremely tough with no GPS and no navaids at all, in which ase you'd best prepare by learing how to navigate! :-)))
Esme (happy to find her way to target through the darkest, cloudiest nights with or without radio navaids)
PS. I have flown solo strat raids in the MA several times in my short time in AH thus far. Theyre doable, but take a ong time, and certainly arent adequately ewarded by perk points. Conversely, IMO MOST fighters should require a certain number of perk points to fly, even if only one to a handful. Anything that thins the herds of P51s late-model Spits, Laggs and N1K's is A Good Thing IMO. But then... I only fly in the MA for amusement. I do my serious flying elsewhere, and I wouldnt want to ruin the fun of those who enjoy MA flying just so my particular tastes are catered for there. Can't unerstand anyone taking the MA very seriously, to be honest... :-}
-
posted by esme Can't unerstand anyone taking the MA very seriously, to be honest... :-}
i agree with that totaly i only use the MA for furballing only.
i like alot of your points on bombing/navigation esme. i think bomber pilots should have the most important and most difficult job to do (meaning nav to target plane managment and bombing)
although i am not a very good bomber pilot (but getting better) i do take this part of the game more seriously that the other parts(fighters & gv's) i have a bomber fetish i guess. as far as making it real as possible not using clipboard going to another target if enemy has an established possion at main target and sometimes just turning around and heading home if too much enemy activity in area.
this is a typical bombing mission for me sit in the tower look at the map and choose a route and a target set my ord and fuel jot down headings and land marks usually vh's and strat targets and ports always pick a close secondary target in case i run into trouble i always take off to the freindly side of the target get to 5k and do a 180 back to the feild by this time i should be at 7.5k click on my stopwatch set speed and direction head NE for 5min theres the port should be at 11-12K my targrt is NW of the port about 1 sector so i turn due W for 8 min should be at 17-18k now iam SE of target about 1/2 sector away depending on the time of day and pos. of the sun i turn to target lets say its 4pm so i turn N and fly adjacent to target(if it were 9am i would cut my 8min w leg to 5min and come in from the E) when i vis the target to the E of me as soon as i can i turn to target and dive to 15k i want to get over the target as quick as possible if the target is an airfeild if not i stay at 17-18k and proceed to target depending on what bomber i fly (ju88,b26&ki67) i toggle all bombs 4 at a time (except with the ki67 its all bombs in one drop ) i usually keep a 3 pass rule for my self (somtimes i break it) after 3rd pass i head home hopefully in one peice.
i know this is a very simple procedure but. this is not an exact science sometimes i mis caculate time and distance an get in a real mess. but allmost aways works for me assuming you dont have to much enemy to deal with or flying with some others with you. oh yes most important if i dont have a gunner along with me do a gun check about every 2 min:D
-
banana
Killing fuel, ammo and barracks will earn you perk points. One fuel will earn you the same as one hanger and you use one bomb as opposed to five. Its not fair but its there. I have no problem getting four to six points on each run if I live.
ET
-
"HTC, IMO, caved in to the "Anti-buff" crowd like Lazs and his ilk by moving the strat targets 40 miles behind the front lines, "
it's all so confusing to me... On the one hand I have oft been accused of contributing nothing to the game except tearing down peoples work and on the other hand I have been blamed for practically singlehandely changing just about every aspect of gameplay that happens to piss someone off at any particular moment.
lazs
-
Hmm didn't see that quote that Lazs is replying to until now...
banana, do you honestly believe it was the anti-buff crowd that requested major country resource centers to be placed in the rear areas......... or could it possibly be the realism crowd..... or perhaps people, and HTC, thought it would make more sense that a country would build it's industrial infrastructure behind it's defenses?
I mean, really, I don't think Lazs even said anything about those targets... all he cares about are fighter hangars.
-SW
-
banana:
You are repeatedly misspelling fluffing, fluffs etc... Are you purposely trying to be offensive?
Hooligan
-
I agree that its relatively pointless to Buff - but if perkies are what youre looking for, try bombing fuel, ammo, and AAA positions instead of hangers - much better perk scores.