Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: FDutchmn on May 19, 2002, 02:58:11 AM
-
Bomber formation is fine with me... but I am wondering if this is going to be applied to all bombers on AH.
B17 - ok
B26 - ok
C47 - ? more drunks?
TBM - ok
Lanc - ok
Mosquito - ? I might make my AI wingman hit the mountain side while flying under radar.
Ar234 - ok
Bf110 - ? this is classified as a fighter but... compared to the Mosquito...
Ju88 - ok
Ki67 - ok
Il2 - ? low level strafing... eek, hope my AI wingman won't scrape the ground
did I forget any other buffs?
I guess it boils down to the difference between carpet bombing and strafing... and for C47s, it would definitely affect field capture criteria.
-
I think this feature only supports the bombers which can do the level bombing.
-
My guess is... Multi-engined, level bombing, bombsite buffs.
-
yep, i think so too.
but i bet single-engine bombers will have it too.
-
me thinks its time to separate Attack aircraft from Bombers... although I am not sure what would happen to some of them...
-
ah, shudda done a re-read of the news...
Here’s how it will work. Certain bombers(but not all bombers) will give you the option to control a box of 4 rather than a single plane.
-
Er, the Mosquito we have is a Fighter Bomber, what the Germans would have thought of as a Heavy Fighter.
Its a fighter.
I would guess that we'll see these with the option:
Ar234B (I'm iffy on this one)
B-17G
B-26B
Boston Mk III
Ju88A-4
Ki-67
Lancaster Mk III
TBM (I'm iffy on this one)
Those are my guesses at least.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Er, the Mosquito we have is a Fighter Bomber, what the Germans would have thought of as a Heavy Fighter.
Its a fighter.
I forget... was the Mosquito considered a fighter sortie or bomber sortie on AH? On AW I vaguely remember it was considered a bomber sortie.
-
Lets not forget the A-20G and the Boston Mk III...
I assume these will most likely have the 4-buff option due to their size and loadout. If we were to get a late war buff, say a B-29, I would think having a 4-buff option might be overkill :)
the a20 wasnt strictly an attack aircraft i hope?
-
no it was a bomber but a 'light attack bomber' but still a bomber.
-
"I forget... was the Mosquito considered a fighter sortie or bomber sortie on AH? On AW I vaguely remember it was considered a bomber sortie."
AW's mossie was originaly an unarmed bomber version.
That was changed in AW2, I believe.
In AH it's a fighter/ attacker, as evidenced by the lack of an F3 view.
-
Originally posted by FDutchmn
Bomber formation is fine with me... but I am wondering if this is going to be applied to all bombers on AH.
I guess it would be limited to those with level bombing sights....
I agree that its time to remove the IL2 M3 from the bomber sector and place it with the Mossi MkIV (and some others that may be coming) in an attack classification.
That would leave formation stuff as
B17, B26, Ju88, Ki67. Possibly the Arado and the TBM. (are we getting a glass nosed Boston?)
I would love the C47 to have formation stuff and the troop requirement lifted for capture (to say 30 per field).
Re the bomb sight stuff....... From what I have read the Norden and the Sperry was set for course and rate to define a ground speed/direction respective to the alt of the targetand air speed of the bomber and then the sight would take over the AC and release the salvo at the correct point. (Planes following the lead plane released their bombs as soon as the bombadier saw stuff falling out the lead bomber.)
Even from pyro's description I am not sure if this is fully mimicked(guess we will find out eventually)
Whats interesting is that we are mimicking the effect of rate adjustment to set a ground speed and then using this to calibrate the sight........
from our present plane set only the B17 and some later B26's would have either the Norden or the Sperry...... but unless the sight is taking over both steerage and release then we are not mimicking it.
My question is what sort of bomb sight procedure was used for Lanc's, Ju88's and Ki67's et al...............
Tilt
-
Good way to throw the perkies you all are saving for B29 by flying 4 ship Ar234 boxes :D If you lose 1 ok you lose some perks but if you lose all 4 well thats already some more ammount of perkies.... ;)
Personally I think Ar234 will be excluded from this concept....
-
Ok, I went offline and saw that the Mossie and the Bf110 only has the Fighter sortie and Attack sortie options. So these are not classified as a bomber in AH.
Il2 has the bomber sortie and the attack sortie options.
-
Ruh roh... I forgot about the B20 and the Boston MkII... but... what about the D3A1 Vals?? Classified as a Carrier-borne Bomber.
nahhh i dont think i need to worry about this one... :)
-
GUYSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Re-read the post about bombers Pyro made.
Certain bombers (BUT NOT ALL BOMBERS) will give you the option to control a box of 4 rather than a single plane.
Please try to use that not so common sense and draw the proper conclusions. If it sounds stupid to have a formation of C-47s....your right....it is stupid. So the real question is why do you expect to see it? I don't.
Hans.
-
Originally posted by LtHans
If it sounds stupid to have a formation of C-47s....your right....it is stupid.
now, now, is it stupid really? nahhh. Formation of a C47 isn't a bad idea either :)
-
4 ship C47 box -> good way to ressuply HQ after some stupid dweebs in 4ship bxes of 30k Lancasters carpetbomb our HQ :D
But really I don't think there will be boxed c47s
-
I think the 4-bomber option will be limited to certain loadouts too. For example, I dont think it will be possible to use ju88s with torpedoes as 4-bombers. Which is fine.
After all, the 4-bomber option is something added primerely to remedy the laser guided bombs-problem.
-
I know I speak for HTC saying we have read this thread, and your answer is not going to happen till post 1.10 MA release version 3 or something where you draw your own conclusions in conjunction with the initial "News" release.
Carry on.
-
Filmed a guy tonight doing something I hope will not be possible in 1.10. I upped in response to a counter at a field. I see one of those hi B17s and begin to grab alt. Noticed a strange thing, the bomber wasnt hitting anything but aaa. I look around for some other planes, perhaps more on the deck - nobody else around.
I dawns on me what the dweeb is up to and I just go land and watch him. He proceeds to de-ack the field then decides to bring his B17 in over the field in low passes while firing his gunners. Unfortunately for him though he was a very poor aim and got killed by the aaa he forgot to kill on one of his subsequent gun passes :)
But it got me to thinking though, imagine that dweeb (and maybe his squad with him - he does belong to one) act with a box of 4 buffs? I am sure HTC has built in some safeguards, but that is one to watch for.
-
Turbot,
I would guess that four Lancs will be pretty effective at deacking a field, but though saturation blast damage rather than pinpoint accuracy.
AA positions are very fragile.
-
4 buffs at low level deacking a field?
You would think at least one buff would hit an object such as tower or hangar.
If it is perked, And i'm thinking it will be, maybe a few points per bomber, maybe 5 or so. I dont think people would waste them on deacking a field at 50 feet.
I beleive these will be among the list.
Ar234
B17
B26
Boston
Ju88
Ki67
Lancaster
C47
The groups should also have other commands like line abreast/astern etc.
-
I'd be very surprised if formations are perked. Very surprised.
With the changes to bomb accuracy a single bomber would be pretty weak, almost useless as an attack platform. Perking the formations, the tool that will make bombers usable, would make bombers pretty much useless.
-
bomberformations perked? are you serious? naaaah you cant be :) Guys lets just wait 2 weeks and see how the concept works and then we shall make conclusions. Im affraid that talking a lot about something we know little about is waste of resources manpower and time :D
-
Originally posted by MadBirdCZ
Im affraid that talking a lot about something we know little about is waste of resources manpower and time :D
Thats what this board is here for right?