Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: LePaul on September 20, 2001, 10:06:00 AM
-
I enjoy reading what you guys are posting and discussing, and I'll grant you that there are some issues that need looking into with the buffs. For example,the ability to shoot thru its own structure (B-17) and also cruise on through to very high alts that you guys have conflicting data on.
But since the large majority of people in Aces are flying fighters, it strikes me more as a "pig pile"/"witch hunt" of those who fly the bombers. Good grief, you guys want oodles of restrictions on the bombers, and people like Laz want them out all together because they disrupt his little furballs. Get real!
I am simply fascintated at some of what is people suggested, or downright demanded by some. Weaken the guns, weaken the engines, make the bombs inaccurate, make them easier to shoot down, make them take less damage...blah blah blah.
Can you imagine the flamefest that would happen if someone made such suggetions to a fighter in Aces High? Oh, of course not, since most of you fly fighters :)
The only instances I've seen of fighters being moaned over is the beloved N1K. Sure we see an occasional blurb here or there on the Spit9 and La7's performance being a little too good to be true, but that's it.
But geesh, God forbid a Buff blast you out of the sky or bomb your bases. Hey, with the attitudes I've been reading, clearly such instances need to be remedied because it certain wasnt due to good shooting or good aim in the Buffs, right?
Heck, the Lancaster has a big bullseye painted on it for you guys, what more do you want :D
HTC: The B-17 needs some looking at in regards to shooting thru itself to shoot down these guys. And perhaps the hi alt performance is too good to be true. I seldom fly higher than 22k because by time I get to the base, its already ours :) Plus I prefer the Lancaster's loadout to the B17.
The Lancaster nose-turrent still has an issue with no icon showing, but the other turrents seem fine.
[ 09-20-2001: Message edited by: LePaul ]
-
I agree on what you say LePaul, although I still do think the high alt performace should be toned down, a B17 shouldn't outmanuver a P51, and especially not a TA152 at 35k, it shouldn't outmanuver it anywhere.
The guns should remain as they are due to the lack of players flying bombers.
There is alot of buff batching going around, I am one of the people who do it but only when it comes to that high alt stuff. There are way too few dedicated buff pilots in AH and there has got to be a reason for it, HTC should make it more rewarding to fly buffs, more perks etc.
One very very good friend of mine is a dedicated buff pilot, wich is allso why he stopped flying AH for a while due to buff batching from other players, and maybe some other issues with them.
People who say Buffs should be taken out of AH are just plain Stu..... .
If they are taken out the game looses much of it's fun and more then just buff pilots would leave aswell.
-
I agree completely with the points you've made.
Its pretty silly the personal attacks the bomber guys have to endure when this is disucssed.
Flying Knight last night, I was amused to see all the requests for Lancs/bombers at this and that location. First they don't want us, then they do :)
-
I agree with most of it. I would like the shoot-thru-structure and the "all guns point to same spot as gunner" and the high alt performance bs be fixed.
I dont want to see buffs become easy targets, that would screw their playability. I would suggest making them TWICE as tough to shoot down, but only IF the 3 points mentioned above are taken care of. A buff should not be able to be a 360 degree P-47 hitpower at convergence at any range -like firepower crate.
I said it a long time ago, make the other gun position fire at a random point in a 10 degree cone from the point the human gunner is aiming at. That would simulate several gunners trying to shoot at the same con, NOT firing at the exact same spot (which is the turbolaser effect!!). It would also give the buffs a MUCH higher chance of scoring a hit on attacking cons, but those hits would come from the gunner position that hit them (2X.50 max), not all the guns that could bear.
-
I fly both fighters and bombers and my veiw is the mere fact that we KNOW the buff guns are slightly more powerfull than they were to help the single bomber flyer is thw whole problem.
for example a bomber is at 30k and a fighter climbs to defend the base he wants to use for next few sorties.as the fighter nears 30k he finds it increasingly difficult to catch the bomber.it outmanouvers him quite easily and the fighter pilot soon becomes annoyed at the time it takes and impatiently attacks getting shot down by a burst from the gunners.I cant tell you how many times ive done this.If after 2 or 3 passes with 20mm i have hit a bomber loads but notshot it down i usually get annoyed :) and go in blasting and get killed.
Now as soon as the fighter pilot (me included) gets shot down the immediate thought is usually 'those damn guns are a joke'.
Now as a bomber pilot and a fan of the aircraft and the way they were used I personally would like to have no extra gunnery help.I would prefer that my 1000lbers cause widespread damage(LIKE REAL BOMBS) and I certainly wouldnt mind less accuracy if a near miss through blast radius does the job.I think those bomber pilots who feel they SHOULD be able to fight 1 v 1 with a fighter are mad BUT I do conceed that if they are too vulnerable in the unrealistic MA they will be less fun.BUT what about in scenarios and CT? where its supposed to be realistic? why do the bombers keep the bonus gunnery?
The answer?
make the bomber guns normal 50cals,that will stop the feeling of being unfairly killed.
ADD to the durability of the bombers,this will prolong fights and make it more likely the buff pilot will get enough normal 50cal hits to down the fighter.(on average it took 22 20mm hits to down a b17 in WW2 according to LW investigation of the b17 wrecks).
I think slightly tougher bombers with normal guns and bomb behaviour with the added blast radius on all bombs would be almost exactly the same for bomber fans and it would stop this anti-improvedgunnery feeling which as you can see i share.
I dont mind playing AH as is with concerns to bombers but i do feel its done wrong.
if you dont agree try bombing with B172 (the game) and you'll see CLEARLY that a successful drop which requires a fair smidgen of skill AND luck is much more rewarding than the AH thing of knowing, if we get to the target we dont miss.This pushes the whole emphasis of bombing in AH to the journey 'TO TARGET' rather than whether your good enough to actually HIT something.Dont you see the problem?
-
Buffs ruin the game as they are right now.
We "furballers" as some label us, relish the fight, the air combat, seeing if you can come out unscathed or maybe a little banged up but back just the same. It matters not to us how many fields we or the enemy has but simply the fight.
"Strat" fighters like to take out fields using jabo tactics. They have to come in heavy, fight thier way thru, then try to get out safely. This takes much skill & practice.
They also are more inclined to do defensive fighter sweeps because field status is their bread & butter, but the fight is still prime.
"Buffs" ruin these options for us. Sometimes as many as 30 or 40 fighters may be in an area, both furballers & strat guys doing thier thing. Along comes a buff, 1 guy and shuts down the hangars. Yes, fighters could go for them, but most of us don't bother anymore. Why should we? Climb to 30k plus where they are currently outperforming high alt fighters? Nope.
One of the best suggestions I've seen in a long time was virtual bomber wingmen. Don't know about the codeing difficulties but it seems that if the bomber gun range was toned back to more "realistic" (I hate using that word) settings and a bomber pilot could count on wingmen, then it would be more of a fight for the fighters. We could setup an attack properly instead of trying to beat guns that shouldn't be hittin' you in the first place.
IMHO of course.
-
Good points, Tac. The times I've flown fighters and chased after a B17, I've always managed to loose a wing tip or some other essential part (well, arent they all?) due to the B-17 shooting thru its wing and hitting me.
I haven't flown the B17 a lot, as I prefer the Lanc. The Lanc isn't a tight turner and I usually require a lot of turning room to go from bomb run # 1 to run # 2. Then again, level, the Lancaster is a lot faster than the B17 so its easier to cut throttles, turn, and get back on course.
But you are right, the B-17s are BattleStars.
I know the B-17 is the biggest target of the whines, but are there issues with the Lancaster? From my Lanc, I always seem to loose the turrents fast to damage, or out of ammo quick. Further, its amazing how if I loose my tail gunner, I simultaneously get the pilot wounded crap. (Never mind the pilot of 75 feet away!).
How about the Ju88 and the TBM? Any issues there? I dont think I've ever downed anyone from the TBM gun positions.
-
Apache,
Nice post, very well thought out.
Now I understand why the "furballers" despise anything that can carry a bomb.
But...
The way the game is setup and designed is to take fields, and whoever eventually owns the most fields, wins and the game is reset.
If we push you out of one field, the fight will resume at another.
And not all the buffs are flying at 30k, I mean I know I'm not flying that high. In most cases I am low so I can get to target faster and support my team. If acks are down, I won't sweat being under 10k. But if they aren't, or its a big furball, I'll generally aim for 15k and know that most of the enemy fighters will not notice me until I've made my first bomb run.
I see your point, do you see mine?
-
I certainly do see your point BD. Good conversation too I might add.
Let me see if I can clarify. In WB, believe it or not, I was part of a very large, dedicated bomber squad. It was one of the oldest squads there and some of the best virtual pilots in the game. We even had a fighter wing. It was led by a guy I think most know, Thunder. It is my opinion HT did bombers better in WB than AH. Why? In WB, if you didn't fly close formation, you were dead meat. If you were by yourself, you were dead meat. If you didn't have fighter escort, you were dead meat. It was really intense seeing fighters come up to you. You knew it was going to be a fight. It was great fun! Isn't that the way it should be?
As it is now, a lone buff can pretty much roam at will. Heck, B17's are even being used as air superiority platforms. Why do you think that is?
Just the other night, one of the rooks was laughing about a 6 kill sortie in a b17. I've seen time after time a bomber take off from a field and the first thing he does is drop his bombs so he can go offensive.
I don't advocate bombers being taken from AH but I also think that catering to a lone buff pilot is silly. Could be why we don't see many bomber squads here.
-
Apache, this is a nice change...a civilized conversation...who would have thought such a thing was possible in this BBS :D
Point by Point....
a) Never flew Warbirds or the other online/pay-to-play online games. Before Aces High, I was big into Falcon 4 and the Novalogic games like MiG 29, F22, etc. In Falcon, it was just hard as hell to find people to fly with/against since they do not have a central server like Aces does. The Novalogic games were great, but the realism wasnt there. And, as Novalogic guys would tell you, look at flight/jet sim sales. ANything with realism/learning required doesnt sell. Make it arcadish and easy and the sales shoot through the roof. I became frustrated with Novalogics F22/MiG29 as guys would takeoff, fire all 6 missiles at once and then proceed to auger in and repeat the process again. These same people would giggle in glee as they shot me down, nevermind the fact I out manuevered/jinked 5 outta 6 of those blasted things. But, again, one of the employees told me [under his breath] that most of the online players didnt know how to land. Just pull up, steer, and shoot.
b) I tend to be a lone buff in Aces High too, but I also work with others, or squadmates, to approach the target in a smart way. If I know Skurj is up ahead providing high CAP, I'll proceed in directly, since I know Skurj is a capable pilot and generally downs what he encounters. He's also an assett to me as a forward air controller of sorts, suggesting what targets I down first and telling me whats in the area. Likewise, my squadmates are prowling the surrounding area and if a con eludes their range, the Check Six's start chiming in. So, while I am lone-buffing it, I'm generally part of an attack group. BUT....I have seen what you are talking about. Most maddening is the B26 car bombers of late when a field capture is in progress.
c) Lack of buff squads...well, I know my squad likes a little of everything (416th RCAF) and know of my love of the Buff mission. Frankly, buffs and goons are abused badly in here and the Main Arena. Guys yell, cuss and demand a buff or goon do thy bidding, and I cant even begin to tell you how many times Ive brought either to such location and found that not only am I the only guy there, but 10+ cons are there waiting for me. Its really quite something...and people wonder why guys are hesitant to drive the M3 or C47, knowing those who request them generally (but not always) will not stick around to support them.
Just real quick...I do not think Buffs are a huge problem in the Main Arena. I'm getting knocked out of the skies by newbies and old pros like Tac in a devestately regular manner. I think some of our fighter guys get impatient climbing to hit the buff or make bad choices, like sitting on their 6 and crying foul when they are hammered into little bits. Clearly there are some issues that you and Tac have raised that need to be addressed in the B17. It seems the homework load for HTC is to cure the B17s U2 tendancies and then re-evaluate those incredible M16s and M3s.
-
Interesting thread, and surpsing civil so far. Hope it stays that way.
Before I jump into this head long, I used to be a dedicated buff driver, and one of the best. I also like to think I was one of the hottest gunners (based on how many people told me they'd have left my buff alone if they had known it was me :D )
Buff guns: Once upon a time the buff guns were too weak. Yes, I'm talking mainly about the B-17. Pyro and I went back and forth about the guns for a bit. To make a long story short (too late, I know :D ) IIRC they were "beefed up" after Pyro joined my -17 as a gunner and we were taken down by a kite coming in on a dead 6 attack and that kite took no damage.
The "beef up" wasn't an increase in power as most of the whines claim. It was an increase in maximum effective range. Not maximum range, but maximum effective range. Maybe they toned down how quickly the bullets lose thier energy or something, I don't know.
One of the main reasons was to kind of cushion the effect of netlag. Attacking fighter sees 500yds range, buff sees 800yds range. IMO a decent compromise, but I think they went just a touch too far and the guns need to be dialed back a hair.
Tac's idea of the 10degree cone of fire has some merit to it I think. It would be interesting to see it tried out.
Maneuverability: This has to be a joke. I took a Ta-152 up after a B-17 at 30k awhile back and the buff literally flew circles around me. IIRC the announcement of the Ta152 brought alot of cheering about the end of the invincible 30k+ buffs, but it dinnae happen like that.
Get a guy who flies a buff like it was really flown and I'll give it 60/40 odds in favor of the fighter (50/50 with a Sierra Hotel gunner).
Get a "gamer" who stomps the rudder to dogfight from the gun positions and the fighter has 2 choices: retire or die.
IMO turns made from the gun positions should be limited to 1G at ~20-30degrees of bank instead of the 2 or 3G/60degree they have now. If someone wants to reef thier -17 around, let'em do it from the pilot seat :D
The laser accuracy of the current Norden is laughable. If you make it to your target (and odds are you will) you're going to hit what you aim at unless you totally suck. All you have to do is put the x-hair on the target and hit the button. IIRC HT said at one point he had plans of changing the Norden so it actually takes some skill. He's come through with other innovative changes, so let's give him time to get this one out (and pray it's getting close to the top of the list :D )
-
This alt monkey business needs to be fixed. Make the gunners freeze up or something. make 'em move slowly, and shaking the whole time if you get too high. It's awful cold up there, after all. Fix firing through any part of the plane. The otto gunners (the ones that fire along with you, obviously not true AI gunners) won't fire unless they have clean LOS to the target. If you fire through a part of your aircraft, well, you hit your aircraft! Speaking of the otto gunners have them off a little bit at first, then converging over time. Meaning if the fighter is silly enough to creep up on the low 6 of a B17, for example, and the human is in the tail position, the ball turret would start converging it's aim on where the human is aiming. So the fighter starts with 2 .50 cals on him, but eventually 4 will be on him. (the top turret wouldn't fire in this case, because it's the low 6, and the waist can't cover direct 6.)
Also, unless it's a coding or lag issue, I'd like to see more than one player be able to join a buff. Just have it so they can jump to any position that isn't occupied.
Oh, as for TBMs, usually I die in them, but in a snapshot I killed 2 Zekes before dropping my torp. That was the exception to the rule tho.
-
Buffs spend a lot more time getting to target, and they die more often when engaged by fighters.
You can complain all you want about how deadly and unrealistic the C-202 is as well, but the stats say that it sucks and if you fly it you are probably going to die.
How the heck can anyone complain about the lethality of a plane that has a K/D of less than 1?
From Tour 19:
Model Kills Deaths Kills / Deaths + 1
Ar 234 31 110 0.2793
B-17G 4648 6511 0.7138
B-26B 3304 5270 0.6268
Il-2 1881 3197 0.5882
Ju 88 428 1711 0.2500
Lancaster III 2016 5093 0.3958
TBM-3 533 2937 0.1814
The only smart place to fly a bomber (where your K/D can get a bit closer to 1) is up high.
I just don't get why so many folks think that buff drivers are only here because they like getting shot down. 2 out of 10, to 7 out of 10 engagements, the buff loses.
Lastly, it's the fighter that chooses to engage the bomber.
Fighters are fast, bombers are slow.
If you don't like bombers, then stay away from them, it's a big sky!
eskimo
-
LP.. Yes... if they can't/won't be fixed they may as well remove the buffs so far as a lot of us are concerned... As a fighter only guy I find buffs extremely frustrating. A lone buff is capable of ruining the game for a dozen or 2 fighters... They have WAY to much affect on the game... A single player should not be able to ruin so many other players fun so easily...and how do they do such a thing? Well....
It's partly the fault of the way things are set up and partly the way bombers are modeled.
the fields are set up pretty far apart with all but a few being useless at any one time so far as practical fighter sortie is concerned.... this is bad enough but.. It is coupled with the fact that the bases don't get captured 9 times out of ten... they simply become useless to either side... A lone buff hits the fuel or hangers... the field is closed but not captured... Anyone wishing to find a fite takes of from a far back base and flys over all the useless fields for several sectors and a totally boring game experiance.
It is allso a fault of the buffers attitude and the bomber itself. The attitude part is the attention starved... "look at me, I dropped all the fighter hangers' but the main thing is that they are able to! The accuracy of their bombs is simply wrong. I don't believe that a lone bomber could hit more than one strat target from alt even if he were very lucky. He certainly should not be able to hit a ship.
What's the result? Well.... animosity. Nobody who enjoys a good fite will sit and cap a field so that everyone else can have fun fiting down below... even if he spots a bomber he is faced with an unrealistic and unfun fite that will probly not stop the suicide buff from closing the field to fighters in any case. A waste of time.
If the fields stayed open to fighters till they were closed completely or even if they were a lot easier to capture things would be better. If the accuracy of bombs were not quite so ridiculous things would be better. Till then..
A lot of guys just ignore buffs and hope they don't ruin things too badly or, if they do, that there will be some other place to fite. That don't make for a lot of good feelings whenever a buff flies over.
I think you know all this to be true but are simply pretending that you don't get it.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Nifty:
This alt monkey business needs to be fixed. Make the gunners freeze up or something. make 'em move slowly, and shaking the whole time if you get too high. It's awful cold up there, after all. Fix firing through any part of the plane. The otto gunners (the ones that fire along with you, obviously not true AI gunners) won't fire unless they have clean LOS to the target. If you fire through a part of your aircraft, well, you hit your aircraft! Speaking of the otto gunners have them off a little bit at first, then converging over time. Meaning if the fighter is silly enough to creep up on the low 6 of a B17, for example, and the human is in the tail position, the ball turret would start converging it's aim on where the human is aiming. So the fighter starts with 2 .50 cals on him, but eventually 4 will be on him. (the top turret wouldn't fire in this case, because it's the low 6, and the waist can't cover direct 6.)
Also, unless it's a coding or lag issue, I'd like to see more than one player be able to join a buff. Just have it so they can jump to any position that isn't occupied.
Oh, as for TBMs, usually I die in them, but in a snapshot I killed 2 Zekes before dropping my torp. That was the exception to the rule tho.
I agree with most of what you say, but the gunners benig affected by the temperature and stuff is ridiculous. No matter the temperature, I can assure you that if my life is in danger, I can do amazing things. And with that said, I'm sure many a frozen gunner was able to man their guns.
IF you want environmental factors like that, then I'll insist the fighters have the same demon, in that say the inflight oxygen masks preclude their view or ability to look left/right etc. Ever fly at alt with helmet and mask? I have, its not bad but can be clunky looking around with a hose dangling off your face and such.
Rather, forget the altitude/freezing idea and stick with getting the B17s performance at high altitude cured, as well as its amazing guns.
Further, I like your multiple join idea, much like we have on the CV and fields for gun positions. My only suggestion to add to that is that if the gunner takes the hit/wound, that it not wound the pilot. I cant tell you how many times my tail gun has been knocked out and I get the pilot wounded stuff. (Coincidentally, the pilot wounded/passing out crap ceases the minute you hit the silk. Shouldnt you also be passing out on the ride down?)
Great discussion, keep it up!
-
Originally posted by lazs1:
LP.. Yes... if they can't/won't be fixed they may as well remove the buffs so far as a lot of us are concerned... As a fighter only guy I find buffs extremely frustrating. A lone buff is capable of ruining the game for a dozen or 2 fighters... They have WAY to much affect on the game... A single player should not be able to ruin so many other players fun so easily...and how do they do such a thing? Well....
See, you are stuck with that argument. Sure, one buff and his ordinance can mire a field, but Laz, THATS HOW THE GAME IS! I enjoy a rational discussion with you or anyone, but you continue to act as though this game is a "furball", when by definition, its largely a game of strategy. Otherwise, we wouldn't have bombers or vehicles like the M3, LVT or C-47, would we?
It's partly the fault of the way things are set up and partly the way bombers are modeled.
the fields are set up pretty far apart with all but a few being useless at any one time so far as practical fighter sortie is concerned.... this is bad enough but.. It is coupled with the fact that the bases don't get captured 9 times out of ten... they simply become useless to either side... A lone buff hits the fuel or hangers... the field is closed but not captured... Anyone wishing to find a fite takes of from a far back base and flys over all the useless fields for several sectors and a totally boring game experiance.
The lone buff, for example, the Lancaster, has 14 1,000 pound bombs. At best, he can down 4 hangars (12 bombs) with 2 1ks left. Even on the small bases, he could only knock down, say, all the FHs, but not the BHs or VH. The B-17, largely the evil we have been discussing of late, carries even less, only able to drop 2 hangars. In a porking role, both could hit radar, barracks and fuels, bringing the base down to 25% fuel.
So you see, one buff can not do all that you claim, in downing all the hangars. He can smoke your resources and cripple you, but not entirely wipe you out.
It is allso a fault of the buffers attitude and the bomber itself. The attitude part is the attention starved... "look at me, I dropped all the fighter hangers' but the main thing is that they are able to! The accuracy of their bombs is simply wrong. I don't believe that a lone bomber could hit more than one strat target from alt even if he were very lucky. He certainly should not be able to hit a ship.
You are adding atitude, rather, injecting attitude to back your argument. As a long buff driver a majority of the time, I'm not throwing any such attitude...if I'm bombing, Im bombing for a cause. I certainly cant speak for others.
As for the sights and accuracy, I'll simply remind you guys of the dispersion on the guns in your various fighter aircraft. Tit for tat.
You make it clear, Laz, you have no love of buffs at any level. With that known prejudice, I wont even try to explain beyond that.
What's the result? Well.... animosity. Nobody who enjoys a good fite will sit and cap a field so that everyone else can have fun fiting down below... even if he spots a bomber he is faced with an unrealistic and unfun fite that will probly not stop the suicide buff from closing the field to fighters in any case. A waste of time.
Sigh. You brought a knife to a gun fight :)
You want to play the victim, that's fine.
<shrug>
If the fields stayed open to fighters till they were closed completely or even if they were a lot easier to capture things would be better. If the accuracy of bombs were not quite so ridiculous things would be better. Till then..
Surely ye jest?
If that were the case, you couldnt capture a field. You are smarter than that. You simply want unlimited abilities for fighters to spawn despite their hangars being destroyed.
Let's see, you want buff guns weaker, easier to kill, plus you hate buffs anyways, oh, and you want unlimited fighter spawns even if the fighter hangar is down. What else, Laz? Maybe some invincibility option as you roll down the runway so you arent vulched by enemy fighters? :D Didn't they make a dueling area to appease your wants?
A lot of guys just ignore buffs and hope they don't ruin things too badly or, if they do, that there will be some other place to fite. That don't make for a lot of good feelings whenever a buff flies over.
I think your data is flawed, from what I've read. You are assuming everyone around you agrees with you, and Im not so sure that is the case. We all agree there are some issues to the bombers, but you are to the extremes in how much you despise them.
I think you know all this to be true but are simply pretending that you don't get it.
lazs
Nope, you are wrong again. You assume that what you are saying is an absolute truth and I'll be happy to debate you on it. You allude to others, but they do not seem to share your [narrow-minded] opinion on the role of the buffs.
Basically, you're peeved that this game has a strategic play rolled into it, and God forbid it intrude in your furball style of play. If the game wasnt about capturing bases and resets, I'd agree with you that its a fighter-vs-fighter game. But it isn't, and once again, you despise the bombers because, well, they exist.
-
Don't get what?
Dammit LePaul, how'd ya get one with a bathroom?
There is one in the C47 but we got none in the B17, we just snag some fighter jocks coffee mug and have the GC put them back when we get home.
Glad to hear that Bombers are now also responsible for wrecking the fun of "STRAT" guys who believe all "STRAT" evolves around ground attack planes.
Lesse, "furballin' fiter" guys hate us, "ground poundin' fiter-bomber" guys hate us, Lazs REALLY hates us, who is left?
Look, why not just take the ability to destroy ANYTHING in the arena that is not a fighter out of AH and the 2 bomber pilots left will just be on their way and peace will return to Candyland.
The good arguments pro and con have been going on here for well over a year now.
HTC, any comment??
-
wow heres a shock i agree with what you said there laz concerning the poor cap pilot and the proposiion of an unfun fightt,not the rest of your babling ;), but we should remember that the ju88 and il2 and tbm are certainly not as dangerous as the b17,B26 and lanc.In that situation you describe if it was a ju88 approaching you'd lick your lips :) .To be honest, I dont fear the lancs or B26 quite as much as the b17 as i still cant find a blind spot on a b17 with even an average pilot in control of it.
The b17 with its mass of perfectly converging guns is just too deadly.Having said that i have shot a lot down in my time and like i said i could live with them how they are for MA.In CT it is a major problem for me though as its always in my head that the b17s werent as deadly as the ones we have to contend with.
I think the answer may even be to make more of the hits cause SEPERATE turret damage.So that if you hit those guns they are knocked out and cannot fire.I rarely lose gunners myself even though im sure the turret has been hit.just how many seperate 'hit' areas are there on a b17?
eg tail,fuselage,innerwing, engines, outer wing,fuel tanks,turrets etc?
sunchaser: calm man, i fly fighter, ground attack, bombers and goons. whats all this grouping of buffs vs furballers vs ground attackers crap?
Its just another issue that is deemed wrong by some and spoils their enjoyment, not an attack on bomber pilots, at least not from me as i fly them as well.
[ 09-20-2001: Message edited by: hazed- ]
-
If I had to summarize the roles of military warplanes in a nut shell, I would say:
Buffs were created to destroy strategic targets.
Fighters were created to either destroy buffs, or escort them.
Take buffs out of the picture and, strategically, you don't have much. In AH we have a skewed view at the role of the fighter (compared to RL) because we tend to use them as bombers, often. Mostly we jabo in AH because it is more fun than driving a bomber that takes you 2 to 4 times as long to get to a target, only to then get shot down before you can u drop your load.
eskimo
-
Currently ranked #2 in buffs.
Buffs are overmodelled in their ability to manuever at high altitude.
Contrary to Lazs' post I agree that buffs should have accurate bomb drops. Else, we would be forced to field 100 buffs/sortie, and that would never happen.
-
True about buffs being used as fighters, I've upped from fields many times and found a b17 on my 6 closing and then shooting me down b4 I get enough speed to get away. I once upped from a field and one b17 had capped it, shot me down (kill # 21) and continued to loop and kill those trying to up until his friends arrived. This type of thing sucks otherwise I like buffs both to fly and to attack.
:D
-
For every time I have been vulched by a bomber, I have been vulched 100 times by a fighter.
Getting vulched by a fighter, GV or buff sucks and is unrealistic and is over-represented in AH.
Vulching with a fighter, GV or buff is a blast and is unrealistic and is over-represented in AH.
So what?
eskimo
-
Base captures, as represented in AH, are unrealistic and over-represented....
So what?!? :D
-
LePaul:
A great post,on the money.But stand by for the flame.
No one has said anything about the B26.What don't they like about what it does.I fly it a lot.
ET
-
Fighter pilots make movies...
Bomber pilots make history...
;)
-
One more myth to destroy.
Hazed states perfictly converging guns. There is no covergance on the buff guns, they just all shoot parallel. i.e. if you are shooting to the side, and the tail gun and nose gun are 40 ft appart, they will be each shooting at a point 40 feet apart.
Also each gun position can be detroyed.
HiTech
-
I fly fighters mostly but do enjoy the odd buff sortie.
Please DO fix bugs with the buffs (ones that HTC decide ARE bugs), please DON'T remove the playability of the buffs. I like seeing them around, more things to shoot down. :D
Oh, and please DO stop all the whining about buffs... Learn to kill them or leave them alone...
My $0.02. ;)
-
"See, you are stuck with that argument. Sure, one buff and his ordinance can mire a field, but Laz, THATS HOW THE GAME IS! I enjoy a rational discussion with you or anyone, but you continue to act as though this game is a "furball", when by definition, its largely a game of strategy."
Baloney. That's not his point at all. Look at from another angle and maybe some of you will see what he's saying; two opposing teams are having a good ground fight battle with tanks, halftracks and m16's but along comes some lone nitwit who jabos or bombs the VH one side is spawning from. Be it that they having a fight that is vehicle to vehicle or fighter to fighter the point is that even one skilles bastidge can and quite often does ruin the fun being had by a multitude of more.
That's not how the game is. That is simply evidence of attention starved self centeredness sitting in front of a computer keyboard.
Westy
[ 09-21-2001: Message edited by: Westy MOL ]
-
Seems you asked the question LePaul, and refuse to listen to the answers.
bowser
-
Originally posted by bowser:
Seems you asked the question LePaul, and refuse to listen to the answers.
bowser
out of all the replys in this post this is the one that makes no scents gezzzzzzzzz.
ya think ya know it all ??? i can see you dont .
-
Originally posted by bowser:
Seems you asked the question LePaul, and refuse to listen to the answers.
bowser
And those answers are?
We're entertaining a pretty rational discussion. If you can not maintain the spirit of the conversation, perhaps you should abstain from posting?
-
I take it back... you don't know what is true LP....
I said that the fields need to stay open to fighters till the whole field is closed or the fields need to be easier to close period. The point being....
In the first instance of availability... that fighters (and the dozens of guys involved) would not be out of the game so far as the close fields went from one or two "flyovers" from one guy in a buff at 10k above the fray.
In the second instance... If the fields were easier to capture then everyone would participate and.... best of all... the field would be CAPTURED ... if it were captured it would then be useful... it would become the "front" instead of a no mans land. The war would move on at a faster pace and involve more players in the so called strat.
I noticed that you didn't comment on bomb accuracy.
I don't believe that a "strat" element of the game is to make people fly long distances to get into a fight. That is bull. I believe that is a bug and will somehow get fixed. How does not having any good places to fite from enhance the game in your opinion? How does people being bored and maybe logging off make for a better game?
Do you actually believe that people should cap every field just in case some suicide buffer might want to drop the hangers? I ask you, who do you think will do this job? do you honestly think that attacking or even killing buffs is "fun" enough for the average fighter that he will forsake the fighting to hunt an unrealistic and unfun buff?
so long as u have so much (adverse)affect on so many peoples game for so little effort... you will not be liked or welcomed in some places. You say I don't speak for everyone around me and that may be true but you akowledge the animosity towards you that is so easy to rise to the surface and ignore any explanations as to what causes it if those suggestions balance your affect on the game.
lazs
-
No, LePaul was right about Lazs. We bomber pilots are not "attention starved", we are simply helping our country capture fields. We, or more specifically I, don't care if I ruin the fun of 6 or 7 fighter guys on the other or even my team, I am simply moving the front. You can whine and piss and moan all the same, but I will stil not care. I get alt to be safer, and I kill hangers to disable the field. You don't like it? Tough, this isn't simply a fighter game. Hell I am sure the Germans never called Allied Command and said "Your bombers are ruining our fighter guys abilities, please remove them from the war!"
Learn to ignore them or kill them. If they pork your field and stop the fight, fly elsewhere and find another one. I don't think killing the FH at one field simply grounds all other planes in the Arena. Now, I am not saying the bombers are historically correct, I am just tired of this same arguement turning into a giant bomber flamefest.
Fighter Pilots Make Movies.
Bomber Pilots Make History.
-
Pardon me, Texace, while I applaud...
<clap clap clap>
As we've covered, we all agree that the B-17s amazing aerial feats need looking into, as well as the guns that shot through their own structure. And I thank HiTech for wadding in here and pointing out the myth of convergence. So, to those complanits about the B-17 in general, I agree, and submit to you, its in need of some tweaking.
However, that leaves us with the Ar234, B-26, Ju88, Lancaster and TBM. All of whom seem to work fine in their respective duties. But to folks like Westy and Lazs, they should be yanked from the game since its simlpy unfair that a bomber, as vunerable as they are, can wreck havoc on a field where these two are doing whatever furballers do.
And quite honestly, their argument is a whine. How dare we ruin their fun, wrecking their hangars and such. Us evil bombers made Westy and Laz fly to the fight. >shrug< Its hard to debate them since their argument is largely emotion...we're been painted the devil for, well, playing the game, in complete contradiction to how Laz and Westy play.
-
my appologies on the comment 'perfectly converging' :), I had made the assumption that all the guns converge from reading other posts, my mistake.
-
At one time it only took 1 1000lb bomb to kill the FHs.2 B17s could kill all the FHs at 6 small bases.Fighter guys complained and rightfully so.They could get nowhere near a base under attack.They upped the load needed to 2500 lbs but 1 B17 could take down the 2 FHs.Now the small bases have 3 FHs and it takes 2 B17s or 1 Lanc to kill them.
They added rearm pads so you get the plane back up when the hangers were down.
If you kill all the ammo at a field,the buff can't go up.
If you kill all the fuel,there is always 25% for a fighter to go with.
The Cvs never run out of planes,how big are they ?
If this is what is needed to keep the game fun for fighter jocks,then so be it.They have a right to enjoy themselves in here doing what they like to do.But so do the buff drivers.
Hey Mr.Taliban,tally me banana.Daylight come and POOF
-
" Us evil bombers made Westy and Laz fly to the fight."
You love to put some spins on what you read and you love to twist what was said with some pretty far reaching distortions.
I'd try to make my point clearer but from your response to my most basic exlanation of what pisses off some people, such as myself, I could see that would be futile with such a paranoidal bomber jock as yourself.
Westy
-
why don't lazs and the rest of the furball starved majority go to the CT or DA n furball in there? Personally I find large furballs kinda fun for a couple of minutes and then boring cause its really all just a matter of luck whether you survive or not. Next time theres a large furball going on, i'm gonna go n bomb all the hangers nearby, only the ones lazs is upping from thou.
:)
-
Oh come on now, Westy, don't get your panties in a bunch! :D
There is no spin, I am basing what I said *directly* on what you and Laz have been saying. You and Laz indicate that whenever a buff appears, we ruin your fun. How else are we to interpet that?
But, when backed into a corner, I suppose that's the best retort you can muster? Perhaps you would like to clarify your statements?
-
Originally posted by Zygote:
why don't lazs and the rest of the furball starved majority go to the CT or DA n furball in there? Personally I find large furballs kinda fun for a couple of minutes and then boring cause its really all just a matter of luck whether you survive or not. Next time theres a large furball going on, i'm gonna go n bomb all the hangers nearby, only the ones lazs is upping from thou.
:)
Just a matter of luck? No wonder you get bored.
-
My statements were perfectly clear. Calling my POV a "whine" and that I infer you and others who pilot bombers to be "evil" is how you brought us down this path.
My point stand. It's too easy for a no skill bomber/jabo pilot to single handedly ruin the fun of a half dozen or more people.
I never mentioned group efforts, I single out the solitary dimwad who has no ability what so ever of making a capture of the base they are bombing but they come in at 15k and make one hit and run (or hit and die).
Also, no one told bomber pilots to go fly H2H if they want to bomb. Yet that's the lame response some people cough up every time when anyone speaks up about how easy it is for a few to disrupt the enjoyment of many.
I do not propose weakening bombers guns. They die easy enough. I do not propose abolishing bombers, they are fun in thier own right and also make nice targets.
I do propose the skill level needed be raised to somewhere approaching the lowest level of some complexity. That's something you "bomber guys" would have no problem with isn't it? I mean you want a sim right? Or would you prefer HTC rename Aces High to "B17-III: Online" and make the fighters AI operated?
Westy
[ 09-21-2001: Message edited by: Westy MOL ]
-
Well said Westy. I concur
BD, a question if I might. Why do you buff guys not fly in multiple bomber formations? Don't take the easy out. There are plenty of bomber pilots.
[ 09-21-2001: Message edited by: Apache ]
-
Lazs1:
It takes at least 2 bombers to close a field.
Part of the reason why fields are so difficult to capture is that they are also difficult to close. Even with 4+ guys capping a field, I have seen 1 suicidal defender kill the goon or troops on the ground without getting in the air himself, again and again. I certainly do not condemn this practice, and I do it myself when I think that I stand a fair chance at getting the troops before I die. It does illustrate, however, that fields often need to be closed before capture.
Most of the time, fields are in the process of being captured.
But, goons are slow, undefended planes. They get shot down a lot. There is usually only 1 goon in a capture team, so if it gets killed, the capture can be delayed another 10 to 25 minutes. Often no one is willing to drive a goon until a base is successfully either 100% shut down, or at least de-acked, VH down, capped and clear of enemy.
Bomb accuracy is a game concession.
It needs to be there to make flying bombers worthwhile.
1 fighter can already de-ack a field, take down its VH, and provide a cap immediately.
What's the point in having bombers if they can't do at least a bit more than a fighter can?
"I don't believe that a "strat" element of the game is to make people fly long distances to get into a fight. "
I have been playing this game since day 1, and I play often.
I do not recall EVER seeing an entire front line shut down (except just before reset).
The point of shutting down a base is to delay the enemy from getting your goon or troops.
If the nearest enemy base is 10 min away, and you have a goon 7 min out, you get the base.
How is that not strategy?
"Do you actually believe that people should cap every field just in case some suicide buffer might want to drop the hangers? I ask you, who do you think will do this job? do you honestly think that attacking or even killing buffs is "fun" enough for the average fighter that he will forsake the fighting to hunt an unrealistic and unfun buff?"
I love buff hunting, so do many others. Most of the time you can climb and intercept an enemy bomber before he can finish bombing your field, if you are paying attention to the world around you, besides the nearest 5 friendlies who are chasing 1 con down to the deck to kill him.
eskimo
-
S!
If the bomber guns are firing parellel to each other, then that confirms the 'shotgun' theory I had.
At 1,000 yards with the dispersion shown in the HTC gun analyzer, that would mean each gun is showing approximately a 30 ft dispersion pattern. In a side shot, if the guns are hitting approximately 20-30 ft apart, then that means the fire from all the guns will be providing a huge shotgun pattern approximately 100 ft in diameter. This pattern would be at its biggest when fireing at a target to the side of the bomber. This is because the length distance between the guns is at its greatest when looking at positioning along the length of the fuselage. A side shot gives a good opportunity to hit with this big pattern, but is reduced in its hit effectiveness due to the low density of bullets by area.
Hitech's explanation would also explain why the directly overhead attack on a bomber is so effective. Only one gun can be brought to bear, therefore the shotgun pattern is smaller, and at its lowest density.
It also explains why the directly ahead, or directly behind attacks are the most dangerous for the fighter.
In those type of attacks, the distance between the bomber guns is actually only the vertical distance between the ball turrets and the tail or chin gun. (perhaps 10 ft) Therefore the shotgun pattern is more concentrated, being probably a 40 foot circle at 1000 yards. In this 40 foot circle you have 6 .50 cals.
Plus of course, no deflection.
-
LePaul it's pretty simple.
The bombers have defensive capabilities which surpass anything in recorded history.
Their ability to hit multiple targets on a single pass from high altitude is surpassed only by the B-2 with GPS bombs. (I'm not kidding.)
And too many MA bombers abuse their superpowers. Ackstars, lonewolf super-high altitude plinking, porking fields where good dogfights are happening, carbombing, etc.
The fighters are not perfect but their offensive and defensive capabilities are a lot closer to the real thing than the bombers.
That's why there is resentment.
[ 09-21-2001: Message edited by: funkedup ]
-
Oh Man, didn't bother to read all new posts in here, what people say about buff guys that we fighter jocks yell for them to come close fields and and bomb the heck out of bases is SO true, I love seeing one of my buff friends flying above a field and then seeing the hangers blow up, I do my best to try and give them escort when I see the. Without bombers in AH the game would be BORING, belive me, Fighter Ace had no bombers (atleast not when I tried it) and it was SOOO boring, sure, FA isn't a good game otherwise but lack of buffs didn't even make it worth the free registration.
There is very very few people in the arena who think bombers ruin the game and all the fun for furrballers. I am a 100% fighter Pilot, I like bringing my 190 A8 into a furrball with my guns blazing, I like attacking buffs in it and all this adds to the game, what i don't like is bombers and bomber pilots chasing fighters and ackstarring because "they can". This of course, mostly happens at high alts.
<S> To everybody who is still flying bombers, even though you're constantly exposed to bad comments and whines, and never whine back! Please stay!
-
Originally posted by Apache:
Well said Westy. I concur
BD, a question if I might. Why do you buff guys not fly in multiple bomber formations? Don't take the easy out. There are plenty of bomber pilots.
[ 09-21-2001: Message edited by: Apache ]
Greetings.
Usually when I get on-line, its 10:45pm EST and most of my squaddies have headed off to bed. When I am plotting to take a Lancaster out, I announce on the country channel. Usually, no one wants to come along but then again, most of my teammates know my abilities and know that I do well as a lone buff, with escort and support. A few times, Sheppy and a few others have asked to go with me, so on a couple of occasions, I've lead a wing of 2 or 3 buffs to strike a field.
But, most folks like the rides they like. Its hard to talk a P-38 dweeb into a long, long climb to 16k in a Lanc and go hammer a base. Each to their own, right?
So, that's why I'm largely flying alone.
What's amusing is my style of buffing isnt what Westy & Laz are complaining about. I don't particularly like the B-17 since its slow and hasn't got the ordinance layout I like. If you are going all that distance, bring all you can carry! I like the Arado and Lancasters a lot, and sometimes I tempt fate and tke the Ju88...although many of those rides dont make it back :)
So, its just timing. Yes, multiple buffs are fun, but I haven't had many want to buff along with me.
Did I answer your question adequately?
-
Go knight Lepaul and I'll take as much time as you need to escort you and your buff friends.
Not a P38 dweeb though :D
-
Originally posted by Westy MOL:
My statements were perfectly clear. Calling my POV a "whine" and that I infer you and others who pilot bombers to be "evil" is how you brought us down this path.
Re-read this thread and the other buff-bithing ones. We've been called every name in the book. Your opinions are shared by Lazs, who makes it crystal clear that buffs are not wanted. That's where I infer from.
My point stand. It's too easy for a no skill bomber/jabo pilot to single handedly ruin the fun of a half dozen or more people.
Your point here eludes me. How is the newbie/moron buff ruining your fun? He's a bomber, and bombing. Wouldn't you be ruining his fun shooting him down?
And if we are touching on No Skill things, then lets match flying an La7 versus a 109G10 or P-51D? Surely anyone can raise hell jumpnig into a super-dee-douper fighter like the La7, N1k, etc etc...but are they ruining peoples fun with their F-16~like handling? Yes. Do we see the same anti-those-airplanes sentiment? Somewhat, but no where near this anti-buff sentiment.
I never mentioned group efforts, I single out the solitary dimwad who has no ability what so ever of making a capture of the base they are bombing but they come in at 15k and make one hit and run (or hit and die).
I fly 90% of my sorties with just me. I'm not a dimwad and if Im egging a base, its in support of a capture. But in any case, you have radar, you have the ability to see these guys coming to plunder, yet fault them for doing so. Its a war sim, I really do not understand this "Foul! No Fair" argument. While I do not understand why someone would drop a field without caturing it, if he does, so what? You have the means to stop them.
Also, no one told bomber pilots to go fly H2H if they want to bomb. Yet that's the lame response some people cough up every time when anyone speaks up about how easy it is for a few to disrupt the enjoyment of many.
That's a pretty broad statement.
You guys indicate you like the furballs more than the captures/strategy. Yet, you constantly comlpain we are ruining everyones fun bombing and capturing your bases. I just do not see the posts to support that argument. Where are the posts that read like "Yea, we were having a great battle at A3 then the stupid reset happen" or the like?
I do not propose weakening bombers guns. They die easy enough. I do not propose abolishing bombers, they are fun in thier own right and also make nice targets.
Agreed!
I do propose the skill level needed be raised to somewhere approaching the lowest level of some complexity. That's something you "bomber guys" would have no problem with isn't it? I mean you want a sim right? Or would you prefer HTC rename Aces High to "B17-III: Online" and make the fighters AI operated?
Ah, the spin and attacks.
So now we aren't good enough, nor deserve the ability to hit the targets we fly for so long to get to. Nevermind if we survive enemy aircraft, acks etc. Well, if you are going to insist that all bomber pilots have PHDs and have completed "Westy's School for Anal Retentive Pilots Opposed to Field Captures", what do you propose we up the ante for in the fighters? :D Where's the "required skill level" for guys to yank around in an La7 or more complex fighters like F4s, P51s, etc etc?
So let me get this straight, you want *limitations*, rather, complexities, on our rides, but none on yours?
I'm not making fun (well, dammit, maybe a little), I'm just trying to make sure I understand you correctly.
Finally, you (or someone) asked about how I felt about the bomb accuracy? To me, its kinda too easy, but that's how HTC has it setup. >shrug< The zoom-ability almost makes it too easy. But, in the buff game, GETTING to the target has always been my biggest challenge.
-
Originally posted by Wilbus:
Go knight Lepaul and I'll take as much time as you need to escort you and your buff friends.
Not a P38 dweeb though :D
I do fly Knight! But I'm on the east coast of the USA, and you are usually tucked away and in bed by time I get online, you dweeb :D
-
bd5
lol mate i've seen you milkrunning cities at 5k in a lanc which is fine by me strat targets require strategic weapons.
I have heard you call for escorts and for people not calling your 6. But none of this is necessary in ah.
You say us fighters should adjust to the way you fly.
But given the impact buffs have on gameplay (there ability to disrupt the by far majorities fun). Most buffers aren't planning there sorties in coordination with a base capture. Most have no real plan of rtbing safely.
My squad is almost always number 1 in buffs. We coordinate our attacks and they are done in conjuntion with a base capture. Mostly we take a b26 and jabos. We have rolled on 7 bases in about 2 hours one night.
I see lanc pilots fly to a base bomb the hangers alone leave ack up and the vh up. This tells me that they are just out to stop my fun. ju88 il2 tbm and 26 are perfect for main arena gameplay. Alone none of them can disrupt my few hours of fun.
No niki or spit or chog or gv has the ability to stop my fun but when I see a 25k lone lanc doin his best to stop my fun I hate it.
You will no doudt say "well what about me and my fun" well you are a minority. Most fly fighters and by far most enjoy a good furball. If the price of your solitary fun impacts the majority people will "pile on buff pilots"
My reply isn't a debate but any answer to the title of this thread, those are the reasons for me. Others may yell about buff gun lethality but i only do that when they kill me :)
<S>
-
Originally posted by Wotan:
bd5
lol mate i've seen you milkrunning cities at 5k in a lanc which is fine by me strat targets require strategic weapons.
I have heard you call for escorts and for people not calling your 6. But none of this is necessary in ah.
You say us fighters should adjust to the way you fly.
<rest snipped, interesting, but repettive...>
<S>
Yup, you hammered me a few evenings ago trying to pummel that city which was literally 2 miles from the end of the runway. Between you and the acks re-upping as I overflew, I got creamed :)
I've also asked for escorts and been ticked off that in a area full of friendlies, no one calls your six. I'm fairly certain I am not the only person to react in such a fashion. I'm certain I am not the first buff or goon that's asked for escort, and 99% of the time, I don't get it. My bird is too slow for them to wait up.
But then you infer that me, my pompous self, desires for you to fly the way I fly. I do not. If that was the case, I'd be calling for your favorite rides to be toned down, re-examined of removed. But I'm not. I'm sticking up for the bomber-bashing that is going on. And, for doing so, guys like you try to paint me as wanting me to force you into playing the game my way.
Again, I'm not.
I am, however, playing the game as it was designed. Fighters knock out enemy bad guys, bombers destroy targets, then people move to capture the base. Clearly the game is designed with that in mind. But, for saying so, and for me to point out the obvious, you guys again continue this vicious circle that its not fair bombers can bomb...etc etc
So how is the game supposed to be played, Wotan? You infer that the strategy game isnt correct, how to you perceive it?
-
If you are worried about just having fun, then I think that the perk system is far more disruptive than any of the aircraft performance.
I understand that the B-17s performance at altitude may be a bit more than normal, but I don't see those guns firing themselves? And where the bases are so close together getting to altitude is a pretty rare thing anyway.
I am sorry if you don't approve of a bomber nailing the hangers on a base. But they are the easiest things to hit. Be happy the craters don't seem to have any effect as the runway would be more of a tactical target than a hanger! I can just imagine the complaining about that!
But as a relatively new player to the game, I have been at it for almost two weeks now? Not long enough to master, but long enough to have a few victories. Yet I don't seem to have any more than half a dozen points. Out of my reach are some of the more fun planes to fly. So I would say there are lots of things that need to be worked out?
-Jim
'abunabi'
-
Well, from my perspective anyone who gets shot down by a bomber and whines is just not willing to admit to themselves that their attack tactics were poor or they're too self centered to admit that the bomber gunner was pretty darn good, or you were flat just unlucky on that pass.
Once I figured out the best way to attack bombers, my kill vs death ratio went up considerably (I think my last 2 tours were a 5-1 kill ratio). That, and recognizing that patience is a virtue when it comes to setting up the attack and to not just go blasting away from the 6 o'clock position because I'd been "chasing this guy for the last 10-15 minutes" trying to gain altitude.
Enough said...
-
As a person who flies both bombers and fighters it just seems to me that you guys are fighting over nothing. Most of the time you will see a furball develop near a field that one team or the other is trying to capture.
Sorry to disappoint you "furballers", but that is just how things go....its logic. I mean, think about it.....knits wanna take A2 from the rooks....rooks try to defend A2....furball develops....there is a lot of dying going on by both sides.....someone says on country channel, "damn...we need to kill those hangars!!" Then here comes the bomber to help his side in the base capture. Ala...ruining your fun so to speak. Why can you not just move along the front to the next developing furball?
Deny it all you want, but that is the main focus of this game in the "Main Arena"....base capture. If you dont want base capture to be your focus, you have other options. I know everybody wants to fly where there are more people, but what are you going to do....the game as it is now in the Main Arena is focused on base capture. As harsh as it may sound, if you dont want bombers influencing your furball that was more than likely the product of an attempted bse capture, then maybe you should consider the DA or the CT.... <shrug>
Dont get me wrong fellas....I love a good furball just as much as the next guy...over the time I have spent here in this game I have developed a little more interest in the fighters over the bombers, but I understand at the same time that if I just wanna furball and duke it out that I have to realize that folks on my team are trying to take a base and eventually the hangars will be killed.
Unless you dont wanna head into the DA to do your furballing its just a necessary evil that you have to put up with.
This issue seems to be more of a players vs. gameplay thing than a bomberguy vs. fighterguy thing to me. I just wish there was a way to find a compromise that satisfied everyone.
-
Jim
theres only 3 perk planes and I have 3200 fighter perks. Do you feel cheated because you cant be 1 of the 3 people who wants to fly a temp or 152 or 234? How are these 3 planes taking away from your ah fun?
Just wait till an ack star kills ya while your in 1 :)
bd5 you are saying that we should adjust to your style. When we need guys flying 30 min to provide hi cap to stop a suicide lone buffer whos dicke auto can out fly a zeke.
Most folks pop in and out of ah just to get a couple of quick sorties in.
The main arena is what the majority of main pilots make it. And by far the majority (demonstrated everyday) prefer what apache already stated
1st fighter vrs fighter (ur furball)
2nd jabo then fighter vrs fighter (furball again)
3rd BnZr's who pick targets out of the furball
vulchers fit in here as well (mostly likely 1st but none will admit it :))
buff pilots wether friendly or nme are in direct contrast to what the majority wants.
When my squad takes a field we usually just kill ack and the vh and then enjoy vulchin the piss out of who ever ups.(yup we admit it) I hate it when a guy on my side thinks hes helpin by flying a buff over and killing the fhs. And I am not alone.
I have taken 190f8s zekes 205s and deacked and captured bases with no buff help at all.
Buffs are not integral in base capture and imo are a hinderence.
Again most buff sorties in the main are not flown in coordination with a base capture.
Laz is right most are just attention starved as evident by the numerous times I've seen them gloating on ch 1. Ha Ha we got ur dar or no more fhs at base axx.
You asked the question no arguement you make will change the fact that the impact a single suicide buffer has on gameplay is too great given the style of play the majority of main pilots enjoy.
You can keep banging your head on the wall but this fact wont change.
-
"So let me get this straight, you want *limitations*, rather, complexities, on our rides, but none on yours?"
Wrong. I'm all for pushing the realism envelope in online sims.
And please, don't compare your milk runs using never-a-dud, never-a-miss bombs and an interface with an extremely simplistic replication of just a mere fraction of what a real life bombardier had to do with what "virtual pilots" do in the MA online "aircombat." It's like comparing the difficult task of sitting up on ones bellybutton with someone else who's able to ride a bicycle.
Westy
-
The more I read this thread, the more I keep thinking one word...
It's not a very popular word around here, but I'm gonna say it... no, I'm gonna shout it anyway...
FIGHTERTOWN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
<g,d,r>
anRky
-
They wouldnt go AN....then they wouldnt have any buffs "ruining their fun" to whine about.... :D <g,d,r>
-
As one who flies fighters, fighter-bombers, bombers and goons and often volunteers to gun in a bomber (and drive PT boats, tanks, etc.), I do what is necessary for my team to win because that is how this game is currently designed. If the "strat" element were removed, I wouldn't be here. If the bombers were removed, I wouldn't be here. If the Spitfire were removed ....
I can honestly say that high buffs knocking down my teams hangers drive me nuts. I can also say no one loves it more than I when I can sneak under a Lanc and blow its guts out, and I accept my fate as a Lanc driver when it happens to me. I love taking out an approaching fighter from the chin position in a B17 because he is dumb enough to make an approach like that. I've flown a TBM with a squaddie in the rear seat and with brains and a bit of luck we defeated a FW-190 :D. The way it is now this game has a lot going for it for a lot of different people. If I ruin one furball (which I doubt is likely) by bombing a base, well, there are always more furballs (which are pretty pointless in themselves, a furball never won a war).
Why don't buff drivers gang up on fields, Apache? Probably because we have as many problems getting organised as anyone. But it has been done, and will likely be done more in the future. It is pretty awsome watching a squad of B-17s sailing over a base and taking out building after building. :cool:
So, why is a squadron of bombers more tolerable than a single bomber? Why should 6 bomber pilots ruin the fun of 6 fighter pilots? Why should 6 fighter pilots be able to down 6 bomber pilots and ruin their 30 minute flight to the enemy HQ? BECAUSE THAT'S HOW IT WORKS.
Bomber flotillas would happen a lot more if we had 100 dedicated buff drivers up every night then sure, we could make the Nordens less accurate. But until then the problems of getting a heavily loaded Lanc up to altitude and getting to a field are enough without having to get 10 or more bombers over it at the same time. As a "lone wolf" buff pilot I have died more often than I've gotten to the target, often by a single fighter pilot flying CAP. I guess some guys are luckier than me. :rolleyes:
So, there are definate problems with ONE bomber (B-17) with high-alt manouverability and being able to shoot through itself (and ack-starring but that is an attitude problem
:mad: ). But the other tradeoffs in the design of buffs have been thought through carefully. After all, if a single German FW-190 had been stupid enough to attack a single, healthy B-17 full of alert and anxious Americans in WWII, I suspect the 190 would not come off all that well. So, why should one do so in this game?
My $0.02 in the pot. (Oh yes LePaul is a squaddie of mine but my attitude has nothing to do with that fact.) ;)
[ 09-21-2001: Message edited by: Holder ]
[ 09-21-2001: Message edited by: Holder ]
-
back on your horse sling?
whining about whines.......... :rolleyes:
this thread is a question by bd5 about why folks have an animosity toward buffers. you enter it then whine about others reply ..........see the pattern
-
Maybe you should read the whole thread first Wotan then you can start throwing stones... :rolleyes:
If you would have bothered doing so then you would have seen that I posted my position about the buffers vs. furballers thing. My second post was a simple jest at AN's suggestion about a "Fightertown"...hence the little smiley thing at the end of it.
Methinks you got your leather LuftWeiner chaps on a little tight today mate. :D <-----note smiley once again....denoting another jest.
-
Ugh...how many times must I tell you.
BOMBER PILOTS AREN'T ATTENTION STARVED NEWBIES WITH NOTHING TO DO!!!!
I am sick and tired of all you pansy assed fighter boys pissing and moaning about us bomber pilots. I fly bombers to help my country in taking your fields. You don't like it? Climb to 25K and shoot me down. The only people whining in here are the fighter jocks who can't stand having their fun ruined by some bomber pilot. It seems now us bomber guys must conform to
their rules so that they can have fun.
:mad: :mad: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
;)
-
I can understand, and support any reasonable issues regarding ANY plane, It's handling, Gunnery etc. That would make it more realistic as far as Simulation will tolerate.
IMHO, The accuracy we have always strove for in the AH FM, Increases the simulation's appeal to us. Challenging us to improve ourselves, to adapt, and overcome. Much like those great souls we emmulate. (Sans, gut wrenching terror, Death and/or dismemberment,etc. of course).
I believe that HTC rose on a Monday, Saw the MAIN ARENA, That it was STRAT, And that it was Good, (And would be better). As the war progressed, HTC saw occasional furballing, Solo B17 joks, stomp rudders, and yank triggers, in futile attempts to RTB safely after an 8 grid flight, And worried not; For the war will police it's self. Those errant, brought in line. THIS was AH, MA, It was STRAT, It was Good, (And would be better).
On Wednesday Morning, (Hung over Tuesday, No workie), HTC saw the Good that was STRAT, (and would be better), Saw the fog lift, and in that moment of clarity, Shortened the story thus.. For HTC so loved the AH ehhh, community, He Lowered the price, (Knowing the whiners would come), And to save the beloved AH, MA, STRAT, (good n' gettin better), Waived his uhh.. PEN, over the ferma, errr.. Fermini.. big empty place, And LO; The COMBAT THEATRE appeared!!
A Furballer's heaven! Allied vs. Axis!! No Bomber problem! (As IF there was a problem!)
And Cheap too!!!
MORAL:
Don't 'Handicap' the sim to suit you! Get over your shortcomings, The AH gang will help, And EVERYONE benefits!
We all like to furball, Bomb, Whatever to varying degrees. AH is the only sim I've seen to really try to accomidate everybody. Lets build on that, Not tear down what's already working for the MAJORITY.
My 23 cents {S}
Remember,BE HAPPY! (Cuz OUR worst nightmare is a CTD after takeoff in a PERK plane!)
-
Originally posted by lazs1:
A lot of guys just ignore buffs and hope they don't ruin things too badly or, if they do, that there will be some other place to fite. That don't make for a lot of good feelings whenever a buff flies over.
That's your way to play the game.
Week or two ago I chased 30-32k flying B-17 with P-51.
I saw a high alt b-17 somewhere near A10 in isles-map when I was @20k. I followed him 50-75miles (maybe more), slowly gaining alt to get on his flight-level and after chanceing bullets with him I shot him down near his main-island in north.
I lost my engine but from 30k I was able to glide back to one of our fields east of center island.
Of course I could give up and let that B-17 fly back home safely but thats just not the way I play this game.
There was a chance I get killed on that fight against B-17 but I wanted to try my luck and I won.
Leaving buff alone means you lose that fight before it even started.
-
S! Staga,
Couldn't agree more, :)
-
BLAAAAA! I am up late during weekends and a few days during the week! No sleep for me! :D
-
Originally posted by texace:
Ugh...how many times must I tell you.
BOMBER PILOTS AREN'T ATTENTION STARVED NEWBIES WITH NOTHING TO DO!!!!
I am sick and tired of all you pansy assed fighter boys pissing and moaning about us bomber pilots. I fly bombers to help my country in taking your fields. You don't like it? Climb to 25K and shoot me down. The only people whining in here are the fighter jocks who can't stand having their fun ruined by some bomber pilot. It seems now us bomber guys must conform to
their rules so that they can have fun.
;)
You hit it right on the head. You don't see US demanded THEIR guns be weakened, or that their aircraft moves TOO fast or is TOO agile.
Yet they accuse US of ruining THEIR game.
The adjectives they use to describe anyone driving a buff is always derogatory...they can't get it into their skulls that they are part of the game, like it or not, for a reason.
-
Hilarious. You start this thread under the pretense of trying to understand the resentment from fighters. When people try to offer explainations, you ignore them or piss on them. So the fighter guys give up in exasperation trying to explain and now the bombers guys are left to talk amongst themselves, bashing the fighter guys. Friggin' hilarious.
Maybe instead of taking up space on this board, you can start a therapy group for bombers? You know, to discuss your feelings of persecution, etc. :)
bowser
[ 09-22-2001: Message edited by: bowser ]
-
"LePaul it's pretty simple.
The bombers have defensive capabilities which surpass anything in recorded history.
Their ability to hit multiple targets on a single pass from high altitude is surpassed only by the B-2 with GPS bombs. (I'm not kidding.)
And too many MA bombers abuse their superpowers. Ackstars, lonewolf super-high altitude plinking, porking fields where good dogfights are happening, carbombing, etc.
The fighters are not perfect but their offensive and defensive capabilities are a lot closer to the real thing than the bombers.
That's why there is resentment."
You just dont get it eh lepaul? What is so hard to understand? You have too much affect on the gameplay and on too many players and.... you do it in a highly unrealistic way.
Wotan get's it... How can someone like wotan who flies both get it and not you lepaul... You give a lot of lip service to wanting to find out why there is so much animosity but when you are told the reason(s) you ignore them or argue that they don't exist! Or, worse yet, claim that, so what, that's tough, now why don't you really like us?
sling is right but... I'm not disagreeing that the way furballs/melees.... fights... are formed is goal oriented. We don't need bombers to capture a field tho. They didn't in any war I know of either. In fact, it is more realistic and less lopsided if they don't participate since they have too much affect comparitively...If the fields were a lot harder to capture or the cities were a lot bigger then, we might need bombers. If the fields were a lot easier to capture then the resentment would probly not exist since there would be good fites close by all the time.
I HAVE seen the "front" devoid of any good fites for long periods of time. It happens all the time. All the close fields are de-fighterhangered with nothing but flackpanzers and some kinda truck that is immune to gunfire. If the fields are a solid red or green bar only.... that ain't a good fite. If the field is far away then the radar info is useless so far as determining if the fite will be good when you get there.
et... your post is nothing but exageration, downplay, ignorance and wishfull thinking. No wonder lecar was so enthused with it that he praised it.
Guess what? regardless of all this, I bet it changes. It changed once for the better and when it changes again it will be for the better.... I bet the next change has bombers being a little more realistic and having a lot less effect on the game than the totally lopsided one they have now.
bet it changes pretty soon.
lazs
-
Lazs1:
I also fly both fighters and bombers as well as drive GVs.
Very few folks in this game are as "well rounded" (if you will) as I. This gives me a more objective viewpoint. I literally can see both sides of the coin because I regularly flip it (the coin).
In my opinion; Bombers don't have it so well in AH.
It takes them a long time to get anywhere and they have a terrible K/D.
Flying a bomber is full of more disappointments than flying a fighter.
If you don't believe me, try it.
Lazs1, I give you a challenge;
Spend a night flying buffs.
See how it goes, then voice your opinion.
Only the Lancaster can shut down fighter opps at a small or large field (solo). To do this, it must fly for 15 to 45 min to the target, and then 10 to 20 min to get home (if he survives). It takes 2 passes to get all Fhs, so fighter opps are only down for 13.5 min. That's a lot of time just to shut down FO at a field for 13.5 min. 1 fighter, on the other hand, can kill a VH, de-ack a field, and then provide a cap (often preventing fighter opps) on it for 30 min.
You also wrote:
"We don't need bombers to capture a field tho. They didn't in any war I know of either."
Lazs1,
This is a game.
Fighters never captured fields either, so what?
Capturing territory was done with a combination of/or ground, air and naval forces.
This sim (or any at this point) can not simulate reality.
Instead, we play a game where a limited number can try to achieve an objective using planes, ships and vehicles from WWII.
Do you think furballs are realistic?
Give me a break.
US planes fighting US planes, German VS. German.
Most folks lone wolfing it.
Everyone (or most of us) learning by doing, instead of receiving actual military combat flight training.
No one REALLY cares if they die.
When they do die, they get to come back to life again.
You also wrote:
"If the fields are a solid red or green bar only.... that ain't a good fite. "
It ain't?
One of the most satisfying things that you can do in this game is deprive 10 or so enemy, who are hard at work trying to capture a field, of their objective all by yourself (by hunting down and killing their goon while you are out numbered).
Or upping from a capped base and killing 1 or 2 vulchers who had everything going for them.
And remember;
Not everyone is here just to furball.
A lot of folks come to enemy bases to shut them down and capture them.
Some of them drive fighters, some are in Gvs, and some are in bombers.
eskimo
P.S.
You sound like you don't like buff guns.
Please read:
The 50 cal. Buff Gun Laser Myth, Part 2: Ballistics and Energy
Topic: The 50 cal. Buff Gun Laser Myth, Part 2: Ballistics
-
nobody cares if buffs die alot (or if they have a tough time in ah) not even most buff pilots as demonstrated by how they fly umm.
The facts about how some fighter pilots feel about buffs are evident in this post. bd5 asked a question and didn't like the answers.
Buffs have terrible k/d do to suicide buff flights car bombers newbies crashing them 7 or 8 times before someone tells them about auto take off and numerous other reasons. I have racked up almost 18 kills on 1 guy carbombing (2 or 3 tours ago on nh cougar thnx mate ) so k/d has nothing at all to do with this thread.
Most fighters guys answering this thread kill buffs rather regularly so this aint about gun lethality.
I will explain it once more.
a single buff in ah has to great an impact on the type of gameplay the majority of main pilots enjoy
Reread this thread if you are unsure what type of gameplay that is. Or better yet go to the main and see.
I fly buffs and nothing about ah buffs requires escorts check 6 calls or formations. A single buff can ruin the fun of 20+ plus people (many more if they rely on radar as a crutch).
Fighter pilots are by far the majority and bd5 and others are telling the majority that inorder for you (buffers) to continue your fun or the fun of the by far minority the majority oughta shut and and deal with it and adjust to how they (buffers)wanna fly.
Thats not gonna happen I suspect people will get more vocal and hopefully HTC will look at it.
but i dont suspect or feel that it should be a high priority especial given the reported strat enhancements coming in 1.08.
All your arguing is not going to change that.
Again we have answered the question posed by the thread topic but you buffiphites are unwilling to listen or respect the answer.
-
Why is there this assumption that the 20 fighter jocks just want to furball and their fun is ruined by the bombers?
Isn't just a bit possible that a bunch of those fighter jocks are trying to capture the base?
I know that I have never felt that my fun was ruined by a Buff dropping the hangers.
-
Because the egos of Lazs and Wotan *assume* they speak for all. :D
-
Karnak:
--------------------------------------
I know that I have never felt that my fun was ruined by a Buff dropping the hangers.
--------------------------------------
I have.
anRky
-
Oh, and when dar gets knocked out--I log. :(
anRky
[ 09-22-2001: Message edited by: AN ]
-
Karnake I used to feel and wish for that.
Fact is look at what takes place everyday.
Most folks up where the nearest "fight" is.
Most folks never bring bombs to base capture/attack they come to vulch/furball
At any given point during the day most folks are congregated around areas where the nme are. Even if the areas are stratigically unimportant. They are not interested in base capture per se but will surely show up at a field that is deacked to vulch. Half the time they fly through ack to get a plane thats uppin. None of this is bad.
You have never been in a good fight between bases when some comes in and kills all the fhs or fuel in a suicide buff run. or off a cv in good fun fights then someone suicides it?
I dont speak for anyone but myself but my observations are valid whether folks admit it or not.
Just look at the main at whats going on.
This is my answer to his question.
<edit>
reread my post to find where I may have implied that I speak for anyone. At most every point I make about the "majority" I have stated "check the main" or as demonstrated everyday". I may not have reinforced these statements enough but they should be clear to anyone who read them.
I did not base mho on what folks say but by what I see in the main...... :)
[ 09-22-2001: Message edited by: Wotan ]
-
Laz Next time your in the game,bring up the clipboard.Go into normal world.Check out the field maps.You will see the small field with two fighter hangers as it once was.Now it has three.Then check the medium field.You will see the one fighter hanger as it once was.Now it has four.The large field has not changed except to spread the two SW FHs out so they were not as close together.But there are also more large fields now.The new changes in fields made a great improvement on the game.The fighters had more chance to up from a base under attack and the buffs could no longer go out and kill the fighter hangers at the 6 nearest bases.
There are problems now between fighter guys and buffers that this thread,which started out pretty good from both sides of the issue that will not be solved here.The people replying to the thread stated their sides and it looked for a while that both sides were listening but then the name calling started and the derogatory comments followed.The thread itself is now useless.
We play this game for fun but to HTC it is a business.They have made many corrective changes in the past to make this game more enjoyable to all.This keeps their customers happy and brings them back month after month.They will make more changes.Whatever they are,I will live with them.And when they make those changes,I believe they will be as close to the specs as they can make them.They can only sacrifice so much for enjoyable gameplay before the game becomes something it was not designed to be.
ET
-
geeze... I'm agreeing with hptmnsuperace wotan? well... He is right. Like him, I can't possibly speak for anyone but myself but... I can point out the obvious.
People go to the action... It's just that simple. Whenever the fighter hangers are dropped at one field or another.. MOST everyone goes somewhere else. They go where the new fight is. Why all the cryong about "furballs" if not that most people participate in em? and if most people participate in em then "most" people must be doing what they want to do and that is.... melee! Most get enough anal, political strat boredom at work.
eskimo... i don't care how good or bad the buffers have it and i am certainly not gonna waste my time finding out. It is irrelevant. It is their affect on the game that I despise. their ability to ruin the fite for so many.
As for the guns of bombers... Look, when I am completly bored (no fites anywhere close) I will kill a buff. it is one of the least fun kills I ever make in the arena. gamey and dumb and just plain arcade. The guns and gunners all see a fighter at the same time and all fire at said fighter at the exact same moment with dispertion that is questionable (for each gun) and sometimes through their own plane. It is like and ant colony... all the little worker ants are slaved to one queen ant.
As for melees.. or "furballs" being realistic... well.. they are the most "realistic" fights we have except that real melees were often much larger. what is unrealistic is 1 v 1 or high alt lone wolf hunters.
And no, I don't think goon hunting is "satisfying" nor do I think that any strat that is not fun and action packed is satisfying.
You are correct... it is a livelyhood for HTC.. A lot of new guys are bored. I bet it changes pretty soon.
lazs
-
DAmnit I am getting tired of saying this. Wontan and lasz, listen up. IF THE BASE THAT YOU ARE FIGHTING AT GETS KILLED, GO TO ANOTHER!!!!!
You all seem to think that is your "fyrball" field gets killed that it shuts down all the fighters in the arena. You do know that fights are going on at most places, not just around you? Are you afraid to actually "fly"? :eek: :eek:
The only way bombers affect the "fun" of MA pilots is that they make them fly to another field. Big whoopeeed deal! Fly there and keep fighting.
I will keep fighting in this thread until it is shut down. Bombers belong in the MA, no matter how much they ruin your fun.
Deal with it.
-
Just a quick question on gunners being able to fire through its own structures...
Is this the case or is it that the other guns are firing at the target?
Flying Dutchman
-
The funny thing is;
The Fighter Hangers can only be shut down for 13.5 minutes. All fighters can fly for at least 27 minutes (about), so if you take off before the hangers fall, your not affected. The time that the hangers stay down is also about how long it typically takes to fly from one base to another, which is what you often must do to get into a furball anyway.
eskimo
-
so basically the majority (guys in fighters) ought to adjust to how the minority (buffers) wanna fly?
This attitude here lepaul should answer the question for you........... :)
-
Just for the record, I'm not advocating removing the buffs from the MA. I feel I had to state that again as there are a couple of people that have a comprehension problem.
I DO however stand by making bomber control and especially the bombardier activites more complex.
Also, after having gotten into a "disagreement" with LePaul online just a few weeks ago where he maintained I'd not given him in his LAnc a "6" call in regard to an approaching Spitfire, when I had (I have the film to prove it), I've sworn off making any "6" calls on solitary friendly buffs (unless I like who it is). Hell, I'll not even defend em anymore but I'll just be happy knowing that the enemy I'm flying to fight against will have FH's up with which to fly from also.
-- Westy
-
texace... you don't get it do you? You are saying that if the fight between two close fields with 20 or so guys participating is shut down by on bomber making one run.. then, we should go to another field that has all red bar or nothing at all or all green bar or is 2 sectors away and try to get another fite started and once we get a good fite going again just.... Hope that a lone buffer doesn't notice it and ruin that one too?
Why the hell don't you bomb back fields that no one is using instead? Most of the fields I see being de-fighterehangered are "useless" to (choke) "strat" anyway. Happened again last nite.... maybe 30 guys enjoying the only good fite on the map for us rooks at the time and a lone high alt buff drops a few bombs to close the fighter hangers.
If there were no killshooter I would kill our own buffs... Not much fun but very "satisfying"... As far as "satisfying" goes right now... I do enjoy shooting buff chutes.
lazs
-
ARGGGHHHHHHH! Damn this. I can't do this anymore. All the damned fighter jocks are too worried about their own "fun" and score that they don't want bombers in the game because "they affect the gameplay of the majority of the fighters in the arena" That is complete bulls**t and you know it. I bomb forward feild so my guys can take them from you and keep the front moving. I can give a s**t if I kill a furball, and I don't care.
I can give a damn if you "fighter guys" get pissed at the lone buff shutting down a field that a furball is at. The tone here is that they don't want to fly, just fight. Yes lazs, I am asking you to actually FLY to a fight and start another. I don't care, y'all. I am here to have fun, and if I have fun killing the forward bases and stopping furballs, then so be it. I also keep track of all the whines about cutting a furball short. So far all I see is your name lazs and a couple others.
And if killshooter was off, I would kill any aircraft, friendly or not, closing on me. I won't take the chance of amazinhunks like you cutting my run short just because you want to keep your furball going.
-
Damn, this thread is still going?
So let me see fi I get this all right....
Westy is whining, err, peeved because he insists he gave me a checksix several weeks ago (beats me, flew a lot of sorties between here and then, and I honestly don't recall what the heck he's talking about) and is opposed to giving me, or my buff, friendly or not, in the forseeable future. Hmmm, sounds petty to me. But, can I say I'm suprised? Nah. And I can't really say I care. <shrug> Apparently I am damned because <gasp> I annoyed Mr Westy once upon a time, so beware to the rest of you who cross his uptight path too! Muhahahahaha
Lazs is the lost cause. He's the retard in the corner rocking back n forth like "RainMain" singing "Definately gotta get rid of bombers" along with "KMart Sucks" :P All he thinks of is fighters, fighters, fighters. Anything with 2 or more engnies is bad, and he and his imaginery advocates all feel the buffs "ruin his fun", although he won't use "he", he'll always allude to others, who apparently do not exist. There is no discussion or reasoning with someone who fantasizes or imagines support of his own thought....
Ah, then there is Wotan. He who claims I am trying to force everyone to play my game, despite the facts of the discussion. Almost as bad as Laz, but he's got a sense of humor and seems like a good natured guy. :D Wotan, we AGREE the B-17 has issues. But as for the buffs in general, what's the big deal? Please, abstain from the Laz "We ruin your fun" mantra. Your fighters on my Lancasters 6 ruin my fun too, but that's how the game is played. Why can't you see it that way?
(Yes, lots of humor has been injected cuz we need it!)
As the thread started out, and has expanded, I dont understand the anti-buff crap still. Seems anything with bombs hung to them piss you guys off :)
-
Not whining and not peeved. I'm being factual and I'm responding to inform your narrow-mindedness just what the scoop is as. Just as you asked. Others have pointed it out that you asked but obviously don't want to listen. You only read and hear only what you want to and on top of that you twist and distorte what is said. Similar to that "6" call incident. I only remember the moment because you looked like a baffoon on the country channel berating all around you for not giving you a "6" call when you'd been given 3. One by myself and two from others. But, like here, you went off half cocked, ill informed and ever so right in your conviction that in your mind you were transgressed.
Westy
-
lepaul and texace... you guys are proof positive that buffers are too dumb to live. I hope you guys are using effective birth control methods or are gay.
You have too much effect on the game for how little skill and/or effort you put into it. What is so hard to understand? the effect that you few have on the many is lopsided and you are unhappy if your affect is diminished... so long as you are able to have such a lopsided affect on gameplay there will be animosity. texace says it best... he doesn't care what affect he has on other players so long as he has his fun.
Really, the way the so called "strat" is set up there is no need for buffs.. In fact... the only way to have em is to make em so concession ridden that they are not even in the same game as the rest of us.... If you make the accuracy of the bombs correct or if you make them have each gun manned then they won't play... Not me throwing them out.... they just will pout and go away...
lepaul... read what funked and wotan said again if you have problems understanding me.. they made it quite clear. I can't believe that anyone could read those and still pretend to not get it... Perhaps you are the one who is retarded? If so, NP... I can understand that but if you are not retarded then it would appear that you have trouble with the truth. "rainman" indeed.
lazs
-
War is hell innit? :)
-
Lazs why don't you just shoot down those bombers and quit whining ?
-
Ah well said, Staga :eek:
-
<sigh> I give up. There is no need for me to keep fighting this. I can't change one man's opinion when he's so dead set on one thing.
Oh, and lasz, you can kiss my ass. This thread has gone on too long and the last posts where I try to reason you just turn back around. I am not dumb. Ok? Got that? I am not dumb. Nor am I gay.
I wll just read with interest and won't post on this thread anymore.
-
I only have one thing to say about buffs & buff formations have u tried flying in a tight formation of buffs & what was ur fps? formations of bombers die ez :( i have a better chance alone than i do in a med to large formation :( it is hard to hit a warpy bandit no matter what & that info has to go to sometimes 6 or 7 other people.
-
lets get this post to 100
I used to spend much time hunting buffs and killing them.
Its boring a waste of time the dweeb keeps coming and coming hell me and a swuaddie shot the same 2 lancs ib 48 earlier tonight 6 times. They nevr made to 48 a p47 ended jaboing the vh before ag could kill him. Then the 2 lanc jokers showed up in spits to deack it they got most but I killed umm both.
They then came back in a spit and a goon and I killed umm again.
This story proves to me the value of buffs to base capture NONE,,,,,,,
The only time they make it is when everyone else is having fun furballin to waste there time runnin umm down. So they come in and with laser accurracy kill the fhs and fly off. Thats when the someone gets mad and kills umm. WOW what fun...........
-
OK I killed 6 or 7 buffs tonight, and got shot down by them twice. They are NOT impossible to kill, if you know what you are doing, but it will never be easy. I have had others shoot my buff down using approaches that daze me, and I am a dam good buff gunner if I do say so myself!
What gets me is the rudder thing. I saw a buff at 22k rudder turn his buff around so fast my n1k couldn't turn with him! That ain't right! Plus I can corkscrew straight down to the deck ina B17 withoug the slightest worry of compression. That ain't right either.
Spivey
Originally posted by Apache:
Buffs ruin the game as they are right now.
We "furballers" as some label us, relish the fight, the air combat, seeing if you can come out unscathed or maybe a little banged up but back just the same. It matters not to us how many fields we or the enemy has but simply the fight.
"Strat" fighters like to take out fields using jabo tactics. They have to come in heavy, fight thier way thru, then try to get out safely. This takes much skill & practice.
They also are more inclined to do defensive fighter sweeps because field status is their bread & butter, but the fight is still prime.
"Buffs" ruin these options for us. Sometimes as many as 30 or 40 fighters may be in an area, both furballers & strat guys doing thier thing. Along comes a buff, 1 guy and shuts down the hangars. Yes, fighters could go for them, but most of us don't bother anymore. Why should we? Climb to 30k plus where they are currently outperforming high alt fighters? Nope.
One of the best suggestions I've seen in a long time was virtual bomber wingmen. Don't know about the codeing difficulties but it seems that if the bomber gun range was toned back to more "realistic" (I hate using that word) settings and a bomber pilot could count on wingmen, then it would be more of a fight for the fighters. We could setup an attack properly instead of trying to beat guns that shouldn't be hittin' you in the first place.
IMHO of course.
-
spivey did you read any of the thread or did you decided to start one at the end of this one?
who said buffs were impossible to kill besides the buff lovers?
buffs arent any harder to kill then a goon most times.
maybe read the topic title then atleast scan some of the post then reply.................... :)
almost to 100 you guys can do it
-
98
-
99
-
100
:D
-
Naso was the number 100 if u include the original.
I am the 100th reply. :)
Lazs1 , u postet that texace and LePaul prove they are to dumb to get any point.
And u are too dumb to recognize the MA is not one big furball room.
Go to Fighter Ace arcade rooms, there u are well placed.
[ 09-25-2001: Message edited by: Naudet ]
-
Naudet My post was number 100, your post was only reply number 100.
my 100 is better than yours :D ;) :p
Btw, I agree with the latter part of your post :)
-
OK urs was post #100, but my put the reply dialer to 3 digits, lets say its a draw. :D ;)
-
ok ;) :)
-
Hey Geeb, kind of like the unescorted raids on Schweinfurt isn't it? If you like flying bombers it goes with the territory. You're typicaly "easy meat" if you fly alone or unprotected. Same thing for most "fighter" pilots in the MA.
The point? Learn, adapt and strive to succeed. Don't whine about it and don't ask for it to be simpler as it's already ridiculously easy to fly a bomber in AH. And if you want to be the "Lone Porker" ("Hi Ho MilkRun.....away!") type then expect the scorn of a lot of people for a lone bomber is not a team player nor a particpant in the air battles they severely disrupt. Teams and organised groups are. Mono-morons are not.
Westy
-
Ok buffers, You are easy to shoot down but hard to shoot down in time for it to matter unless a fighter is a dedicated buff killer... hanging out at alt far forward waiting for a suicide buff to show...something that someone else earlier described as a waste of time and boring in the extreme and... useless in any case.
naudet.. read my posts again. I understand there is a language problem but I never said the point of the MA was one big furball... I said that the furball was by far the most realistic combat we have in AH but certainly... the most fun (if you fly anything except LW planes).
texace... yes, I'm afraid that you are indeed dumb. A good honest dumb tho, instead of a sneaky, weasley dumb like lecar. I didn't say you were gay.. Only that I had hoped that you were in order to prevent thinning the gene pool. Your telling me to "kiss my ass" was a glimmer of hope for me that you may indeed be.
The bombers have tto much affect on the game for the amount of people who fly em, the skill required to fly em and the ability to abuse and "ruin" gameplay.
Bet they get changed soon.
lazs
-
And there you have it, folks.
Lazs can't argue or have an open discussion without calling others names. He's openly maknig fun of my nick, saying we are stupid, and going one further saying we are gay, etc etc.
That's fine, I've had some fun pointing out "RainMan" 's inconsistencies and they bounce off that remarkably thick skull of his and tried to keep the smug remarks above par. But Lazs can't apparently do that, and if he can't argue or have a discussion like an adult, I can see why his fragile little feelings are hurt when he can't magically roll from his favorite field.
He wants realism, but can't accept the realism that bombers bomb fighter hangars, and that is part of the game.
I had a good time buffing last night and every con I shot down, I asked "Did I ruin your fun?" No one said Yes, Lazs. If anything I got (Salutes) and other positive responses.
So you and your imaginery legions of supporters can go screw.
-
Lepaul:
Real buffs had a very hard time hitting anything as small as an airfield much less a specific building, and they were uniformly hopeless for attacking moving ships. However in AH they perform these tasks quite well. Buffs are by far the least realistic feature in AH.
Hooligan
-
LePaul:
------------------------------------------
I had a good time buffing last night and every con I shot down, I asked "Did I ruin your fun?" No one said Yes, Lazs. If anything I got (Salutes) and other positive responses.
------------------------------------------
Ummm, LePaul, the argument is that the buffs effect on gameplay, ie. ruining furballs by taking down fighter hangers, etc. is what is ruining the fun in the MA.
Their ability to sometimes shoot down a fighter does NOT ruin the fun. The fact that they fly so far over a good fight that they aren't even participants in the fight, but have the power to bring the fight (that they're not even in) to an end for 10 or more people, DOES.
All this, and add on top of it that it takes absolutely no skill for a bomber to hit the target.
anRky
-
Well, I said I wasn't going to post again, but I am bored. I know a friend like lazs at school. Whenever he finds something he believes in, he sticks to it, no matter what. I once punched his aregument (I don't remember what about, although I had like 5 guys backing me up) and he just kept with it.
It seems here that we now have a good defined split in the AH community. We have on one hand, the guys who just want this to be Quake in Planes, an eternal deathmatch, like lazs and Wontan; and we have the strat and realism guys, like myself and LePaul. One says the other is wrong, and the other says the same thing. It is an endless cycle that will never be stopped because everyone has their own opinion.
I think the time has come to face the facts. Bombers in the MA are here to stay, and more will be on the way. I'm sure that we'll get all the things we want, like depresion and wind and not-so-accurate bombsites (WB is a good example) and then we will all be happy. The only thing I can suggest for the Quake-High players is that the must accept the fact that from time to time a bomber will shut a field down and stop a furball. I do this all the time. Like I said before, fly to another field and start again. I noticed a contradicting statement in one of lazs' previous posts, saying something about starting another fight and hoping another buff won't stop it. Well, what's to stop the QH players from moving yet again?
Bombers are not ruining anyone's fun, they are simply moving the QH players elsewhere. Now if you consider flying to a fight not fun, well then I hope you aren't in the Air Force.....
-
Ahhh... so lecar... when you make fun of someone and call them names it is in the spirit of fun but when you are made fun of it is a crime against humanity? that's all fine tho, ur persecution complex is pretty well known by now. the real issue is your inability to grasp what is being said. Anarky's last post is worth adding to the list of posts u should have not skipped over by the way. Hooli has pointed out how you ruin the "imersion" too.
texace.... u said you weren't going to post again.... i would hate to have to believe that gay people were untruthful. remember... you are not just representing yourself.
lazs
-
<places head in hands and shakes it> Damn....this...to...hell....
Hell..I even posted a civlilized observant message and all lazs can do is insult me. Oh well...perhaps I'll go play and relieve tension.
[ 09-25-2001: Message edited by: texace ]
-
Originally posted by AN:
LePaul:
Ummm, LePaul, the argument is that the buffs effect on gameplay, ie. ruining furballs by taking down fighter hangers, etc. is what is ruining the fun in the MA.
Guess I'm dumb but isn't it why bombers are here ?
I meant taking down fighter hangars etc...
-
Staga:
----------------------------------------
Guess I'm dumb but isn't it why bombers are here ?
I meant taking down fighter hangars etc...
----------------------------------------
I figure there are bombers in the MA because there were bombers in WWII.
I don't think HTC put bombers in the MA just so that there would be something to kill the fighter hangers with.
anRky
-
Starting to sound like one of your MA rants Lepaul...you know, when nobody plays the way you want them to.
Breathe deeply, relax. :)
bowser
-
texace i'm not making fun of you. your sexual preferance is really none of my business. And ...
speaking of your "civilized" thread.... that "friend" you have that continues to argue even tho you and 5 others told him he was wrong.... did he perhaps have a good argument and you and the villagers (no, i didn't say "village people")not?
lazs
-
No lazs, his arguement was completely and totally biased. He decided that he was right and that anyone else who challenged him was wrong. When me and the "other villagers" proved once and for all that he was wrong and his argument no longer had any meat to it, he got huffy and stated in a whining voice: "Well, that doesn't matter, 'cause I am right and your not!" He hated anyone ever contradicting him. He even got thrown out of our debate class because he couldn't stand the fact his argument was wrong. That's the way it seems here. Me and others can punch your argument full of holes, with proof that it is extreamly biased, and you still go on about how we are wrong.
texace... yes, I'm afraid that you are indeed dumb.
------------------------------------------
Only that I had hoped that you were in order to prevent thinning the gene pool. Your telling me to "kiss my ass" was a glimmer of hope for me that you may indeed be.
i would hate to have to believe that gay people were untruthful.
Yes lazs, you really didn't insult me. :rolleyes: You need to re-read your posts before flat out lying again. :p
-
Originally posted by texace:
It seems here that we now have a good defined split in the AH community. We have on one hand, the guys who just want this to be Quake in Planes, an eternal deathmatch, like lazs and Wontan; and we have the strat and realism guys, like myself and LePaul.
Then I guess you would have no problem with the ability to man only one position and lose the ability to steer your bomber with your rudder pedals while you are gunning?
You wouldn't mind having bombs effected by the wind then? You wouldn't mind having to spend 10 minutes in the Norden locking your target in the crosshairs? You wouldn't mind more accurate bomb dispersion then?
To say that you are in pursuit of realism moreso than Lazs is... well that's simply laughable because bombers and vehicles are the least realistic and most gamey element in this game.
-SW
-
WTG SWulfe!!!!
Very nicely said!!!
:)
-
This needs to be repeated because I don't think they'll see this it the first time around and it's harder to ignore when it's repeated.
"To say that you are in pursuit of realism more so than Lazs is... well that's simply laughable because bombers and vehicles are the least realistic and most gamey element in this game."
Westy
-
After all these posts I think I misunderstood.
I believe Le-Car is dyslexic and must have meant:
"Why are buffs in AH such a big pile?"
Could this be it?
Hooligan
-
:) I hardly respect any of you now. :p Except SWulfe, I liked his post, because I would enjoy flying bombers more if those things existed.
Seriously, if you have no intentions of attempting to take a base, leave the fighter hangars alone. A tactical strike in AH would involve bomber hangars, vehicle hangars, ammo, and barracks. That removes that base's ability to pork/capture your field. If it's a mission to take the base, level it. ;)
Actually, I like Lazs idea. Fighters should be able to spawn as long as any hangar is available. To add to it, bombers however, are only spawnable if the large hangars are available. Next, 3000lbs necessary for small hangars, 4000lbs necessary for large hangars. Then add in drift and dispersion for bombs (yet add more blast radius). No flight control at all from a gunner position. You want to manuever and shoot back, hire a gunner. :D
-
texace... where Have i made fun of you? I told you that your sexual preference was none of my business and In fact... I admire you for being so brave about it... How many marines would do such a thing on a public BB such as this? As for the being dumb comment.........
Well... it seemed to me that you were asking me to evaluate your mental powers and I did so in an honest manner based on your post at the time.
Hooli... thank you for helping me understand what le'car meant...
lazs
-
No, no, no. I didn't say that I LIKED the bombers as they were. I would like to see them fixed and changed and what not. What I am arguing against is those people who want them removed because they ruin the fun. I like the bombers, but I want them fixed just like everyone else.
Oh lazs, please, you are digging an even deeper hole, and you have absoulutly no idea what you just said, I can tell. Please, if you want to argue, fine. But if you are going to insult me, do it properly, and don't walk around it. :D
I do think the bombers need wind drift and drepression. I do think the bombs be blast radius. I do think the flight models need to be revised. I do NOT think they should be removed. Is my argument clear now?
[ 09-26-2001: Message edited by: texace ]
-
well.... I suppose it is a good tactic to take out fighter hangers and fighter hangers only if you only have so many bombs but.. It would be a good tactic to use radar guided naval shells to level a field from 2 sectors out if that were possible. It would not be a good thing for gameplay tho IMO and I would probly squeak about the fleets having too much affect on gameplay.
The naval types would complain that they needed to have fun too and needed some "concessions" otherwise no one would man the fleet. They need all the guns slaved to one person and the pinpoint accuracy to make up for lack of interest and lack of shell blast... I'm sure they would point out how long it took them to get to within 2 sectors of a field and how us fighter pukes could just take off from another field.
I'm sure the A bomb advocates have their arguement too.
buffing has too much affect on the other elements for how little effort and skill is required. It needs to be fixed so that they have less affect.
lazs
-
texace:
----------------------------------------
I do think the bombers need wind drift and drepression...
----------------------------------------
I don't know about anyone else, but I always get drepressed when I see a bomber. <g,d,r>
anRky