Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Halo on July 16, 2002, 05:03:59 PM
-
With all the hoopla about the 3-bomber formations, I thought 1.10 would be the era of the bomber. Big surprise -- just the opposite. So far the bomber trios have been just juicier targets for interceptors and maybe even less a bomb threat than ever because the bombsights are so difficult to use, let alone master.
I thought three sticks of bombs would clobber just about any target, but even with three Lancs, they're just a line of 52 thousand-pound bombs that only hurt whatever happens to be in their line without near the spread I inaccurately envisioned.
Is that how real bombsights are calibrated? If so, kudos to the real bombardiers. Their life is much more difficult than I imagined.
I've given it a good try, but I cannot set that bombsight by holding the joystick over a spot for two seconds and hitting the y key. Sure, I've gotten it set several times, but I can't figure where the bombs are going to hit anyway.
I've read many of the posts with information about bombing, but I just can't fathom the infinitely varying y spots which for me so far have only a vague correlation about where I release the bombs and where they hit.
I realize that's the idea. Real strategic bombing takes a lot of training and precision setting and hold-still bomb runs.
And it's a very good thing the absurd laser-guided bombs are gone.
However ... for playability, the bombsights are too difficult for most players, from what I've seen. Don't know what the solution should be, and sure don't want to go back to laser-guided bombs.
Meanwhile, like so many posts I've read, I'm having more fun than ever in jabo -- in them, life seems doable again, and I can play and have fun instead of feeling I'm in a graduate course in navigation and bombing.
So contrary to my expectations, 1.10 so far ushers in not the Era of the Bomber but the Era of the Jabo.
-
Well...all I can say, or should, is: Look out!
There is a ready room full of fellas that have taken the time to master the skills neccessary to doing a good job at level bombing.
Hell...it took me a week to figure out that I needed to slew the damned bombsight in calibration mode (both vertical and horizontal to maintian my selected calibration point). The only draw back to the new system for me is the time it takes to reverse on a field for a second or third pass without losing the AI bombers -but I feel that this is a natural evolution of the game, and a much needed and appreciated one at that.
Im totally plussed by the new system.
-
Halo.. not sure but by reading the above u don't say that u HOLD the y key while holding the spot in your xhairs...
You need to HOLD the Y key while you are holding the point in the xhairs.. What i do is find a spot, hold it for a second then hit and hold the Y key all the while holding the point in the xhairs. I hold this for 3-5 secs minimum and then i release Y key.
even after all that I still can't hit %$#%$#!
SKurj
-
I've figured out how to use the new calibration system, but the new system really seems to discourage bombers.
Additionally, the perk system w/ the Arado is ridiculous. HT said that bombs would be less accurate, but noted that the fix for that was that you would drop three times as many.
So basically, when you fly the arado now, you get the effective fire-on-target of the old Arado, but it costs 3x as much? C'mon.
-
ya i took a gaggle of arados out last nigh...wha a pain in the ass...
just taking off is horrible..
It was succeful..but really not worth it...
How about..arados only with the old laser guided bom sights???
lolo
im now 4 for 4 vs/ CV in my box of 17's.... I drop all 36 500lbs..from 11k.... .06 delay:)
But against airfields im about 4 for 10..Its getting me pissed off....
I feel like i do everything the same way each time....But they are diff hits??? I figured out if you are above 14k you have to go east-west directions or the wind blows them away....WHY doenst this Super Bom sigth calibrate for that>????
Other then that ..I kil many a ftr who attaks me:)
Love BiGB
xoxoxo
-
The ARADO didn't bomb like we do in ah. If we ever get that pesky periscope to work :)
As the Ar-234 landed at high speed, it had a drag chute as standard equipment; it was one of the first aircraft to do so. The rounded nose of the aircraft was covered with plexiglas, giving the pilot an excellent view to the front, but no view to the back except through a periscope. The periscope, which was not provided in the Ar-234 prototypes, also served as a sight for dive-bombing attacks.
There was no ejector seat. The pilot got into and out of the aircraft through a transparent hatch on top of the cockpit. Getting out of the Ar-234 in an emergency was not a trivial task.
The Ar-234 handled very well at all speeds and was capable of all aerobatics. The worst operational problem was the unreliability of the Jumo 004B engines, which required overhaul or replacement after about ten hours of operation. The brakes also tended to wear out after about three landings and so had to often be replaced.
The fuel consumption of the Jumos varied widely with altitude. At 10,000 meters, it was a third of what it was at sea level. This meant that for low-altitude bombing missions, the operational radius of the aircraft was only about 190 kilometers (120 miles), while in high-altitude reconnaissance operations the range was as much as 720 kilometers (450 miles) with the drop tanks.
When operated as a bomber, the Ar-234 could be used in shallow dive attacks, low-level horizontal attacks, or high-altitude horizontal attacks. In shallow dive attacks, the pilot would drop from about 5,000 meters to under 1,500 meters, aiming the bombs through the periscopic sight that stuck up above the cockpit.
In low-level horizontal attack, used only when the target was obscured, the pilot simply flew level and dropped the bombs when it seemed appropriate. Results were not generally very impressive.
High-altitude horizontal attacks were particularly interesting. Since the Ar-234 was a single-seat aircraft, the pilot had to double as the bombardier, and did so with the help of a sophisticated Patin autopilot system. The pilot would fly to within about 30 kilometers of the target, engage the autopilot, swivel the control column out of his way to the right, and then lean over and sight the target through the Lotfe 7K bombsight.
The bombsight was linked to the autopilot. As long as the pilot held the target in the crosshairs, the autopilot would change the aircraft's heading accordingly, and then the bombsight would automatically drop the bombs at the right moment.
In principle, the Ar-234B had a pair of fixed rearward-firing 20-millimeter guns for protecting its tail, with the pilot sighting the guns through the periscope. Not only did the pilot have to be his own bombardier, he was his own tail gunner as well. However, in practice the guns were not always fitted and were never an important feature of the aircraft.
-
Yeah, guys, thanks for the responses. I really do like and appreciate the new bombing system, but I lament its steep learning curve.
I think I've been holding the y and even working the slew, but what really bugs me is having to guess what it all means. For example, all that messing with the joystick just strikes me as too cumbersome.
And after all that, if I do line the bomb sight up perfectly, and it should be calibrated for proper alt and airspeed, the bombs never hit the x, usually going long. After going to all that trouble, it seems the bombs should fall where you aim, right?
I usually bomb around 10k so wind shouldn't be another factor (and don't bombers have some way of compensating for wind too?).
The bombing was a great challenge at first, but after many attempts with erratic results it became frustrating and no fun.
Hard to enjoy a system that the more you try, the dumber you feel.
My major complaint is the seemingly randomness of the y point calibration, picking any point you want in the whole view. Every time you set a different point, the bombsight view looks different. I guess that's the point, but it's too difficult for me so far, and I've seen a lot of posts by people who are not interested in investing the time and effort to bomb (good double entendre) that I have so far.
I do like the 1.10 play more than ever, including the bombing changes. I suppose enough people will master the new techniques so eventually I'll catch on by osmosis. But for the time being, my rewards are not in horizontal bombers except for shooting them down.
-
so eventually I'll catch on by osmosis
====
Hehe...thats all Ive ever done. In fact, still doing it ;)
-
Is that how real bombsights are calibrated? If so, kudos to the real bombardiers. Their life is much more difficult than I imagined.
In actuality, it was a great deal uglier than that.
You can look at the procedure to initialize and calibrate the Norden bombsight (http://www.bombergroup.com/bg/bombsight.html) if you want to be thankful you don't have to go through all that. The process in AH is loosely similar to the actual process, except that with the real Norden, once you've got the target set up in the sight your bombs drop automatically.
-
I can hit with the Norden, its easy. Killed 2 hangers 1st ever try (dumb luck that was). I can hit the field which is accuracy enough for me, I use B-17s and carpet bomb with 500s
-
Which version of the Arado had a landing skid? Most of the film I've seen of Arados (eastern front) has them landing on a central ski.
It looks a wild ride, I'd love to see some one risk perkies that way :)
-
The Ar-234 was originally conceived in early 1941 by an engineering team under Professor Walter Blume, director of the Arado aircraft company. The design project was codenamed E370, and was in response to a German Air Ministry requirement for a fast reconnaissance aircraft.
The E370 was to be a sleek, high-winged aircraft with a pair of Junkers Jumo 004 turbojets, one under each wing. The Air Ministry wanted a range of 2,150 kilometers (1,340 miles), and so to reduce weight, Arado proposed that the E370 would take off on a wheeled tricycle trolley that would be left behind after take-off, and land on skids at the end of the flight.
Skids would also be built under the engines to prevent them from being damaged on landing. The pilot would be able to steer the nosewheel of the take-off trolley, while the main wheels would have hydraulic brakes, controlled by the cockpit rudder pedals.
Arado projected a maximum speed of 780 KPH (485 MPH), an operating altitude of almost 11,000 meters (36,000 feet), and a maximum range of 2,000 kilometers (1,250 miles). The range was a little less than what the Air Ministry wanted, but they liked the design anyway, and ordered two prototypes. The aircraft was given the military designation Ar-234. Additional prototypes would be ordered presently.
The two prototypes were largely complete before the end of 1941, but the Jumo 004 engines weren't ready, and wouldn't be ready until 1943. In February 1943, Arado finally got a pair of Jumo 004As. However, these engines were only cleared for static and taxi tests. At the time, Messerschmitt had priority for engine deliveries, and Arado had to accept what they could get.
* Flight-qualified engines were finally delivered late that spring, and the Ar-234 made its first flight on 30 July 1943. The initial flights went smoothly, except that on the first two takeoffs the parachutes that were intended to soft-land the take-off trolley didn't deploy, and the trolley was wrecked in both cases.
By September, four prototypes were flying. However, back in early July, even before the first flight, the Air Ministry had been seriously considering building a bomber version of the Ar-234. Orders were placed for two prototypes of such a bomber variant, with the designation Ar-234B.
Since the aircraft was too slender to carry the bombs internally, the bombs would have to be carried on external racks. This made the skid-landing scheme impractical, and so the bomber would have conventional tricycle landing gear.
The skid landing scheme had proven conceptually flawed anyway. Skid landings were a rough and doubtful proposition, and once an Ar-234 had landed, it was effectively immobile for the twenty minutes it took to jack it up and put it back on its trolley. With Allied air attacks increasing over the Germany, skid landing made the aircraft far too vulnerable to destruction on the ground.
* The Ar-234 program suffered a tragic setback when the second prototype crashed due to an engine failure on 2 October 1943, killing its pilot. Nonetheless, Adolf Hitler and other top-ranking Nazis saw a prototype on static display at an airshow in East Prussia in late November and were very impressed. The program was given the highest priority.
Work intensified on a prototype of the Ar-234B variant, while four more trolley-mounted Ar-234 prototypes were completed. The fifth prototype incorporated new Jumo 004B-0 engines, which had the same thrust rating of 840 kilograms (1,850 pounds) as the Jumo 004As used in the first four prototypes, but weighed 90 kilograms (200 pounds) less. The seventh prototype was similar.
The sixth and eighth prototypes were intended to study powerplant schemes to be used on advanced versions of the aircraft to follow the Ar-234B. They were both powered by four 800 kilogram (1,760 pound) thrust BMW 003 turbojets. The BMW 003 had less thrust than the Jumo 004B, but the BMW engines were much lighter, and increased the overall thrust-to-weight ratio of the aircraft.
The sixth prototype had the four BMW engines in separate nacelles, while the eighth prototype clustered them in pairs under each wing. The paired nacelle scheme proved more satisfactory than the four separate jets, which led to aerodynamic troubles.
All the prototypes starting with the third had provision for rocket-assisted takeoff. A rack was fitted under each outer wing to carry a bottle-shaped Walter 109-500 rocket, powered by hydrogen peroxide and sodium permanganate. Each rocket weighed about 280 kilograms (617 pounds), and was capable of generating 500 kilograms (1,100 pounds) of thrust for 30 seconds.
The rockets were dropped by parachute after the Ar-234 was airborne. The aircraft incorporated a scheme of pressure switches that sensed whether the rocket units were delivering thrust or not. If one did not generate thrust, the other was automatically shut down to prevent it from slewing the aircraft around.
The ninth prototype was the first Ar-234B, with a built-in undercarriage, and first flew in March 1944. By this time, production lines were being set up to build the aircraft in quantity, and the first of 20 pre-production Ar-234Bs came off the line in June.
However, ambitious plans for massive production of new variants had to be scaled back. During the last week of February 1944, the Allies pounded German aircraft factories and seriously damaged production capacity. While the "Big Week" raids had spared Arado production facilities, as they were too far east and out of range, the following reshuffling and dispersal of production meant that resources originally planned for building new types of aircraft had to be reserved for manufacturing existing types.
* That same March, the fifth and seventh prototypes were equipped with cameras and handed off to a special Luftwaffe reconnaissance unit for operational readiness tests, in preparation to fielding the Ar-234B. The Allied invasion of France was to then give the aircraft an excellent opportunity to prove themselves. Allied fighters were doing such a good job of protecting the Normandy beachhead from German reconnaissance aircraft that Wehrmacht commanders were completely in the dark about enemy intentions.
The Ar-234, with its high speed, seemed likely to penetrate Allied fighter screens, and on 25 July the two aircraft left Germany for France. One had to turn back, but the other arrived safely, only to wait a week for the take-off trolley, rocket booster units, and other kit to arrive by truck.
The first operational flight took place on 2 August 1944, when Leutnant Erich Sommer took his Ar-234 on a reconnaissance flight over the beachhead, cruising at about 740 KPH (460 MPH) at above 9,200 meters (30,000 feet). Two Rb 50/30 aerial cameras were mounted in the rear fuselage, each canted 12 degrees from the vertical in opposite directions. At operating altitude, they took one set of pictures every 11 seconds, imaging a swath almost 10 kilometers wide across the direction of flight.
Sommer came and went unhindered. Altitude and speed kept him safe, and in fact he wasn't even detected. The images he returned showed a buildup of more than 1.5 million men and a matching amount of supplies and weapons.
That day the second Ar-234 finally arrived, and over the next three weeks the two machines flew 13 more missions without interference from Allied defenses. They returned high-quality intelligence data, but they only confirmed in detail what the Wehrmacht ground commanders knew only too well: the Germans were being beaten by an overwhelmingly superior adversary.
The results of this became apparent to the jet pilots, when they were forced to withdraw to Holland in early September. This did not take them out of harm's way; their airfield at Volkel was plastered by 100 Royal Air Force (RAF) Lancasters in a daylight raid on 3 September 1944. The Ar-234s were then withdrawn back to Germany. By this time, Ar-234Bs were available for operational use and the prototypes were no longer needed.
Arado 234 (http://www.vectorsite.net/avar234.html)
-
Thanks!
-
I think the issue is the large map. The new system works (for me) when I can weave between radars and arrive at the target undetected.
With the small map, this is almost impossiable.
-
The problems with bombers now have nothing to do with the difficult of calibration. The problem is that bombers now are forced to do one pass, on a target which is usually very spread out. The result is that hitting a field, a bomber formation with a perfect calibration will be lucky to kill two or three ANYTHING in one pass. Also problems are the fact that strat bombing is pointless, as it has little effect, especially on akdesert. The worst though is that bombers are taking some of the same damage. When you hit one bomber, sometimes the other bombers will also take that damage.
I've seen it a number of times before while in a buff(check the bug board) And just last night, I shot the wingtip off of a b17, he bailed, out, and the next plane also started spiraling down, then he did it again, and the last one spiraled into the ocean.
A formation of buffs now, is about as difficult to kill as a 1.09 lone buff.
-
why bomb the airfield?
jabos can deal with it. Hit the strat targets. Twns, cities, factories, hq, etc.
Use bomber in a roll that they were designed for. Dont expect to snipe of individaul buildins on an airfield. Theres a reason why attack and fighter bomber aircraft were developed.
-
Wotan,
There's no point to hitting the factories. They're too spread out to do any damage and they don't have any effect on the game.
I spent an hour in Lancs in order to destroy a single AA factory building. My bombs marched all the way across the middle of the AA factory complex, but the the complexes are almost completely empty space.
In order to get bombers to hit these targets the targets must play a significant part in the game and be able to be significantly impacted by a trio of bombers. Right now they do not affect the game in any significant fashion and are basically immune to anything short of a 15-30 bomber raid.
-
I agree with Innominate about the bomber damage carryover stuff. I think that bug has been mentioned before, and has the attention of the AH staff. Hopefully we will get a resolution on that issue soon.
If I could change one thing with the calibration system however, it would be to have a way to control the speed of the bombers automatically. Not like the current auto speed setting, which uses altitude changes to match speed. I have noticed that the B-17 is one of the most accurate bombers for me because its speed "settles" relatively quickly. It takes a lot less time for the B-17 to come off climb speed and settle into the level bombing speed that I like, and setup for the second drop is also much shorter because of this.
With the Lancaster, it takes almost a full sector "settle" on a final bombing speed, and small changes in throttle will take much too long to settle on. It is almost like it is on skates. I have found that this acceleration issue is the primary reason for my inaccuracies, and if I take more time to allow for these speed changes, I am much more accurate. Allowing a speed setting that would automatically adjust throttle to maintain speed would significantly shorten this calibration process.
I am not sure how difficult this would be, but it is just an idea to help the calibration process. Wasn't the speed controlled by the bombardier on the bomb runs in real life anyway?
-
Trying to bomb a factory is no different from trying to bomb a field. Both are virtually all empty space and require pinpoint drops to actually inflict any damage. On top of that, strat targets have little effect on the game, especially on akdesert. We can take three people, hit three seperate strat targets, and then any fields we attack within the next hour will take another 20-30mins to repair(Except hangars which are hardly affected).
Never mind that by the time an attack gets there the strat has started repairing, and that if you can GET a successfull attack on a field, you might as well just cap it and wait for a goon.
Strat bombing, leaving bombers out of field attacks, sounds good. But in the game, strat bombing is pointless without the ability to bomb fields.
-
For bombing airfields to be more effective *and* realistic:
Bomb craters should behave like debris. That is, planes and vehicles shouldn't be able to drive over them w/o damage (or in the present case, blowing up).
A flight of three B17's with 500lb bombs could essentially shut down a small or medium field by trashing the runways. Scattering bombs around the VH would make it difficult to drive a vehicle out safely.
I also agree that the factories are a little too sparse for effective bombing with a single box of three. If flattening a factory had a more tangible/noticeable effect on gameplay, it would motivate larger missions of bombers to hit them, but as it is I don't think anybody really notices when one of their factories has been brought to 0%, so why bother. The only thing that is generally noticeable is when dar is brought down.
-
The fun of bombing is gone. Even when I set up right I don't get a lot of hits. Bombing factorys is useless work at best. Bombing ordinance on fields is hit or miss. Kill a hanger and its back up before you land. Dropping 3 times the bombs and getting 1/3 the hits. Fighters don't get hit by ack so they jump you while your in bombsite. Jump to guns to protect your plane and you have to make a ten minute turn to get back on target. Turn too quick and bye bye drones.
Check the K/D ratio between last tour and this one.Kill ratio of B17, B26 and Lancs has doubled.
-
Bomb craters should behave like debris. That is, planes and vehicles shouldn't be able to drive over them w/o damage (or in the present case, blowing up).
This is an excellent idea; with all the complaining about level bombing being ineffective against airfields. Have the craters appear on the ground where the bomb hits, and cause X amount of damage to the landing gear of a plane that tries to taxi across the crater. Past a certain point, though, the crater would be deep enough that dropping a gear into the crater would be enough to tumble the plane and destroy it.
A picture of a Stuka attack against a Polish armored train, dropping a single 550-lb bomb:
(http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/pol/PolishArmoredTrain.jpg)
You can estimate the crater size from the track guage and the people standing to the left of the train.
From estimates used by the US Air Force for its dropped ordnance, a 250-lb GP bomb can be expected to make a crater about 10' in diameter, a 500-lb bomb a crater about 15' in diameter, a 1000-lb bomb a crater about 35' in diameter, and a 2000-lb bomb a crater about 50' in diameter. The depth of a crater is roughly half the crater diameter.
Of course, it would be necessary to add ground repair to the field rebuild process. It would be simplest to abstract it so that a crater of size X would be repaired in Y minutes, with each field size being able to repair a different number of craters at the same time (i.e., bigger fields have more people to work on repair). There should also be a drivable repair vehicle -- some sort of bulldozer would be perfect -- that could ignore the effects of driving across craters, and that would repair a crater by driving across it a number of times dependent on the crater size.
-
Craters already appear and there does seem to be a "ground repair" process figured in, because craters dissappear as structure damage is repaired.
A quick and simple implementation would be for a crater to just be a piece of debris - run into it and *boom*.
Of course it would be better if there were an actual damage model associated with them, but the same is true for building debris.
Note that you couldn't necessarily completely disable an airfied with bomb craters, because folks could simply take off w/o using the runway (Spits and Zeros hardly require a runway). But it certainly would be a crippling effect and add some realism in the process.
It should also be possible to stop a train resupply by bombing the tracks.
-
how about a 4000lb bomb,
or better yet,
12,000
22,000lb?
-
oh yeah, pre-1.04 (i think) had crater damage
I think it was removed due to people whining about the laser guided bombs landing on spawn points
but we don't have that anymore, do we?
-
closing down the runways with eggs... bad idea...
but .. hitting targets at a field or factory right now... pointless to even try
SKurj
-
Skurj, why would having bomb damage to runways be a bad idea? It was certainly a valid tactic in WWII.
Admitedly, dirt runways are easily repaired (and thus arguably should have a shorter regeneration time), but I'll argue bombing improved runways, roads, and RR tracks is every bit as valid as bombing a hanger or factory and should be reflected in AH.
-
Killing runways would be kind of pointless, since they arent actually needed. No point in bothering when there are other less drastic ways to make bombing worth it.
-
yes please incorporate bom dameg to runways as the boming is reall whacked now........
I can carpet bom a cv from 11k and im 6 for 6 on killn them....
But an air field!!! im 4 for 10 on hittng a specific target..ARGHHHH
It is a bit frustrating now this whloe bomr thing...does any1 here have a 70% or higher hit rate on the targtes they meant to hit?? On an Airfield???
Love BiGB
xoxoxo
-
"Bomb craters should behave like debris. That is, planes and vehicles shouldn't be able to drive over them w/o damage (or in the present case, blowing up). "
In AW craters were fatal. In Fighter Aces craters and crashed aircraft were fatal. I think this is a good idea. Crater out the spawn point, then the runway and hanger approaches.
Won't do you any good to spawn from the hanger if both ends are blocked with craters.
-
ya thas the part where it s screwed up..Tanks and halftraks can drive thru "some " craters..so capping a vh by putting craters there is kinda wak..same as spawn point thing
-
What if the possibility of going "boom" crossing a crater was based on the speed you crossed it at? Perhaps something as conceptualy simple as damaging gear or wheels when you first enter the area of the crater by a set amount that increases with velocity. That way, a tank would have a small chance of being "tracked" by it but a almost certainly would be unable to land or take off across it.
(Then all we would need is a Bulldozer in the VH so the SeaBees could repair the field. ((Don't laugh, I'm kinda serious. I think it would be rather neat if we had to take a hand in the repair of the field other than dropping supplies.)))
-
Originally posted by BGBMAW
It is a bit frustrating now this whloe bomr thing...does any1 here have a 70% or higher hit rate on the targtes they meant to hit?? On an Airfield???
Accurate bombing is easy, you just need to take a few minutes for your speed to level out, and hold the mark key for 20+ seconds, instead of the required two. From the time you start letting your speed level out, to the time you drop your bombs, you should only turn using the f6 view.
The real problem is that, at the very best, you can hope to get two, maybe three targets in a pass, and not enough of the same type to actully have any effect on the field/factory. A single pass takes as long as a full jabo sortie, and to actually disable something will take from two to four passes.
The problem isnt so much bomber's ability to cause damage, but rather, the ability of jabo's to cause signfiicantly more damage than bombers, with more flexibility. The way targets are set up now REQUIRE the old pinpoint bombing. The new bombing system is quite good, it's only deficiency is that targets are arranged to make carpetbombing hit nothing but open ground.
-
hmm easy???
Well im blasting cv too the there grave,,,so i beleive i can get more accurate with FH-VH....i will try calibraten for 20 sec!!! hel lill try it..i kno wim at a constant speed and i ussaly only make final tunr in fine adjust mne t from the bombadiers seat...
ANd hell i would be happy with 1 or 2 tagetrs hit with one pass.... I have killed hanagrs with a salvo of 2- 500lbers.... form each b-17..should i use more???...If i do then i really dont get more then 2 passes at the most..I just Really Want bomers to be a threat in here...not just against ftrs but airfileds...
Love BiGB
xoxoxo
-
in reality... alot of airfields didn't have 1 lane runways like we do in AH
Some were just a huge grass area permitting planes to takeoff in any direction they chose.... ww2ol's airfields are abit closer to reality than AH's..
give us more typical fields and runways, before we get runway damage +)
SKurj
-
Ja, i've read a good number of books by guys who flew big planes (P-38s & P-47s) off the field in finger-4 formation
-
Why not give the factories some real impact on the game?
Just disable auto rebuild after two hours. So if a factory fully up, rebuild in 30 minutes, if it's half up 60 minutes, etc. if it's fully down, don't rebuild at all.