Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Rojo on November 21, 2001, 08:39:00 AM
-
As version 1.09 will likely see radical changes to bombing and level bombers, I wanted to get peoples opinions and ideas on how we’d like to see such things as bomb-aiming, formation keeping, and defensive guns handled. The only things we know for sure at this point are a) that some (but not necessarily all) bombers will now be launched in groups of four, with a single pilot controlling all four; and b) that dispersion will be added to the fall of bombs. As with most tidbits released by HTC regarding future changes to Aces High, these have generated a plethora of additional questions. Setting aside the question of what purpose those bombers will have in the MA (which has been discussed ad nausea in other posts), let’s get some ideas out there for HTC to consider.
First, I’d like to see the option of launching either as a flight of four or as a single aircraft. The player would select this before hitting a spawn button. The reason for this is that there are mission profiles that call for low-level flights and attack profiles, which would be impractical for a flight of four aircraft in a tight formation. The Ju-88 also needs this option, since it is designed to either level bomb or dive bomb. It would be very difficult to program a group of four planes making dive-bombing attacks, and the other planes would be wasted anyway.
Next, how should formation integrity be handled? By this I mean how good should the AI wingman be at maintaining formation, especially during violent evasives. What happens when one of the AI wingmen’s aircraft is damaged and can’t keep up? It seems to me that if an AI plane gets to far from it’s human controlled flight leader (whether due to damage or violent evasive action by the flight leader), it should probably disappear and be counted as lost. Taking violent evasive action should cause the formation to loose integrity (to drift apart), and perhaps even present the risk of collisions between the planes in a flight. This would provide incentive to players to keep control inputs gentle, relying on the formation’s defensive firepower to avoid destruction (as they should).
This brings us to the question of how defensive guns should be handled. Except for ground and ship based anti-aircraft guns, HTC has studiously avoided A/I controlled armament. Should AI gunners be allowed on the AI aircraft, or should all guns in a flight be slaved to a single human gunner (similar to how multiple guns on a single bomber are currently able to track to a human gunner’s aim point)? Should there be allowed more than one human gunner per flight (i.e. one human gunner per AI aircraft)? If all guns in a flight are slaved to a single human player, it would seem necessary to reduce the lethality of them. If you only allow one human gunner per flight, but don’t slave all guns in a flight to that gunner, then you negate half the motivation for having multiple bombers per human pilot. The decrease in level bombing accuracy must be balance by a reasonable ability to reach the target.
Lastly, what changes should be made to the bombsite? The complaint has been made (rightly so, in my opinion) that little skill is currently required to hit targets from even extremely high altitude. Dispersion will make it harder to hit, but the effect will be random, and still not be appreciably influenced by the bombardier’s skill. Bombing with the Norden (or any other bombsite of the era) should require the same level of practice and experience as deflection shooting. Wind was a major factor in level bombing, for example. Should wind effects be included in the ballistics equation? Part of the skill of course will be learning exactly where to place the aim-point to get the best effect from a particular size of bomb and from a particular release altitude. So perhaps the current Norden won’t need to be changed. Any thoughts?
Guess that’ll do to get the discussions rolling. Let’s hear from all the buffers and would-be buffers.
-
Also, what happens to the pilot should he (or she) be shot down, crash or bail? In other words what happens to the remaining "AI" flown bombers? IMO they should self destruct - if the provision is not there for the pilot to emmediatly hop to any of the remaining three planes to control.
I say "emmediatly" because I can easily imagine a situation where a couple of pilots launch a mission together for a flight of 8 bombers. Then right after take off they both bail but the AI ignorantly drones on their own to the target. In the meantime the two fluffernutters emmediatly respawn from the same base, or one closer to the target, with yet another flight of 8 bombers and using 100% throttle they catch up to thier old flight where upon they simpy chop throttle and form one huge bomber group.
In effect two pilots now possibly have an exponentially negative effect on the arena that equals or surpasses what they can do currently - even with any planned bomb drift or new distributed bomb damage etc etc.
As for the new feature? Well regarding formations it would be nice if the system lets the pilot choose any of several formation types as well as the actual distance between each plane in the formation. As for Otto gunners on the AI planes? I'll just hope it is nothing like WB 2.xx and in the meantime I'll just wait to hear word from HTC on how they will implement that.
The bombsite (bombing itself period) should be a long the lines of being more realistic. Much more. I bow to folks like Sunchaser and Jordi who have mucho experience with "B17-II" to color this subject in - if they choose to.
Westy
[ 11-21-2001: Message edited by: O'Westy ]
-
rojo i agree i think u should have a choice to go as one or four bombers,also if wind is gonna play a major role i would hope we get a weather report for the target area mainly wind speed and direction as to decide weather to drop with or aginst the wind and adjust drop point accordingly. an other thing that would be neat if say you get several pilots that all launch 4 bombers maybe there needs to be manchainal problems randomly placed in the ai bombers and some would either dissappear or rtb. anyway just a thought.
-
O`Westy: I couldn't agree more with your concern, and would be surprised and dissappointed if HTC actually allowed such an implementation. Personnally, if the human pilots plane is shot down or he bails, I think he should automatically be sent to the next one in line. That way he would have to bail out four times to voluntarly abort his mission; each plane he bails out of would of course explode as they do now. In fact, this automatic transfer on bailing or having the plane your riding shot down is the only reasonable way to go, I think. That way, if your aircraft is damaged and is slowing the whole flight down (or becomes too difficult to control), you can elect to bail out of it to another plane in your flight. In effect, it's like ordering the damaged plane to leave the formation.
-
It is likely that a human pilot will be able to jump between the planes at will in order to direct the defencive fire, bail out of a seriously damaged plane, etc.
This way there will not be a need for the AI gunners.
A pilot will probably be able to select a number of planes from 1 to whatever is the limit.
The bombardieres in WWII did not have to select an alternative aiming point for windage - they entered the calculated adjustments for supposed values (altitude, speed, temperature, wind, etc) into the bombsight and then aimed as usual. So I would not expect any change from the current aiming practice - other then the bombs spreading out.
P.S. According to Hotseat, WB already has capability for completely AI-controlled level and even tactical bombing strikes - to fill/balance the numbers and provide environment for scenarios and such.
How about an idea much closer to AH - a fleet control, but a fleet of bombers.
A bomber formation (10-20 planes) can be controlled just like a fleet. Pilots in a plane nearby can chose to escort/protect it and pilots far away may chose to jump in at the last/critical moment to man the guns - just like the fleet. This way a major raid could be played without having to empty the arena of the figher planes for an hour.
miko
-
I think it'll be interesting to see how it works.
One thing that concerns me is the dispersion for the eggs. I love to the watch the History channel, especilly when they're running WWII stuff. I can't recall ever seeing footage of a stick of bombs landing in a 'shotgun' pattern caused by some dispersion effect. They always explode in a nice, orderly fashion in a fairly straight line. If this bomb dispersion is anything like what's on the guns aboard the kites now the buffs will be useless. Maybe even divebombing if they're affected by it too. And let's not forget the lack of blast radius. I've dropped 1k eggs on armor units sitting and firing and they have taken no apparent damage from less than a direct hit. Been many times I've gone plinking with 1k eggs only to drop the first egg, look over my shoulder on the pull out, and see the vehicle sitting there still firing on the edge of the crater (no, it wasn't moving when I dropped the egg).
Defensive guns also causes a slight raise of the old eyebrow. Will it be AI gunners? If so, if it has the same kind of code as the ground-based field guns then it will be pure suicide to try any kind of attack on an AI buff. The faster you move and harder you jink the easier it is for the fiend guns to get you (while you can turn lazy 140mph circles in the ack nearly all day).
hmm.. buffs that are immune to attack but can't hit spit cause of over done dispersion.... hope this doesn't lead to that
-
well, get 4 bomber pilots under the proposed 1.09 system and you've got a flight of 16 B-17s. That's significant. Get the DHBG on a mission, and that could be 40+ bombers at once right there. Take 200 people in the arena. say 20% jump into buffs. that's now 160 fighters vs 160 buffs (4 per buff pilot). I think that's plenty, IMO.
Next, make the sights historically accurate. If you're in the B17 or B26, you get the Norden. If you're in a Lanc, you get whatever sight they used. Same for the JU88 and the TBM, if it had a sight for level bombing (I dunno, did it?) I think that'd be fun and add to the experience of buffing. Putting some crosshairs on a target and pulling the trigger is just not very much fun.
as for AI, I think the AI buffs should defend themselves. It's bad enough when two fighters bracket a buff now. In the buff, you can only defend against one. In the flight of 4, if there were no AI gunners, two fighters would easily shred the AI buffs. Just come at the same time from different angles, and one of the fighters will be firing on a defenseless plane. The AI accuracy should be tweaked so that it somewhat sucks, yet isn't a horrible shot. Definitely shouldn't be an above average shot. Come up slow on dead 6, and the AI will shred you. Make intelligent fast passes, and you might get pinged, but more often than not, you'll be fine.
I think it'd be interesting of the pilot could man any of the 4 planes, and not always be in the lead position. As to whether the player could switch between them during flight (either full control or just gunner positions) I dunno. My thinking is, if the player is always in the lead plane, and can't jump to other planes, then fighters will go for the AI buffs if the AI gunner accuracy is below average. If the buff player can jump around, the fighters don't know which is pilot controlled.
I agree with formation integrity in Rojo's post.
-
"AI accuracy should be tweaked so that it somewhat sucks, yet isn't a horrible shot. Definitely shouldn't be an above average shot."
Ah....there's the rub. ;)
-
no AI Gunners!
If I wanted that I'd be playing EAW.
-
This is the 1st I've heard of this new wrinkle...while I'm open minded...I also have deep seated concerns. Buffs are already overmodeled from a gunnery perspective. A B17 is almost invulnerable to attack from a single pilot (assuming a decent gunner onboard). The thought of "quads" is frightening...it makes any kind of solo attack pure suicide. This game started as a flight sim focused on air to air combat (going back to AW dos)...yes bombers have a place and expanded game play is great...but breaking the 1 man/1 plane standard is going to lead to rubican of sorts....
The end of the beginning....or the beginning of the end.
Are we building a tactical 1st person flight sim...with expanded capabilities...or a stratigic simulation...when will I have my tank platoons to face the tiger 2...or my fighter squads to face the 100+ bomber stream that will be coming soon. This is easily the best game/best community I've been exposed to and I'm certainly here to stay...but I'd love to fly and fight...not drum up my AI hordes and go forth...just my 2 cents.
-
NO AI!!!!NO AI!!!!NO AI!!!!
Allow more crewmen to man multicrew bombers!!
Say, enough to man all the guns. And when killing a bomber show how many people were inside of it and show everyone who died on kill counter.And if a gunner pos is destroyed the player manning that gun at that time would be dead.
Thats all i have problems with. Maybe with bombing accuaracy, but hey, Im not worrying
about it. Actually leave the Laser/Norden with this new start system bombers need all the accuaracy they can get.
-
Humble: Read the interview with HiTech at http://www.wargamer.com (http://www.wargamer.com) for the source of the above information. There's some other interesting nuggets there, too.
As for you reservations, they are understandable and probably shared by many. I am both excited and nervouse about the possiblities here. However, I've got faith that HTC will be responsive to player feedback as this is introduced. This idea has been suggested many times before, and I am heartened that HTC is willing to give it a try.
-
First, thanks Westy.
I am sure some others actually are way ahead of me in what should be regarding bombers.
I am also sure HTC has pretty much decided what will be happening in 1.09 and as long as it includes making the B17 look better I will be OK.
I fear bombers are going to be much more controversial as soon as the first 4 Lanc formation controlled by 1 person at 30K levels the local furball field in 1 pass.
Auto gunning in AI bombers, no matter how implemented, will cause problems.
I have always supported more realistic sighting and bombing accuracy and am glad HTC has evolved to a point where some of the less important aspects of this great game can be addressed.
As a strat proponent (sounds way cooler than strat dweeb, eh?) I applaude any effort to enhance my bombing experience and irritate fighter guys.
-
Can you imagine the ackstars raising off harried fields in defense. Two horrible words: ack star. :(
-
*shrugs* ackstars lifting off are the easiest to vulch... slow and big targets. :)
-
Whitout AI controled guns. There would be no need for 4 bombers in formation. 1 man can't jump from position too position in 4 planes. And there is not always 3 other players avlb for gunning. But is it not possible too make the AI "Shoot like an average human gunner"?????? or....?????
:rolleyes: :D :D ;) :confused:
-
I actually think it is great that HTC is trying to make the bombing part of AH more 'historical'. I agree that some bombers need to be able to fly single (Ju-88, NOE B-26 missions, etc.) I see it like this.
1) HTC is going to add the bomb dispersion as accurately as they can, as World War II Bombers didn't have the LGB accuracy we now have. However, adding this effect creates a problem for the medium to high altitude level bombers.
2) To insure that the level bombers can effectively carpet bomb in a manner similar to that used in World War II, they will now require a method to allow bombers to maintain the 'classical' box formation for both mutual defensive support and to improve the chances of success with the new dispersion added into the mix. Not to mention it will look really cool to see a field carpet bombed (Well, if I'm not sitting on the runway at the time anyway ;) -).
3. Having the ability to have the bombers in such a formation, I like the idea of having the pilot who 'creates' the buff flight being the pilot/bombadier for the entire mission. However, now I think he needs the ability to add 4 gunners, one for every bomber. Whichever bomber gets hit and can't continue with the formation, would break away, and the gunner on that bomber could now pilot it (As it is 'disconnected' from the flight) and he can decide whether to continue on towards the target, or attempt to RTB. The pilot of the flight, remains the pilot of the flight. If the lead bomber which he is in is the first hit and 'flight disconnected' he is just automatically 'moved' to the next 'good' bomber in the flight. This would continue until only one good bomber is remaining, in which case, it is exactly what we have now, except without the laser guided bomb effect.
If one of the 'flight disconnected' bombers is unmanned, I think it should just enter a downard spiral until someone downs it or it augers.
I would like those features, because having a gunner for every buff will definitely make it tougher on the attacking fighters (It wasn't meant to be easy ;) -). It will also allow for better SA on the buff formations part when attacked by mulitple bandits.
I know what I would like to see wouldn't be easy to implement, but I think it would greatly add to the immersiveness of AH. I can't wait to see how they implement it. :)
P.S.- I would also see the 'Flight Leader/Pilot/Bombadier' selecting how many bombers he wants to roll while in the hanger (i.e. 1 or 4 - is there really a need for 2 or 3?) Or, I see all the bombers rolling with a single pilot in each and three of them 'joining up' on a lead bomber to implement this feature.
P.P.S.- Maybe, tied in with item 1 above, all HTC is adding is a formation command. Bombers will want to fly information for mutual support and for a greater chance of bombing success. The other bomber pilots wouldn't need to hop into the bombsite. They would just drop on the leader's cue (As many did during World War II). Perhaps HTC will give us a .box 'name' (Box formation and the name of the leader for buffs), .EchL 'name' (For echelon left on the name of leader, also a right side version) and a .fourl (For finger formation left on the leader). This would automatically gate the leaders throttle at 80% of max T for all planes to maintain formation. Just an idea. However, I think it would be relatively simple to code compared to all the other ideas. The echelon and finger four formation commands would be there for fighters.
[ 11-21-2001: Message edited by: Sundog ]
-
Originally posted by humble:
A B17 is almost invulnerable to attack from a single pilot (assuming a decent gunner onboard). The thought of "quads" is frightening...it makes any kind of solo attack pure suicide.
Hmmm...I believe the LW usually attacked bomber formations as a unit rather than individually. Also, there was a reason why they tried to separate a bomber from the rest of the herd before falling upon it like crazed vultures. A lone bomber should be easy meat to a lone fighter. A lone fighter attacking a bombers flying in close formation should get his head examined.
I don't see anything wrong with AI gunners as long as they are properly implemented.
-
It’s all a matter of trade-offs, really. A single fighter attacking four B-17’s in tight formation should be at considerable risk. However, since the buffs can’t maneuver and still hold that tight formation, it should be easier for the attacker to exact a pound of flesh for that risk. I’m of the mind that thinks AI gunners – with an option of adding human gunners to each plane in the flight – would be okay IF those gunners exhibit only average aptitude. The comment made above about the LW attacking by sections is correct according to my sources. Likewise, they didn’t attack the whole bomber stream, but concentrated on sections of it. With buff formations forced to maneuver more sedately, the attacking fighter will have an easier time setting up the attack; however, the defensive firepower will make such a lone attacker’s pucker factor go up.
I sure hope they bring back bomb-crater speed bumps for 1.09. Imagine how careful you’ld have to be then when taking off from a field that has just been carpet bombed by 30 or 40 Lancs with 1,000 lb’ers. Yikes, watch your step there! :D
-
Originally posted by zarkov:
A lone bomber should be easy meat to a lone fighter. A lone fighter attacking a bombers flying in close formation should get his head examined.
My objection is to a single B-17 decimating fighters...I don't fly buffs much but will on occasion. My last sortie I had multiple kills including a tempest (think 4 total) and had no problem reaching target...now I have been hosed by a couple bomber busters to be fair...a single bomber shouldnt be able to explode an attacking fighter before he closes to 400 yds...a common occurance in AH.
-
Rojo, you have all good points and questions. Well though out and clear.
I hate to continue playing the devil advocate a bit but so far most of the discussion has been good and involves how mature people will use and play AH with these new features. A lot of it is about how to make bombing/strat/etc more realistic. :) That's all very well and nice for the majority of folks here who are looking for that too. One problem is there needs to be some serious talk, or reassurances from HTC, about safe guards and the closing of loop holes. Because as is seen in the MA and the TA the slowest common denomination will find them.
So, since you (and many others) have great ideas for HTC to ponder when putting this together allow me to add in some points that need to be looked at to help reduce idiotic gameplay.
Besides the issue I brought up, where AI outlasts the bailed or shot down "master" pilot and the one about ack stars, has anyone given though to how this may empower the ultimate online dweebs who "pork and auger?" The tards who are also known as suicidal bombers? I have. My recommendation is that HTC disable bomb release if the medium and heavy bombers are not within 20 degrees of being level. This would help prevent a B17/Lanc/B26 for instance from rolling over into a stall and easily dropping four times it's normal bomb load on a base, depot or CV. But it would not impede a pilot from using a plane that was built to dive bomb, like the Ju-88, from doing what it naturally would and could do.
Westy
-
A good point, Westy. Perhaps a better solution would be to limit the AI aircraft to reasonable angles of attack, bank and speed.
-
Originally posted by Rojo:
I sure hope they bring back bomb-crater speed bumps for 1.09. Imagine how careful you’ld have to be then when taking off from a field that has just been carpet bombed by 30 or 40 Lancs with 1,000 lb’ers. Yikes, watch your step there! :D
i remember those,back in 1.03
btw,i started playing AH in 1.03,when i got it off a cover disk, but didn't start playing online untill 1.05
-
This could be a revolution in ww2 online flight sims. Massive bomber formation, has never been seen before. (ok I know the Bish bomber squad "Dickweed, or something, hmmm Dick+weed.... god, I hope I have mistaken their name :rolleyes: ) I at least trying too make a good realistic bomber formation in AH, and a big (S) for that. But this is something new. 4 player would acctually be able to fly 16xB-17 in a close combat box. (how cool is that)... This would mean, figthers need too cooperate too take down a bomber formation. And it would make the ww2 frase :The bomber would everytime fight its way too the target and they would return, the only question I had was "how many is left" -Bomber Harris Cmd Britans Bomber Force- And it would open a whole new arena for the Scenario makers (sweinfurt raid, hamburg Raid,, Air War over Germany 1942-44)
And How about a City with every AF, that controled production. Lets say an AF have the ability too scramble 50 AC. If the city (offcourse it has to be a large city) is 50% destroyed, this means that the factory, and workers can only make 25 AC, and 25 AC is avlb in that field. Ok ok this is over ambitious, but it is my mad idea. I loved the strategy element in Lucasgames "Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe" an old time flight sim. :rolleyes: Ok ok I have seen too much ww2 aviation movies. And my favoritt is a episode of a series called "The World at War" produced by the BBC (i think) in 1973. Episode 13 (or 11) is called "Wirbelwind" and it is abt bombing of germany 1941-44. And there it is lots of cool footage. And Intervues with Adolf Galland and Gunter Rall. And Gunter Rall said " When we attacked a bomber formation, I always told the new pilots too close their eyes, for att abt 1000 meters the American gunners would open fire with their tracer amunition, and they would scare the new pilots, so I always told them too close their eyes"
-
" 4 player would acctually be able to fly 16xB-17 in a close combat box."
!! Aha!
And yet... one more item to think about :) (you guys are gonna hate me, if not already)
Imagine.... What if the four players fly on right top of each other? They fly so close they've literally mixed the four seperate bomber groups together to make one hell of an impregnable formation with themselves and the AI? :) Imagine ..... One huge DickWeeb Bomber "ball". ;) It would have four times the firepower coming from firing points in a formation that physically never would have occured as there would have been collisions between planes. Now you can have four tail gunners conentrated within feet of each other firing eight fifties at you. Add in the turret guns too and you can see a slight problem.
I do have to say this is a pretty darn good idea on HTC's part but they also have thier work cut out for themselves to remove the obvious dweeb factors.
Westy
-
Maybe bomber "groups" could be like the task forces. The "commander" lays out waypoints, and altitudes, and clicks "fly". The group takes off and follows the waypoints. Meanwhile, the commander can man guns or the bombardier postion, but NOT the pilot position. He can plot new waypoints, but they will be restricted to reasonable course and altitude changes by the waypoint plotter. As the bombardier, the commander will have direct control of the group on the bomb run, but will be limited to level turns. All bombers drop when the lead drops. Other players can join the group as gunners (just like the task force).
This would provide mass bombing that would adhere to "historic" maneuvers, flight patterns, and altitudes (as controlled by the waypoint plotter). It would only apply to the 1.09 multi-plane level bomber groups, single bombers would function as they do now.
[ 11-21-2001: Message edited by: popeye ]
-
Westy,,, We dont hate U :D It is why this board is here. We must give HT and the staff, every posible way this could be exploited by "DWEEBS" and "people who will shoot ya in the back like a dirty Mexican" Clint Eastwood. But I think this idea is great news. :rolleyes: (att least for the 10% who like too fly Bombers) And we need too raise the number of bombers in AH. I WANT CARPET BOMBING. I remember the First time I tried AH. I got shoot down in a figther all the time. So I tried the bomber. Me, my brother and Looser111 and Cpt.Andy flew bombers in a sort of formation. It was back in January , and it was fun. But it never became the combat Box I dreamt abt. Btw my callsign then was Olav-V, and I never flew more than my 2 free weeks. Untill now :D
-
Bomb accuraccy should mostly be determined by bomber altitude/bomb-air-time.
At 2k a single bomber should still be able to nail a single hanger with a single bomb.
At 30k, no way.
In-between alts, somewhere in-between, of course.
A vertical dive component should add accuraccy to a bomb. That is, a bomb released from a vertically diving 450 MPH fighter at 6K should be less influenced by dispersion than a bomb released from a level bomber at 6K. Dispersion should be a factor of bomb flight time over its alt.
Either way, as long as buffs can still ruin Lazs day, I'll be happy.
eskimo
-
I think it's a great idea. I'd love to see large formations of bombers roaming the skies, just as long as the lgb's and overmodeled guns are addressed.
CRASH
-
I am not sure why we need the AI bomber wing. It seems like it could create more problems than it solves.
-
Originally posted by eskimo2:
Bomb accuraccy should mostly be determined by bomber altitude/bomb-air-time.
Perhaps,
My 5 cents: Make the Bomb sight "historical" then bring in the AI gunners.
I fly plenty of Buffs, if you're on the bomb run its almost impossible to bomb, and defend yourself over the target.
Leave the Bomb aiming alone, then no otto.
Buff guns aren't overmodeled. Any competent fighter can take down a buff. I always smile at the ones who try to hit your six in a slow dive!
I figure you want authentic bomb aimers, stay with B-17 II.
Tronsky
[ 11-22-2001: Message edited by: -tronski- ]
-
This possibility of massive bomber formations can also radically change the atmosphere of air combat, too ;). No matter how inaccurate it is, with a flight of 12~16 4-engine buffs raining down bombs upon a single airfield area, you know it's gonna be slaughter.
What will happen if such things become possible? The current trend of "deck alt furball" will become sterile, if not completely obsolete. A field will be easily neutralized IF the buffs can get there(It is currently like that too, except, it isn't exactly easy to kill all resources and hangars with just one~two Lancasters flying over a base.. easily hunted down by a single fighter).
The trend of air combat might flow from current furballs, to massive engagements at much higher altitude. Thus, the furballs would still commence, but this time, it's gonna be the clash of aces, high above.
Sure, La-7s and N1K2s are superb planes under 10k. But what if they would have to engage bombers coming in as a tight group at altitudes of 18k or higher, where they lose their 'edge'? If the engagement alt becomes regularly higher, we'd certainly see some change in preferences of the types of planes people use.
The emphasis in the ways to field capture might change. Currently, it is nothing more than 'who has the most fighters clogged up in a single area'.. I'm guessing it might shift to 'who can escort the bomber groups safely to its destination'. (I can already here the whiners, yelling against these sort of 'historic re-creation's :D)
We're still all speculating around what HTC has just simply mentioned in one single interview( :D).. but indeed, this concept is very interesting, even just discussing about it :)..
-
Kweassa
Great write upp. Some like Historical Accuracy some dont. I like it. And the russian and japanees planes could still be used. If we make the bombing "not so lazer guided as today" there is still use for the Jabo. There could perhaps be a Ship convoy system too ferry supplies, bridges too knock out, AI controlled Panzer (like in FA, where u can send Pz too attack an AF,Base, etc. Then the Ju87G, Hs-129 and Il2 Sturmovik could be realy cool.
Implement the elements of "Strategic Bombing", "Front Line Figthing" , "Panzer Clashes". I know these would mean more A.I controled Vehicle, but this is a Flight Sim, and U can never get a realistic ground/air war, when 99% is here for the Birds. I am sure HTC can make our dreams come true (and it would sure piss of ww2online makers Lol)
-
We will have to wait and see but.. i believe that any strat that forces people to organize and burn up more than a couple of minutes of online time getting to the fight is doomed to failure.
Most play for fun and for relatively short periods of time. They do not want to come on to devestated resources or fields and have to fly many sectors or wind their way up to 20k or wait in the tower till they can get a flight of 4 or more guys together so that they will then be able to sneak on up to 20k to find a fight that may or may not be there or may or may not be even worth engaging in. Certainly, there are very few who would enjoy an hour or so of taking orders or playing hide and seek.
Now you can realize this or you can continue to live in lala land and come up with more complex and time consuming, fun destroying strat but...
If you have anal strat and fast action all in the same arena then the anal strat guys will be very lonely and whiny ("why is there no cooperation?"). If you have all anal strat to "force" the action crowd to participate or at least ruin their online time... they will simply log off. Nothing in the strat you have mentioned holds any appeal for me and i am pretty average in time online and preference I think so....
What's in it for me?
lazs
[ 11-22-2001: Message edited by: lazs1 ]
-
I know HTC will do what is best for the future of AH. And with so many good online flight sims under development (IL2,WB3 and FA3) I know AH will strive too be number 1.
Both for the player who is there for Fun and the Die Hard ww2 flight simmer.
:D :D
-
Actualy, this thread doesn't address the strat issue, Lazs, only how the technical aspects of the bomber pulk (or box) might be implemented. Any thoughts on that?
P.S. You used the word "anal" three times in this post...what is it with you and that particular part of the human anatomy, anyway?
[ 11-22-2001: Message edited by: Rojo ]
-
Rojo are you sure you wanna know?
-
I know I[/i] don't wanna know.
:D
-
On second thought...forget I asked :rolleyes:
-
just say my name three times and here i am..
"What will happen if such things become possible? The current trend of "deck alt furball" will become sterile, if not completely obsolete. A field will be easily neutralized IF the buffs can get there(It is currently like that too, except, it isn't exactly easy to kill all resources and hangars with just one~two Lancasters flying over a base.. easily hunted down by a single fighter)."
I believe that this part does indeed address a new and disturbing "strat". I believe it is lala land tho.
Now, simply read that and then my response and it will all come together.
as for the "bomber box"... who can say? we will have to see how the guns work.. how the bombing works... how the targets are affected. I believe tho, that we should be able to ignore the "bomber box" which is really just...ONE LOUSY GUY and still have fun in the sim. Yes, that's right.... I believe that one attention starved and skilless bus driver shouldn't control the gameplay. so sue me.
lazs
lazs
-
Well after all mr Hitech himself Dale"HiTech"Addink said.
SABRE: I’m glad you brought up those trains. You’ve obviously begun fleshing out the strategic system. The trains and the convoys add a tremendous framework. Are there still more major elements that you see to be added to that, or does it have the basic skeleton of what you’re looking for.
HITECH: It’s got the core features, the skeleton of a strat-system. What I’m trying to do is balance the [strategic] bomber aspects with the JABO [or fighter-bomber] aspects. In the end what I want is to incorporate what bombers did well, which was mass area bombing, and not pinpoint bombing. Today, when you look at the previous strategic system, that was real hard to do. What were doing is starting to incorporate a lot of targets in a close area, so that I can start doing things like each bomber pilot fly’s four buffs all at once versus just one bomber. Then that gets enough ordnance load that I can do dispersion bombing techniques. One guy controlling a force of bombers is much more about game play than about realism. Obviously no one [person] flew four bombers, but at the same time there was never [just] one bomber that went out by itself. So it’s a compromise with realism…I want him to control multiple bombers so when he drops a load of ordnance, I can throw in dispersion. He does hit his target because he has enough ordnance dropping on target to do what real area bombing did.
HITECH: The basic emphasis for 1.09 will be bomber enhancements; that’s the core aspect of it. What else gets thrown in there, I don’t know yet, but that’s the core piece we’ll be changing.
So if u dont like the idea off massive bomber attack. Well.... He he he. :D
Ok There is not just Bomber pilots who have something too look forward too.
HITECH:On ground warfare, what I envision at some point is a first-person shooter run as a secondary item to base capture. What I’m sort of envisioning in the end is something that would run along the lines of a C-47 dropping a spawn point at the [enemy base’s] map room. The map room now is expanded to a full, underground bunker-warfare, first-person shooter. The defender always gets to spawn in the bunker. The attackers, now for the next thirty minutes, they can spawn people in the bunker, and there’s this big, first-person shooter war happening underground to do an actual [base] capture.
Is this man a genius or what....
big (SALUTE) for Dale and his staff.
-
And if you think a furball is "quake with wings"; wait until the FPS guys start turning up.....
Oh well, there goes the neighbour hood.
-
read what he said any way you like but i get that there won't be any 'pinpoint' bombing. I seriously doubt that HTC will turn the MA into a board (bored) game. I believe that they realize that not everyne wants to participate in a "war" that they may or may not see any results from but will surely be affected by.
lazs
-
What happens if 5 or 6 pilots hope into b17s,u have formations off up to 20 or 30 planes.These will be invinccible for even the most hardend 262 pilot. and if these where to fire all at the same time.The amount off tacers and the number of planes will slow the your computer down to zero frames a second.
p.s. the stupid hanger smoke also slows your computer.Somebody fix that
-
Ok my 2 cents -
Instead of 4 bomber formations - Perk them.
2nd B17 costs 5 perk point
3rd B17 costs an additional 10 (15 total)
4th B17 costs an additional 20 (35 total)
5th? B17 costs an additional 40 (75 total)
Up to what ever limit of B17's (or other Bombers) HT sets. Now the DHB group can with 4 pilots (well bomber pilots) can fill the air with massive amounts of fling targets. Just a thought.
0osik
-
From what I saw in the interview on Wargammer this is going to be a net=zero math equation.
We're getting 4 ship bomber formations per player.
We're ALSO getting target changes and bombsight changes that make bombing harder.
So the result is the same as we had before. A bomber pilot with his 3 AI buddies won't be destroying the whole countryside.
I really do hope that the bombsite is changed so that the pilot has some controls to fiddle with. At the very least he should lose the ability to zoom in. Bomb dispersion will probably be a small sideways movement that over the time of the bomb's fall will be magnified (the higher you are, the less accurate you are). Things like this is why having 4 bombers is not going to make bombers a huge threat all of a sudden.