Idea discussed at the con.

[cav58d]

Again...This is a waste of time!  Whether you admit it or not, your complaints are with the strat being down...Not the way the strat has been taken out...  If this waste of time idea is implemented, I want all of the guys who are 100% for this to promise with their account that they will never complain when troops are porked for 5 sectors from the front, and will always be the first to re supply without question....deal?

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

Troops, ordance, radar, and fuel should be nearly impossible to destroy with guns. It should take nearly a full ammo load from something like a 110 to destroy ONE bunker/barracks/tower. No one plane should be able to take out all of any resource at even one base, never mind having one or two run along an entire front and take out ordnance and or troops.

The AAA should be accurate enough that an attacker is forced to kill it first in order to concentrate on taking out the bunker/barracks/tower that they want to kill. Ignored AAA (when an attacker zooms in and blazes away at a resource and ignores the AAA while the AAA sprays all around him), should ramp up rapidly in accuracy, simulating the fact that the gunners are not being shot at and can concentrate on their target with little or no fear of being hit by return fire. On the other hand, the dispersion of fire from a AAA installation should increase rapidly as it is being fired upon, especially a manned AAA installation. Or a death in a manned AAA installation should count as a real death in the case of the person manning the AAA, AND as a kill for the attacking plane (or GV). This should apply to both field and ship guns. The person killed in the gun should not land any kills if he is killed and the gun destroyed.


That will prevent the absurd pork runs where one or two slick fighters goes about wiping out resources along a whole front. It should take 3-5 planes to take out ONE resource at ONE base.

A ten second delay should be plenty to deal with the porker/griefer that augers in with his ordnance.

The bombs dropped from a formation should be dispersed AT LEAST as much as the formation is. That way it would be next to impossible for a formation of bombers to get their entire payload on a CV. A formation of level heavy bombers wouldn't be used to take out a single object or building anyway. Think about it, the formations were used when you wanted to cover square MILES with bombs in order to assure destruction, and not to cover square FEET.

Formations would still be useful for attacking large targets like towns and strat installations, or taking down the VH hangars at ports. They SHOULD be useful for large targets, and other than that, formations should be a liability except for their added defense guns.

[EagleDNY]

Originally posted by KTM520guy
I'm not a suicide dweeb and I'm always looking to better myself. Each time I up a plane or GV it's never my intension to crash or get shot down. The later happens a lot though. LOL. But, how does the game know that?

I don't consider myself a suicide dweeb, but I'll take on missions that I know are likely 'one-way' to try to put the brakes on a horde overrunning one of our airfields.  Since I fight with the Knights, I find myself having to do this more often than I would like since we are often outnumbered.

For game-balance purposes, I like many of the suggestions in this thead.  I still do not like the idea of a "damage timer", nor do I think it would stop the porkers who will just extend & evade for 1-2 minutes following a pork mission.  I can tell you it sure wouldn't stop me.  Stronger ord bunkers, less troop downtime, and some real ack-ack at an airfield would make it a lot tougher on me, and a whole lot more fun.

Frankly I attack CVs a lot because I like the challenge of trying to get through the heavy ack to get hits on target.  If I attack alone and get wacked by the ack after dropping the cruiser, I consider that a successful operation because I deprived the enemy of a high-value unit.  If I wack the cruiser and get away, even better, but dive-bombing a CV group alone is always a dicey proposition.

The airfields should be just as dicey, and they aren't.  What they most need is mannable big AA guns - it is just way too easy to de-ack a field, and existing base AA is NO threat to level bombers over 5K.  Give the defense 88mm or 128mm AA guns to man and the base defense has a chance.  Leave it as is and I, the unrepentent porker, will not be stopped.

EagleDNY
$.02

[Kev367th]

Originally posted by gsharp
From a primarily base taker point of view what I would like to see is:

1. Increase Field ack hardness/number.  Make a small field have the defense of a CV group.
2. Program Random Dud bombs.  This forces people to not min/max bomb drops.  
3. Revert to the old bombsite (the one that took skill)
4. Increase the required troops from 10 to 20.
5. Put some non-puffy ack in towns.  
6. Arange the field buildings so that it makes more sense to carpet bomb a strip than to pinpoint bomb hangers.  Maybe more but softer strat targets.
7. Runway damage would be nice.  Have it take alot of ord but make the runway unusable for 20 mins.  

Just dont put in the proposed system.

1) Agreed - This IS the problem, nothing else.
2) Only if you agree to random failures of aircraft components (engines, guns etc).
3) Think HT has said this isn't going to happen.
4) Not needed, in fact would make situation worse.
5) Put them back they way they used to be.
6) Yup
7) Doesnt work, check various other threads on cratering spawn points.

Seems most agree what IS needed is more and heavier calibre acks at fields. I'd go as far as giving the mannable ack proxy fuses ala CV and crusier guns.
I'd even add mannable acks at the cities.

[cav58d]

I agree with Kev...The solution is increading the hardness of the ammo/troops...not adding silly timers

[hitech]

Kev this is in no way intended to "FIX" dive bombing buffs, thats your pet peve,not mine.

What it is intended to change is the attitude ,if I put orindance on target I succeded even if I die, both in bombers,straffing, or jabo.

As to quick and dirty, Ive only been discussing and working on this issue for over a year. Infact your F6 thought process is the quick and dirty one.

And it in no way addresses the issue/behavior we are trying to change.

As to hardening targets, That would have absoulutly 0 imapct on the suicide behavior, It would just make people have to rinse and repeate more often.


HiTech

[cav58d]

Hitech...How do you explain what happens to the guys with the right attitude, who go after a target and either compress (by accident), get killed by ack, get shot down, rip wings off ect?  Do you just write them off????????

[Simaril]

EDIT -- typing during HT's post, so didnt see before my post

Cav, Kev, and Harp -- Problems with those suggestions.

First, the F6 only fix WILL NOT WORK. I can hit the f6 key and then the "fire2" key in 1/2 sec., and with slower autotrim in the last patch there wont be any flight path effects. F6 restriction will have NO effect on dive bombing.

Second, harder bombsites will not happen. HT changed them to easier mode on purpose, and has refused to change back. I think thats because of the critical role bombers play in keeping players in the game while they learn. In short, whats a good idea for bombers as simulation may be a bad idea for AH2's survival. Low player retention ----> lower subscriptions == bad for the game.


Third, more difficult fields themselves -- harder bunkers or harder ack DESTRUCTION values particularly -- wil tend to encourage or require hording. OTOH, more autoack streams from the same number of ack locations, same difficulty to damage WILL NOT make fields harder to take. More lethal but just as vulnerable ack will require different tactics, higher alt attacks, whatever.

Fourth, I have to agree that nowhere has HT said bombers wouldnt be affected. The entire point is to stay alive for 2 minutes after the bombs hit. Lets be real -- we all know we can do that, it jusut means different tactics.

[Vudak]

Originally posted by hitech
Kev this is in no way intended to "FIX" dive bombing buffs, thats your pet peve,not mine.

What it is intended to change is the attitude ,if I put orindance on target I succeded even if I die, both in bombers,straffing, or jabo.

As to quick and dirty, Ive only been discussing and working on this issue for over a year. Infact your F6 thought process is the quick and dirty one.

And it in no way addresses the issue/behavior we are trying to change.

As to hardening targets, That would have absoulutly 0 imapct on the suicide behavior, It would just make people have to rinse and repeate more often.


HiTech

Is there any chance you could take Widewing's post and rebut it?  I'm sure you've put more thought into this whole thing than I have but I can't see at the moment what's wrong with his suggestion besides the possible pain it might be to code.  I'd like some edumacation on the subject

[Speed55]

I really like the idea of using bomber perks to pay for bigger bombs.

Another idea, is to make the outcome of the run real simple, if you land successfully, you get all the perks from the run.  If you bail out, you would have to be at least outside an enemy radar ring for you to get any percentage of the points, or it would be treated like a death, and then that percentage would be based on how far you are from a friendly field.
If you die you don't get squat, and lose what you spent.  This could be used on all bomber/jabo runs.
Everyone has bomber perks to burn, but if you knew that you would have to use them carefully maybe things would change for the better.

As far as porking ords and stuff, the big complaint is that it's too easy, which it is. Basically anyone in a la7, typhoon, n1k, or similar plane can de-ack a field, or pork all troops and ord.  I think that if it would take like 550lbs of ord to destroy 1 barrack/ammo bunker, it would be an improvement.
This way even if someone dives in from 15k, drops there 500lb bomb and dies, they get no perks, and the bunker is still up. If they had a 1k bomb, they would kill the bunker, but actually lose the perk cost of the bombs, because they didn't land or bail outside of enemy lines.

[Simaril]

Widewing's changes woudl be great if they affected only experienced players. But I fear they'd hurt AH overall -- because bombers keep early players in the game while they learn their way thru the incredibly challenging curve.

Harder or less effective bombers can only decrease player retention.

Many of you guys have been playing for a decade or more, and I suspect you may not remember or realize just how daunting this game can be when you start. Even though I'm a major aviation history buff, I suspect I might have given up if I didnt find SOMETHING to do well during the hopelessly frustrating times.


Easier bombers help AH as a game business, and that helps us all.

[Kev367th]

Originally posted by hitech
Kev this is in no way intended to "FIX" dive bombing buffs, thats your pet peve,not mine.

What it is intended to change is the attitude ,if I put orindance on target I succeded even if I die, both in bombers,straffing, or jabo.

As to quick and dirty, Ive only been discussing and working on this issue for over a year. Infact your F6 thought process is the quick and dirty one.

And it in no way addresses the issue/behavior we are trying to change.

As to hardening targets, That would have absoulutly 0 imapct on the suicide behavior, It would just make people have to rinse and repeate more often.


HiTech

In all honesty your first post was so lacking in details I just assumed what everyone was. I think if you look back I wasn't the first to mention dive bombing buffs etc (not my pet peve).

By the same token will the timer apply to GV's and CV's also?
They are subject to the same gameyness your trying to stop for strats.

Sorry, I just disagree, the timer idea has just far too many flaws to be a viable solution.

a) Doesn't allow for guy porking getting hit by ack/planes. (unless you've not told us of something)
b) NOE's will become problematic due to VH not going down immediately.
c) Will encourage even bigger hoarding/porking to ensure strats go down

[hitech]

Yes they would also apply to CVs and GV's. Any thing that hits ground targets.

And as to holes, quite frankly I realy havn't seen one posted in this entire thread.

Ive seen lots of posts trying to change game play other than suicide issues. But nothing that points any holes other than peoples "Selective idea of realism" to accomplish there own wish list.

As to Widewings Idea, Ill just comment on the perk bombs,

If you don't have any perks, how are you ever supoosed to take bombs in a bomber to get perks?

The rest of his ideas would not impact wanting to live in any way, they just impact how hard it is to destroy objects.


The one decent idea in this thread is the smoking buildings before being destroyed, the only issue I have with that idea is the time it takes to implement it.


HiTech

[Kev367th]

Originally posted by hitech
Yes they would also apply to CVs and GV's. Any thing that hits ground targets.

And as to holes, quite frankly I realy havn't seen one posted in this entire thread.

Ive seen lots of posts trying to change game play other than suicide issues. But nothing that points any holes other than peoples "Selective idea of realism" to accomplish there own wish list.

As to Widewings Idea, Ill just comment on the perk bombs,

If you don't have any perks, how are you ever supoosed to take bombs in a bomber to get perks?

The rest of his ideas would not impact wanting to live in any way, they just impact how hard it is to destroy objects.


The one decent idea in this thread is the smoking buildings before being destroyed, the only issue I have with that idea is the time it takes to implement it.

HiTech

Thanks for fleshing thing out a little.

RE: GV's, just how are you going to get this to work?
In 2 mins a GV will be a long way from where the ord was dropped, will you be driving along then just blow up mysteriously?
Meanwhile you might of killed 2 or 3 other GV's, will they suddenly re-incarnate?

[hitech]

Kev: by ground targets I was refering to any non player controled targets" like buildings and CV's.

And when I said it would effect CV's and GV's I was referning to if you destroyed a building with deck guns, or destroyed buildings with a GV.

HiTech