Author Topic: Perk US bombers (Read 4082 times)

Debonair · « **Reply #75 on:** February 05, 2007, 12:08:15 AM »

roflmao

skycaptn · « **Reply #76 on:** February 05, 2007, 11:12:47 AM »

B-24 is the P38 for fighters/bombers compairision... Heavy bombload, decent defensive loadout.. but not overly tough.. the heavy bombload accounts for more of them being encountered.. lets compair to the LA7. Noobs discover that the speed of the plane affords them some mistake time.. vets like the agility and versitiliy of the plane.. same situation for the B-24.

Now lets go into bomber world for experienced bombers..
1.) B-24 heavy bombload. (2nd largest in the game.)
2.) Decent defensive guns. (2nd best defensive arrangement. 1st from some positions.)

Now using some of the above examples would you demand perking of the LA7 because its superior to some other planes in one or two aspects?
Why saddle the B-24 with a perk cost because it has one or two valued assets over another plane?

There are at least 10 or so examples of this among unperked fighters.. each vehicle has its strengths and weaknesses. Rather than demand HTC perk THE MOST COMMONLY PRODUCED BOMBER IN THE WAR.. Lets request another ride...
Another thing Krusty check my kill stats this tour so far... Ive bomber hunted more...

Krusty · « **Reply #77 on:** February 05, 2007, 01:40:31 PM »

Skycaptn, please read the part where I pointed out many many many times that you cannot compare this to asking for a fighter to be perked -- we ***HAVE*** perked fighters to spend perks on.

Don't tell me you didn't read any of this thread? It's been gone over so many times.

You can't honestly post that if you understood what I've been saying the entire thread.

FORGET FIGHTERS. LEAVE THE FIGHTER COMPARISONS ALONE!

This is NOT an LA7, that people are asking to be perked because it's faster than every non-perked plane. This is not a Spit16, that outstripped even the la7 for most kills!

This is a bomber. You tell me WHAT we can spend our bomber perks on. Right here and now. That's right. The Ar234. The most useless bomber in the planeset. The only reason it's perked is because it was a very rare jet. So, having discounted the Ar234 as not worth wasting perks on, YOU TELL ME what we're going to spend bomber perks on.

That's right!

DING DING DING!

NOTHING!

Okay, can I make it any clearer? Yes perhaps I can, but I won't.

We're not getting any new aircraft for a while. When we do there's little chance it'll be a bomber, and even less chance it's a perked bomber. We can't wait 5+ years for something to spend bomber perks on.

Sooo..... Follow me here, logic-wise

1) We only have the AR234 to spend bomber perks on

2) The Ar234 isn't worth buying, so

3) We have nothing worth spending bomber perks on, and

4) we won't get anything worth spending bomber perks on for a long time,

5) Thus we need to perk something we already have, leading us to

6) the most widely used and best performing bomber in the game, which would be by FAR (90% above the rest) the best choice for a reasonable perk price.

Each point leads directly to the next. Please don't mention "well then are you going to perk the 190D?" because it's not even in the same UNIVERSE as the issue at hand.

tedrbr · « **Reply #78 on:** February 05, 2007, 01:43:59 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by skycaptn

Rather than demand HTC perk THE MOST COMMONLY PRODUCED BOMBER IN THE WAR.. Lets request another ride...
Another thing Krusty check my kill stats this tour so far... Ive bomber hunted more...

You mean like.....

the A-26 Invader in both B and C models?

Like in thisthread here: http://forums.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=198001

It comes down to a basic difference in philosophy here:

# Those that want to find a reason for buff perks by changing what is now a free ride to a perk ride to spend perks on, or believe the B-24 "too powerful" or "overused" now.

# Those that want to find a reason for buff perks by asking, begging, pleading with HTC to give us a perk-worthy bomber addition to the game other than the Ar-234.

I'd rather gain something than lose something, and I fly B-17's far more than I do the B-24's, so really, perking the B-24 does not effect my game play, but I still argue against it.

Primarily, I'd rather not give HTC the ability to argue that bomber pilots "already have two perked planes (B-24 and Ar-234)", when I'm trying to argue and crusade for an attack bomber/penetration/and spud gun toting bomber to be added to the plane-set for buff drivers to spend perks on, and currently being able to argue we only have 1 perk ride available to us now.

Giving up the B-24 as a free-ride to become a perk ride weakens the argument for adding a perk buff to the plane-set to spend perks on.

(and for you GVr's out there with only the Tiger, I also argue for the addition of a perked Flak36 so you have another choice too:
http://forums.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=198029

Quote

Sooo..... Follow me here, logic-wise
1) We only have the AR234 to spend bomber perks on
2) The Ar234 isn't worth buying, so
3) We have nothing worth spending bomber perks on, and
4) we won't get anything worth spending bomber perks on for a long time,
5) Thus we need to perk something we already have, leading us to
6) the most widely used and best performing bomber in the game, which would be by FAR (90% above the rest) the best choice for a reasonable perk price.

I totally agree with the first 3 points, Krusty. I totally disagree with the last three. I'd rather keep a strong argument going that buff drivers deserve an addition to the plane set. Point #4 is of particular interest though..... has there been an announcement or thread confirming that HTC is not going to add anything to the planeset in the foreseeable future that I've missed?

Bronk · « **Reply #79 on:** February 05, 2007, 02:00:32 PM »

Notice none of you against this touched the "no risk" stuff I mentioned.

Typical, don't mess with my style of play.
Buff drivers need a reason to try an survive other than score.
A light perk on 24s do just that.

Bronk

Krusty · « **Reply #80 on:** February 05, 2007, 02:04:37 PM »

I understand your position that it may weaken requests for other aircraft (like the A-26). To answer your question, no HTC has not said anything. Look at their track record. They don't let you in on things until said things are already well underway and being tested for final release. The planeset hasn't changed since the F4us, and those were after a VERY long dry spell after the 109s/spits were done.

We have so many out-dated fighter models (and they said their priority will be updating all the old 3D models to current standards -- less chance of newer models if they're redoing old ones) that even if they keep up steady work we won't see anything new for a while. Including bombers.

Some might call this pessimistic, but I call it being realistic. I maintain hope, but not anticipation.

You can petition for A-26s. You might get the same response every other well-worded and well-argued plane request has gotten (no response or a flat out "no" in rare cases).

You find my #4 interesting. Can you honestly say you think we're getting a new perked bomber within the next 2 weeks? The next 2 months? What about the next year? Oh but wait they're still doing CT that's going to push things back, and they're still updating all the old "Generation 1" skins, that'll push it back more. 2 years? 3? When do you expect, seriously, a perked bomber?

I find that wait far too long. By that I mean too long to not do something as a stop-gap in the meantime.

You may not agree with my #5, and I can understand this, but it is one of the best ideas for filling the void until we get a perked plane.

Say we do get a perk on the B-24s. It's not a permanent perk. It's a perk because we have nothing else. Then when we get an A-26 or a B-29 (in 1, 2, 3, or more years from now), the B-24 perk price reverts to "free".

EDIT:

Bronk: your "no risk" comment doesn't cover just bombers. It cover fighters. It covers GVs. It cover PTs. Nothing in this game has a real risk. Hence I didn't think it was part of the issue. I wasn't ignoring you, honest.

Bronk · « **Reply #81 on:** February 05, 2007, 02:30:04 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Krusty

EDIT:

Bronk: your "no risk" comment doesn't cover just bombers. It cover fighters. It covers GVs. It cover PTs. Nothing in this game has a real risk. Hence I didn't think it was part of the issue. I wasn't ignoring you, honest.

Game risk sheesh, a little perspective please.

What do you think is more frequently used a tiger or 234s?
How about Temp or 234s.

Guys frequently risk perks and lose them in GVs and perk fighters.
Buff guys don't period.

Put a little something on the line from them .

Bronk

Krusty · « **Reply #82 on:** February 05, 2007, 02:37:41 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Bronk
Game risk sheesh, a little perspective please.

What do you think is more frequently used a tiger or 234s?
How about Temp or 234s.

Guys frequently risk perks and lose them in GVs and perk fighters.
Buff guys don't period.

Put a little something on the line from them .

Bronk

Yes, I know what you mean and that it's a game. I was just saying that even so there's no risk for fighters or GVs. Hell the perked fighters are often the best, able to run away (tempest), kill in a single hit (chog), or do everything better than 90% of the rest of its category (4hog). The Tigr can sit there and take multiple 1k eggs off its head, and if one is just a hair off it's able to survive them. It can take strafings by hurr2Ds and IL2s, it can take millions of hits from a T-34 and never take damage (test this offline if you doubt me, there's no way a T-34 can kill a tiger, ever), and while it CAN be killed by a panzer it's more than likely only if the panzer shoots it 5 times in the same spot.

So there's little risk for fighter pilots in perked fighter planes, and there's little risk for GV drivers in the tiger. They take these rides knowing they'll have the chance to ring up countless kills and survive.

And then we have the Ar234. In all my years I've only gotten 1 kill with the tail guns on it. I've never bombed anything of importance, and often have no fun in one, despite being shot down in one many times.

I think overall there's little to no risk in any perked craft. I think that's why you pay for them.

Just a difference of philosophies, I guess.

skycaptn · « **Reply #83 on:** February 06, 2007, 06:56:50 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Bronk
Game risk sheesh, a little perspective please.

What do you think is more frequently used a tiger or 234s?
How about Temp or 234s.

Guys frequently risk perks and lose them in GVs and perk fighters.
Buff guys don't period.

Put a little something on the line from them .

Bronk

NO RISK?? Try climbing for 1 hour to a respectable bombing altitude transitioning to target and fighting off interceptors.

Its a huge risk of how you spend your time...

4deck · « **Reply #84 on:** February 06, 2007, 12:36:59 PM »

** listens intently **

Perk the boston

**walks out of room**

Kermit de frog · « **Reply #85 on:** February 06, 2007, 12:50:06 PM »

Fear the Boston!!!!!!!!

tedrbr · « **Reply #86 on:** February 06, 2007, 02:04:32 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by skycaptn
NO RISK?? Try climbing for 1 hour to a respectable bombing altitude transitioning to target and fighting off interceptors.

Its a huge risk of how you spend your time...

Not sure it qualifies as a "risk", but it certainly is a much higher investment of a player's game time to take a bomber up to medium or high altitudes to run a bomb run. Even planes running intercepts against bombers, don't have as much time invested.

The problem comes down to reward: bomber perks for Arado's not much an incentive to most pilots, so it leads to bomb and bail, bomb and burn, or suicide runs. There is much less incentive to run strategic bomber raids against strat factories and cities unless they are conveniently close (and often from a higher altitude airfield). Bombers are run on the deck in one-way missions.

I don't see how perking B-24's will change that. Make pilots pay for something they've been getting for no cost in the past? Not a popular move, IMHO. It will just put more pilots into B-17's if they don't have the perks to spend on B-24's, or turn them off bombers altogether for a while. It won't encourage the collection of perks for B-24's for most. I hit strat targets, so I tend to use the B-17. Others luv the 14K ord that a Lanc carries.

* The A-26 B and C's as an addition could be an incentive, argued elsewhere.

* Allowing the purchase of up to an additional 3 drones, or perk all drones and allow up to 5 drones for a pilot per sortie altogether (3 wide, 2 deep, rear flights slightly offset), would be an incentive to buff drivers that want to carry out strategic bombing campaigns.

Oleg · « **Reply #87 on:** February 06, 2007, 02:34:30 PM »

Perk formations, dammit

Not additional 2,3,5,etc drones but 2 we already have.

tedrbr · « **Reply #88 on:** February 06, 2007, 03:29:13 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Oleg
Perk formations, dammit
Not additional 2,3,5,etc drones but 2 we already have.

Why would the majority of current buff drivers want to give up something they already have? To give them a reason to need perk points?

Perk points are supposed to be earned and spent by a pilot as a reward to their accomplishments in the game, and should not be instituted as a limiting or punishing measure for perceived problems that don't exist to any great degree, or just to create another bomber perk point economy sink in the game since the Arado has proven to be inadequate in that role.

Lusche · « **Reply #89 on:** February 06, 2007, 03:34:44 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Oleg
Perk formations, dammit
Not additional 2,3,5,etc drones but 2 we already have.

So that some without buff perks doesn't even has the slightest chance to get some in the first place? A single buff is utterly defensless.