Triple Buffs Should GO

[4deck]

Originally posted by moot
Oleg what about fighters that climbed to 30k 1 sector before the frontline.. should we nerf those too?

Bombers always have and always will require pre-emptively climbing up to them for interception.

And without a stupid yellow dar bar please. GEEZUS. This thread is phreaking pathetic. Thanx moot.

I swear when I get home tonight, Im bombing the living crap out of everyone. In VERY LARGE BOMBER FORMATIONS. YOU want to See what 18 Bombers can do. Here go gents Your Capitals are mine tonight BIAtchres.

[weirwolf]

Originally posted by Krusty
No, you've missed the point.

The bombers are not the problem. The formations are not the problem. The slaved guns are not the problem. The excessive speeds at which they always travel are the problem,  _____________________________ _____________________________ _____________________________ _____________________________ ____                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         Krusty I do see your point on the speed of the bombers...however floats brought up the number one issue we have had as bombers and that is the lack of fighter support on the missions, and thats s why I woud vote to leave the bombers speed and guns alone ....UNTIL things with fighter escort has been resolved efficasiosly..... just my thoughts:D

[1Boner]

Originally posted by 999000
Ok I fly a B17 occassionally..lol....I'm not sure what all the speed disscusion  is all about..... the B17 does about just over 200 mph ....215 level flight
you really can't pull hard on it with out ripping the wings off.
And if you ever reach  just over 300 it all falls apart.!
999000

Ditto!!!!!!!!!!!!!

i,d certainly love to get my hands on some of these 300 mph buffs i,ve been hearin so much about!!!!

are they locked up with the rv?????

do i need a special code???

or do i just need some reeeeal good drugs.




screaming past you in a lancaster,

Boner:cool:

[hubsonfire]

Everybody, in everything, gets to fly around at WFOT all the time. I really don't think that's a problem, except in the more realistically minded scenarios and such. In the MA, it's kind of moot. What everybody doesn't get is 3 planes, 2 of which are prone to some really odd behavior, and everybody else has to aim.

[moot]

What's the problem Hub?

The drones warp while you setup your next approach.. or do you mean it's a problem because you can't sit on their six?

While they are spiralling down, they can't aim at you.
While they're trying to regroup from level dispersion, they may not be warping and as such do have an advantage over you, if scoring hits while you can't.  But how does that justify removing the drones?  It's a netcode problem.

[SkyRock]

Originally posted by moot
What's the problem Hub?

The drones warp while you setup your next approach.. or do you mean it's a problem because you can't sit on their six?

While they are spiralling down, they can't aim at you.
While they're trying to regroup from level dispersion, they may not be warping and as such do have an advantage over you, if scoring hits while you can't.  But how does that justify removing the drones?  It's a netcode problem.

The problem is that one player gets 3 platforms to kill things with.  It's a thing of the past and should be done away with.  One player, one plane!!!!!

Mark:aok

[Ghastly]

The fuel multiplier works okay for fighters.   Debatable to begin with, as the higher the multiplier the greater the comparative advantage of the faster climbing aircraft. As a result I'm opposed to any multiplier greater than about 1.6, where the advantage becomes significant between the fastest and slowest climbers.  And a multiplier of 8 would guarantee that the bomber pilots who perform more realistic missions in them would become frustrated, and all that would be left with would be tree-top dweebery.  I stand opposed in anyway shape or form to forcing that on any pilot in any aircraft no matter how good the intentions.

1. Buffs fly too fast compared to what they did historically.   Fighters do too - for the most part they patrolled at greatly reduced throttle settings.  And in most aircraft, there was a significant number of tasks that had to be performed to ready your aircraft for an engagement - some even risked a blown engine if you just firewalled them improperly.  We get off easy...  

2. Buffs have almost no weight considerations or fuel management when loading the plane and in flight. Again, fighters too.  Our front is 10 miles long and 10 miles away....

As long as a person and not a robot has to man the guns, I'm OK with the concession that allows a single or pair of players to successfully simulate a full crew (i.e synchronized aiming). And the same game mechanics that enable bombers also allow fighters to their aircraft at a greatly increased throttle setting a far greater portion of the time that they are flying than would really be the case, so in my humble opinion, it's a case of "fair is fair is OK".  
Dive bombing with level bombers s should probably not be allowed though, but unless it's so rampant (and successful) to have an impact on gameplay I'd argue that there are other things more beneficial for HTC's consideration than implementing a solution.

And to blkmgc, it has indeed been awhile!!

[Krusty]

Fighters fought at their fastest speed possible.

Bombers never did.

Doesn't compare between heavy bombers and fighters.

[Oleg]

Originally posted by Stoney74
Here's a challenge for anyone that wants to try it.  Take the TA terrain and load it offline.  Go to one of the 30K bases and takeoff in a B-17 with 6,000 lbs of bombs and 100% fuel.  Gross weight will be 64,000lbs  and change.  Once you get out of the nose dive at the end of the runway, level off at 25,000 feet and try to fly the plane at 150 mph TAS.  It is impossible as the plane stalls out.

Then, you can tell HTC that their model is wrong and hear how they explain it.

It can not, in AH2 at least. But i will rather believe AH2 model is wrong than baugher's site is wrong.

Have better idea, though. Probably cruising speed in both baugher's and boeng's sites is IAC not TAC. Looks weird because top speed is TAC for sure, but makes some sense at least.

Originally posted by 1Boner
i,d certainly love to get my hands on some of these 300 mph buffs i,ve been hearin so much about!!!!

are they locked up with the rv?????

do i need a special code???

Just climb to 30k

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Originally posted by Ghastly
The fuel multiplier works okay for fighters.   Debatable to begin with, as the higher the multiplier the greater the comparative advantage of the faster climbing aircraft. As a result I'm opposed to any multiplier greater than about 1.6, where the advantage becomes significant between the fastest and slowest climbers.  And a multiplier of 8 would guarantee that the bomber pilots who perform more realistic missions in them would become frustrated, and all that would be left with would be tree-top dweebery.  I stand opposed in anyway shape or form to forcing that on any pilot in any aircraft no matter how good the intentions.

1. Buffs fly too fast compared to what they did historically.   Fighters do too - for the most part they patrolled at greatly reduced throttle settings.  And in most aircraft, there was a significant number of tasks that had to be performed to ready your aircraft for an engagement - some even risked a blown engine if you just firewalled them improperly.  We get off easy...  

2. Buffs have almost no weight considerations or fuel management when loading the plane and in flight. Again, fighters too.  Our front is 10 miles long and 10 miles away....

As long as a person and not a robot has to man the guns, I'm OK with the concession that allows a single or pair of players to successfully simulate a full crew (i.e synchronized aiming). And the same game mechanics that enable bombers also allow fighters to their aircraft at a greatly increased throttle setting a far greater portion of the time that they are flying than would really be the case, so in my humble opinion, it's a case of "fair is fair is OK".  
Dive bombing with level bombers s should probably not be allowed though, but unless it's so rampant (and successful) to have an impact on gameplay I'd argue that there are other things more beneficial for HTC's consideration than implementing a solution.

And to blkmgc, it has indeed been awhile!!

Real world crews didn't have sync aiming. The rear gunner saw it, warned it and the side gunner saw it zoom past him before managing to pull the trigger.

In AH gunners are friggin BORG with an assimilated conciousness.

[Krusty]

Oh, and FYI: the B17 doesn't do max cruise at alt too well when weighed down 100%, because you burn off 30-50% climbing up to those alts. It cannot maintain level flight in max cruise.

However, the more powerful engines of the B-24 *can* maintain max cruise at alt with 100%. I tested this and the B17 back when we first got the Liberators.

[4deck]

3 man bombing crews with gunners. Vulching a field near you:aok

[bozon]

Originally posted by Ghastly

1. Buffs fly too fast compared to what they did historically.   Fighters do too - for the most part they patrolled at greatly reduced throttle settings.  And in most aircraft, there was a significant number of tasks that had to be performed to ready your aircraft for an engagement - some even risked a blown engine if you just firewalled them improperly.  We get off easy...  

2. Buffs have almost no weight considerations or fuel management when loading the plane and in flight. Again, fighters too.  Our front is 10 miles long and 10 miles away....
 

1. Fighters do their fighting while flying as fast as possible. Bombers fight fighters while still flying slower than their max speed.

2. If you fly spit16, La7 or 109s you have no weight considerations. You always take 100% internal because the fuel tank is made of a recycled beer can. If you fly P47s, P38s, mosquitos, Ta152 or a few others that carry A LOT of fuel, you balance performance and endurance. These planes suffer badly from over loading. If you really want to get the most out of them you have to manage your fuel and cruise at reduced RPM and MAN. As for ordnance - You can load a P47N with 10 rockets, 500lbs central and 2*1000lbs on the wings, 8*0.5 and 3400 rounds. You'll climb slower than a lanc, so you might as well get 3 buffs for the same cost, much bigger bang and better defense.

[Softail]

Originally posted by 999000
Stoney good information Sir!.....so even with formations the kill to death ratio is still isn't even close to ONE!..........ok now what you think the kill to death ratio would drop to with single formations???.20?
Maybe we should be talking about making Bombers Stronger?
999000

Hey... I have noticed something after 5 pages of "stuff."   I am seeing the word "realistic" a lot.

Has anyone thought of this?    Attack 3 bombers with TWO (2) fighters.

Is it "realistic" that a single fighter would

Yes...ALL guns are slaved but have a fixed convergence of about 500 yards.
       Realistically....shouldn't every gun point at the TARGET the "commanding gun" is shooting at?   I mean...how many times in WWII did two tailgunners, two waist gunners, two ball turret/top turret gunners shoot to intentionaly MISS their target because it wasn't exactly at 500 yards?

       With the guns slaved to one point in space and one operator....you (the bomber pilot) can only shoot at 1 target at time.    So someone edges in from the high 6 and the other cuts across the 3-9.  Bomber pilot shoots at the dead six pilot and BOOM... Dead bombers.    Realistically shouldn't  the outside waistgunner see the other plane coming in, call it in one the intercom and commence firing?  I mean...if you want to be "realistic".

       Given the numbers of kills/deaths... I don't see bombers as that big of a threat to fighters.

        As for perking bomber formations....go ahead.  I need something to spend my 4000+ bomber points on.   AR234's just don't seem worth it to me. ;-)
 
       
        Actually...making it so I can fly an entire squadron of bombers would be kool too ;-)

Later.

Softail

[1Boner]

Originally posted by SkyRock
The problem is that one player gets 3 platforms to kill things with.  It's a thing of the past and should be done away with.  One player, one plane!!!!!

Mark:aok

in order to have a 50% chance of surviving the mission and make it home,
you almost have to have 3 platforms.

without the benefit of 3 platforms, you won,t last 5 minutes.

with every fighter in a 15 mile radius chasing you down for those easy points!!!

and the buffs will get little or nothing for shooting the fighters down.

sure, some guys abuse the 3 plane platform

but the guys who don,t shouldn,t be penalized because of those who do.




"screaming" by you at 300mph in my lancs,

                                                           Boner:aok