Suicide bombers and why

[BnZ]

You know, I have to take this entire thread with a certain amount of cynicism.

Reason being, the rare times you see big formations of buffs coming in at realistic altitudes (20-30K) with large numbers of escorts ready to pounce on the interceptors, IOW "The way it was and ought to be done", there is even more whining, wailing, gnashing of teeth, and strange vague threats to "report 'em" than when a formation divebombs something.

[Krusty]

As has been mentioned earlier in this combined post, Krusty, It's not just CV's-FH's at airfields, too. Or factory objects. It should be fixed, considering that someone in CT who takes' flak damage, or hits' from a fighter, might do something gamey like DB the primary because he's not able to maintain alt, or speed, or any of the other things' that you need to do to accurately level bomb.

Incorrect. It's not going to be a factor in CT. It's not going to happen, unless it's INTENDED to happen. For the initial open (8th AF bombing) it's not intended.

You can't deviate and just go off doing what you want, not even if you take hits and dive to run or whatever.

There's even talk of mysterious engine failures if you stray too far from where you're supposed to be.

Wanting something for MA is another matter, but it's a non-issue for the CT. It's way more stuctured than you suggest.

[Stang]

Well then, I guess I'll just shut up then.

You?  pfft, nevah!

 

[hubsonfire]

Incorrect. It's not going to be a factor in CT. It's not going to happen, unless it's INTENDED to happen. For the initial open (8th AF bombing) it's not intended.

You can't deviate and just go off doing what you want, not even if you take hits and dive to run or whatever.

There's even talk of mysterious engine failures if you stray too far from where you're supposed to be.

Wanting something for MA is another matter, but it's a non-issue for the CT. It's way more stuctured than you suggest.

Just curious, where are you getting specifics for CT?

[hubsonfire]

You know, I have to take this entire thread with a certain amount of cynicism.

Reason being, the rare times you see big formations of buffs coming in at realistic altitudes (20-30K) with large numbers of escorts ready to pounce on the interceptors, IOW "The way it was and ought to be done", there is even more whining, wailing, gnashing of teeth, and strange vague threats to "report 'em" than when a formation divebombs something.

I don't fly a great deal (couple of hours a night, couple of nights a week max), but I do not see this (the whining and reporting threats) happening.
Then again, I squelch a lot of the squeakers, since everything is too hard and anyone who does anything their misshapen little narcissistic heads can't comprehend is automatically cheating. Overall, at least with the players I know well, there is more disdain for the suicide jabo formations than the rarer high alt missions we encounter.

<edit> Initial post wasn't very clear.

[BnZ]

You mean you don't see missions like this or don't hear whining about it?

[Masherbrum]

This is still going?   

[FrodeMk3]

This is still going?   

It appears' that one new feature of the revised BBS is the ability for the mod to now tie related threads' together into one, producing a monster thread. I thought it was done when we were telling 999 that his idea to simply put more CV's in the task force was a good one, and then POOF it's huge! 

[moot]

I think formations are a good thing for the game.. It gives players more targets; I think more firepower is better than less, wherever possible.  I think that a good counter-balancing feature to this would be real ballistics for puffy AAA, and maybe more guns on the task groups.  But two more CVs would probably be enough extra puffy... It would really be cool if TG flak got real ballistics though.

[Tilt]

My Take

Using the perk system

• Formations would be perked
• Ordinance  would be perked
• These are bomber perks and a balance would be struck such that folk who regularly suicide or get shot down would find it hard to earn perks for heavy ordinance load outs or formations or both.(Heavily tooled formation = Formation perk + 3 times the heavy ordinance perk)

Enabling/disabling stuff for formations

• When in formation only enable bomb release when in the F6 view
• When in formation cause the period to arm fuse to be extra long
• These limit the benefit of formations getting close into the target or even release bombs during a shallow dive

Stuff relating to the use of single heavy bombers.

• Only enable bomb release when in the F6 view
• Cause the period to arm fuse to be extra long
• This recognises that some heavy bombers were not typically used in an attack role and therefore should not have the oppurtunity to do so "in game". They use parameters are the same as formations.

Aircraft that were used in both Attack and Bomber roles (Ju88, B25, Boston, TBM, Kate, AR234) would have the ability to be chosen for the Attack role in the hanger. In this case.....

• Formations disabled
• F6 view disabled
• Pilot releases bombs
• F3 view disabled
• Short (standard) fuse arm times

These would join some aircraft that only have attack roles (IL2, Ju87, SBD, A20). Attack aircraft would be perked for heavy ordinance load outs as would bombers.

The objective here is twofold

1) Use the perk system to make the suicidal use of heavily loaded formations some thing that cannot be "afforded" over the medium or long term. Medium loaded single bombers should be free to use (even if lost) to ensure players still have access to them, however the persistant reckless expenditure of bomber perks on heavily loaded or (even more expensively) heavily loaded formation based suicide missions would be eventually self limiting.

2) Cause game play mechanisms (forced use of F6 and longer fuses) to push formations and heavy bombers into their traditional roles of level bombers whereby they operated at some altitude and used their bomb aimers to release targetted bombs

[Bruv119]

I think Tilt has got it spot on.

Some would argue "its my $15 i can up what i want, when i want"  but all of these points I believe would have a positive/realistic effect on gameplay.

My take on people who would have the above opinion are that they are Childish, spoilt little brats who need a kick up the rear end.

Bruv
~S~

[SIG220]

Some of Tilt's ideas on enabling/disabling features to keep level bombers as being used as level bombers sound OK to me.   I've never even tried this dive bombing with a heavy or medium bomber formation. 

But his ideas of perking heavy bombers and attack bombers to death are ridiculous.  He obviously is a most biased fighter jock himself.

To be historically accurate, some Japanese planes in the game do need to have a Kamikaze ordnance load out option.   And then allow that to detonate when you crash your plane into the carrier.  I would have no problem with that option being perked. 

We should have an historically correct option for people to be able to commit suicide in the game.


_____________________________ _____________________________ ______________________

[Bruv119]

But his ideas of perking heavy bombers and attack bombers to death are ridiculous.  He obviously is a most biased fighter jock himself.
_____________________________ _____________________________ ______________________

Not at all.  Why do you think us Brits scrapped daylight bombing and resorted to night time flying with lancs.  The bomber losses during the day were too much for us to sustain.

The problem is the use of heavy bombers out of context.  Newer players are going to opt for the biggest payload to get the most damage to make up for their lack of skill.  One way to prevent this would be to perk the big formations and heavy loadouts so that they get used on occasions when they are needed.  I would hope people would think twice before lancstuking or suicide bombing if they knew they would be wasting perks by not trying to fight their way home and land it.

Bailing buffs would also get hit.

[Tilt]

But his ideas of perking heavy bombers and attack bombers to death are ridiculous. 

I aint no fighter jock.............. and I would not perk stuff   "to death". Players must have access to stuff .

Any system must enable us to fly a bomber even if we dont have perks to fill it  (or 3 of them) full of 1000/2000lb bombs. Plus we only lose those perks if we dont bring the bombers back.............. its about making repeated heavily loaded suicide expensive ............. not about denying folk the rides they want

[LYNX]

Well done Tilt....I likes your proposition.  You make far to much sense that it'll never be used    

Folk have complained that they don't have anything to spend "these stoooopid bomber perks" on.  Well now they do or would do if part or all of your suggestion was implemented.

1) Use the perk system to make the suicidal use of heavily loaded formations some thing that cannot be "afforded" over the medium or long term. Medium loaded single bombers should be free to use (even if lost) to ensure players still have access to them, however the persistent reckless expenditure of bomber perks on heavily loaded or (even more expensively) heavily loaded formation based suicide missions would be eventually self limiting.

I know some would complain at first but they would actually accumulate vast amounts of perkies if they didn't suicide the darn things every time they got in them.

Take me for an example.  Not because I like me or am gods gift to AH..just an example.  Played since 02 have lynx name since 04 have 11k bomber perkies BECAUSE I don't game the system IE bomb and bail or suicide.  Heavies!... I'm always over 17k and higher. Do get shot down but rarely lose the whole formation.  Generally land more kills than losses.  Medium bombers 6 to 10k alt.  Same as above.  CV bombing in AR234's I do at 7K+... lose the odd drone to manned ack rarely lose the whole formation to fighters and or acks.

As for the reader that just picks up the 11k bomber perkie bit... no I ain't gonna suicide 11k perkies just because I have them.....not my style friends.  THAT's why I have 11k perkies.