I SAY....PERK THE BIG BOMBERS!

[Bronk]

Since you bring it up, You were given the oppurtunity in the MA, you chose not too.  Why? Score.  

LOL You do not want a fair fight with set rules.. you need an advantage. period end of discussion. That is why you will not da.

LMAO score bwaahahahahahaha

[Dadsguns]

LOL You do not want a fair fight with set rules.. you need an advantage. period end of discussion. That is why you will not da.

LMAO score bwaahahahahahaha

And you cant do that in the MA?  Fair fights can only happen in the DA?

[Bear76]

And you cant do that in the MA?  Fair fights can only happen in the DA?

That's why they made the arena

[Bronk]

And you cant do that in the MA?  Fair fights can only happen in the DA?

You have already said to me that the DA is not a fair fight and that is why you will not. I'm out so now i'll leave you to spin your timidity.  

[Dadsguns]

You have already said to me that the DA is not a fair fight and that is why you will not. I'm out so now i'll leave you to spin your timidity.  

Dont lose the context of that discussion, you simply refused to duel in the MA and used this statement as your out.  Just like what you always seem to do is pick and chose your quotes and forget the rest of the context. 
So, if your ever in the MA and would like to have a good fight, let me know.  That offer still stands.

 

[Acidrain]

You need salvo 2 to drop FHs, so its only 7.
If a Lanc driver gets to fly to 5 seperate fields untouched the only people to blame are the defenders.

It's the usual I don't want to do it, someone else can, or can't we just get HT to perk buffs out of the game.
Been a problem for years, another is no-one wants to cap CVs so buffs come in un-molested at only 8k and sink it.

When do you put the onus on players to protect their assets?

im glad you brought this up Kev as it points to a major part of the problem when a single player is able to take a formation of Bombers in on a CV the only real defense is to have SEVERAL players fly a CAP role around the CV to have a legitimate chance at stopping the 1 guy controlling 3 bombers from reaching his target with enough Ord to do major damage if not sink the ship. The option to take a Bomber formation is a force multiplier that i really cant understand the justification for having in the game at this point. If a fighter pilot wants a good chance at surviving he is ill advised to go into a fight alone(im referring to a base attack not a 1v1 duel) why is a bomber pilot afforded the luxury of bringing 3 times the offensive as well as defensive force?

[Kev367th]

im glad you brought this up Kev as it points to a major part of the problem when a single player is able to take a formation of Bombers in on a CV the only real defense is to have SEVERAL players fly a CAP role around the CV to have a legitimate chance at stopping the 1 guy controlling 3 bombers from reaching his target with enough Ord to do major damage if not sink the ship. The option to take a Bomber formation is a force multiplier that i really cant understand the justification for having in the game at this point. If a fighter pilot wants a good chance at surviving he is ill advised to go into a fight alone(im referring to a base attack not a 1v1 duel) why is a bomber pilot afforded the luxury of bringing 3 times the offensive as well as defensive force?

Ok

So what chance does a lone Lanc 4 x 50cals (rear) have against oh, let say a tiffy 4 x 20mm?
I would guess the formations is to try and even things out.

[999000]

Here is the easy answer....I think I have metioned this before.....Jut like you have 3 different size airfields (#of hangers) you could have just like in wwII have different size task forces with 2-3-4 CV's in each task force again (small medium and large fields)...the interesting part would be each CV in the task force could respawn within 15 minutes at the current location of the task force unless the last CV has been sunk.
To balance this game play out Hitech might think or  considering adding subs at this point also.
good hunting 999000 <S>

[Lusche]

im glad you brought this up Kev as it points to a major part of the problem when a single player is able to take a formation of Bombers in on a CV the only real defense is to have SEVERAL players fly a CAP role around the CV to have a legitimate chance at stopping the 1 guy controlling 3 bombers from reaching his target

Wrong. It just needs one fighter guy. Bombers attacking CV are quite easy to attack. They can't get very high, most come in 8-10k.. it's very easy for a fighter to climb to 12-15k and then swoop down on the buffs trying to line up on the cv.

And generally spoken, the formations are a way to enable players to fly buffs on their own at all.

[SEraider]

To all that say it is the same to salvo 2 @ 500lbs versus salvo 1 @1,000lbs:

That is only 1/2 true.  What you need to consider is a 1,000lb and 2,000lbs, you have a larger blast radius than a 500lbs.  I can't tell you how many times i go up in lancs of 2,000lbs loadout and it is easier for me to destroy targets at alt than 500lbs.  So don't really agree with that premise with respect to that argument.

[Lusche]

To all that say it is the same to salvo 2 @ 500lbs versus salvo 1 @1,000lbs:

That is only 1/2 true.  What you need to consider is a 1,000lb and 2,000lbs, you have a larger blast radius than a 500lbs.  I can't tell you how many times i go up in lancs of 2,000lbs loadout and it is easier for me to destroy targets at alt than 500lbs.  So don't really agree with that premise with respect to that argument.

But you have to take into account that smaller bombs are more powerful relatively to their weight. A 500lbs has slighty more bang than 0.5x 1000lbs.
Wehn I was new, I was flying much more buffs in my first weeks (like most newbies do), and I quickly discovered that 2x500 were giving me some more leeway when having a slightly off calibration, or bigger spread due to last-moment course corrections.

And of course, on top of that the 500'er loadout has the advantage of being more effective if you want to destroy some smaller targets (like ords) as well. 12x500 is giving you more flexibility than 6x1000.


Edit:

Bomb damage values

bomb size - damage value - efficiency
4000lbs - 3.3 - 78%
2000lbs - 1.7 - 85%
1000lbs - 1.0 - 100%
500lbs - 0.56 - 112%
250 lbs - 0.31 - 124%
100 lbs - 0.15 - 150 %

[RTHolmes]

yeah 112% sounds a bit more like it for a small structure like a hangar, thinking about it I was assuming a very large structure for 120% (and 141% for a bunker-buster ) how did you test those?

[Lusche]

yeah 112% sounds a bit more like it for a small structure like a hangar, thinking about it I was assuming a very large structure for 120% (and 141% for a bunker-buster ) how did you test those?

All hardness is measured in x(1000lbs bomb) units. The 1000lbs bomb is the default. A structure with a hardness of 1 takes exactly one 1000lbs bomb to destroy.

To test bomb values relaitve to the 1000lbs bomb, you can up a bomber and then test the bomb vs a structure like a BH or FH. You are changing the hardness until you find the highest hardness it must have to be still destroyed with one bomb.
The resulting number is the bomb's damage value. Example: a 250 lbs bomb will kill a FH with hardness = 0.31, but not at hardness 0.32 anymore. So the 250lbs bomb is worth 0.31 x 1000lbs bombs.

So a single B-17 with 6x 1000lbs bombs is carrying 6000lbs of "damage value", but then carrying 500lbs bombs it is carrying 12*560 = 6720lbs of "damage value"

[RTHolmes]

nice , if time consuming   did you notice if the splash is full damage to the blast radius or tapers off as you'd expect (ie. did any close misses still destroy at the same hardness as a direct hit?)

[Lusche]

nice , if time consuming

Especially when you test 1800kg or 4000lbs bombs, which are only being carried one at a time