Bomber Combat simulation in Aces High

[Karnak]

I stooged around in B-17s below 10,000 feet over an enemy base the other day because I was away from home, on a crapulent computer. This is the first time I've done this in my AH career. On a sattelite connection, no frame rate to speak of, lousy monitor, and no stick. That's right, a mouse. Remember, first time I've ever done this.

I shot down two fighters and gained some assists for 3 deaths. And my death rate is only that high because I accidentally flew into a mountain range while looking  backwards   (I was stooging around low enough to actually take some hits from base ack)

I noticed many fighter planes wisely shying away from me, to attack targets that are easier, such as every fighter plane in the game  

At 10,000ft you'd have added three kills to my Mossie total and never had a shot at killing me.  I love finding buffs below 13,000ft.

That you ran into guys who don't know how to attack bombers in AH doesn't make them an engine of destruction, it makes the guys you killed dumb.

Did I mention I was flying with a flippin' mouse and never fly bombers? I shudder to think what I could do with practice.

It is easier than using the wirblewinds everyone complains about.

Mouse is irrelevant when flying bombers.  Literally, has no effect on the ease or difficulty of your claim.  Mouse only hurts when you need to do aerobatics.

So yes, bomber gunnery has been made incredibly gamey and easy, to the point that the hard lessons from WWII about unescorted bomber vulnerability make absolutely no sense in AHII. A three ship flight of 17s is a monster in this game, a proper box would be an insane engine of destruction.

Yes, it is more effective than it was historically.  I don't see anybody claiming otherwise.  The choice you have is to either make the bomber guns more effective than they were historically or give each bomber player 9, perhaps 19, drones in full box formation.  If one of those two things isn't done then slow bombers would go unused in AH.

Most of the people who want bomber guns nerfed also want the drones taken away.  They want helpless, free kills and they never stop to consider who will play the helpless, free drone.

[kvuo75]

the VAST MAJORITY of buff gunners cant even ping me if I attack properly (from front quarter). it's comical.  I mean, not a single ping thru multiple passes.


999000 is one who can, I think he may have gotten my oil last time I met him. I'm pretty sure I have a winning record against him anyway.. so if the best buff gunner in the game cant even kill me more than I kill him.. yeah..

[XxDaSTaRxx]

the VAST MAJORITY of buff gunners cant even ping me if I attack properly (from front quarter). it's comical.  I mean, not a single ping thru multiple passes.


999000 is one who can, I think he may have gotten my oil last time I met him. I'm pretty sure I have a winning record against him anyway.. so if the best buff gunner in the game cant even kill me more than I kill him.. yeah..

Woah hey there Mr. Ego Calm down

[GScholz]

Showing a video of a damaged B17, or maybe lost, cut out from the formation and getting cut to pieces doesnt mean that was the preferred method of attack by the LW. It was actually the last way they wanted to do it. Unless of course the Bomber was on its own or, as the video showed, the tail gunner was blown out of it. The fact that HO attacks were preferred is a well known fact.

In 1942 and first half of 1943 the Luftwaffe tactics swayed between attacking from 6OC and HO. However in August 1943 the OKL ordered that all attacks must be made from the rear, mostly because the greenhorns had problems performing a HO attack. Also in the fall of 1943 Hans-Günter Kornatzki's "Sturmstaffeln" started making mass attacks from the rear in tight formation. The defensive fire would be spread out among the large formation of attacking fighters. Attacking the B-17 from the rear the Luftwaffe targeted the tail and ball gunner first, then the oil tanks between the fuselage and inner nacelles. The number 3 engine was also a prime target since it powered the hydraulics. In HO attacks they would target the cockpit and no. 3 engine. In diving attacks they targeted the inboard oil tanks and the fuel tanks between the nacelles.

[BnZs]

 If one of those two things isn't done then slow bombers would go unused in AH.

Unescorted bombers having a bad time in AH2? The horror, the horror! That's as bad as tanks unescorted by flaks and/or fighters getting slaughtered by A-20s and Il2s!...Couldn't have that in a combat game, no sir.

[BnZs]

So you would rather face his Corsair than his B-17?  

Yes, yes in fact I would much rather go Corsair to Corsair with him than Corsair to his B-17s. I'm a good duelist but I've never seen anyone approach him doing his stooging about in B-17s technique without getting shot to pieces. He does this *instead of* taking his Hog into heavily outnumbered and disadvantaged situations for a very good reason, he can damage or destroy more enemies while outnumbered that way.

The much feared 999000 has 31 kills for 48 deaths in his B-17.  That equates to a .63 K/D.  

Actually what that means is that 999000 has 31 kills in comparison to having his formation destroyed 16 times. That's a k/d about 2, again better than the average MA pilot's fighter score. The formation, upped and controlled in tandem by a single pilot should be considered a single unit when considering it's lethality against fighters.

Some lackluster pilot I know has 59 kills of B-17s this year, to only 2 deaths (1 of those being in a C.202 ).  That same pilot got waxed a Hell of a lot more by fighter planes, I can assure you.  

Any lackluster pilot can rack up a heck of a k/d against bombers by simply breaking off whenever the gunner appears to be competent, and most pilots with that sort of k/d against buffs do exactly that. (Most AH players do exactly that in fact, drifting buff K/D even higher.) And you Snuggie, are no lackluster pilot. You've lost two 1v1s against B17s, which is probably about as many true 1v1s as you lose to most plane types in a given year.

[BnZs]

Thank you. I wonder if peeps playing this *game* honestly think that German fighter pilots used the straight-down-asking-for-a-collision attack runs that deathstar bomber attack makes necessary in this game.

In 1942 and first half of 1943 the Luftwaffe tactics swayed between attacking from 6OC and HO. However in August 1943 the OKL ordered that all attacks must be made from the rear, mostly because the greenhorns had problems performing a HO attack. Also in the fall of 1943 Hans-Günter Kornatzki's "Sturmstaffeln" started making mass attacks from the rear in tight formation. The defensive fire would be spread out among the large formation of attacking fighters. Attacking the B-17 from the rear the Luftwaffe targeted the tail and ball gunner first, then the oil tanks between the fuselage and inner nacelles. The number 3 engine was also a prime target since it powered the hydraulics. In HO attacks they would target the cockpit and no. 3 engine. In diving attacks they targeted the inboard oil tanks and the fuel tanks between the nacelles.

[Brooke]

Fighter pilots complain that the guns on bombers are too powerful.  What they really mean is that a trio of B-17's should be easy to shoot down by a single fighter who attacks from 6 o'clock.

In real WWII did the average fighter pilot shoot down 3 B-17's under those conditions?  (Average, not the story of it happening three times in all of WWII.)

I think that AH pilots have a lot more practice in their environment than WWII pilots had in their environment.  A typical AH pilot has hundreds of hours of combat time.  Not 100's of flying time, but 100's in combat.  They have fired millions of rounds of ammo at maneuvering enemies, not at stationary targets.  That adds to their ability to hit things in our environment.

[Wiley]

If, through whatever mechanic, you make it so the "average" low six creep attack from a fighter has a chance, a fighter with a clue will be under precisely zero threat from them.

Wiley.

[Karnak]

Unescorted bombers having a bad time in AH2? The horror, the horror! That's as bad as tanks unescorted by flaks and/or fighters getting slaughtered by A-20s and Il2s!...Couldn't have that in a combat game, no sir.

They wouldn't have a bad time.  They would go unused as they would be pointless.

Tanks do far, far better against Il-2s and A-20Gs than bombers would with realistic gunnery and no drones.  It isn't even comparable.  A single B-17G would be meat on the table for almost any attacking fighter. B-17Gs would be lucky to have a 0.08/1 K/D ratio each tour under those rules, about where the He111 and G4M1 sit now.

Why would players waste time using those when you can be so much more effective in suicide P-51s/P-47s/P-38s/Typhoons?

A lot of new players start in bombers.  Why would they stick around to become subscribers when they are free kills that almost never accomplish their goals?

[GScholz]

Are people here really advocating making "gameplay balancing" to aircraft performance in AH? Because that's what this is.

[Karnak]

Are people here really advocating making "gameplay balancing" to aircraft performance in AH? Because that's what this is.

Yes.  Because it is more important for the game to survive than to have realistic bomber gunnery.

Either that or find a way for players to control a whole box of bombers.  Just figure out how to limit what 140,000lbs of bombs dropped from ten Lancasters does to things on the ground....

[bozon]

Using your example of shawk's bomber K/D, how does that compare with his K/D in fighters?  Looks like he has a 5.1 fighter K/D, versus a .77 K/D in bombers. 
So you would rather face his Corsair than his B-17?   

The much feared 999000 has 31 kills for 48 deaths in his B-17.  That equates to a .63 K/D. 

Some lackluster pilot I know has 59 kills of B-17s this year, to only 2 deaths (1 of those being in a C.202 ).  That same pilot got waxed a Hell of a lot more by fighter planes, I can assure you. 

You have to remember that bombers come in trios. 999000 is not feared because he never loses a bomber. Guys like him are feared because you will get maybe one or two of his drones while you will be downed or headed home trailing smoke and fuel. He still gets to land his remaining planes. A 0.63 K/D means at lease 1.89 kills per short trip to the tower (i.e. 3 bombers lost). It is at least, because he probably lands many sorties with 1 or 2 bombers remaining - the lost drone still counts to lower his K/D even if the sortie ended in "landed safely". This is quite impressive given the inability to escape bad situations and the gang-factor that bombers generate. Direct comparison to fighters K/D is difficult.

The heavily armed bombers (B17/24/26) have a K/D of around 0.33. This means that their "equivalent" (factor 3, allowing up to 3 deaths per sortie) K/D is around 1.0. Also keep in mind that this statistic includes all the bomb&bail, CV kamikaze, GV carpet laying, gamestyles that tend to push K/D way down. This stat is quite good and means that game-wise, these bombers are balanced. Game-wise, not historically wise. We have seen what happens when more challenge and a bit of realism is introduced to bomber piloting (full manual calibration anyone?). As much as I dislike it, the game is better off in its current configuration.

[Volron]

I see this is still going...


Hmm...  Okay, for those of you who think bombers are too hard to kill/have it too easy, why don't you all get together and fly in a formation of bombers, no formations enabled (following a more historic route).  Then do it again, with formations enabled.  Make sure you take escorts for both.  Target a long range target, deep in enemy territory (8+ sector round trip flight).  None of that, "I don't have time for that" BS either.  You can make the time.  Make plans to get together and do it a month or two from now if needed.

Let's see how you do.

[caldera]

Actually what that means is that 999000 has 31 kills in comparison to having his formation destroyed 16 times. That's a k/d about 2, again better than the average MA pilot's fighter score. The formation, upped and controlled in tandem by a single pilot should be considered a single unit when considering it's lethality against fighters.

Going with your 1=3 formula, the most devastating bomber gunner in the game has a K/D of about 2.  How many fighter pilots do you think have a K/D over 2? 

Most bomber pilots are not aimbot killers.  All you have to do when attacking bombers is employ a rocky/paladin-style timid BNZ approach and it's a cinch.  I see lots of familiar names fly right up the 6 O'clock, when they would normally try to get the high ground over another fighter.  It's not really magic.  A fast closing speed with a huge target from above equals dead bombers.