Can we do something about suicide HQ bombers?

[Zimme83]

Add some serious flak at HQ, now its just laughable to see the slow firing acks trying to scratch the paint of the lancs. there is no other object where u can go in at 5k in a bomber, drop your target and get out with nearly no damage at all. Some manned 88 or 5in should be minimum. That would eliminate most NOE raiders.

[icepac]

You can kill CV without even losing a drone at 5k in B26s.

I have only twice seen all 3 get blown up and that was from a manned 5 inch.

[Zimme83]

But with a few manned 5 in at HQ there is always a possibility to defend it. 4-5 guys in the guns makes it a lot harder and u only need  to kill one of the lancs to save the hq.

[icepac]

Now that's an idea I like.

[Vinkman]

If I had to suggest anything it would be to make HQ responsible for dot dar only.
Make local airfield radar towers more numerous, increase their range to 75 miles,  and have that represented by dar bar only in that area. This would also have the limited ability to allow airborne radar platforms to fill in the dot dar and bar dar gaps.

I think I would do it backwards...
1) Make HQ resposible for Dar Bars only.
2) Still show local radar dots for enemy.
3) Always Show friendly dots.

[wpeters]

I think I would do it backwards...
1) Make HQ resposible for Dar Bars only.
2) Still show local radar dots for enemy.
3) Always Show friendly dots.

+1

[WWhiskey]

I think I would do it backwards...
1) Make HQ resposible for Dar Bars only.
2) Still show local radar dots for enemy.
3) Always Show friendly dots.

+1 on that or some variation of that theme!
 

[Volron]

I would still like to see at least 2x more required to knock down the HQ.

[Tilt]

I think I would do it backwards...
1) Make HQ resposible for Dar Bars only.
2) Still show local radar dots for enemy.
3) Always Show friendly dots.

This works IMO....... maybe 3 would be limited to local friendlies. HQ function would then be one that gave data beyond the local radar ring.

agree re hardening it  to just beyond the capability of a single formation of B29's.

[Lucifer]

+100 000

I think I would do it backwards...
1) Make HQ resposible for Dar Bars only.
2) Still show local radar dots for enemy.
3) Always Show friendly dots.

[Volron]

This works IMO....... maybe 3 would be limited to local friendlies. HQ function would then be one that gave data beyond the local radar ring.

agree re hardening it  to just beyond the capability of a single formation of B29's.

Increasing the amount of stuff to be destroyed as well.  Not just that big concrete fort.  They could go back to the degrading effects with a setup like this.  4 buildings, requiring 2x the amount of ords for what our current HQ needs to be brought down.

[Rondar]

Maybe HQ downtime should be treated as a hanger is... downtime 15 minutes.

[Slade]

I think I would do it backwards...
1) Make HQ resposible for Dar Bars only.
2) Still show local radar dots for enemy.
3) Always Show friendly dots.

+1

[Rob52240]

I think I would do it backwards...
1) Make HQ resposible for Dar Bars only.
2) Still show local radar dots for enemy.
3) Always Show friendly dots.

This is the perfect solution for small maps.

[WWhiskey]

I think I would do it backwards...
1) Make HQ resposible for Dar Bars only.
2) Still show local radar dots for enemy.
3) Always Show friendly dots.

number three ; when they Key up  and are within range of the radio maybe?