Jump to content


Time to do something about tier 10 bombers


  • Please log in to reply
227 replies to this topic

GoldKnight #41 Posted 08 April 2020 - 03:22 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 12356 battles
  • 415
  • [FEED] FEED
  • Member since:
    10-14-2017

View Posthoughtonbee, on 08 April 2020 - 10:29 AM, said:

Lol yeah I've seen Goldknight and his mate at tier 10, game after game one in a bomber and one in a XF90. I asked them if they dont get bored just rofl stomping every game and the salt poured forth. Wasnt even complaining (I'd been on a team with them one game and against them the next), was genuinely curious what fun they got out of 5 minute roflstomps. Almost like they had a form of guilty concious over their actions :D

I do remember that phrase and i do remember an answer also "the sweet taste of tears" 

simple and pure troll or, sometimes, just tired of reading ppl complaining for everything

 

T10 is full of heavy+bomber, fighter+bomber, gaa+bomber or even 2x bomber, the fact ppl complain about us means we do it more effectively. Also, as wrote before and as u can read on clan description "we do love the sweet taste of tears" 


Edited by GoldKnight, 08 April 2020 - 03:53 PM.


Merkwuerdigliebe #42 Posted 08 April 2020 - 04:09 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Conquest Member
  • 9997 battles
  • 177
  • [FEED] FEED
  • Member since:
    10-22-2012

View PostGoldKnight, on 08 April 2020 - 03:14 PM, said:

When on pc gonna paste it again

 


Edited by Merkwuerdigliebe, 08 April 2020 - 04:09 PM.


Merkwuerdigliebe #43 Posted 08 April 2020 - 04:15 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Conquest Member
  • 9997 battles
  • 177
  • [FEED] FEED
  • Member since:
    10-22-2012

View Posthoughtonbee, on 08 April 2020 - 09:29 AM, said:

Almost like they had a form of guilty concious over their actions :D

They have, and if not they ought to.



GonerNL #44 Posted 08 April 2020 - 04:25 PM

    First Lieutenant

  • Advanced Member
  • 16214 battles
  • 3,611
  • Member since:
    09-02-2017

View Postatlasapl, on 08 April 2020 - 03:31 PM, said:

As you say, bombers at lower and mid tiers are generally pretty straightforward to deal with. Its not really a problem there. Tier 9/10 is something else.

 

Or maybe it's the other way around ; the heavies at tier IX and X are not powerful enough ? And the heavies at tier VI etc are ?

Looking at my recent experiences with trying to fly a bomber there ; everybody says the B-17G is awesome, but so far every bot Ki-102 and Me-410 just kills me without any problems.

(not saying that the bombers at tier X are OK, before someone bites my head off !!)

 



anonym_MfZ6T7iwWpUC #45 Posted 08 April 2020 - 06:43 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 350
  • Member since:
    10-29-2021
I never fully got comfortable with the 262HGII to really comment. I have considered stepping back to the t8 262 and having another go with that in order to try and improve.

Maybe its a combination of high tier heavies not quite being strong enough and the bombers needing to be tweeked a little, in order to even things out. Probably doesnt need much changing. A little tweek to both.

But mid tear bombers played by a bot are certainly pretty easy to deal with. Bagged a few today in the mosquito. Human bombers go higher more often. Needs a determined player to bother going for it.

CheefCoach #46 Posted 08 April 2020 - 06:54 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Conquest Member
  • 9772 battles
  • 1,489
  • [BBMM] BBMM
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

As far as I remember, it is not so hard to deal with t9/10 bots bomber as well, as long you bring proper plane. Also my experience with t9/10 bombers is that heavies can be painful if they find me, and that bombs aren't that accurate. 

 

Specialization, specially the one with ultimate equipment will make almost every plane OP. 


Nothing interesting to write. 

Siagor #47 Posted 08 April 2020 - 07:10 PM

    First Lieutenant

  • Alpha Tester
  • 12070 battles
  • 4,117
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostCheefCoach, on 08 April 2020 - 07:54 PM, said:

, it is not so hard to deal with t9/10 bots bomber as well, as long you bring proper plane.

 

I've brought both ultimate Javelin and XF-90. Especially Javelin can dispatch bots with ease - but when you meet those two (they are always in flight) 131 and XF-90, both ultimate too and good players, you will lose the hunt. Always.



apartclassic #48 Posted 08 April 2020 - 07:59 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Advanced Member
  • 31361 battles
  • 1,582
  • [UNIC] UNIC
  • Member since:
    01-21-2014

It's not MM that is at fault. HF are strong enough, on all tiers, to deal with bombers. It's how both of those classes are played that is the variable, plus the fact that t9/10 bombers are imbalanced. I will try to keep it short (had a longer version, that I accidentaly deleted...):

- high tier bombers have very high speed coupled with powerfull defensive armament; when you tail a He-111, there is only a single MG shooting at you - when you tail t9/10, there are at least 2 cannons shooting; when people choose to pursue the bomber all the way through the range of rearguns, kaboom; on one hand you have planes' stats (guns, reargunner skills), on the other side you have psychology (humans 'pursuing' instead of 'intercepting' - come at the bomber at an angle, sidewise of from below, and watch the bomber's hp gone in a blink) - good bomber drivers exploit both, bad players are prone to be the victims of both

- German bombers can totally single-pass a garrison, thanks to the splash and power of their mininukes; it's entirely possible to destroy two GTs with a single bomb, if aimed well - and one doesn't need any aerial kills to flip the sector; as much as those bombs are the main reason I enjoy both Ju287 and EF131, they also make them horribly imbalanced; when you do the calculation for bombs, it turns out Su-10 and EF131 are exactly the same in terms of DPS (power of bombs times number of bombs times reload time), if I remember the relevant discussion from the official WG Discord right, but the nature of bombs makes for a difference in playstyle and effectiveness of those bombers

- tinkering with MM is bound to be temporary and ineffective; as it is right now, MM finds a flight of bomber/HF (usual mix), looks for any other two humans to fill the other team up, and that's it; with a full roster (i.e. 9 humans and 3 bots per side, as per current MM rules) this would balance itself out some, as you most probably would have human bombers and HFs on both teams - but with the playerbase we have now, it doesn't work; not the MM itself to be blamed, in my opinion, and if you try to do something with it now, you will have to come back to it when playerbase numbers change (I realise it's potentialy a topic to be discussed further, but not right now)

- HF are powerful enough, both in their own stats and in the number per battle; ironically, bot HFs are more effective at shooting down bombers than humans are, because bots will break away before being chewed by reargunners, heal up and come back to finish the job (most often), while the humans will just take the pain till someone goes down (and it's usually the miss-played chasing HF that's shot down); when you don't do what the bomber pilot wants you to do, HF will eat bombers with ease - but a skilled bomber driver will do everything possible to deny you the chance, and to make you play according to his strengths; it's psychology, not plane stats or MM, and as such should not be brought up here

 

Bomber drivers do feel invincible and pro on high tiers, because the game gives the reasons for it. Playing a bomber right is not as easy as some would like to make it, but playing it well is not as demanding as other would like to make it seem. On the other hand you get people who run into the same bomber - alone or in a flight - battle after battle, and the only choice is to either go after the bomber (which thanks to bomber stats and the way they are played is challenging, to say the least), or accept losing battle after battle. Bomber driver who is successfully countered gets mad; non-bomber who is outcapped all the time gets mad; when the two meet, sparks fly all over the place. The toxicity on high tiers comes from both sides of the argument, though - because the bomber drivers are a minority, which tends to leave the biggest impression on battles - we tend to blame only one side. Justly or not, it's the way most of us see it. In the current state of WoWP high tiers are most often a question of 'is there a human bomber on the other team' - if so, you have to focus him if you want a win. The endgame right now is a bomber game, and it's all about how fast bombers cap, how effective they are at defending themselves, how rapidly they redeploy - and this makes bomber drivers both the object and the source of a lot of venom.

 

TL/DR: it's not MM, it's bombers themselves that are the issue, because of imbalance of stats (bomb power and reload time, reargunner power and range, speed of the plane) - which is exploited by human players; the fix would be rather to change bomber stats in one/all field mentioned above, with MM left untouched till deemed absolutely neccessary


Edited by apartclassic, 08 April 2020 - 08:02 PM.

You have reached your quota of positive votes for the day

how ever thanks wery match

you will teachern me how to play? god bless me

seriös and respecktfull


levlos #49 Posted 09 April 2020 - 10:57 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 8843 battles
  • 475
  • [BBMM] BBMM
  • Member since:
    03-19-2017

If we look at a historical design point of view, we can see those trends:

 

About the tail gunner of the EF-131: (from wikipedia)

"One important development for the Luftwaffe that never made it onto its larger night fighters or strategic bomber designs, would have been the Borsig firm's "quadmount", hydraulically-powered Hecklafette HL 131V manned tail turret, fitted with a quartet of the firm's own MG 131 machine guns. Prototype examples of the HL 131V were trialed in the late spring and summer of 1943 on a trio of He 177A-3 examples set aside as the V32 through V34 prototypes. This innovative design never made it to production status, only existing as a series of engineering department mockups with Heinkel and Junkers, among others (for their aircraft designs that were intended to mount them) and as the aforementioned working prototypes. The HL 131V turret's design was advanced for a German-origin manned emplacement, using hydraulic drive to both elevate the turret's side-mount gunmount elevation units through a +/- 60º vertical arc either side of level, with a capability for horizontal traverse (of the entire turret) of some 100º to either side, all at a top traverse angular speed of 60º per second.". Here, we have our very well performing gun turret for the EF-131, no need for 20mm guns.

 

The British altogether did without tail gunners for their post-war  Sperrinand (more succesful) Canberra  bombers. The idea was that the planes would fly so high and fast that interception would be impossible. It is true that the Canberra could fly higher than any interceptor existing at the time of its design -and even for a short while afterwards. Migs 15 and 17 could get close enough to shoot them down, but they did not in practice. The protection was assured by a ECM suite, but that did not stop the Canberras from being shot down by SA-2 Missiles, Gloster Meteor NF.13 or F-86 Sabres. At no point it seems designers thought it would be useful to include a rear gunner into the design. The 'V' bombers of the early fifties did not have any gunner either.

 

The US designers did include tail gunners in their designs, or even guns on the wings or within nacelles. The B-29, B-50, B-54, B-49, B-36 and even the B-47 all had a tail gunner position (2 × 20 mm (0.787 in) M24A1 autocannon in a remote controlled tail turret ). The B-52 also had a tail gun (4x M3 machine guns, later a M61 20 mm gatling on the 'H' model, about what we have NOW currently on the EF-131!!), guided by radar as was the B-47's (mind you, that radar could be used to guide missiles onto the aircraft, hehe). Most positions used M2 machine-guns, except for the post-war tail gunner positions (single or later double 20mm guns).

 

The Soviets aknowledged their planes would have to fly lower and slower than the other's. Why ? Well, the Soviets always had issues with aero-engines -it was their weak point. Before ww2, the Soviet aeroengine industry was mainly engaged in producing foreign designs, notably Wright, Bristol, Hispano-Suiza, Fiat and Gnome-Rhône. Several engines design were developed for local production, although these were probably largely based on foreign models (e.g. Mikulin M-17, Shvetsov M-25, Klimov M-103 etc.). The Soviets also had trouble with their early jet engines, and were saved when the British sold them their Rolls-Royce RB.41 Nene. Back to topic: with underperforming engines, the Soviet  bombers could not afford protection based solely on speed. They had tried it with the SB bomber, only to see it shot down in droves in 1941 when interceptors had caught on them.

 

So the Soviets put guns on their bombers. Lots of heavy guns. 20mm or later 23mm canons. Soviet canon designs were excellent, perhaps the best in the world when they were designed. Even when the OKB bureaus copied the B-29 and produced it as the Tupolev Tu-4, they replaced every heavy machine-gun with 20mm and later 23mm canons (10 canons on a single bomber, Yikes !). Mind you, the Soviets had excellent heavy machine guns, but they apparently did not trust them enough. [ Perhaps it has to do with the fact that bomber escort would not be expected ? I did not find litterature on this topic, if anyone knows about it, please add your comment below ]. Soviet designs sported tail gunners into the eighties, even on Il-76 transport aircraft. Another thing the Soviets had trouble with were the remote-controled turret. The turrets on the SU-10 never worked in a satisfactory fashion, and on another plane (I forgot which), the power needed for the turrets made it impossible for the plane to fly: there was enough power generated on board of the bloody plane to feed all the inflight systems ! I also read somewhere there was trouble with the remote-aiming of the power turrets too.

 

So, to sum it up and get back to the OT: the Germans had a very modern 13mm quad turret with aiming assistance and fast traverse for their tail gunner in the works for the EF-131 and its brethren. That means lower range than 20mm, less damage but higher RoF and super fast traverse associated with very good arcs of fire. The Soviet tier X bomber has strong canons, but with lower accuracy, pitiful traverse and lower range too than now. Oh, and slower too.


Edited by levlos, 09 April 2020 - 11:31 AM.

- You can't shoot me! I have a very low threshold of death. My doctor says I can't have bullets enter my body at any time.-

- Handle these capsules with care. Dr. Noah's bacillus is highly contagious. This germ, when distributed in the atmosphere will make all women beautiful and destroy all men over 4'6."-

ApartClassic - 'may all your certainly illegitimate progeny suffer pox or at least perpetual flu'


FlyingDutchman69 #50 Posted 09 April 2020 - 11:36 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Conquest Member
  • 7921 battles
  • 216
  • [KTAFF] KTAFF
  • Member since:
    12-26-2016
1 pass one cap    i've heard this concerning t10 bombers….   i do it also with german and russian T 10  groundpounders (if you know what to hit), and tailgunner is just as strong (14 point tailgunners)  only the reload on the bombers is longer

Edited by FlyingDutchman69, 09 April 2020 - 11:38 AM.


GoldKnight #51 Posted 26 April 2020 - 09:16 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 12356 battles
  • 415
  • [FEED] FEED
  • Member since:
    10-14-2017

View PostFlyingDutchman69, on 09 April 2020 - 12:36 PM, said:

1 pass one cap    i've heard this concerning t10 bombers….   i do it also with german and russian T 10  groundpounders (if you know what to hit), and tailgunner is just as strong (14 point tailgunners)  only the reload on the bombers is longer

 

with the little difference that GAAs are easily attacked by any kind of plane, they are slow af and, believes me, their rear gunners are not even close to be powerfull as a su10, not even in same planet :)

just to say, EF131 has 950km/h top speed with moon altitude performance, how many planes can rly deal with such thing without die or lose 99% of their hp? ^^

 


Edited by GoldKnight, 26 April 2020 - 09:17 PM.


Ziptop #52 Posted 27 April 2020 - 07:07 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 8284 battles
  • 1,229
  • [_-0-_] _-0-_
  • Member since:
    08-31-2012
So much to look forward to.....

KlausHetti #53 Posted 27 April 2020 - 09:04 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 14758 battles
  • 408
  • Member since:
    10-06-2012
Sorry guys! I can't understand this "overpowered-tX-bombers-hype".
I am mainly playing heavy fighters - killing bombers is my main job in the heavy fighter role.
I am sure I killed more tX bombers than tX bombers killed me.

I you are whining cause they kicked you [edited]in a battle flying a light fighter ...
choose a heavy and kick their asses!   

Morgen ist heute schon gestern! 

 


levlos #54 Posted 27 April 2020 - 10:20 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 8843 battles
  • 475
  • [BBMM] BBMM
  • Member since:
    03-19-2017

Klaus,

 

A rear gunner in a bomber, with the right crew skills (+50% critical), the right equipment (+5+10% criticals) and the right consumable (+10%+?) has a 85%+ chance of causing a critical damage to a chasing fighter. Given the fact that the bomber has enough HP to resist a frontal attack pass AND has enough speed to control the angle of defense of its rear arcs, its interception is extremely challenging. Indeed, when you go fast enough, you make maneuvers in-and-out of the firing arcs near-impossible: it is euclidian geometry at work . The turrets are simply too powerful: when you get a pilot critical onto a chasing airplane (and that happens a lot), you are free to roam. Yes, you can use the gold consumable to heal your crew. No, I do not accept that as a standard procedure. Its not WoT here.

 

I will not dwell more on the single-pass base cap issue, we have all seen it. But it shows there is something rotten in the kingdom of WoWP when the prey is not afraid of the hunter. I chase bombers for a living, being much in love with heavies -but those tier X turn the tables around. Even when I kill those bombers (full HP, right not the limping one), I have so little HP left that even a sneeze kills me (I use the specialized Javelin, mind you, not a light fighter). Meanwhile, the bomber I just killed has already capped another base. It is totally non-viable. And bots are useless, as they get critted so fast they break off almost immediately.

 

If post-war bombers were so impossible to shoot down, we would only have ground-to-air missiles criss-crossing the skies after 1946. The Brits did try it in their infamous white paper -but oh, look, when was the last time you saw a B-52 or a TU-16 fight off attacks with their tail-gunners ? I think B-52s shot down two aircraft in their whole career (tell me if I am mistaken).

 

The prey has to be afraid of the hunter, not vice-versa. De-fang the bombers, and make them use their brains to plan their route, not float around like tourists. It will make the game more interesting for everybody.


- You can't shoot me! I have a very low threshold of death. My doctor says I can't have bullets enter my body at any time.-

- Handle these capsules with care. Dr. Noah's bacillus is highly contagious. This germ, when distributed in the atmosphere will make all women beautiful and destroy all men over 4'6."-

ApartClassic - 'may all your certainly illegitimate progeny suffer pox or at least perpetual flu'


Siagor #55 Posted 27 April 2020 - 10:24 AM

    First Lieutenant

  • Alpha Tester
  • 12070 battles
  • 4,117
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012
 

Amen to all above, especially this:

 

View Postlevlos, on 27 April 2020 - 11:20 AM, said:

 The turrets are simply too powerful:

 

...also coming from a dps-insanely-maxed-out Javelin pilot.



KlausHetti #56 Posted 27 April 2020 - 02:14 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 14758 battles
  • 408
  • Member since:
    10-06-2012

Ok levlos, I see what you want to tell me.

But do you have an tdea how many of these tX bombers do have a tail gun with all these gunner skills, equipment and consumables?
There are for sure players who optimised their bomber like this - but there are many many others who did not yet optimize their bombers. And there are bomber bots in tX,too.

 

Using this RND-based maths against your euclidian geometry I can still say at the end ... I killed more tx bombers than tX bombers killed my heavies. 
I was looking in my statistics but I can't find an indicator connected to tX Heavies in relation to tX Bombers ... sorry!


Morgen ist heute schon gestern! 

 


apartclassic #57 Posted 27 April 2020 - 02:44 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Advanced Member
  • 31361 battles
  • 1,582
  • [UNIC] UNIC
  • Member since:
    01-21-2014

Klaus, you are missing the point. In the current state of the game, playing t10 boils down to two effective options, if you want to win consistently: either play a bomber (so you can cap fast and win that way), or play a HF (so you can kill bombers, preventing them from capping). Other classes - especially GAA - are just a flavour on the cake, totally irrelevant in the current state of t9/10 bombers. One class defines the 'end-game', and this is far from balance. You said it yourself, 'choose a heavy and kick their asses!' - and this simply shouldn't be the case. When you fly an LF, MRF or GAA, you pray there's no human bomber on the other team. This in itself speaks volumes about how imbalanced the class is. On top of it, to add what levlos recently wrote and was mentioned by others too, reargunners are simply bollocks; they are the only instance in the game of a damage dealer with 100% accuracy, plus high crit chance, plus high dpm. Nope, not how it worked; B-17 had 10+ MGs and flew in box formations because of the statistical chance to hit, not because those gunners were so powerful individually. B-29 flew higher than their expected interceptors, later bombers were supposed to fly faster or higher, or undetected - and the defensive turrets were more of a psychological factor than a real deterrent.

 

There's a combination of factors that makes bombers imba. We are talking about t9/10, but look at skilled early Blenny pilots, or He-111 pilots, or Ju-88, or Do 217, or B-32, or RB-17. Did you notice I mentioned a bomber on every single tier they are on, even before t9/10? Those bombers can easily dictate the battle - that is unless you fly a HF and focus them. But in that case it's no longer WoWP, it's 'World of How-to-deal-with-a-bomber'. Does that clarify the issue that is being discussed here? One class, that due to design choices is dominating the other classes when it comes to playing with a win in mind. It may not seem so obvious given the current population, but I am convinced that if it was high enough and you had human bombers in each and every battle, this would be more evident. You either play a bomber, or play against a bomber - and this constitutes the imbalance. Even if I play other classes than HF (meaning I can't kill the pesky bomber in my battle), way too many battles turn into trying to outcap that single guy that is out of my reach. When testing and when seeing the relative ineffectiveness of bot bombers, it may have seen balanced - throw the human factor into the mix and things change dramatically. Also - with all due respect (even though I don't know them in person), I have reasons to believe the testers doing the job are not good pilots. They are either WG staff that plays the game less than we do, or some folks that are not on top of HoF. Testing is simply insufficient here, and bombers are the result of it. Personally I don't like that. Personally I think bombers render 3 classes of planes obsolete. Personally I hate being forced to choose a particular plane (because e.g. so many daily missions have the 'win' condition).


Edited by apartclassic, 27 April 2020 - 02:45 PM.

You have reached your quota of positive votes for the day

how ever thanks wery match

you will teachern me how to play? god bless me

seriös and respecktfull


CheefCoach #58 Posted 27 April 2020 - 03:07 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Conquest Member
  • 9772 battles
  • 1,489
  • [BBMM] BBMM
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

I have beaten many bomber players with my IL 40P. It comes down to quality of players, not on class of planes. And I want to have human bombers on other side, oppose to attack humans, because bombers don't threaten me, and I have plenty of sectors to cap. 

 

Bombers aren't that much OP as some players are OP. Every plane (well almost every) with full specialization became OP. 


Nothing interesting to write. 

apartclassic #59 Posted 27 April 2020 - 03:21 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Advanced Member
  • 31361 battles
  • 1,582
  • [UNIC] UNIC
  • Member since:
    01-21-2014

View PostCheefCoach, on 27 April 2020 - 03:07 PM, said:

I have beaten many bomber players with my IL 40P. It comes down to quality of players, not on class of planes. And I want to have human bombers on other side, oppose to attack humans, because bombers don't threaten me, and I have plenty of sectors to cap. 

 

Bombers aren't that much OP as some players are OP. Every plane (well almost every) with full specialization became OP. 

 

Don't split hairs please. Of course the pilot/player can make a whole lot of a difference. But ask yourself, how many times - in a battle of 1v1, you in IL, the other guy in a bomber, both of you with similar experience and skill at the game - did you lose? How many times did the bomber cap faster than you, go places faster than you, flipped the sector you just took mere seconds after you did? How many times have you had 'your' ground target bombed out of existence before you were in range, because bomber, be it bot or human, got there before you? How many times was your IL attacked by a HF, LF, MRF and other GAA (yes, bot GAA are aggressive sometimes, though it's tricky to trigger that) - while the enemy bomber went around unmolested, except for a sporadic HF?


Edited by apartclassic, 27 April 2020 - 03:21 PM.

You have reached your quota of positive votes for the day

how ever thanks wery match

you will teachern me how to play? god bless me

seriös and respecktfull


levlos #60 Posted 27 April 2020 - 03:49 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 8843 battles
  • 475
  • [BBMM] BBMM
  • Member since:
    03-19-2017

I must add the following factor:

 

There are very few maps for tier X. Really, the diversity is low. One map especially automatically spells doom to Ground Attack aircraft: the one with the many mountains (what's its name?). As a GA, you have to fly up and down (which you cannot, because higher than 700 meters its like you have to get down to push your aircraft), and then deal with command centers that have their installations at multiple levels, nested against the rocks. It makes for nice fighting, especially against following fighters that crash against the rocks, but it crazily handicaps the GA compared to the nifty bombers. Those scattered targets are hell to shoot at, and many less-skilled pilots plant themselves in the scenery, setting back the capture even further. I mean its hard enough as it is...

 

Then, how could I forget it, there is also the issue of the faulty path-finding of the friendly GA aircraft, that makes them loose a good minute at the start of the game while they try to find their way through the mountains.

 

It takes much more than skill to win on those maps as a GA -actually, a half-wited bomber player will breeze through the map in an eerie manner, capping everything while you, in your Ilyushin or Messerschmidt will have to manage your booster like crazy to reach back a base you just capped that got flipped my a bomber. Not a pleasant experience. Even when you shoot down that daring low-level bomber, no problem, it will respawn in 10 seconds and will be releasing its bomb on another sector by the time you have moved across a tenth of the map.

 

A solution I propose many times is a class-dependent respawn time. The farther you are from the frontlines, the longer the respawn.
- immediate for GA (they are always within reach of the front-line)

- 1 cycle for fighters and multi-roles

- 2 cycles for bombers

 

That should add gameplay to the game, as bomber pilots would think twice before getting shot down.


- You can't shoot me! I have a very low threshold of death. My doctor says I can't have bullets enter my body at any time.-

- Handle these capsules with care. Dr. Noah's bacillus is highly contagious. This germ, when distributed in the atmosphere will make all women beautiful and destroy all men over 4'6."-

ApartClassic - 'may all your certainly illegitimate progeny suffer pox or at least perpetual flu'





3 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 3 guests, 0 anonymous users