Up and coming.... ideas for 1.70?

Thought I'd start a thread for what the users of WBFH want for the next update.

I'll start with one:

1. Shape data for aircraft: As it is right now, I noticed when taking off with the Meteor tonight that I got a shape error and the F4u was used in it's place. I guess my update from 168 to 169 messed up. Anyway, I thought the F6F was used for a default if the aircraft shape data wasn't available? The F4u has a pretty good clear view compared to what some aircraft have as far as view obstructions are concerned. So, this has me concerned and wondering about the possibility of "cheating" in this respect. I find the F4u shape data more annoying than useful with a spinning prop in the middle and the gun sounds/effects but, visibility is very good compared to what I remember in the Meteor, looking to the right or left over the wings.

Seems like an easy type of cheat, being able to see more. To prevent possible cheating I have an idea to present....If shape data isn't available, some other shape data that makes the view areas worse than the actual shape data should be fitted to the aircraft or, a simpler solution....prevent the ability to take off.

What do you think?

 

Change bomb blast radius, bombs kills paras, remove jets and make zeke to be paper plane

 

kill paras by bomb and rox in tasklist yet.

why need remove jets?
why you want change blast radius? increace or decrease? why?

 

Bomb/HVAR blast effects:
I don't carry bombs that often but, when bombs/hvars take out commandos/paratroopers....I'll be flying heavy more often. This will make a big difference!

Bomb blast radius has to be kept to a minimum in my view because precision bombing is already too easy in the game. Pretty easy to damage nearby targets already with bombs.

Jets:
I don't care much for jets either, and many folks think they should be either taken out or relegated to one day of use. I would agree but, the Me262 was produced by the hundreds and used quite a bit. As much as I don't like seeing the Me262, it should be there but, kept limited as it is now. We have the Meteor as well for balance but, it comes out much later so, we have to get more creative.


As for the zekes......I think many people will agree that some planes are taking way more damage than they ever could have in real life, unless we are talking about the old flying tank Wildcats/Avengers. Fuel leaks still leave me amazed. I know Japanese aircraft like zekes and many Axis/Allied WWII aircraft didn't have self sealing tanks so a leak was pretty much guaranteed with any bullet strike but, it would seem obvious a fire would follow instantly with a hail of bullets, rather than seeing the aircraft fly around still, taking hits constantly. 190s, P40s, F4us, 109s, yaks, spitfires, Laggs, etc catch fire, pilot kill, break apart, lose engines from single bullet hits, and not surprisingly, from those 20mm cannons on zekes.

 

I suggest completely redoing the main wbfree.net website so that there is one single file that people have to download and install. This will definately increase the numbers of people playing.

use the flight models from about 5 years ago.

it seems admins dont care anymore. look at how pissed off bullet is, this game is goin dowwwwwwwwwwwwwwn.

 

It is big difference. Gold 109 with 4*50kg is more efficient then red spit with 2*250lib.
Bomb power of 109 and spit is same, but blast radius of 114kg(250lib) bomb isn't same as 50kg, so some changes should be make (1x109 can kill dar side, but spit can't).
Calculate, to cap small field you need 3x109 an Ju52 or 5xspit and LI2, Imo something need change, or make ground ottos more precise, or change blast radius.
Never heard or see precision bombing in WWII like we have in the game (with buff you can kill each target with one bomb, and we know how they do it in WWII)

About Jets personal I think Meteor is for balance only and ME 262 too many days for flaying.

Can't agree more, but I would like to point no pilot armor too.
Watching History channel and listening US WWII pilots after 1943 Zeke was siting duck, and US planes still could take more hits then zeke.
Old zeke technique to run away from danger with high speed dive didn't work any more cos new US planes were faster in dive then zeke.

 

I agree whole heartedly, make the website easy for newbies, a one click download/file/install would be a good start with current IP# for logging on.

Yes I'm pissed but i just won't fly the screwed up planes, which seem to be the ones I really like. but I havn't flown really in a couple weeks so I don't know if some changes were made to the planes that I griped about.

On the 262 and meteor, Keep the 262 and use it on the last day like it used to be and remove the Meteor.

 

Agree: One click download- one click install is ESSENTIAL !!!!

262 should be the only jet, period. Bring 262 out exactly as historically was released. Personally I do not think the 262 is a game changer. Very over rated.


As far as cockpits: It should be all inclusive; all versions, high or low res should be in the one download package.

Even the optional sounds should be included and could be on a user option during the install.

Having to download all options one at a time and taking care to install them in the correct directories takes too much time.

We need "One Stop Shopping" !

Also:

Bomb blast effective damage radius should be standardized per bomb mass in single drop. Group drop should allow for some slightly larger effective radius and there should be no target immune to damage.

 

1)shape bug: must be bug and provided we know details, bimbom could control file versions more strictly

2)bombs/rockets for paras: in to-do list

3)blast radius: although IRL radius is inverted square, IEN radius is logarithmic (tiny calibres have higher than irl radii, large have lower). i tried to change it to inverted square in 1.67 and people yelled and screamed.

4)50kg vs 100kg: with in-game terms they are almost equal, since the smallest target (aaa) could be taken out with any of these. the difference could be noticed only for heavy targets, such as hangars.

thus these 50kg make ju88 an über effective bomber (28 acks, that could be balanced only heavy by b-17's 24*100lb), and now you state that 109/b is überattacker too.

we could make AAA as hard as 80kg, so one should use 2*50kg, or else 100kg.

but reds has much more rockets, and soviets ingeniously used them since 1939.

5)luftwhiners constantly demanded 262 to be available as early as possible. (actually they always cry for everything)

so they got meteor. ihmo the situation is perfectly balanced now: 3 months of jet monopoly along with 10 months of jet flying per tour.

face it and fight on equal terms.

removing meteor only will lead in removing a quarter of gold airplanes as well, including:
bf 109 f-2 (<500)
bf 109 t-2 (balance unit)
c.205 (<500)
fw 190 a-3 1.32ata (<500)
fw 190 f-8/panzerblitz (<500, balance unit)
he 177 a-3 (<500, balance unit)
ju 87 g-1,2 (<500)
l2d (<500, balance unit)
ju 52 will be restored to IRL 250km/h because it's sped up for balance. and it will have half of c-47 load.
n1k-1j will be removed from cv (balance unit)
n1k-2j will be removed completely (<500)

on the other hand, reds have these balance units:
pe-8 (your fee for playing here, at FH)
meteor (another your fee)

any scream or whisper for red-balance units will result in removing all these gold airplanes at once.


6)one-click installer: lift your ass up and compile a one click installer. with blackjack and hookers. it's not a deep programming skill at all.

 

i took another decision.
we will continue FH, doesn't matter how deep is hate of luftwhiners

here i state new FH forum rule:

those who demand removal of red balance airplanes, pe-8 and meteor, will be banned for two weeks for indirect demand of banning lot's of gold balance planes, thus demanding kill of FH itself.

the rule is in effect since now

those who hate meteor and pe-8 are free to leave FH.


dixi.

 

If it is in the realm of the possible, I would suggest a little improvement, I hope not too difficult:

As you probably know, so far, destroying an hangar means destroying the hangar roof. The destruction or not of the supporting walls being totally independent and inconsequential (If I'm not mistaken).

This leads to the surrealistic situation of hangar roofs floating in mid air, as I'm sure you have seen, when the hangar roof is up and one or both walls are down.

In my opinion, it would make more sense if the status of the hangar and its walls was linked and indicative of the degree of damage of the hangar as a whole. The logic could be:

Hangar down with a big bomb. 100% damage (presently 100% damage of hangar roof) Normally 2000s of downtime IIRC. Server algorithm destroys both walls even if the bomb "didn't" damage them. When 33% (or another arbitrarly set value) of time for hangar up has passed, rebuild one wall. Another 33% of time, another wall. Finally the roof appears and hangar is declared up.

Hangar down. 50% of damage (1000s). Roof and one wall get destroyed, but this wall is in the middle of the way of being rebuilt (because 50% between 33% and 66%).

And so on... but:

Bomb damages only 100% of a wall. Presently hangar roof magically rest on just one hangar wall. That is absurd, so either make the hangar roof be destroyed too and declare the hangar down for a reduced time or preserve the complete hangar structure.

So, in the end, hangar wall destruction logic would improve gameplay being a visual cue of the closeness of hangar up time.

Sorry for the neuroticism and thank you to the developers and contributors.

 

yup. we must do something with levitating roofs, of course.

 

Another idea: Better than both sides getting Li-2 all the war, make a realistic Ju-52 the para transport for both sides up to a certain time in the war, then change it to the faster Li-2 for the later part of the war.

Btw, isn't it a shame that WBFH doesn't have bomber formations as Tabajara. What about it? (I don't remember now, but other features of TH I didn't like).

 

"tonnage per target" is the only way to exploit drop of imprecise drop of 17/24/177 bots. how about that?

as for ju 52: i just hate it. and allies never used it in war.

every year it gets worse: g5e (1939) 308km/h, g7e (1941) 285km/h, g8e (1943) 230km/h.

let's just fly li-2 and l2d4 (turret armed versions) and have fun.

 

So you're saying the A6M is so damn fast for balance? And it's bufftuff 8 or something ridiculous like that for balance? What was wrong with pilot skill being used to make up for the imbalance? If you mean to make the A6M like that, I'll adapt, but give us some warning next time, ok?

 

men, which zeke do you speak?

"zeke is übertought" is the nice slogan to blame devs, yeah.

may be some collaboration?

"zeke is überdiver" is good for bitching devs also.

may be any dude will hint which one of three? may be conduct some tests and say that, for example, a6m2b outdive tempest/thunderbolt?!

any help?

 

I've seen hangars with only the roof hanging in mid-air, no walls. Would be cool if this can be fixed.

 

alw, i just demonstrated how many balance airplanes reds and golds have, i.e. introduced "artificially". reds have two, golds have multiple.
just to show how much golds will loose when demanding to remove balance-planes.

>What did they yell and scream about in the 1.67 release? Sorry, I don't conduct bomb runs that much. So, is there a happy medium option or is it just 2 options?
okay, R=F(M), more or less.
radius depends on mass of the bomb.
IEN made F=log(M)
IRL is F=sqrt(M)

so IEN radius for 50/100kg is greater than IRL radius for 50/100kg. easier to hit something as little as aaa.

1.67 (or 1.68?) has sqrt(m) function for radius. and folks cried that they cannot hit aaa, either buff, or jabo.

1.69 returned to IEN's log(m).