Since al bombers seem to have sniper otto's and are verry weak, i think this could be a better option: Why not give al the bombers the same armour like the IL2? It will be nicer to fly the bomber because you won't get down that easy. Take away the sniper otto and the attacker plane is only longer exposed to the otto gunner wich in my opinion is more realistic. Bomber pilots have allso the difficulty of bringing in heavy damaged bombers like in real situations because you can survive attacks more (wich is now allmost impossible if you get hit). What do you(allso FH admins) think about this?
Do you want to completely remove autogunners or just make'em worse ? Removing them completely would be unfair. 1 man cannot fly whole plane just by himself. In AH at least he can shoot many guns at once. Without allowing many players to join one crew (which i would really like to have !), such solution is a bad idea IMO. Second idea is what, I think, we were trying to figure out how to do it. So far there were some ideas, but none of them got in the game so far (increased dispersion actually helped here a lot, but it's probably only a temporary solution as there are too many people against it) With sniper ottos, there is no way we can have normal, tough buffs as it was in RL - there would be no way to shoot'em down. I posted sth more about it in "dispersion thread"
Outside of D3, a human gunner is much better than Otto. At D3, it's about the same. Only within D2 does Otto become lethal beyond a player's capability. Bufftuff is not the answer. Bombers -should- be fairly easy kills when in a heavy armed plane, not at altitude, and not escorted.
Neg, don't remove otto...just make him as he was in the first place(or a fair otto). If it is harder to get the buff out of the air the longer you are exposed to him. All i want is make a higher survive rate for buffs
Before to make Otto "fair" check them in offline mode. I think there they are tougher then in FH arena. Seriously. Regards
@vag: in offline, you dont have lag, and otto parameters are not limited like in FH. and you can still see the tracers in their true position
Very carefully With a B-24 at its ceiling of 36,000 feet, you can almost outrun 190D9s. I was only caught after the 190 started doing a series of shallow dives , gaining about D5 each time. It still took him a very long time to catch me. Altitude is life for bombers, rather than ask for more armor or better Otto, just climb higher It would be nice to get rid of the laser-guided bombs, such as Aces High is now doing (hey, they finally had a good idea!) but it would require quite a bit of changes. I'm not sure it could even be done without redoing the client.
If the laser-guided bombs must be removed, the amount of bombs a bomber can carry must be increased. Otherwise will be quite impossible to close a big field in three or less bombers. Just my opinion...
Just think about the difference,boys. If you are bombers - it's more a strategic game then if you are fighters. To make a good buff's raid you need at least 1 hour, have everything planned, have a map and cover. And have a good luck. Dogfight required a good pilot - bombing raid required a man able to make a good plan to be succesful.
AFAIK the bombloads are historically accurate (like a good sim). Adding payload would be 'cheating' history and simulation. And now, talking about history... Just think about how many bombers were involved in WWII raids -- Usually more than 20! And that's even for the 'small' raids, like factories and such. Do you imagine 3 (or less) bombers closing a big airfield (in real life)? Not possible... Maybe they can't even close a small field! So what we need is more bombers for each raid, since we are used to closing fields with 1 or 2 bombers, which is NOT historically correct. Luis
@mexlife There ain't enough people. If you need 10 bombers (or even 5, i don't know) to close an airfield, how would any side (reds or golds) capture any airfield when there are 20 persons each side. Just impossible. Realism must be taken aside when you need to play
