PDA

View Full Version : Bomber Issues



IcarusXP
01-29-2004, 09:27 PM
1) Not enough of them.
The TBM-3 is great after about 4 beers, and I've stoped paying attention to the game. Seriously...the TBM-3 is good for nothing more than comic relief. It was a Joke in the great patriotic war, and its a joke in the game. The HE-111 is the only viable bomber currently available in IL2FB.

2) The flight sim community is made up of informed, and expierianced real world pilots,
WE ARE TIRED OF BEGGING FOR BOMBERS !
1C Madox Games, and Ubi Soft has pulled the rug from under Microsoft and captured the Combat Flight Simulator market. It is very arguable that this simulation needs balance between fighter craft and Bombers. Right now we have to manualy edit mission files and fly the B-17 from 3rd person view....that should say somthing about the players desire to fly bombers

3)Payloads and Accuracy
AI gunners are way to sharp. From 1942 to early 43 U.S. bomber crews had a %30 chance of surviving thier tour of duty(Actual Stats). Bomber relied on formation disipline, and the ruggedness of their planes to survive. U.S. bomber crews averaged 0.7 kills per 25 missions flown.
http://www.ww2guide.com/britishb.shtml

4) Formations and cooriagraphy

I'll leave this subject open. I can't imagine what my computer would do with 300 Bbombers in box formation.

"The only reason we liberated France was to get to Germany"
-Rush Limbaugh
http://trackpad.home.comcast.net

IcarusXP
01-29-2004, 09:27 PM
1) Not enough of them.
The TBM-3 is great after about 4 beers, and I've stoped paying attention to the game. Seriously...the TBM-3 is good for nothing more than comic relief. It was a Joke in the great patriotic war, and its a joke in the game. The HE-111 is the only viable bomber currently available in IL2FB.

2) The flight sim community is made up of informed, and expierianced real world pilots,
WE ARE TIRED OF BEGGING FOR BOMBERS !
1C Madox Games, and Ubi Soft has pulled the rug from under Microsoft and captured the Combat Flight Simulator market. It is very arguable that this simulation needs balance between fighter craft and Bombers. Right now we have to manualy edit mission files and fly the B-17 from 3rd person view....that should say somthing about the players desire to fly bombers

3)Payloads and Accuracy
AI gunners are way to sharp. From 1942 to early 43 U.S. bomber crews had a %30 chance of surviving thier tour of duty(Actual Stats). Bomber relied on formation disipline, and the ruggedness of their planes to survive. U.S. bomber crews averaged 0.7 kills per 25 missions flown.
http://www.ww2guide.com/britishb.shtml

4) Formations and cooriagraphy

I'll leave this subject open. I can't imagine what my computer would do with 300 Bbombers in box formation.

"The only reason we liberated France was to get to Germany"
-Rush Limbaugh
http://trackpad.home.comcast.net

Future-
01-29-2004, 09:46 PM
As many stated already, the increased efficiency of the ai gunners can be justified by the fact that large protective formations like they existed in WW2 can not be recreated in FB. Partly maybe in the mission builder, but if you go online and fly a B-17, even if you get some people to fly with you, you would only be able to pack together a force of about 1% - 2% in numbers compared to an average real task force back then.
Plus if the ai gunners would further get tuned down, they would be useless, especially for big birds like the B-17.

Apart from that, I agree with you, it's more than time that some more flyable bombers are added. However, it's not sure if Ubi/1C will react on this... as rumors are now that even the long-expected B-25 won't make it (at least not with cockpit) to the expansion. The fate of the Bf-110 is also still unsure.
The Fw-200 Condor, although only a recon plane, was first planned fully flyable too, but will definitely be just ai only.
The Ju-88 is still a work in progress, won't be flyble in the add-on either.

So overall, if they also scrap the B-25 now, the expansion can be regarded as a huge let-down, at least when it comes to new bombers/ground attack craft.

- Future

Commanding Officer of the 530th Bomb Squad
380th Bomb Group 5th AF USAAF

http://invisionfree.com:54/40/30/upload/p1083.jpg

Visit us at http://members.tripod.com/tophatssquadron , home of the 310th FS and the 380th BG

owlwatcher
01-30-2004, 04:10 AM
The bomber formations can be created.
Got 108 in the air they bomb & land .
Just the computers are not fast enough to play it.
Making a B-17 flyable would at least give some better control on the formation itself.
Alittle command & control would be nice.

Aaron_GT
01-30-2004, 06:08 AM
There seems to be at least one set of bombers
coming in the paid add on - the B25. More
would be welcome, of course - e.g. Ju88, Pe-2,
etc., to name ones that already have a presence
in the game.

What would be a nice addition to the game
for bombers would be the ability of the AI
to call out positions of incoming fighters.
This is present in games like Warbirds, but
sadly missing in FB. About the only way
to recreate it is online, and have a real
human(s) man position(s).

Future-
01-30-2004, 06:29 AM
I just hope the B-25 will really be there, latest rumor has it the interiors won't be completed in time for the add-on.

- Future

Commanding Officer of the 530th Bomb Squad
380th Bomb Group 5th AF USAAF

http://invisionfree.com:54/40/30/upload/p1083.jpg

Visit us at http://members.tripod.com/tophatssquadron , home of the 310th FS and the 380th BG

Black Sheep
01-30-2004, 06:45 AM
Yes, I really hope the B25 makes the expansion pack as a flyable bird and want to see more bombers too - especially the strategic four engine bombers such as the Fortess, Liberator et al.

Man, I'd give my right arm for a Lanc, Stirling or Halifax. Well, someone's right arm anyway http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

IcarusXP
01-30-2004, 08:49 AM
As far as I know, the big computer companys are all useing Pentium 4s, and AMD athlon 64s in their products. Dell, IBM, Gatewqay ect...ect...

Those are powerfull prossessors! I'm useing a Duron 1.6 and do very well keeping up with most online gamers, and offline single play is very smooth, Frames around 35-40 on perfect settings are common for me.

My point is, For years PC development has been driven by the need to run more complicated software. The latest line of PCs are so powerfull and affordable, it should'nt be an issue to challenge users PC power with complicated Aircraft.
Folks like me who run older CPU's only do so because we don't need the extra power to run our games.
But If a B-17 was availbe today, I'd buy a new prossessor today.

Check this out. CFS did a pretty good job with their multi crew bombers, and I was running CFS3 on a Duron 1.2. I can't say if the Bombers have in that game have issues, because that whole game has issues. (i still want my $60 back) But those were very pretty planes.

By the Time BOB is releases I sure most gamers will be running 2.0 ghz or faster. The only major thing that needs to be worked out is a good interface with A.I. support, much like what we have now.

Offer a Bomber and I'll buy it.

"The only reason we liberated France was to get to Germany"
-Rush Limbaugh
http://trackpad.home.comcast.net

Jettexas
01-30-2004, 10:58 AM
No (b)25????.......No (U.S.)$29

Its time we had an official word/clarifiation on this.
Many squadrons watching and waiting for the only thing this fine sim is missing.
S!

Zen--
01-30-2004, 01:23 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Future-:

As many stated already, the increased efficiency of the ai gunners can be justified by the fact that large protective formations like they existed in WW2 can not be recreated in FB.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


You can't justify the accuracy by saying that it simulates the protection that a bomber WOULD have in a stream. FB has never been about game balance, it's been about accuracy all the way.

A single bomber in real life was effectively a goner against fighters. No escort, no bomber box = low probability of survival.


Why should FB be different than that? What makes a bomber justified in having unrealistically high accuracy from it's AI gunners?


Plane FM's get picked apart with a microscope and everything that is not realistic is heatedly debated to the Nth degree....I don't see where a flyable or AI bomber of any sort is justified to have something that it did not in real life, that contradicts what FB is about in the first place. Bombers should be held to the same standard as everything else...if that means they can't survive by themselves, well, they can't survive by themselves then. Same as real life, right?

I like bombers a lot. I like AI planes included in the missions, they add to the game play and lots of people enjoy them and the change in dynamics they create.

I just don't think it's right that AI gunners are have their current accuracy because it simulates cover they would have had in real life, but don't in the game.

-Zen-
Formerly TX-Zen

IcarusXP
01-30-2004, 03:20 PM
P.S.

Can any explain why I can't use a track ball to control my rear gunners, when it works in every other aspect of the game?

"The only reason we liberated France was to get to Germany"
-Rush Limbaugh
http://trackpad.home.comcast.net

Future-
01-30-2004, 04:29 PM
@ Zen: To give you some numbers, the usual hit rate of the ai gunners is between 2% (&lt;-"bad day", low ai lvl) and 9% (&lt;-"good day", high ai lvl).
Now, these days, I've been on a server were some of my opponents had hit rates between 11% and 15%. Now add the fact that most of these good shots use planes with Mk108 to attack bombers. I'm sure you get the picture.
As it has been reported, the ai gunners have recently been fine-tuned a little, and aren't as accurate as they were a few weeks ago. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think the amount of critical hits that they score has also been slightly reduced.

Further down-tuning would render them practically useless.

@ IcarusXP: I don't know, maybe you should ask this in Oleg's Ready Room... but I doubt anyone except the developers really knows for sure.

- Future

Commanding Officer of the 530th Bomb Squad
380th Bomb Group 5th AF USAAF

http://invisionfree.com:54/40/30/upload/p1083.jpg

Visit us at http://members.tripod.com/tophatssquadron , home of the 310th FS and the 380th BG

BS87
01-30-2004, 04:41 PM
I dont care that the AI gunners hit me, its that when they do, 90% of the time it either takes out my engine or its a .50cal to the face

Zen--
01-30-2004, 04:51 PM
Respectfully, in real life I would consider MG defensive fire alone to be 'practically' useless. It has been demonstrated I think pretty conclusively in WW2 that bombers needed escort to be effective...better or worse I would hope in FB they would be the same.

If that means they aren't effective online because one can't get the proper teamwork, I think that is a different story and AI gunners hopefully should not be used to 'give the bombers a chance'.

The game is built around the concept of historical accuracy. It does not always get it right but I haven't seen much in the way of justifying a plane's attribute for playabilities sake.

(did I spell that right?)


Thanks for the percentage figures on hit rates, though I don't see where a hot shooting MK108 firing pilot should NOT have the advantage...he should I think.

I do agree with you that the critical hits seem to be lowered, which is good. Too much AI accuracy can ruin the game for everyone else while the bomber pilots are having a good time...remember, there is offline play to consider, flyable HE111's, IL2's etc....it's not fun to play a coop or play an offline campaign and get shredded by AI gunners nearly every time you come in contact with them.

I'm glad they dropped the accuracy and honestly hope they reduce it further. I fly Stuka's, HE111's and IL2's also, so please don't assume that I am anti bomber...I'm anti AI gunner uberness of any sort, whether I'm flying the plane or shooting at it.

-Zen-
Formerly TX-Zen