Jump to content

Combat Box by Red Flight


Recommended Posts

=EXPEND=CG_Justin
2 hours ago, RedKestrel said:

There seems to be a catch-22 situation where reducing the durability enough to make splash damage effective essentially makes everything killable by 20mm cannon/HMG. It's a pickle. It does seem likely that the previous level of splash damage was too much but maybe this has gone too far.
 

Agreed to an extent, but what is "the happy medium"? The only real fix is a rework for the DM for every asset. Right now, its an "all or nothing" situation. That's unfortunate side effect we are dealing with now i think.

Link to post
Share on other sites
RedKestrel
1 hour ago, =EXPEND=CG_Justin said:

Agreed to an extent, but what is "the happy medium"? The only real fix is a rework for the DM for every asset. Right now, its an "all or nothing" situation. That's unfortunate side effect we are dealing with now i think.

Mostly I think its a case where improvements in one area reveal deficiencies or limitations in another. The inverse square law damage calculations we're seeing now are, IMO  more realistic than what we were seeing before, but because static objects are either in a pristine or destroyed state, and have a flat durability value, the game is unable to calculate and represent the complexity of nearby bomb damage to buildings. We don't see broken windows, cracked foundations, fires or blasted-off roofs, and for the game to make all the calculations and rendering to show all these states on the scale we need is just not feasible.

I think we will see tweaks - maybe some kind of special category of static object damage for buildings separate from others, so that durability functions differently for HE bomb blast vs. direct hits from ammo? - but the fundamental premise of the new 'power law' calculations is probably here to stay, which means relatively speaking big bombs are not going to be as effective since the blast damage reduces rapidly with distance. 

For myself, I'm going to be practicing a lot with rockets and bombs to try and make more precise attacks, as all we can do is, as they say, 'git gud'.

Link to post
Share on other sites
69th_Mobile_BBQ

Here's something I noticed from taking an I-16 with unlimited ammo 50kg bombs into single player QMB and bombing the moving tank formation.  

At least when it comes to vehicles and tanks, splash damage might be reduced, but multiple near-hits does cause cumulative damage.  

The tanks, I dropped on would keep rolling, seemingly unaffected.  After awhile though, and after a few missed (but close) shots, I started to notice that the tanks were starting to put out slightly darker exhaust smoke that progressively got worse.  The tanks still attempted to roll as far as they could until the engine degraded and they became disabled, eventually awarding me the kill.  For static vehicles that are in an "engine not running" state, it would seem to me that engine damage from a nearby shockwave would be reduced.  

 

If I had a dollar to bet, I'd say that splash damage still does cause damage to structures that are not knocked down, albeit ranging from "One more shock like that and the building will collapse" to "this level of damage will still take 10 years for the support beam to fail."    

Dugouts, which are heavy timbers covered in packed dirt, probably do get some of the dirt "blown away" by shockwave damage - even if there isn't a visual model of it in-game.  Mostly though, they should require pretty direct hits to go down.  

 

I don't know exactly how to really test things like this, but as far as I can observe, multiple attacks dealing out multiple concussive waves should degrade hardened or structurally strong buildings into a "destroyed" state.  

 

For things like tents: Yes, the shockwave, if well-placed, should blow them to the sky.  But, if outer edge of the shockwave only knocks the tent and it's contents 10 feet away from where it sat, and all items are recoverable and rebuildable, is it really destroyed?  How would that even be represented in-game?

 

It kind of comes down to looking at whether each bomb has the correct explosive radius, the correct "flying debris" radius, the correct effective shockwave radius, and whether or not target objects are experiencing the correct effect based on where they are in relation to the bomb blast.  

 

It could well be that things are actually working right, but expectations and tactics need to change. 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Alonzo

I've made some changes to the maps where blue is absolutely crushing red, hoping to make it at least winnable when red decides to do ground attack. There have been recent results where red did more ground damage but still lost the map, so I'm trying to adjust for that. Battle of the Scheldt, Closing of the Ruhr Pocket, Mitchell's Men and The Rhineland Campaign have all been tweaked.

  • Thanks 3
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
=EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand
On 4/22/2020 at 5:52 PM, VBF-12_Snake9 said:

121 blue missions won 53 red

11531 blue kills 9153 red

53227 blue ground kills 35088 red 

Flight time equal

 

 

Wow, you just proved the allied point🤣  Your better at proving our point than anyone on red side.  🤣


Played an hour today. 7 reds 7 blues. Allied didn’t attack any ground targets. Axis took out 2 targets without ever seeing an allied plane.  What allies were doing is a mystery to me.

The problem is not blue not giving red the chance to win, but reds seemingly having no interest in winning.

I see vbf12 attacking ground targets a lot, don’t get me wrong, but many of your allies just sit at 6k with their finger in their ?!@ all day.

 

btw flight time is NOT equal allies even have more...😂 that’s pretty defining IMO

Link to post
Share on other sites
Birdman
16 minutes ago, =EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand said:


Played an hour today. 7 reds 7 blues. Allied didn’t attack any ground targets. Axis took out 2 targets without ever seeing an allied plane.  What allies were doing is a mystery to me.

The problem is not blue not giving red the chance to win, but reds seemingly having no interest in winning.

I see vbf12 attacking ground targets a lot, don’t get me wrong, but many of your allies just sit at 6k with their finger in their ?!@ all day.

 

btw flight time is NOT equal allies even have more...😂 that’s pretty defining IMO

 

Alonzo looked at the data and tweaked maps, that's telling.

 

Red flew 3% more flight hours so far. That's not defining at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
RedKestrel
8 minutes ago, =EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand said:


Played an hour today. 7 reds 7 blues. Allied didn’t attack any ground targets. Axis took out 2 targets without ever seeing an allied plane.  What allies were doing is a mystery to me.

The problem is not blue not giving red the chance to win, but reds seemingly having no interest in winning.

I see vbf12 attacking ground targets a lot, don’t get me wrong, but many of your allies just sit at 6k with their finger in their ?!@ all day.

 

btw flight time is NOT equal allies even have more...😂 that’s pretty defining IMO

With low numbers like that its not surprising you saw weird results. I doubt that red simply isn't doing ground attack at all. Its not borne out by the mission stats anyway.

If you look at all the missions from today I don't see any missions where the allies haven't done some ground attack. The only one that looks terrible is MItchells Men, and its probably just that they were mostly escorting the bombers rather than attacking, which is critical since killing the bombers is an objective for the Axis and leaving them to die to (ineffectively) move mud is a bad call on that map. 

https://combatbox.net/en/mission/4802/
https://combatbox.net/en/mission/4803/

https://combatbox.net/en/mission/4804/
https://combatbox.net/en/mission/4805/
https://combatbox.net/en/mission/4806/
https://combatbox.net/en/mission/4807/
https://combatbox.net/en/mission/4808/

The fact that more allied flight hours doesn't result in more ground kills doesn't prove much...if anything it gives more credence to allied ground attack weapons and methods being rendered less effective. But maybe some pilots are giving up ground attack since it is more difficult now, who knows. Regardless we see a clear change in map outcomes since the patch, and it would be a hell of a coincidence if the patch came and simultaneously by coincidence the allies just turned into 100% fighter-only uncoordinated solo pilots. 

In my case next time I'm on I'm likely to run 100% ground attack just to get a better feel for the weapons and to try some new things. Things may change but overall more difficulty rolling ground targets for the allies is probably going to continue for the foreseeable future so I have to look into this whole 'git gud' thing. 
 
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
69th_Mobile_BBQ
21 minutes ago, =EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand said:

1). …..but reds seemingly having no interest in winning.

 

2). ….but many of your allies just sit at 6k with their finger in their ?!@ all day.

 

 

 

1). I think that would change if Allies had a similar amount of variety in bombers and attackers to choose from that are usable in the BoBp time frame.  

 

P-38 drops bombs and 4 109s latch onto the tail.  P-47 drops bombs and same.  A-20, same.  All usually insta-kills from spray and pray 30mm.  That is of course if they're not actually intercepted 11km outside of their spawn base.  Out of all those, the A-20 is the only dedicated bomber and it's rearward defense is totally inadequate.  Very few people are comfortable with every flight having a nearly zero chance of not dying. 

 

2). So basically WoL, but the tables have turned.  😄

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
II./SG.1-MarkWilhelmsson

I personally think it would be awesome if CB maps included a bit more ground forces targets that are actually moving like tank formations and etc. I've seen it on at least one map for sure, Ruhr Pocket I think.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Alonzo
1 minute ago, 69th_Mobile_BBQ said:

P-38 drops bombs and 4 109s latch onto the tail.  P-47 drops bombs and same.  A-20, same.  All usually insta-kills from spray and pray 30mm.  That is of course if they're not actually intercepted 11km outside of their spawn base.  Out of all those, the A-20 is the only dedicated bomber and it's rearward defense is totally inadequate.  Very few people are comfortable with every flight having a nearly zero chance of not dying.

 

I'm pretty sure I could write the above paragraph from the perspective of a 110/190-A8/German heavy and it would still be true (apart from the 30mm insta-kills, I do agree that's a significant blue advantage). Ground attack without an escort has always been a crap shoot, though. I did some good sorties with Sketch and his Friday Night Flights crew last week, four or five P-38s attacking various targets with four or five P-51s as scouts/escorts and it worked quite well. Not zero casualties but not bad, and having fighter escort sure helps get bad guys off your tail. Even with escort we were doing "one pass, haul ass" attacks. And the P-38 is a lovely bird, I managed to spot a bomb-carrying 190 during my return to base and sneak up on his low six (full emergency power on the P-38 to do so) and lit him up good.

Link to post
Share on other sites
VBF-12_Snake9
1 hour ago, =EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand said:


Played an hour today. 7 reds 7 blues. Allied didn’t attack any ground targets. Axis took out 2 targets without ever seeing an allied plane.  What allies were doing is a mystery to me.

The problem is not blue not giving red the chance to win, but reds seemingly having no interest in winning.

I see vbf12 attacking ground targets a lot, don’t get me wrong, but many of your allies just sit at 6k with their finger in their ?!@ all day.

 

btw flight time is NOT equal allies even have more...😂 that’s pretty defining IMO

I see that you have already been answered by a few others.  😁

Link to post
Share on other sites
69th_Mobile_BBQ
6 minutes ago, Alonzo said:

 

I'm pretty sure I could write the above paragraph from the perspective of a 110/190-A8/German heavy and it would still be true (apart from the 30mm insta-kills, I do agree that's a significant blue advantage). Ground attack without an escort has always been a crap shoot, though. I did some good sorties with Sketch and his Friday Night Flights crew last week, four or five P-38s attacking various targets with four or five P-51s as scouts/escorts and it worked quite well. Not zero casualties but not bad, and having fighter escort sure helps get bad guys off your tail. Even with escort we were doing "one pass, haul ass" attacks. And the P-38 is a lovely bird, I managed to spot a bomb-carrying 190 during my return to base and sneak up on his low six (full emergency power on the P-38 to do so) and lit him up good.

 

I agree that the current Allied set isn't useless and with good tactics can be effective, but perhaps you would agree that in the realm of dedicated bombers the Pe-2 (which doesn't fit most CB scenarios) really filled in a lot of gaps that A-20 can't?   I was trying to pint out that if there was more variety in the true bomber set for Allies, the scenario might be different.  Axis does at least have the 111 and 88 to add to the mix.  The model types still fit the time frame.  The Allied variety issue really boils down to what the devs offer for sale in the future though, so there's not really any issue CB staff should be asked to worry too much about IMO.

 

I do agree that competent escort coupled with the attackers using good tactics in all phases - going to target, while attacking and returning to base - are all very important.  After all, using escort planes that perform best at mid-to-high altitude are not very good at protecting bombers trying to get there by flying on the tree tops.  I'd say that it's more important that the bombers/attackers use tactics that best play to their escort's advantage, or that the escorts are better matched for the tactics the bombers will be using.  We really don't see many P-39s doing "stealth lawnmower" escort along with those low fliers.  I'm sure that there are escort and attacker combos on Axis side that fail too when the wrong tactics are used.   

Still, 1 guy in our squadron is a dedicated gunner and he almost never even gets a chance to shoot before he and his A-20 are obliterated.  I would say that's more based on the weaknesses in the A-20's design than anything.  History is what it is, sometimes.  

 

And...  if the 30mm 1-hit advantage is actually working as intended (ie; as historically modelled as possible), then there's nothing to do, but suck it up.  I still think the American .50s are currently under-potential as they currently stand with no API rounds and no separate horizontal and vertical convergence adjustment

Link to post
Share on other sites
QB.Shallot

@69th_Mobile_BBQ How did you manage to type that out with a straight face?

 

"I think that would change if Allies had a similar amount of variety in bombers and attackers to choose from that are usable in the BoBp time frame."

What, you mean like the 110 and 190F/G, which are the only real ground pounders the axis get?

 

"P-38 drops bombs and 4 109s latch onto the tail.  P-47 drops bombs and same.  A-20, same.  All usually insta-kills from spray and pray 30mm."

'190 drops bombs and 4 Tempests latch onto the tail. 109 drops bombs and same. 110, same. All usually insta-kills from spray and pray 20mm"

 

"Out of all those, the A-20 is the only dedicated bomber and it's rearward defense is totally inadequate."

'Out of all those, the 110 is the only dedicated bomber, and it's rearward defense is totally inadequate.'

 

Surely you see how astonishingly one sided your argument is?

All of the allied single engines can carry more than the axis fighters, and perform perfectly after dropping their ordinance. I mean jesus, the P-38 gets six 500lb bombs, more than any axis attacker can bring to the table. Not to mention almost all American fighters can equip rockets and bombs at the same time. Another major advantage over the axis. 

The only blue single engine that can compete is the 190F/G, which is extremely hindered by reduced armament and extra armor after it drops it's bombs.

It's no use pointing the finger at 88's and 111's. They're more flying targets than anything. I've seen some brave players get a 4 ship of them wiped by 2 well piloted mustangs. 

Edited by QB.Shallot
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
69th_Mobile_BBQ
10 minutes ago, QB.Shallot said:

How did you manage to type that out with a straight face?

 

 

 

Surely you see how astonishingly one sided your argument is?

 

 

Likewise.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
=EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand
1 hour ago, RedKestrel said:

were mostly escorting the bombers


Not with 7 vs 7

 

bombers spawn at minimum 10 on either side iirc

1 hour ago, RedKestrel said:

The fact that more allied flight hours doesn't result in more ground kills doesn't prove much...if anything it gives more credence to allied ground attack weapons and methods being rendered less effective.


Right, it’s always the plane never the pilot 😉

Link to post
Share on other sites
=EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand
1 hour ago, 69th_Mobile_BBQ said:

 

2). So basically WoL, but the tables have turned.  😄

Exactly 😄

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Birdman
7 minutes ago, =EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand said:


Not with 7 vs 7

 

bombers spawn at minimum 10 on either side iirc


Right, it’s always the plane never the pilot 😉

He's not referencing the 7v7 I believe.

Link to post
Share on other sites
=EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand
1 minute ago, QB.Shallot said:

 

@69th_Mobile_BBQ I'm not arguing that one side is disadvantaged. I'm saying that it sounds pretty balanced to me. Players just need to use the tools that are given to them.

 


You are not, but the whining is strong on the allied side on this server. Many people bought the game for bobp hop in a mustang and think they are invincible, get shot down and blame it on the equipment.

 

Many people flying blues have been playing the game for years.

This is not the case for everyone, there are without doubt many very good pilots flying allies, but imo this is the general tendency on the server, which leads to the observed stats.

5 minutes ago, Birdman said:

He's not referencing the 7v7 I believe

Well he must be, because it was today and it was the stats he pulled out and referenced to.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Birdman
2 minutes ago, =EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand said:

 

Well he must be, because it was today and it was the stats he pulled out and referenced to.

The rundown is:

Guy 1 saw no ground attack in one mission (from the opposing side and does not say if it's Mitchell's men)

 

Guy 2 says he looked at all the missions of the day and saw that there was ground attack in all with Mitchell's men being the worst.

 

I don't see the relevance of the bomber spawn threshold.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, 69th_Mobile_BBQ said:

If I had a dollar to bet, I'd say that splash damage still does cause damage to structures that are not knocked down

 

That is correct.  A near bomb miss on a bunker will require a single rocket to finish it off, rather than two for a fresh bunker.

 

What I don't know about this game, and I'm not sure if anyone else does, is if there is a damage threshold to pass before a target actually receives damage.  For example, does every hit from a 7.62 round chip away at the total health of an object?  Or do you have to have to deal a certain level of damage before a target actually loses health?  My guess is the latter.  In gaming this would be known as damage and damage resistance.

 

This is tough to balance because as far as I know (with my 2 nights of mission editor), there is only one "durability" value you can set for an object.  If we don't know actual damage values, we can't say with certainty "you need a bomb or rocket to hurt this, but 30mm won't do anything."  It sounds like durability is total health of an object, but does that set it's damage resistance as well?

Link to post
Share on other sites
69th_Mobile_BBQ
43 minutes ago, QB.Shallot said:

@69th_Mobile_BBQ I'm not arguing that one side is disadvantaged. I'm saying that it sounds pretty balanced to me. Players just need to use the tools that are given to them.

 

I can somewhat agree.  I think you might also agree that some plane models - in the true bomber field - are outdated for both sides, even for BoBp time frame.  The aircraft that would qualify as "attackers" are currently the way to get the job done.  

 

BTW, even tough the 110 tail gunner isn't great, it still has more ammo than the A-20 and there's not a huge center-line vertical stabilizer getting in the way.  The 110 gunner's visibility is much better too compared to either of the A-20's positions.  The 110 is much more capable than the A-20 of self-supporting/escorting in a flight of 3 or more.  Even with decent SA on the Allied pilot's part, it's still possible to end up with 2 behind, getting spray and pray shots in while the Ally is in a state of having blown his energy.  The 110 does have some very good ability to pull off some very tight one-off break turns and can regain energy decently when it has a moment to breathe.  The P51 might have its advantages, but it needs a lot of extra space and a much more methodical approach to managing speed and positioning or it gets too slow or too much AoA, causing accelerated stalls that are truly deadly down low.  Snap-paced maneuvers that the 109 and 110 can pull are mostly poison to the 51.    

 

Between the Ju-88 and the He-111, I'd say it falls to tactics and escort, just like the A-20.  Those 2 have a pretty fair amount of self-defense gunner stations compared to an A-20 though.  

I would say that flying low-level runs would favor the A-20 - provided the lighting conditions on the map didn't make it glow for anybody looking at it from 3km altitude.  

The Ju-88 does suffer from having it's dive bombing capability basically removed by this stage of the war.  It usually is suicide to try if Allied defenders are present.  

The 111 was never meant to attack like that as far as I know, so using it like that should usually carry with it bad results.   I would say that experienced bombers with the patience to climb up to an effective level bombing altitude with good escort could be devastating with either the 111 or the 88.  I don't know if there are later models the game currently lacks, or if they would be an improvement over the models we have, but I could imagine that if there is - and they are improvements - Axis would rightly benefit from having them too. 

 

Stukas are only for the bravely stupid, unfortunately.  I don't even think the last iteration model of them could help that if we did have it available.  

 

I've seen 190 A-8s start attack runs slightly above me, get their bombs off and run fast enough that I was forced to choose whether or not to creep up on 6 slowly or break off and reset to try to defend against the next attacker.  This was in a 51 matching their dive angle initially just outside of gun range.  I must say that I do disagree with the 109s fitted for Jabo are the only viable strike fighters.  

Edited by 69th_Mobile_BBQ
Link to post
Share on other sites
Alonzo
1 hour ago, thatguy said:

What I don't know about this game, and I'm not sure if anyone else does, is if there is a damage threshold to pass before a target actually receives damage.  For example, does every hit from a 7.62 round chip away at the total health of an object?  Or do you have to have to deal a certain level of damage before a target actually loses health?  My guess is the latter.  In gaming this would be known as damage and damage resistance.

 

In the editor you can tweak the threshold at which an object will report damage, so I suspect the game tracks object health at some more granular level than we can see. Targets are probably losing health via splash damage, just not enough to go from 'alive' to 'dead' (which is pretty binary for static objects, it's either 100% happy looking or 100% in pieces). It may also be that there's some kind of "penetration" value, so that machine guns do very little damage to strong structures (or maybe not, maybe if you had infinite ammo you could kill things with machine guns, I'm not sure).

 

An exception to this is real vehicles such as tanks, they have a more complete damage model and you can blow the tracks off them, set them on fire and have them eventually blow up, etc.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
=ABr=422nd_RedSkull
3 hours ago, QB.Shallot said:

 

'190 drops bombs and 4 Tempests latch onto the tail. 109 drops bombs and same. 110, same. All usually insta-kills from spray and pray 20mm"

With the amount of Tempest available in the maps, a scene as common as 04 Me 262 behind a red at the same time (no criticism to the room administrators pls, its not the objective, just one observation) I think that only in the Combat Box training room will you see a scene of these.

Quote

"Out of all those, the A-20 is the only dedicated bomber and it's rearward defense is totally inadequate."

 

Have you ever tried to engage a Bf 110 G-2 in a curve and against an A-20 to see the difference?

3 hours ago, QB.Shallot said:

@69th_Mobile_BBQ How did you manage to type that out with a straight face?

 

the P-38 gets six 500lb bombs, more than any axis attacker can bring to the table. Not to mention almost all American fighters can equip rockets and bombs at the same time. Another major advantage over the axis. 

 

And what is the capacity of pumps that a 110 can carry, comparing?

3 hours ago, QB.Shallot said:

Out of all those, the 110 is the only dedicated bomber, and it's rearward defense is totally inadequate.'

But at least it warns you when an interceptor dives in your tail, something that a P-38, P-47, etc. doesn't have to be able to try to dodge and defend themselves.

3 hours ago, QB.Shallot said:

Surely you see how astonishingly one sided your argument is?

Neither are yours, since you fly more than 90% of the missions as an axies side pilot?

 

Edited by =ABr=422nd_RedSkull
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Alonzo said:

I've made some changes to the maps where blue is absolutely crushing red, hoping to make it at least winnable when red decides to do ground attack. There have been recent results where red did more ground damage but still lost the map, so I'm trying to adjust for that. Battle of the Scheldt, Closing of the Ruhr Pocket, Mitchell's Men and The Rhineland Campaign have all been tweaked.

I wonder how many Red pilots are making it home after the new DM updates . 

Link to post
Share on other sites
=ABr=422nd_RedSkull
6 hours ago, Alonzo said:

I've made some changes to the maps where blue is absolutely crushing red, hoping to make it at least winnable when red decides to do ground attack. There have been recent results where red did more ground damage but still lost the map, so I'm trying to adjust for that. Battle of the Scheldt, Closing of the Ruhr Pocket, Mitchell's Men and The Rhineland Campaign have all been tweaked.

@Alonzo

I'm really happy that at least in part the comments (and grumbles😝) of the pilots who dedicate themselves more to the allie side were heard and attended to.

I still miss more Tempest but I will not return to this topic, who knows in the future this may happen. (I hope so 😎).

 

 I take the opportunity to apologize to Alonso sincerely if I was rude at some point, but I usually go overboard when I understand a just cause (and such a long quarantine only makes the mood worse 😷 🤣)

16 hours ago, Talon_ said:

 

150 octane is allowed based on historical presence, not as a balancing measure, in all maps except A Bridge Too Far.

 

Sorry @Talon_ but the Battle of Scheldt map doesnt have too. 👍

Edited by =ABr=422nd_RedSkull
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, =ABr=422nd_RedSkull said:

@Alonso

I'm really happy that at least in part the comments (and grumbles😝) of the pilots who dedicate themselves more to the allie side were heard and attended to.

I still miss more Tempest but I will not return to this topic, who knows in the future this may happen. (I hope so 😎).

 

 I take the opportunity to apologize to Alonso sincerely if I was rude at some point, but I usually go overboard when I understand a just cause (and such a long quarantine only makes the mood worse 😷 🤣)

lol ....You and that Tempest . i think your find it runs deeper that a few tempests . 

Tonight Allies nearly won a map but ran out of time . There was some good comms going on with efforts to hit the ground targets . 

I did notice that there was a drop in allied players as well when i was on.  . Before patch allied was nearly  full and in some cases out numbered Axis . 

 

Edited by ACG_KoN
Link to post
Share on other sites
CIA_Elanski

Shallot,

 

The 110 rear gunner hit my tempest as I crossed at 350mph from 3 oclock of 110 to 8 oclock in a diving turn...I took a crossing shot.  His .30 cal set me on fire.  It was Hipster diving on the AF target.  REALLY?  Ace gunners like that are not the norm.  Many 110s have gunners that wont hardly fire.  Other 110 gunners from SOME people set you on fire at really stupid speeds and angles.  Have we all not been flying for years and noticed this?  I see it in chat weekly, why is one 110 gunner an ACE and several others are just so so?  We know the answer to that question.  They have a cheat but it is a white elephant in this game.  It is worse to say there is a cheat than to be a cheat.  So the white elephant is staying put.  Don't think for a moment I believe it isnt.  Luth and I both came across tail of 110.  He shot I was just trying to distract the gunner.  He killed Luth and destroyed my plane engine.  AT THE SAME TIME.  It was our first pass and high speed.  We only got one pass and that .30cal did us in.  Do I think it is stock?  No but there are enough people using ACE rear gunners to make it a real no no to come in behind 110.  And those same 110s are so fast you cant get in front of them without having three grids to do it so they almost always get their bombs down.   The 110 could not survive un-escorted....historical fact.  Yet in here many brag often about killing 3 or 4 planes before being brought down.   Not so for allied.  

 

Say what you want, think and feel what you want.  The axis firepower is now over powering since patch, allied bombs suck and our ammo sucks.  So escorting to target sucks because you cant stop fighters from killing your bombers unless you happen to be one of the guys using (white elephant) assist and shoot 20percent when the 109 rolls in on the A20.  Then guys get tired of the constant PKs which is about as fun as getting shot in Wings in your spawn point.  So yup, there goes any interest in going 5 grids deep to a target placed way behind enemy lines.  Y29 every deep target is a death trap.  I took P47 to 20,000 ft.  I full speed dove on target, dropped at 10,000 feet.  Zoomed level, even slight dive.  Got caught by F'ing 109 within a grid, 10km.  Scissor, bang, plane dead.  So we have our thoughts Shallot and you have yours.


:)

Edited by CIA_Elanski
  • Like 2
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
=ABr=422nd_RedSkull
2 hours ago, 69th_Mobile_BBQ said:

 

BTW, even tough the 110 tail gunner isn't great, it still has more ammo than the A-20 and there's not a huge center-line vertical stabilizer getting in the way.  The 110 gunner's visibility is much better too compared to either of the A-20's positions.  The 110 is much more capable than the A-20 of self-supporting/escorting in a flight of 3 or more. 

It is a pity that in the BoN the Mosquito will come and not the Beaufighter. I think that due to its characteristics it would make up for the lack of an airplane with similar characteristics to the 110 for attacking the ground

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, CIA_Elanski said:

Shallot,

 

The 110 rear gunner hit my tempest as I crossed at 350mph from 3 oclock of 110 to 8 oclock in a diving turn...I took a crossing shot.  His .30 cal set me on fire.  It was Hipster diving on the AF target.  REALLY?  Ace gunners like that are not the norm.  Many 110s have gunners that wont hardly fire.  Other 110 gunners from SOME people set you on fire at really stupid speeds and angles.  Have we all not been flying for years and noticed this?  I see it in chat weekly, why is one 110 gunner an ACE and several others are just so so?  We know the answer to that question.  They have a cheat but it is a white elephant in this game.  It is worse to say there is a cheat than to be a cheat.  So the white elephant is staying put.  Don't think for a moment I believe it isnt.  Luth and I both came across tail of 110.  He shot I was just trying to distract the gunner.  He killed Luth and destroyed my plane engine.  AT THE SAME TIME.  It was our first pass and high speed.  We only got one pass and that .30cal did us in.  Do I think it is stock?  No but there are enough people using ACE rear gunners to make it a real no no to come in behind 110.  And those same 110s are so fast you cant get in front of them without having three grids to do it so they almost always get their bombs down.   The 110 could not survive un-escorted....historical fact.  Yet in here many brag often about killing 3 or 4 planes before being brought down.   Not so for allied.  

 

Say what you want, think and feel what you want.  The axis firepower is now over powering since patch, allied bombs suck and our ammo sucks.  So escorting to target sucks because you cant stop fighters from killing your bombers unless you happen to be one of the guys using (white elephant) assist and shoot 20percent when the 109 rolls in on the A20.  Then guys get tired of the constant PKs which is about as fun as getting shot in Wings in your spawn point.  So yup, there goes any interest in going 5 grids deep to a target placed way behind enemy lines.  Y29 every deep target is a death trap.  I took P47 to 20,000 ft.  I full speed dove on target, dropped at 10,000 feet.  Zoomed level, even slight dive.  Got caught by F'ing 109 within a grid, 10km.  Scissor, bang, plane dead.  So we have our thoughts Shallot and you have yours.


:)

I know Elanski by his rep as he has been flying combat sims for a very very long time , I think he has a point here , Has this been reported . 

I thought we had anti-cheat in game like DCS and cliffs of dover . ??

 

 

Edited by ACG_KoN
Link to post
Share on other sites
II./SG.1-MarkWilhelmsson

You guys don't like the 110G2, wait till the 410 comes out. Lol. 1700hp per engine, twin 13mm rear cannons with not only top and rear protection, but also sides and bottom.

 

Anyone caught cheating should have their license keys revoked and not just IP banned, but PC ID banned. That way they can't just buy a new copy of the game, they have to also play it from a different PC hahaha.

 

As far as AI gunners in MP are concerned, do map makers decide what skill the gunners will be set to for each plane just like they can set the skill of AI AAA?

Link to post
Share on other sites
=ABr=422nd_RedSkull
13 minutes ago, ProfesseurDePhysique said:

You guys don't like the 110G2, wait till the 410 comes out. Lol. 1700hp per engine, twin 13mm rear cannons with not only top and rear protection, but also sides and bottom.

 

" The Me 410 was also used as a bomber destroyer against the daylight bomber formations of the USAAF, upgraded with Umrüst-Bausätze factory conversion kits, all bearing a /U suffix, for the design — these suffixes could vary in meaning between subtypes. 

They were moderately successful against unescorted bombers through 1943, with a considerable number of kills against USAAF day bomber formations being achieved. However, the Me 410 was no match in a dogfight with the lighter Allied single-engine fighters such as the North American P-51 Mustang and Supermarine Spitfire.

From mid-1944, despite being Hitler's favourite bomber destroyer, the Me 410 units were taken from Defence of the Reich duties and production was phased out in favour of heavily armed single-engine fighters as dedicated bomber destroyers, with the Me 410s remaining in service flying on reconnaissance duties only.[5] Some Me 410s were used with Junkers Ju 188s during the Battle of Normandy, for high-altitude night reconnaissance."

Link to post
Share on other sites
41Sqn_Riksen

Units that operated the Bf-110 and Me-410 at the end of 44:
- II./ZG1: Bf-110 from Nov 43 to Jul 44 (Wels - Austria)
- Stab./ZG26: Mixed from Mar 44 to Jul 44 (Wunstorf, Konigsberg-Devau - Germany)
- I./ZG26:Me-410 from Apr 44 to Aug 44 (Fassberg and Konigsberg-Devau - Germany)
- II./ZG26: Me-410 from Oct 43 to Aug 44 (Hildesheim, Pfaffenhofen, Konigsberg-Devau - Germany)
- III./ZG26: Me-410 from Mar 44 to Sep 44 (Konigsberg-Devau, Leipheim, Lechfeld - Germany)
- Stab IV./ZG26: Bf-110 from Sep 44 - Feb 45 (Oerlandet, Trondheim-Lade - both in Norway)
- 10./ZG26: Bf-110 from Jul 44 to Nov 44 (Herdla, Lister, Trondheim-Lade - all in NOrway)
- 11./ZG26: Ju-88 and Me-410 from Aug 44 to May 45 (Gerdermoen, Oerlandet - both in Norway)
- 12./ZG26: Bf-110 from Jul 44 to Feb 45 (Gossen, Oerlandet, Herdla - all in Norway)
- Erg.Staffel/ZG26: Mixed from Apr 44 to Aug 44 (Illesheim, Brandis, Sagan-Kupper - Germany)
- Stab./ZG76: Me-410 from Apr 44 to Jul 44 (Wien-Seyring, Malacky - Austria and Hungary)
- I./ZG76: Me-410 from Apr 44 to Jul 44 (Wien-Seyring, Malacky - Austria and Hungary)
- II./ZG76: Me-410 from Apr 44 to Nov 44 (Wien-Seyring, Powunden, Seerappen, Grossenhain - Austria, Russia, and Germany)
- Erg./Staffel ZG76: Mixed from May 44 to Aug 44 (Ohlau - Poland)
- Stab./ZG101: Bf-110 and Ju88s from Mar 44 to Mar 45 (Bad Aibling - Germany)
- I./ZG101: Bf-110 and Ju-88s from Mar 43 to Mar 45 (Memmingen, Illesheim - Germany)
- II./ZG101: Bf-110 and Ju-88s from Mar 43 to Mar 45 (Bad Aibling - Germany)
- Ergänzungs-Zerstorergruppe code 1E+: Bf-110, Me-210, Me-410 and Ju-88s from Sep 43 to Jun 44 (Deblin-Irena, Braunschweig-Broitzem, Illesheim - Poland and Germany)
- Ergänzungsstaffel: Mixed from Apr 44 to Aug 44 (Illesheim, Salzwedel - Germany)

Edited by Riksen
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
QB.Shallot

@=ABr=422nd_RedSkull

Not only did you miss all my points, but you also made another one of those wonderful claims that a simple look-see will prove incorrect.

"Neither are yours, since you fly more than 90% of the missions as an axies side pilot?"

42-58 split on flight time. I like to think I have a pretty balanced perspective Mr. "100% Allied". 

To boot, just got off a sortie where I helped 3x A-20's, and 2x 38's to go bomb a target, and we rolled it in one sortie. 

Teamwork really does achieve wonders. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
II./SG.1-MarkWilhelmsson
3 hours ago, =ABr=422nd_RedSkull said:

However, the Me 410 was no match in a dogfight with the lighter Allied single-engine fighters such as the North American P-51 Mustang and Supermarine Spitfire.

 

Not sure what the point of all this copypasta may be, but I gotta say anyone trying to dogfight Mustangs and Spitfires in a 410 or even a 110 for that matter are either extremely overconfident or extremely skilled.

 

Not even the single engine German fighter planes are a match for Mustangs and Spitfires in dogfights if they start on an equal energy and speed playing field lol.  

 

2 hours ago, Riksen said:

Units that operated the Bf-110 and Me-410 at the end of 44:
- II./ZG1: Bf-110 from Nov 43 to Jul 44 (Wels - Austria)
- Stab./ZG26: Mixed from Mar 44 to Jul 44 (Wunstorf, Konigsberg-Devau - Germany)
- I./ZG26:Me-410 from Apr 44 to Aug 44 (Fassberg and Konigsberg-Devau - Germany)
- II./ZG26: Me-410 from Oct 43 to Aug 44 (Hildesheim, Pfaffenhofen, Konigsberg-Devau - Germany)
- III./ZG26: Me-410 from Mar 44 to Sep 44 (Konigsberg-Devau, Leipheim, Lechfeld - Germany)
- Stab IV./ZG26: Bf-110 from Sep 44 - Feb 45 (Oerlandet, Trondheim-Lade - both in Norway)
- 10./ZG26: Bf-110 from Jul 44 to Nov 44 (Herdla, Lister, Trondheim-Lade - all in NOrway)
- 11./ZG26: Ju-88 and Me-410 from Aug 44 to May 45 (Gerdermoen, Oerlandet - both in Norway)
- 12./ZG26: Bf-110 from Jul 44 to Feb 45 (Gossen, Oerlandet, Herdla - all in Norway)
- Erg.Staffel/ZG26: Mixed from Apr 44 to Aug 44 (Illesheim, Brandis, Sagan-Kupper - Germany)
- Stab./ZG76: Me-410 from Apr 44 to Jul 44 (Wien-Seyring, Malacky - Austria and Hungary)
- I./ZG76: Me-410 from Apr 44 to Jul 44 (Wien-Seyring, Malacky - Austria and Hungary)
- II./ZG76: Me-410 from Apr 44 to Nov 44 (Wien-Seyring, Powunden, Seerappen, Grossenhain - Austria, Russia, and Germany)
- Erg./Staffel ZG76: Mixed from May 44 to Aug 44 (Ohlau - Poland)
- Stab./ZG101: Bf-110 and Ju88s from Mar 44 to Mar 45 (Bad Aibling - Germany)
- I./ZG101: Bf-110 and Ju-88s from Mar 43 to Mar 45 (Memmingen, Illesheim - Germany)
- II./ZG101: Bf-110 and Ju-88s from Mar 43 to Mar 45 (Bad Aibling - Germany)
- Ergänzungs-Zerstorergruppe code 1E+: Bf-110, Me-210, Me-410 and Ju-88s from Sep 43 to Jun 44 (Deblin-Irena, Braunschweig-Broitzem, Illesheim - Poland and Germany)
- Ergänzungsstaffel: Mixed from Apr 44 to Aug 44 (Illesheim, Salzwedel - Germany)

 

A cursory look at available information makes it seem like even having 110s or 410s available for ground attack at all is historically inaccurate. From what I've always understood, 110s, 210s, and 410s on the western front after 42 were almost 100% used for recon or bomber intercept, not ground attack. 

 

I think it would be completely realistic and acceptable for server admins to not even have bomb loadouts for 110s on CB maps. But you know half the axis loving community will squawk about it. I'm an A8 man myself when I'm ground attacking in the west. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
69th_Mobile_BBQ
7 hours ago, =ABr=422nd_RedSkull said:

It is a pity that in the BoN the Mosquito will come and not the Beaufighter. I think that due to its characteristics it would make up for the lack of an airplane with similar characteristics to the 110 for attacking the ground

 

Well, at least the Mossie will come pretty decently armed, be fast enough to be competitive and turn better than a 110 with 10% fuel and no bomb racks - if it's done right.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
69th_Bazzer
11 hours ago, QB.Shallot said:

@69th_Mobile_BBQ I'm not arguing that one side is disadvantaged. I'm saying that it sounds pretty balanced to me. Players just need to use the tools that are given to them.

Luckily you don't have to argue it, the stats bear it out.

 

If you think it's allies being less organized, you're just not flying much or paying attention when you do.

 

And before Schwarze jumps in, I've seen you guys work targets, and noone else is that organized. Kudos to EXPEND.

 

Also, spend some time on the training server, or take a look at the 30 or so tracks I recorded doing it if you don't want to. Right now the 110 with 12x50kg is far more effective on most targets than the P-38 with 6x500lb, and other loadouts are worse. The A-20 with 20x100kg, or even more so a Ju-88, are better still, but they really are flying coffins.

 

110 rear gunner is a funny thing. When I fly one (last time was pre-4.005), they seem completely useless. However, when I am fighter patrolling in a Tempy, it's the plane I least want to spot. The number of times I've made a high speed beam attack only to have that gunner shoot me right in the face as I fly through his arc for 1/10 of a second is just uncanny.

 

If things continue as they are, I'd like to see the 110 restricted from the 12x50kg loadout. 2x500kg + 4x50kg ought to be more effective anyway, surely that proposal won't be too controversial...

 

However, let's see how the changes already applied work. We were able to win Rhineland handily tonight, with Axis far more interested in vulching captured airfields (including multiple kills within 30 seconds of takeoff) than playing the objectives. They even spent the bulk of their ground attack effort killing the Y-46 flak, I guess just to make vulching easier. Go figure. Maybe the problem is already solved.

Edited by 69th_Bazzer
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Bilbo_Baggins
8 hours ago, CIA_Elanski said:

Shallot,

 

The 110 rear gunner hit my tempest as I crossed at 350mph from 3 oclock of 110 to 8 oclock in a diving turn...I took a crossing shot.  His .30 cal set me on fire.  It was Hipster diving on the AF target.  REALLY?  Ace gunners like that are not the norm.  Many 110s have gunners that wont hardly fire.  Other 110 gunners from SOME people set you on fire at really stupid speeds and angles.  Have we all not been flying for years and noticed this?  I see it in chat weekly, why is one 110 gunner an ACE and several others are just so so?  We know the answer to that question.  They have a cheat but it is a white elephant in this game.  It is worse to say there is a cheat than to be a cheat.  So the white elephant is staying put.  Don't think for a moment I believe it isnt.  Luth and I both came across tail of 110.  He shot I was just trying to distract the gunner.  He killed Luth and destroyed my plane engine.  AT THE SAME TIME.  It was our first pass and high speed.  We only got one pass and that .30cal did us in.  Do I think it is stock?  No but there are enough people using ACE rear gunners to make it a real no no to come in behind 110.  And those same 110s are so fast you cant get in front of them without having three grids to do it so they almost always get their bombs down.   The 110 could not survive un-escorted....historical fact.  Yet in here many brag often about killing 3 or 4 planes before being brought down.   Not so for allied.  

 

Say what you want, think and feel what you want.  The axis firepower is now over powering since patch, allied bombs suck and our ammo sucks.  So escorting to target sucks because you cant stop fighters from killing your bombers unless you happen to be one of the guys using (white elephant) assist and shoot 20percent when the 109 rolls in on the A20.  Then guys get tired of the constant PKs which is about as fun as getting shot in Wings in your spawn point.  So yup, there goes any interest in going 5 grids deep to a target placed way behind enemy lines.  Y29 every deep target is a death trap.  I took P47 to 20,000 ft.  I full speed dove on target, dropped at 10,000 feet.  Zoomed level, even slight dive.  Got caught by F'ing 109 within a grid, 10km.  Scissor, bang, plane dead.  So we have our thoughts Shallot and you have yours.


:)

 

What complete and utter drivel.

 

You bloody reds have become accustomed to the 1 shot PK's, the insane maneuverability and the ridiculous damage models for too long now. That's all there is to it. 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Barnacles

Anyway, if the reds want to win a map, the easiest way to do it is:

1. Get a plane 
2. Put bombs and rockets on it.
3. Use it to put those bombs and rockets on the objectives.

4. Go and cap for your teammates doing steps 1-3.

It really doesn't matter if 10% or 70% of those planes are Tempests.
It really doesn't matter if the mk 108 is 'OP'.

 

If everyone does that, you'll win the map, because that's how CB is set up.

 

4 hours ago, ProfesseurDePhysique said:

 

I think it would be completely realistic and acceptable for server admins to not even have bomb loadouts for 110s on CB maps. But you know half the axis loving community will squawk about it. I'm an A8 man myself when I'm ground attacking in the west. 

I don't think you can block all the bombs on a 110 because it has bombs in the right hand loadout column rather than the modifications. I may be mistaken though.

I'm with you, though, I'd much prefer to take an a8 rather than a 110. Lately, every time I've encountered 110s or a8s it's gone like this.

2 Spit V 3 110s, 2 kills and 1 mission kill (jettisoned bombs) with no loss.

2 Spit V 2 110s, wipeout with no loss.

3 Spit V 2 110s, 1 kill 1 driven to RTB with no loss.
3 Spit V 6 110s, 3 kills and one loss because the 110 obliterated itself and my prop got hit by *^&£$ debris. The 3 others I think got intercepted by someone else.

 

2 spit V 2 a8S, 1 a8 evaded and got to target and 1 kill.
2 Spits V 4 a8s, 2 x mission kills but got driven off, no losses no kills. 2 a8s got to target.

And the list goes on,

 

Also flying the a8 and 110, I've found that without opposition the 110 has a very slight advantage owing to a higher capacity of bombs, but you are more visible and more screwed if you get caught. The only other advantages are the R2D2 giving you callouts in the back seat and the 110 is more capable of RTB with battle damage though.

 

Edited by 71st_AH_Barnacles
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
=EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand
53 minutes ago, 71st_AH_Barnacles said:

I don't think you can block all the bombs on a 110 because it has bombs in the right hand loadout column rather than the modifications. I may be mistaken though.

 

Have you been on WoL 😄 , I don´t think there is a limitation to locking things

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • SYN_Haashashin pinned this topic

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...