stump

Ordnance arming timers should be compensated for

149 posts in this topic

Hi,

 

OK.

lol

CRS would have saved time by removing bombers from this game. At least it would be a clear way of doing...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Silky said:

So is the idea that aircraft strafing or bombing armour misguided?

if we wanted to start with historical accuracy and work backwards, where do we start?

That's not what I meant.  I was strictly referring to history.

 

In game, we don't really have the ability to do those things I listed above.  No one here will despawn a tank just because they are getting strafed with BBs out of utter fear, nor can we attack fuel depots and support vehicles.  

 

Every WWII game I've ever played that included aircraft also included effective ground attack aircraft in some fashion (even games that stressed realism).  If anything, one in our game can argue that direct kills on armor simulate the "disabling" I described above.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Silky said:

So is the idea that aircraft strafing or bombing armour misguided?

if we wanted to start with historical accuracy and work backwards, where do we start?

Strafing and bombing armor is legit. What's misguided is the idea of two things: non-direct bomb hits, and non-direct rocket hits. Assuming, of course, the bombs and rockets in question are good enough.

Starting where CRS is right now is pretty good: anything that's not a literal direct hit probably isn't going to do anything. I think maybe the concussion effects could be looked at for large bombs and their interaction with armor, but I'm not sure it's wrong atm.

What'd be best is to add some more stuff CAS can effectively do that's not directly against armor, but that will take a lot of work.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, BLKHWK8 said:

Actually with QA testing we were  seeing 30-40m is the threshold for the 2.5 second delay. We will monitor this, please use .report if you see this is not the case.

 

As for the bomb issue, they are being worked on by the production team. The HE/KE audit was step 1 in a multi-step process to updated to historical aspects.

I'm not sure what type of reply that is, but on my last mission I went into a dive with a stuka: dive brakes, siren, 50kg bombs ready.  I dropped and pulled out at ~500m, then I got a message saying something along the lines of "wasted bombs, give the bomb time to arm" 

Hey, geniuses, a dive bomb is very precise because its VERTICAL, and when you're dropping bombs like that, they impact the ground much faster than 2.5 seconds.  Am I supposed to level bomb with a Stuka now?  You clearly did not think this out at all.  If you want to prevent suicide bombers, all it would take is a .5 second delay.  Planes fly fast.  .5 seconds is a significant amount of time, 2.5 seconds is a very long time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, moe5000 said:

Its to stop the rampant kamikazees. 

what rampant kamikazees?  Ju87-Bs are rarely seen in this game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, BLKHWK8 said:

As I stated we will look at the results of live game play and make adjustments as necessary. Our QA team is made up of players and pilots. Before going off the deep end and making assumptions get in game and try it. 

I think you will find that in order to drop and not have the bomb arm you would be in the ground anyway which is the point. 

Clearly false

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, stankyus said:

There are no P39N missions

There are P39N missions - if you look at the french name of this plane. It is the Bell 26mle like I said. It got a few missions and a few tank kills.

5 hours ago, stankyus said:

You will find the H2D is lacking engine power and the Stuka is more stable at the slower speeds. 

I don't think the stuka is performing better in speed or in stability. As I said, you have to trim it 50% downwards to fly at level flight at cruise speed. That just means it's not stable at allmost any other speed, it allways wants to climb or dive whatever you trim is set to as long as you are not flying level.

It is also performing worse than the hurri according to stats. It needs more missions to aquire the same tank kills and it has a significant worse k/d ratio.

But I guess you and I and everybody just stick to the usual "the other side got the better equipment" argument. I'll gonna try the hurri out more often. Until then, I'll shut my mouth.

Edited by vanapo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, the main thing is not the arming timers but the fact that we need more ground targets for airplane bombs other than tanks.

PPOs, FBs, radar, supply stuff, bridges, trains, whatever.....

Edited by piska250

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, stump said:

I'm not sure what type of reply that is, but on my last mission I went into a dive with a stuka: dive brakes, siren, 50kg bombs ready.  I dropped and pulled out at ~500m, then I got a message saying something along the lines of "wasted bombs, give the bomb time to arm" 

Hey, geniuses, a dive bomb is very precise because its VERTICAL, and when you're dropping bombs like that, they impact the ground much faster than 2.5 seconds.  Am I supposed to level bomb with a Stuka now?  You clearly did not think this out at all.  If you want to prevent suicide bombers, all it would take is a .5 second delay.  Planes fly fast.  .5 seconds is a significant amount of time, 2.5 seconds is a very long time.

Just tested this myself.. I was able to drop from around 450m AGL (remember its 450m above the ground, not in altitude from sea level) in a Stuka full dive straight down and the bomb armed. Dove in from around 1500m AGL.. Also tried from first cloud layer and dove in and dropped around 450m and it still armed.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, stump said:

what rampant kamikazees?  Ju87-Bs are rarely seen in this game.

JU87's BD7's/Havok's and Hurri bombers all were taking part in pile driving themselves into tanks, kind of on a repeated basis
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this is a great change that will encourage realistic play, reduce abuse of the game mechanics and increase the value of player skill. 

A pilot will have to release their bombs at least 50m from the target which is very reasonable.  The implementation sounds perfect for me and I will definitely be bombing under these rules. 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Silky said:

if we wanted to start with historical accuracy and work backwards, where do we start?

Military campaigns are about supply lines. The most straightforward way to win a campaign...indeed, the only way other than attrition or a weapons breakthrough...is to cut the other side's supply lines. 

That's how Germany won in France and in Balkans/Greece. Their inability to achieve that is why they lost in North Africa and again in Russia and western Europe.1940.

To make a realistic wargame, start with a realistic supply system. Players don't need to do the actual supply movement, but they have to be able to find and try to interdict that movement. Opposing players have to have a chance to defend against such interdiction. 

The whole system has to be virtualized with only the fighting modeled, not all the boring supply movement in between.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, stump said:

I'm not sure what type of reply that is, but on my last mission I went into a dive with a stuka: dive brakes, siren, 50kg bombs ready.  I dropped and pulled out at ~500m, then I got a message saying something along the lines of "wasted bombs, give the bomb time to arm" 

Hey, geniuses, a dive bomb is very precise because its VERTICAL, and when you're dropping bombs like that, they impact the ground much faster than 2.5 seconds.  Am I supposed to level bomb with a Stuka now?  You clearly did not think this out at all.  If you want to prevent suicide bombers, all it would take is a .5 second delay.  Planes fly fast.  .5 seconds is a significant amount of time, 2.5 seconds is a very long time.

2.5 seconds is a realistic average for general purpose bomb fuzes.

The game continues to move toward better realism. Past gameplay wasn't very realistic in many ways. The expectation is that the great majority of players do want the game to be realistic, and will adapt to the more realistic gameplay requirements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had no problems dive bombing an EFMS earlier today with a Stuka. I made sure I didn't drop too low to the ground, but I just eyeballed it. Didn't look at my dashboard, didn't do any math, just thought "Yeah, this is probably starting to be too low". I wasn't even that high up, because my first dive from 1k~1.5k had me looking for a nonexistent target, so I circled until I saw something, regained altitude, and then went back for a dive. All 5 bombs went off. I was a bit off target, but that's because I'm not great at flying yet. Prior to these changes I probably would have made a direct hit because I could spend more time perfecting my aim, but then I'd just pull up, hear shrapnel hit my plane, and fly off safe and sound.

So far, no real issues from me with this change, other than all the nearby players receiving the message and getting the headshakes whenever bombs fail to go off. I just think a lot of people aren't used to it, and the knee-jerk reaction is to hate change. I'm surprised people are actually questioning the recent issues with kamikaze pilots; there were multiple threads about it from BOTH sides. For example:

 

And this one which got onto the topic of planes suiciding in FMSes to deny spawns

 

I think 2.5 may have been too aggressive to start with, even though it seems alright for me. Perhaps 1.5 or 1.75 would have been better, and to scale that up if it's still too gamey. I do agree that some rendering things may have to change to be able to discern targets easier from higher up, and until then that might justify the 1.5 and 1.75 timers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, GrAnit said:

http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/combat-aircraft-versus-armour-in-wwii/#Normandy 1944: the RAF’s and USAF’s Story

According to the RAF, the Hawker Typhoon was the most effective ground attack and tank killing aircraft in the world in 1944, which may have been true. No fewer than 26 RAF Squadrons were equipped with Typhoons by mid 1944. These aircraft operated round the clock during the Normandy campaign operating in ‘cab rank’ formations, literately flying above the target area in circles, waiting their turn to attack. Official RAF and USAF records claim the destruction of thousands of AFVs in Normandy. There are many examples such as:

  • During Operation Goodwood (18th to 21st July) the 2nd Tactical Air Force and 9th USAAF claimed 257 and 134 tanks, respectively, as destroyed. Of these, 222 were claimed by Typhoon pilots using RPs (Rocket Projectiles).(2)
  • During the German counterattack at Mortain (7th to 10th August) the 2nd Tactical Air Force and 9th USAAF claimed to have destroyed 140 and 112 tanks, respectively.(3)
  • On a single day in August 1944, the RAF Typhoon pilots claimed no less than 135 tanks as destroyed.(4)

So what really happened? Unfortunately for air force pilots, there is a small unit usually entitled Research and Analysis which enters a combat area once it is secured. This is and was common in most armies, and the British Army was no different. The job of The Office of Research and Analysis was to look at the results of the tactics and weapons employed during the battle in order to determine their effectiveness (with the objective of improving future tactics and weapons).

They found that the air force’s claims did not match the reality at all. In the Goodwood area a total of 456 German heavily armoured vehicles were counted, and 301 were examined in detail. They found only 10 could be attributed to Typhoons using RPs (less than 3% of those claimed).(5) Even worse, only 3 out of 87 APC examined could be attributed to air lunched RPs. The story at Mortain was even worse. It turns out that only 177 German tanks and assault guns participated in the attack, which is 75 less tanks than claimed as destroyed! Of these 177 tanks, 46 were lost and only 9 were lost to aircraft attack.(6) This is again around 4% of those claimed. When the results of the various Normandy operations are compiled, it turns out that no more than 100 German tanks were lost in the entire campaign from hits by aircraft launched ordnance.(7) Thus on a single day in August 1944 the RAF claimed 35% more tanks destroyed than the total number of German tanks lost directly to air attack in the entire campaign!

Considering the Germans lost around 1 500 tanks, tank destroyers and assault guns in the Normandy campaign, less than 7% were lost directly to air attack.(8) The greatest contributor to the great myth regarding the ability of WWII aircraft to kill tanks was, and still is, directly the result of the pilot’s massively exaggerated kill claims. The Hawker Typhoon with its cannon and up to eight rockets was (and still is in much literature) hailed as the best weapon to stop the German Tiger I tank, and has been credited with destroying dozens of these tanks in the Normandy campaign. According to the most current definitive work only 13 Tiger tanks were destroyed by direct air attack in the entire campaign.(9) Of these, seven Tigers were lost on 18th July 1944 to massive carpet bombing by high altitude heavy bombers, preceding Operation Goodwood. Thus at most only six Tigers were actually destroyed by fighter bombers in the entire campaign. It turns out the best Tiger stopper was easily the British Army’s 17pdr AT gun, with the Typhoon well down on the list.

Skip to the 40 minute mark: 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, stump said:

what rampant kamikazees?  Ju87-Bs are rarely seen in this game.

Dunno what you are talking about, but when I was playing I'd see blens crashing into tigers daily. Every single time I played I'd see someone kamikazee a panzer. Every. Day. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, wiesshund said:

JU87's BD7's/Havok's and Hurri bombers all were taking part in pile driving themselves into tanks, kind of on a repeated basis
 

Yup, because the "pilots" of those planes find it easier to be dbags instead of learning how to bomb properly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do you not understand that targets dont even render in your game at the heights your asking us to drop at--makes things real easy for those aa guns to pop out when your low and slow looking for targets then shoot you out of the sky before you have the alt to bomb them. 

Again what dont you understand about not being able to render targets in the game at the heights youre asking us to drop at. Not much game playing fun in that now is there?

 

If you really want to help out the tanks ability to survive on the battlefield then maybe look at not allowing atgs to spwan at fms' and force people to tow em to town like the good ol days. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, redst0rm said:

How do you not understand that targets dont even render in your game at the heights your asking us to drop at--makes things real easy for those aa guns to pop out when your low and slow looking for targets then shoot you out of the sky before you have the alt to bomb them. 

Again what dont you understand about not being able to render targets in the game at the heights youre asking us to drop at. Not much game playing fun in that now is there?

Incorrect.. The shortest rendered weapon in game is infantry and they render at 700m. Last night while testing some bombing we had no issue with render distance and lining up a target. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, moe5000 said:

Yup, because the "pilots" of those planes find it easier to be dbags instead of learning how to bomb properly. 

I know the 1 I was seeing do it a lot isn't in game anymore. Haven't seen any kami recently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/22/2018 at 0:16 AM, moe5000 said:

Its to stop the rampant kamikazees. 

I will just LoL at this comment. 

ONCE AGAIN, CRS has listened to a VERY small, VERY vocal few... who whined about a VERY small number of tank kills by kamikazees. And now we have this mess. 

There was never a rampant problem to begin with. But they wasted valuable time implementing a "fix" to a problem that was so small as to NOT be a problem to begin with.  Typical. 

 

Edited by lipton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, lipton said:

 VERY small number of tank kills by kamikazees.

LOL, what game are you playing??? I've played for 17 years and every other damn tank kill by air has been due to this gamey, fake BS. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, xanthus said:

LOL, what game are you playing??? I've played for 17 years and every other damn tank kill by air has been due to this gamey, fake BS. 

I was AA gunning a few maps ago at an axis AO near an allied AF. I counted 2 tigers and 2 4gs and a stugG killed to kamikazees, on the same attack. I even have the video of some of it. 

Anyone who says it's a very small number either doesn't play the game or is being obtuse. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lipton said:

ONCE AGAIN, CRS has listened to a VERY small, VERY vocal few... who whined about a VERY small number of tank kills by kamikazees. And now we have this mess. 

There was never a rampant problem to begin with. But they wasted valuable time implementing a "fix" to a problem that was so small as to NOT be a problem to begin with.  Typical. 

Note that the game, at its foundation level, is a big database system, with a transactional notification system on top. Everything that happens in-game goes into that database.

CRS has comprehensive real-time statistics for every essentially simultaneous death of an aircraft and a ground target at essentially the same location.

You're entitled to your opinion that the numbers have been small, but that opinion is probably of less weight than their hard statistics.

My understanding from developer comments is that the problem has been recognized for some time from the statistics as substantial and requiring a fix.

We know they did an extensive period of testing the fix to make sure it was scaled correctly, because we were told the fix was prepared some time ago and the intervening time was that testing.

Quote

a VERY small, VERY vocal few... who whined about a VERY small number

I don't think CRS changes anything without understanding the underlying hard statistics., which give them an ironclad way to judge the validity of any community complaint, whether it's one person complaining or 50% of players.

My guess is that the only difference a large number of players complaining makes is that it results in greater assurance that CRS looks at the statistics regarding that issue. But, a one person complaint can have that effect as well, as long as it's not missed here in the traffic flow. 

Edited by jwilly
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.