juliet7bravo -> (7/15/2002 10:18:51 PM)
|
I think it's obvious the effects of flak, especially at low levels is understated. The facts pretty much speak for themselves. What's even more obvious is that the effects of other factors aren't pronounced enough; The disruption effects of flak and CAP. The effects of morale and fatigue. Repair times. The lack of, or insufficiency of escorts. Overstated spotting with insufficient search assets allowing massive strikes at extreme range. Large scale air attacks with insufficient recon of the target. Bomber pilots gaining experience too quickly. Being able (and willing) to conduct low level attacks with high accuracy, with relatively low experience. No division between "level bombers" and "attack bombers". You cannot convince me that B-17's, flying in small groups, at 1000', could attack the IJN "SuperDuper CV TF", and sink 1 CV and 1 CVL with a mere 33 sorties...with the loss of 1 aircraft. This is ridiculous. It's stupid. It is totally unrealistic. It's not an isolated occurance in game. How about the infamous "3 bombers that fly through 125 fighters on CAP, then through the flak from an entire CV TF and sink 2 carriers"? That's probably happened to most of the people here. How or why anyone would even attempt to justify these kind of results totally escapes me. It's not just the B-17, the B-17 is just where it's most glaringly noticable. It's not just the Allies. This is a pervasive, across the board problem. Probably all of these factors just need slight tweaking. I don't think it's any one thing that is glaringly "wrong", it's the sum of many factors, all just off slightly, that need further tweaking and refinement. All of these factors, working together, should prevent unrealistic or totally ahistoric results...currently, they do not.
|
|
|
|