(Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945



Message

Mike_B20 -> (10/27/2003 9:55:48 AM)

I agree with you Mdiehl regarding how B17's [B]should[/B] be modelled, but they aren't in UV in my experience.
Apparently a while back, some UV users were very vocal regarding the effectiveness of B17's generally and Matrix penalized the B17's operational durability to balance the game...at least that is my understanding.
I commonly see operational losses of 10-20% in UV B17 missions.

Currently the program constantly reinforces B17's squads with very low skilled pilots.
UV then sends these guys out on bombing missions.
There is a difference between the way pilots are chosen for missions between bombing and fighter squadrons for some reason. Fighter squads choose best pilots, bomber squads seem to send least skilled pilots a [B]lot[/B] of the time. Maybe this is a contributing factor th the operational losses.

I've read something of how B17's were used early in the conflict and the operational losses were high, however this was more the result of using them in circumstances where they did not enjoy a lot of support and at bases close to the Japanese.
From what I've read about number of B17's in theatre I believe there are too many B17's in UV. Some squadrons were withdrawn from the theatre but this is not modelled in UV.

Generally, I think B17's need looking at by Matrix, like a lot of other things in the game. It must be a nightmare juggling all the factors and finding the right balance to achieve a reasonable simulation and at the same time create a balanced game.



Luskan -> (10/27/2003 10:00:16 AM)

Well Peter, objectivity only goes so far (as maybe this forum proves). The outstanding issues that are approached correctly and politely, are generally the ones that have lots of forum support - so they are generally the ones that get fixed. How is this unusual?

If you want to keep your posts personality-less in order to try and get your point across, you are going to be about as effective as a wet mop. As for your point re: no specific interest about any points raised - that test was a circus. I agree completely - for the reasons Frag posted.


Now as ahistorical as this is: I don't have a problem when I see my 200+ b17s and liberators (who had an ASW role - that is almost the same sort of bombing technique as anti shipping?) taking off from Nevea and at 6000, finding 25 IJN aps unloading over the beach at Irau - and then dropping a huge tonnage of bombs to get a few hits, especially as usually 1 ship gets pounded under while the rest either take no hits or the odd scratch - and it is even more aceptable when I check my bomber squadrons to see that since it is 11/43, and they've been on ops without ever running into serious CAP or flak for 13 months, they have average experience of above 75 in all squadrons.

However, Chiteng, you'll be glad to hear that as far as WITP is concerned I have come around to your way of thinking with the B17 - and am discussing it with a few other testers (no tweaking will be done until we're out of alpha however so no news yet) but my problem is the 3 b17s taking off from supply less manila and smacking a transport on the way to invade Luzon - or worse, a transports loading troops on Formosa under 20+CAP. This has happened more than a few times if you check the AAR between Raver and I, and even more in the first few games I tried.

I don't care how tough the b17 is, if there are only 3 of them, they are low, slow, inexperienced, flying over a major IJ airbase on a bombing run and they are bounced by 20 zeroes . . . well 2 zeroes damaged and 2 b17s damaged doesn't sit right with me.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.171875