So when are they skip bombing.

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

So when are they skip bombing.

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific >> So when are they skip bombing.

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

So when are they skip bombing. - 7/15/2002 12:55:42 PM

1089

Posts: 210
Joined: 7/4/2001
From: Portland, OR
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Deep Breakfast
[B]Why weren't B-17s used to glide bomb Japanese shipping at low altitudes?

If the answer is that they would get torn up by flak, then the flak effectiveness needs to be increased against low flying level bombers. If the answer is that they couldn't hit a moveing ship, then their bomb accuracy needs to be turned down against ships at sea. If the answer is that the commanders at the time did not fully realize the B-17's effectiveness at low altitudes, then nothing needs to be changed.

Skip bombing shouldn't even enter the discussion. To my knowledge B-17s flying at 1,000 feet are NOT skip bombing in UV. [/B][/QUOTE]

Allied bombers set at 100 ft. never bomb, they just strafe, and their altitude is reported as 1000 ft.

Allied bombers set at 1000 ft. have their bombing accuracy increased dramatically and their altitude is reported as 1000 ft.

2x3 staffers have stated that skip-bombing was modeled in the game.

So what is the setting for skip-bombing?

IMO 1000 ft. Manuals have been known to be wrong in the past. It could have happened here. Matrix and 2x3 remain mute.

thanks,
kp

_____________________________

The Earth is but a hollow nougat, reverberating with the sounds of the big bands... :cool:

(in reply to emorbius44)

Post #: 31

- 7/15/2002 10:50:57 PM

Von Rom

Posts: 1705
Joined: 5/12/2000
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by dgaad
[B]

Um your post didn't exactly support your point.

"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here, this is the War Room!" [/B][/QUOTE]

Sorry dgaad, but I'm afraid that YOU missed the point I was making.

In the real war, when the B-17 was used in low level bombing, it was against relatively UNARMED shipping (such as convoys, troop transports, etc), and many of these ships were anchored in port.

Even so, even against the AA of destroyers, the B-17s took a great deal of damage.

This is far different, than to have B-17s and other large bombers successfuly attack MOVING, EVADING carriers, battleships, and cruisers on the open sea, that are all firing AA at them.

At the Battle of Midway, all the bombers that attacked the Japanese fleet failed to score a single hit. Why? Because the ships were EVADING THE ATTACK.

In the game, the bombers should be somewhat successful at attacking anchored merchant ships in port from a low altitude.

But on the open sea, there should be relatively few hits on warships. Even so, any low level attacks against warships should be met with withering and devastating AA and fighter interceptions.

In the picture below, Japanese aircraft carrier Soryu circles while under high-level bombing attack by USAAF B-17 bombers from the Midway base, shortly after 8AM, 4 June 1942. This attack produced near misses, but no hits. US Air Force Photo

_____________________________

(in reply to emorbius44)

Post #: 32

Joel to the rescue - 7/16/2002 12:04:17 AM

brisd

Posts: 614
Joined: 5/20/2000
From: San Diego, CA
Status: offline

Copied from the "low-level bombing" poll:

Originally posted by Joel Billings -

"These are the three changes that I believe have been made to date in the next patch to be released.

1) Experience gain for pilots on transport missions has been greatly reduced.
2) Repair times for level bombers have been increased, especially for heavy bombers.
3) The Norden bombsight modifier for US aircraft has been limited below 6000 feet and totally taken away below 4000 feet (it had a minimum altitude that was not being accounted for which Mike just realized that Gary had not accounted for).

In addition, Gary is going to make a change that will reduce morale for level bomber units that have a large proportion of their planes damaged and are set for low level bombing (probably under 5000 feet). Along with the changes above, this should cut down on the ability to keep bombers flying low level missions day after day (as well as their effectiveness).

As for flak, be careful what you wish for. As it is, US combat TF's in late 42 can chew up huge amounts of enemy planes. If we were to increase flak it could seriously throw things out of balance. We are very reluctant to make a change here unless all other relatively safe/simple options have been exhausted. We're trying to achieve the rifle solution instead of the shotgun. Is the perceived issue all flak, or flak against the high endurance bombers?"

Well done!

(in reply to emorbius44)

Post #: 33

Re: So when are they skip bombing. - 7/16/2002 6:51:54 AM

Mike Wood

Posts: 2095
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Oakland, California
Status: offline

Hello...

Skip bombing occurs when level bombers are given naval attack orders and are assigned an altitude of 100 feet. There were some bugs in the skip bombing code, which have now been repaired. When the next patch comes out, it will work properly.

Hope this Helps...

Michael Wood
_________________________________________________

[QUOTE]Originally posted by 1089
[B]

Allied bombers set at 100 ft. never bomb, they just strafe, and their altitude is reported as 1000 ft.

Allied bombers set at 1000 ft. have their bombing accuracy increased dramatically and their altitude is reported as 1000 ft.

2x3 staffers have stated that skip-bombing was modeled in the game.

So what is the setting for skip-bombing?

IMO 1000 ft. Manuals have been known to be wrong in the past. It could have happened here. Matrix and 2x3 remain mute.

thanks,
kp [/B][/QUOTE]

(in reply to emorbius44)

Post #: 34

Testers didnt drop the ball. - 7/16/2002 12:21:49 PM

Ross Moorhouse

Posts: 2354
Joined: 1/5/2001
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline

The test team we have for UV is the best I have ever worked in or with.

I think you need to understand how testing is done.

We are given a list of things to check to see if the programers/designers have got the game doing what it is supposed to do. This list comes from the designer/programer.

Testers are assigned things to check. Which they then report in.

At the same time the testers are also suggesting things that could be done a different way, or a better way. These are then taken into consideration by the designer who then asks the progarmer to make these changes. Which then have to be tested as well.

Game design is also constrained by the amount of money that can be used for development. I have heard some of the figures quoted for some FPS as being in the millions to develop those games.

Also a games development is aslo constrained by time. Most companies what games out selling so they have more income comming in to keep developing the game (also for fixing things that customers find, patches) and starting to develope new games.

So next time someone says that the testers dropped the ball maybe more people should be testers (not just with Matrix) and see whats involved as these guys do give up their free time to test, it can get boring just watching a game run waiting to see if something has been fixed or not.

I can give a 100% indorsement for my UV test team as they did a great job and continue to do this.

_____________________________

Ross Moorhouse

Project Manager
www.csosimtek.com
Email: rossm@csogroup.org

(in reply to emorbius44)

Post #: 35

Re: Re: So when are they skip bombing. - 7/16/2002 12:38:44 PM

1089

Posts: 210
Joined: 7/4/2001
From: Portland, OR
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mike Wood
[B]Hello...

Skip bombing occurs when level bombers are given naval attack orders and are assigned an altitude of 100 feet. There were some bugs in the skip bombing code, which have now been repaired. When the next patch comes out, it will work properly.

Hope this Helps...

Michael Wood
_________________________________________________

[/B][/QUOTE]

Thanks, Michael, for the response. I'm glad it will work when the patch comes out. Keep up the good work!

kp

_____________________________

The Earth is but a hollow nougat, reverberating with the sounds of the big bands... :cool:

(in reply to emorbius44)

Post #: 36

Re: Testers didnt drop the ball. - 7/16/2002 12:41:52 PM

1089

Posts: 210
Joined: 7/4/2001
From: Portland, OR
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Ross Moorhouse
[B]The test team we have for UV is the best I have ever worked in or with.

I think you need to understand how testing is done.

We are given a list of things to check to see if the programers/designers have got the game doing what it is supposed to do. This list comes from the designer/programer.

Testers are assigned things to check. Which they then report in.

At the same time the testers are also suggesting things that could be done a different way, or a better way. These are then taken into consideration by the designer who then asks the progarmer to make these changes. Which then have to be tested as well.

Game design is also constrained by the amount of money that can be used for development. I have heard some of the figures quoted for some FPS as being in the millions to develop those games.

Also a games development is aslo constrained by time. Most companies what games out selling so they have more income comming in to keep developing the game (also for fixing things that customers find, patches) and starting to develope new games.

So next time someone says that the testers dropped the ball maybe more people should be testers (not just with Matrix) and see whats involved as these guys do give up their free time to test, it can get boring just watching a game run waiting to see if something has been fixed or not.

I can give a 100% indorsement for my UV test team as they did a great job and continue to do this. [/B][/QUOTE]

I concur in the endorsement. Thanks to all who have been working hard to make this the best game ever! I like the compromise on the B-17s, as well.

kp

_____________________________

The Earth is but a hollow nougat, reverberating with the sounds of the big bands... :cool:

(in reply to emorbius44)

Post #: 37

- 7/16/2002 1:52:42 PM

dgaad

Posts: 864
Joined: 7/25/2001
From: Hockeytown
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Von Rom
[B]

In the real war, when the B-17 was used in low level bombing, it was against relatively UNARMED shipping (such as convoys, troop transports, etc), and many of these ships were anchored in port.

Even so, even against the AA of destroyers, the B-17s took a great deal of damage.

[/B][/QUOTE]

God, if I see another high altitude bombing picture I think I'll puke.

(for the umpteenth time) : B17s WERE used in a low level bombing role against both merchant ships and destroyers. For the limited sorties and times they were used, they were quite successful, and "proved the concept" of skip bombing; after the proof of concept they continued to be used in low level attacks but were gradually replaced by medium bombers who were even better at this type of mission due to the superior AA suppression and manuverability characteristics of medium bombers. The tally of B17s used in this role included numerous transports that were moving, as well as reported bomb hits on manuvering destroyers.

As you said, B17s took a lot of damage. This was in fact one of their strengths.

Given all of the historical evidence, there is nothing to suggest that they could not have been used as players have tended to use them in the game, and there is nothing theoretically impossible about an attack on a carrier group, nor theoretically impossible about having a reasonable chance to score a hit in this role.

No one, including myself, has maintained the position that B17s could hit moving ships from high altitude, so please spare yourself the trouble of posting more pictures like that. Seen em.

_____________________________

Last time I checked, the forums were messed up. ;)

(in reply to emorbius44)

Post #: 38

Re: Testers didnt drop the ball. - 7/16/2002 5:17:44 PM

elmo3

Posts: 5820
Joined: 1/22/2002
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Ross Moorhouse
[B]The test team we have for UV is the best I have ever worked in or with.

I think you need to understand how testing is done....

[/B][/QUOTE]

Ross

I've been a tester for Gary in the past (worked some on BoB and all the way through BTR) and am currently testing for a competitor. I've been there, done that, and have the T shirt. Your team is doing a fine job with UV. It is usually a thankless job, and discouraging at times when you see people posting threads with titles like this one. However there are those who can appreciate all the behind the scenes effort that goes into making a game a success. Keep the faith, there are plenty of people playing UV who truly appreciate the effort of your team as well as the other support people at 2by3 and Matrix.

Lee "elmo3" Elmendorf

(in reply to emorbius44)

Post #: 39

A Thankless Job - 7/16/2002 8:47:31 PM

IChristie

Posts: 673
Joined: 3/26/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline

Ross and all testers:

Part of my real job involves managing a software group that frequently has to produce very high reliability software against fixed and challenging deadlines. The software testers are always in a terrible position they have to:

a. understand all of the functions
b. Wait for code that is finished late and still get their job done on schedule
c. tell the overworked and overstressed developers that their code doesn't work
d. Take the heat when bugs show up after release (which they always do).

Testing consists of more than playing the game and making notes on the stuff you don't like. It's not just an excuse to get to play the game before everybody else. It's hard work, it can be boring. Above all, it takes immense dedication and attention to detail to do it right.

The UV test team did and continues to do a great job. They do it because their hearts are in it. They all deserve a round of applause.

They definitely do not deserve any more threads with titles like this one.

_____________________________

Iain Christie
-----------------
"If patience is a virtue then persistence is it's part.
It's better to light a candle than stand and curse the dark"

- James Keelaghan

(in reply to emorbius44)

Post #: 40

Re: A Thankless Job - 7/16/2002 9:09:15 PM

Posts: 3332
Joined: 7/17/2001
From: V�ster�s,Sweden
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by IChristie
[B]Ross and all testers:

The UV test team did and continues to do a great job. They do it because their hearts are in it. They all deserve a round of applause.

They definitely do not deserve any more threads with titles like this one. [/B][/QUOTE]

I agree with you IChristie. To test a complex game like this and all the patches that are released in a very short time deserves a big thank you. There has been way too many BS threads on this forum of late where someone claims too know how the game should really work. I dont mind constructive critisism (we have had plenty of good views from members here that actually want to improve the game and not just complain) but not like " I am right and therfore this product sucks" or " I have read history books and therefore this computer game should work just like in real combat situations". Its a game! And a darn fine one. Do you see anyone else producing games with this much historic accuracy or detail? I dont think so.
Dan

_____________________________

(in reply to emorbius44)

Post #: 41