Quote:
Originally Posted by AbortedMan
Example, there's not a lot, well...enough motivation and emphasis right now on objectives for the common non-regular player, whether that be to go bomb something (which is not on the common Red pilot's mind/agenda...we only have one buggy bomber),
|
Well, actually the Blenheim is much less buggy than the 111 currently. The 88s has the same issues as the 111 but it is usable because it can at least dive bomb. I fly all bombers except the Br.20 and have done extensive testing in them, spent entire nights reading up whatever technical resources i could find online about bombsights and their operation, etc.
The Blenheim is probably the most accurate one right now and especially the bombsight is a good mix of realism and functionality. There are a couple of operations that are simplified or handled automatically by the simulator, but other than that it's pretty close to the real course setting bomb sight.
The problem is that it's impractical because it lacks an autopilot and a way to adjust the view to look under the canopy framing in the nose. This means people have to bomb from no more than 4000ft, so that they can see the target early enough to make course adjustments.
I have proposed binding the level stab command that currently does nothing to a new AI control mode that would function somewhat similar to the German autopilots (so that code can be reused) and made available to all bombers. This mode would give control of flying the plane to the AI once engaged, but only the control surfaces. The player would still be able to adjust his engines, but the aircraft would fly straight and level. Then, using the "course autopilot left/right" commands, the player would command the AI to turn. One to three keypresses would result in level, rudder-only turns. Four or more keypresses would result in banking turns, with bank increasing as more keypresses as dialed in. Finally, pressing a key to turn the opposite way would cancel all turns and have the AI return to level flight.
This would simulate the way many bomber crews did it, where the bombardier was guiding the pilot to the target over the intercom: "left, left, steady" etc...
As for the forward visibility issue, the Blenheim sight doesn't have an up/down adjustment neither an automation toggle. Maybe it would be possible to use those keybindings to adjust the view, with the camera rotating up/down in a way that makes it possible to look ahead and under the canopy framing while in bombsight view. Then pressing the automation toggle would return to the proper view angle that aligns the forward and backward sighting rings so that bombs could be dropped.
I think this would be relatively easy to code because it would use existing resources copy/pasted and edited a bit from other bombers, without introducing new keybindings for us.
However, the thread i had opened with bug reports and suggestions didn't gather too much interest apart from the people who fly bombers regularly. So, give me some help you fighter boys and 1C will probably take notice and fix these issues, which will in turn result in more people flying bombers and more targets for you
As for mission design, i agree more or less with what you say, but i don't think it's the responsibility of people like Bliss because they don't have the tools to be effective. There are scripting commands that don't work correctly yet and some netcode issues that prevent the kind of mission environment we would all like to see. Mission designers often have to cut down on features because of this, since there is no known work around for some of the issues.
For example, i was browsing Wolf's thread on the ATAG forums about his new channel command mission and he has had to cut down on static objects quite a lot in order for the mission to run acceptably.
The good thing in all of this however is that focus is gradually moving to the type of missions you describe and a lot of people in the community are engaged in the effort. I think that even with the current problems we can still get a workable mission environment: maybe the scripts will be tweaked a bit to force a work around, which in turn will necessitate smaller amounts of objects on the map to run well, but we can still have maps with interesting objectives that will get people to fly in a certain manner while also enjoying it.
However, this hinges on there being a reason for players to fly bombers. I have been trying to "advertise" this viewpoint for a while because in a sense, fixing the bombers will also give the fighters the kind of engagements they would like to see. However, my success has been limited because everyone was and still is up in arms over getting exact accuracy for fighter FMs, 100 octane and so on.
I'm not insinuating these are not important issues.
All i'm saying is that when the fighters are finally fixed to an acceptable level, there still will be no other use to them apart from your aptly named "battle of Hawkinge" furballs, unless there are bombers around that:
a) are usable and can bomb accurately (fixing the bomber bugs) and
b) the results of that bombing can affect availability/serviceability of fighters (scripting/FMB bug fixes)
So come on fighter boys, rally with us and drum up some support for showing the bombers some love, you'll get free targets out of it
On another note, let me just say that you guys have always seemed to me like level headed people. I think you are getting in a cycle of misunderstanding because written text on the internet can't convey facial expressions and voice tones, so we all tend to often misunderstand eachother's intent.
In short, i don't have you guys cut out for trolls who stir up trouble on purpose, i've flown with a lot of you on ATAG and while i often don't use a mic because i fly late at night, i've been on voice comms and listening to the lively banter and i didn't get a bad impression about anyone. I think you are genuinely misunderstanding each other. So please be nice and don't go insulting each other over this