Unfortunately many PC gamers tend to have a Hollywood impression of what attacking bombers should be like, expecting they are something like ducks in a shooting gallery. According to this way of thinking the only serious RAF casualties were from enemy fighters, the bombers being close enough to undefended.
In reality attacking a bomber stream was always very dangerous. In fact the RAF used a range of tactics to reduce losses. For example feinting with one flight to draw bomber defensive fire and then attacking from another direction altogether with a separate flight. (This apparently worked really well with Heinkels which had a single gunner to operate both left and right waist guns)
A similar issue occurs with strafing capital ships. Gamers get indignant if shot down by a heavy cruiser or battleship whining about "sharpshooter" AAA.
This is what Medal of Honor winner Joe Voss had to say about strafing ships ...
" ... sometimes it will cost you about 50% of your fighters. You really lose the fighters on that deal. When you do get out and get out alive on a strafing attack on warships, you just aren't good, you're lucky? "
The problem is:
1) Real world loss ratios are unacceptable in a game because getting shot down every 2nd or third time you attacked mass bombers or a ship is just not that much fun. Games need to give the player a unrealistic chance of survival.
2) Unfortunately admitting that things like AAA need to be toned down in a game for game play reasons seems to injure some people ego's
|
11-08-2010, 05:22 AM
Threaded Mode