Fred19 Posted January 1, 2006 Share Posted January 1, 2006 There's a bug in this campaign: as Axis player you cannot assign range 2 aircraft to Lasithiou although it is described as a range 2 region. But you'll get the error message saying "The highlighted pilots have been assigned to a region that is beyond the range of their aircraft." When you replace the ME109 with a ME110 and the Stuka with a HE111, it'll work fine, but that's something I don't want to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bartbert Posted January 1, 2006 Share Posted January 1, 2006 I think the range should have been showing as 3 for the Axis. I have made an update that should correct that problem (but I'm afraid that means you'll have to use the Bf-110's and He-111's to attack that region). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred19 Posted January 1, 2006 Author Share Posted January 1, 2006 Thanks for fixing that, Brian! Though I absolutely like the optical appearence of the ME110, I try to avoid using it for escort missions whenever I can. Guess I have to alter my strategy now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bartbert Posted January 1, 2006 Share Posted January 1, 2006 The Bf-110 may improve slightly once we implement some changes that we are testing out right now. Currently, aircraft are only rated for Bursts as a measure of their armaments. We are testing out some changes in which aircraft will be rated for Bursts and "Damage Bonus". Bursts will be more a measure of rate of fire, while "Damage Bonus" will be a measure of the destructive power of the gun when it hits. At a simplistic level, aircraft armed with lots of machine guns will tend to get higher Burst ratings, and aircraft armed with lots of cannons will tend to get higher "Damage Bonus" ratings. The Burst rating will work the same way it always has, i.e., it factors in to how many burst cards you can play. The "Damage Bonus" acts as a modifier to the damage value of a card. For example, an aircraft with a +1 Damage Bonus that successfully plays an "In My Sights 1-Burst: 2-Damage" would actually inflict 3 points of damage instead of 2. We think this will help differentiate the aircraft a bit, and make them more interesting to fly. For example, right now the Spitfire I and the Bf-109E are pretty much identical. The Spitfire I can take one additonal point of damage, but other than that they both have Burst rating of 1, Wingman Offense and Defense of 2, etc. Under the new system, the Spitfire I has a Burst rating of 2 and a Damage Bonus of -1. The Bf-109E has a Burst rating of 0 and a Damage Bonus of +1. In addition, the Spitfire has a Wingman Offense of 3 while the Bf-109E has a 2. These aircraft feel a lot different from each other when you fly them now. The Spitfire will be able to get in a lot more bursts, but will do less damage when he hits. The Bf-109E won't be able to fire as often, but when he hits it hurts. The Bf-110 will get a Burst rating of 1 and a Damage Bonus of +1. That will add a little sting when he hits, but his Performance rating still sucks, so he may not hit all that often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred19 Posted January 1, 2006 Author Share Posted January 1, 2006 Sounds like an interesting idea and will give each aircraft a more specific identity. So the ME262 will have burst rating 2 and damage bonus +2 then? :cool: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bartbert Posted January 1, 2006 Share Posted January 1, 2006 I'm not sure what ratings Dan has in mind for the Me-262 because we are also introducing another aircraft rating called "Heavy Cannons". This rating represents those aircraft with large caliber cannons (30 mm and up). It didn't take very many hits from these types of weapons before significant structural and/or mechanical damage brought most any aircraft down. Each point in the "Heavy Cannon" rating will increase the chances that the dreaded "In My Sights 2-Burst: Fuel Tank Hit" card is drawn instead of a regular "In My Sights" card. We're still playing with the numbers, but a rating of 1 might mean there is a 10% chance, a rating of 2 would be a 20% chance, and so on. Right now, the Bf-109K and the Ki-102 are the only aircraft that have this capability (each with a value of 1), but the Me-262 certainly would as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sixxkiller Posted January 1, 2006 Share Posted January 1, 2006 Hi just to clarify, I meant for only the He-111 and Bf-110C to be able to reach Lastithiou. Was originally 3 and I needed to change it to 2 for something and forgot to change it back. -Ray Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lakespeed Posted January 1, 2006 Share Posted January 1, 2006 Originally posted by bartbert: The Bf-110 may improve slightly once we implement some changes that we are testing out right now. Currently, aircraft are only rated for Bursts as a measure of their armaments. We are testing out some changes in which aircraft will be rated for Bursts and "Damage Bonus". Bursts will be more a measure of rate of fire, while "Damage Bonus" will be a measure of the destructive power of the gun when it hits. At a simplistic level, aircraft armed with lots of machine guns will tend to get higher Burst ratings, and aircraft armed with lots of cannons will tend to get higher "Damage Bonus" ratings. The Burst rating will work the same way it always has, i.e., it factors in to how many burst cards you can play. The "Damage Bonus" acts as a modifier to the damage value of a card. For example, an aircraft with a +1 Damage Bonus that successfully plays an "In My Sights 1-Burst: 2-Damage" would actually inflict 3 points of damage instead of 2. We think this will help differentiate the aircraft a bit, and make them more interesting to fly. For example, right now the Spitfire I and the Bf-109E are pretty much identical. The Spitfire I can take one additonal point of damage, but other than that they both have Burst rating of 1, Wingman Offense and Defense of 2, etc. Under the new system, the Spitfire I has a Burst rating of 2 and a Damage Bonus of -1. The Bf-109E has a Burst rating of 0 and a Damage Bonus of +1. In addition, the Spitfire has a Wingman Offense of 3 while the Bf-109E has a 2. These aircraft feel a lot different from each other when you fly them now. The Spitfire will be able to get in a lot more bursts, but will do less damage when he hits. The Bf-109E won't be able to fire as often, but when he hits it hurts. The Bf-110 will get a Burst rating of 1 and a Damage Bonus of +1. That will add a little sting when he hits, but his Performance rating still sucks, so he may not hit all that often. Hmm, does that mean if I have a IMS1:1 card for the Spitfire it will become useless, and the lowest damage the Me-109 will do will be 2? And theoretically, a Me-109 on my tail with Marksman could do a total of 4 bursts and could max out with 8 pts of damage using a OOTS3:4 and OOTS1:2? Not sure I like the changes but I'm willing to try anything. I've found that early on with low level pilots, especially those on the Allied sides, that if you take the Spoil Aim skill you can prevent any bursts against you, which is really effective angainst the Japanese side whose first 2 aircraft won't be able to fire on you until they are on your tail. So all you really have to do is prevent any manuevering against you. Aren't you worried that changing these types of basic abilities that you will severely hamper the ability to do any damage with low burst aircraft? Playing the early Japanese with 0 bursts makes it very difficult to shoot anything down, and I can see the same difficulty now with the Me-109, who may only be able to get 1 or 2 shot attempts which could be blocked easily by a handful of cards. What good is more damage if you can't hit, or get into position? Neutral as a position won't really mean anything. I'm just playing Devil's Advocate here, and throwing out some possible issues I could see popping up. I kind of like the system the way it is with maybe a little tweak here and there, and this seems like a rather large change. [ January 01, 2006, 04:50 PM: Message edited by: lakespeed ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bartbert Posted January 2, 2006 Share Posted January 2, 2006 This is all stuff that's being tested right now. I'm not really sure when it might see the light of day. We have already been making adjustments here and there as potential problems pop up, but I figured you guys might be interested in some of things being worked on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tornado Posted January 2, 2006 Share Posted January 2, 2006 Hi Brain - yes, we have been very interested. I DO like the idea of a damage bonus for certain aircraft. When flying something like the P-47 I felt a little "cheated" that a zero could inflict the same amount of damage as I did with the same card. It just didn't really seem right, but I accepted it. However, I agree with lakespeed in that making an IMS1:1 useless (by having a -1 damage "bonus") for certain aircraft is a very bad idea. I have flown low level aircraft that only get 1 or 2 shots in an entire mission - and more often then not it's an IMS1:1 card. Just throwing my 2 cents in. I'm half asleep now, so I'll probably have more to say later I know -just what you wanted to hear! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 Another minor error - this time apparently in hte graphic for a damaged Buffalo on hte campaign map - the background to the square it is in is white - I suspect it should be transparent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bartbert Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 Hmmm. That was found and fixed a couple of days after the Buffalo was initially released. Try checking for updates under the Help menu. If that doesn't fix the problem, I'll look into it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 Nothing new from update sorry - got hte big one yesterday hen I got back from holiday & jsut tried again. The 109B's in hte Greece campaign map show as the old yellow colour scheme too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fej425 Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 Just an FYI...I have also seen the problem with the background on the Buffalo. All updated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sixxkiller Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 Hi Tom, As punishment for your previous attempt at mutiny, the P-47 doesnt have cannons (in the new test). So the P-47 will not have any additional damage modeled. That is all... -Ray Originally posted by tornado: Hi Brain - yes, we have been very interested. I DO like the idea of a damage bonus for certain aircraft. When flying something like the P-47 I felt a little "cheated" that a zero could inflict the same amount of damage as I did with the same card. It just didn't really seem right, but I accepted it. However, I agree with lakespeed in that making an IMS1:1 useless (by having a -1 damage "bonus") for certain aircraft is a very bad idea. I have flown low level aircraft that only get 1 or 2 shots in an entire mission - and more often then not it's an IMS1:1 card. Just throwing my 2 cents in. I'm half asleep now, so I'll probably have more to say later I know -just what you wanted to hear! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tornado Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 Originally posted by Sixxkiller: Hi Tom, As punishment for your previous attempt at mutiny, the P-47 doesnt have cannons (in the new test). So the P-47 will not have any additional damage modeled. That is all... -Ray [/QB] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sixxkiller Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 LOL Tom, at the moment you ARE VMF-6 hehe. I will start playing ladder again soon though. And yes the P-47 has 8 browning .50 cal guns (thats 4 on each wing or 8 for you non math mofos) so having a cannon and extra dmg would be just a tad unrealistic. Then Stalin0 would be mad so i am sure its better not to go there! -Ray PS. Welcome back Stalin0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 Waht should I be mad about?? I missed something?? the 8 x 50's were a bit of overkill - jet fighters went to 2 x 20's or back to 6 x 50's, while no-one ever seems to have had problems with much smaller armaments like 2-3 HMG's or cannon only - the Russian Mig-15's and it's predecessors went to 2 x 23mm cannon for use vs fighters and 1 x 37mm for use against bombers all on one a/c. Remember the Zero had 2 x 20mm cannon, which does help firepower quite a bit, and hte Thundebolt has [cough]quite a bit of structure[/cough] than the Zero to reflect it's armour, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bartbert Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 Hey StalinsO, could you send an e-mail to difadmin@battlefront.com regarding the issue of the Buffalo and the Bf-109B images not being correct. I also wanted to discuss a couple of other things with you. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 Done Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts