Thanks
Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2001 7:31 pm
A very merry Christmas season to all . . . and special thanks to Jeremy (Major Tom), Rich, Ken and any/all other volunteers that continue to work to keep Pacwar fresh and playable. I'm looking forward to the 2.3 patch.
I was scanning a year's worth of posts on the Pacwar discussion board the other day and three items caught my eye:
1. Ken had recalibrated naval and AA gun factors.
2. Jeremy was experimenting with the use of minefields in the game.
3. There was a lively discussion on the range/load of American heavy bombers.
I hope the 2.3 patch can incorporate Ken's recalculations, especially since they offer the prospect that when 200+ airplanes strike a 1944-45 task force, a few bombers might actually survive the AA fire. It is probably too much to hope that a workable mine system can be incorporated, but I tip my hat to Jeremy for recognizing how important mines were.
I enjoyed reading the furious debate on B17/24/29 values. I noticed Ken's post (Feb 10, 2001) calculated that the B17s normal load should be about 30, which seems about right. So I was surprised to see the B17 get a bomb rating of 55 -- much greater than a B24 and nearly the same as a B29 -- in the proposed v2.3 aircraft ratings. Could the B17 actually carry nearly as much as a B29 on a normal-range mission? That seems counter-intuitive.
I was scanning a year's worth of posts on the Pacwar discussion board the other day and three items caught my eye:
1. Ken had recalibrated naval and AA gun factors.
2. Jeremy was experimenting with the use of minefields in the game.
3. There was a lively discussion on the range/load of American heavy bombers.
I hope the 2.3 patch can incorporate Ken's recalculations, especially since they offer the prospect that when 200+ airplanes strike a 1944-45 task force, a few bombers might actually survive the AA fire. It is probably too much to hope that a workable mine system can be incorporated, but I tip my hat to Jeremy for recognizing how important mines were.
I enjoyed reading the furious debate on B17/24/29 values. I noticed Ken's post (Feb 10, 2001) calculated that the B17s normal load should be about 30, which seems about right. So I was surprised to see the B17 get a bomb rating of 55 -- much greater than a B24 and nearly the same as a B29 -- in the proposed v2.3 aircraft ratings. Could the B17 actually carry nearly as much as a B29 on a normal-range mission? That seems counter-intuitive.