Air field Fuel Targets (Porking fuel)

[mars01]

Up to this point you make zero sense so I'll let that go.

And you could not state any of this before? you had to jump in push your chest out. WTF

Figured this was common knowledge.  Where did I push my chest out.  Saying your wrong.  So Sorry.

People can fight with 25%, People can fight with whatever they have in there hand, People can. Now perhaps it changes odds, makes things more difficult to do so, and not nearly as easy or fun, but bottom line they can. This is however a game, that grows profits from the individuals that play it. People play it because the "enjoy doing so". Now if there was an element that HTC identified has hindering people from that enjoyment I can understand the change. It does not improve the strategic element of the game at all.

Spin it any way you want.  When the fuel was porked across a front, many people would log off.  That is no fun.

As for the whole strategery thing, if one side has the numbers they are going to be taking the fields.

What part of the fuel model did they change?

They increased the Fuel burn rate from 1.5 to 2 to try and make people use the new engine management features.

[JRCrow]

Originally posted by mars01
Pass judgment on who? you?

I disagreed with your statement making it the furballers fault for the fuel and you jumped all over me.

I have nothing against you Crow, (other than you total lack of spelling ).  I disagree with the fuel whine and blaming the Furballers.

You have taken this thing into some personal realm and gotten all bent.  If me disagreeing with you makes me a salamander so be it.  This is just some silly BB and nothing else.  Don't take things so seriously.  




 BTW - My tone would be just the same.  I have yet to turn down handing out a good ole prettythang kickin.  And you think I'm  outa line and you are taking this into a phsyical fight hahahaha.  Take your prozak and relax.

"I said fuel pork sucks"

"I said it doesn't"

"Let's fight"   HAHAHAHAHAHA

    While I do agree my spelling sucks,

   You do not thin you made it personal when you told me to grow a pair of balls.  C'mon Mars.

    Did I say I was going to beat your prettythang? no,  I merely stated that in person I am sure you would talk differently.  I am sure I walked up to you on the street, jumped into a conversation, and the first words out of my mouth were "Grow a pair of balls" I am sure you would react, as that is total inappropriate, I think you know that.  A far cry from "Sounds like furballers got bent".  Which is not specifically directed at any one person at all.

     The statement "sounds like", though spelling may be off meaning is the same, "Sounds like" is an unknown statement of uncertainty.  Perhaps you took it the wrong way.  Perhaps the "Fragility" of people in this forum works both ways.

[JRCrow]

Originally posted by mars01
Up to this point you make zero sense so I'll let that go.
 Figured this was common knowledge.  Where did I push my chest out.  Saying your wrong.  So Sorry.

That might be beacuse it all got started on the wrong foot,
If you read your begining statements objectively I am sure you will see it.

Originally posted by mars01
 Spin it any way you want.  When the fuel was porked across a front, many people would log off.  That is no fun.[/B]

No fun, that is what I am gathering from this conversation, that is end point and result.  Thanks..

Originally posted by mars01
As for the whole strategery thing, if one side has the numbers they are going to be taking the fields.[/B]

Thats a whole nother debate.  

Originally posted by mars01
They increased the Fuel burn rate from 1.5 to 2 to try and make people use the new engine management features. [/B]

Good info, thanks again...

    Mars you came out with some really good info that no one else has yet in this forum, Ironically thats what a I was looking for here, and it helps me to understand some of the changes. Now I can make beeter sense of it.  Whish we did not have to go through all that other crap to get here.  Maybe next time.

[straffo]

Originally posted by JRCrow
    People can fight with 25%,  

Wrong ,I can just barely take off when having 6 minutes total flight time.

[DipStick]

Originally posted by JRCrow
Mars you are not sorry to get my patties in a bunch

There's some sig material for you beet1e! Too funny..

[JRCrow]

Originally posted by straffo
Wrong ,I can just barely take off when having 6 minutes total flight time.

  Sometimes again "Sometimes" that’s all ya need when they are knocking on your front door.  6 minutes of flight is still more than no flight at all.  Other times it sucks depending on the aircraft you are using i really sucks.  I realize that 25% in AH2 in not what 25% was in AH1.  That point was relayed to me which puts the situation in a different light.
 
   Bottom line as stated before is game play.  People do not enjoy playing the game with 25%.  Thus things changed.  That is the way I see it anyway.
   
   I do not wish to get into a silly semantics conversation, but when I say you can fight with 25% I guess I am just being optimistic.  If optimism is wrong, then I am guilty.  On many occasions we (as a country) have rose to the occasion when a challenged has ben set before us.  Though these days we usually have the upper hand, the entire WW2 era is filled with such occasions.

   I do not expect them to change the fuel settings from what they are now.  This conversation started with me not having all the facts.  Now I have a better understanding of what is going on.  While I think 50% may be more appropriate then 25% Like Mars said why HTC chose 75% over 50% only HTC know.

[straffo]

If you want to taste the effect of the 25% go offline get a Yak9U with 25% shot all the drones and land.

Good luck

[RDRTrash]

When the fields were porked down to 25%, you might not have gotten to fly the glitzy fighters, but A6M, P47D11, and P51D were perfectly viable aircraft.  But the true weapon to turn the tides in those situations was bombers, something that very few furballers grasp as plausible.  

It doesn't matter except for this: HTC wanted to make it funner for the furballers, and he changed it.  I respect that as a business decision.  But the change went too far the other way.  Now, when you look up at a base that the enemy has capped, you can count on them NOT running out of fuel.

[phookat]

Why would you want the enemy to run out of fuel in a multiplayer game?

The real effect of the AH2 change is that it makes capturing a base more difficult.  Isn't that better?  More of a challenge, say?

[mars01]

Grow a pair stop looking for the easy fuel pork way out, stop trying to ruin the fun for others and just pork barracks or FH. Gets you the same affect, you precious base can't be taken if there are no troops. Nuf said

Ahh you were offended by the Grow a Pair.  Then I do apologize, but yes I would have said this in open conversation.  I guess a nicer way to have said this would have been "Suck it Up"

My point is this game is about the journey not the end result.  It's about the fight not who died and who flew on.  It's about making it against hard odds to your target and dropping your ord.  It's about fighting for an hour over a base not who finally took it.  It's about the entertainment.  So if it is more difficult to do things this only heightens the journey.

The fuel situation stopped most of the above from happening.  When fuel was porked to 25% across a front the journey was over for many.

By not being able to pork fuel those that just want to fight can and those that want to bomb still can.  

I agree it does mean there will be more resistance but isn't this game all about resistance.  It forces people to organize rather than two guys in 51s crippling a fields ability to fight.

The current fuel situation gives better balance and creates more fighting.  I'm all for that.

[mars01]

When the fields were porked down to 25%, you might not have gotten to fly the glitzy fighters, but A6M, P47D11, and P51D were perfectly viable aircraft. But the true weapon to turn the tides in those situations was bombers, something that very few furballers grasp as plausible.

Wrong Wrong Wrong.

If you are defending a base most of the time you are outnumbered by the attacking force.  You are not going to defend a base using a P47 or a P51 unless you were able to up 4 mins before they got there and even then your chances are slim and won't be timely.  You will have a chance in a Zeke but you aren't catching anything.  So as base defense goes, if these are my only three options you can have the base.  

If you are telling me I need to up bombers so you don't kill the fuel that is a joke.  I'm not here to fly bombers I'm here to fight.  Something some folks have a hard time understanding.

It doesn't matter except for this: HTC wanted to make it funner for the furballers, and he changed it. I respect that as a business decision.

So basically you think this is some kind of furball conspiracy. I wish the lobby had that much pull. Making this assumption and stating it like a fact shows true ignorance about this subject.

But the change went too far the other way. Now, when you look up at a base that the enemy has capped, you can count on them NOT running out of fuel.

If you really want to take a base, you either have to cap the field or kill the hangers.  Any squad or group that was worth their weight and any good never hit the fuel.   Fuel porking is and thank god was for the weak.

[RDRTrash]

If you are telling me I need to up bombers so you don't kill the fuel that is a joke. I'm not here to fly bombers I'm here to fight. Something some folks have a hard time understanding.

I reiterate:  
But the true weapon to turn the tides in those situations was bombers, something that very few furballers grasp as plausible.

So basically you think this is some kind of furball conspiracy.

That's not what I said, I said that HTC made a business decision, based on the fact that a good portion of his customers are "furballers".

If you really want to take a base, you either have to cap the field or kill the hangers. Any squad or group that was worth their weight and any good never hit the fuel. Fuel porking is and thank god was for the weak.

Some of this is accurate.  Some reflects shallow thought, but since it is a blanket statement, I'll gloss the deficiencies over because the thrust seems to be that if you intended to capture a base it was foolish to destroy the fuel first, which is true.

...and stating it like a fact shows true ignorance about this subject.

Is this a personal attack, Mars???  Seems you have a history of making personal attacks.

I'm not here to fly bombers I'm here to fight.

This is classic furballer mentality.  Not that it's wrong or anything, but just clearly defined furballer mentality.  The error in thought is that if you are flying a bomber, you are not "fighting", when in reality the bomber pilots are contributing equally if not more than the fighter pilots are; the difference is even more obvious in AH2 btw.

Any squad or group that was worth their weight and any good never hit the fuel.

Any squad or group that was worth their weight and any good could capture a base without capping it.

[phookat]

Originally posted by RDRTrash
I reiterate:  
But the true weapon to turn the tides in those situations was bombers, something that very few furballers grasp as plausible.

Can you explain what you mean in the context of the AH strat game?  The "situation" I presume refers to having your fuel porked.  As a player on the defending team, what are you going to do with a bomber that will "turn the tides"?

[mars01]

That's not what I said, I said that HTC made a business decision, based on the fact that a good portion of his customers are "furballers".

Do you have proof to support this as fact, that he made the decision because of the furballers.  If so please produce it.  Just because we are one of the groups that benefits does not mean we were the impetus for his decision.  I think a lot of the community as a whole disliked the imbalance of fuel porking and thats why he went with 75% rather than 50%.  But again it is my assumption, not fact.

But the true weapon to turn the tides in those situations was bombers, something that very few furballers grasp as plausible.

What are you saying to combat fuel pork take a bomber and kill the other bases fuel.  Don't you see how all you are doing is stopping the fight.  That sucks and it's not that I don't grasp it, I'm not going to do it.

Is this a personal attack, Mars??? Seems you have a history of making personal attacks.  

My god is everyone so dam sensitive in this thread.  On the contrary trash.  I am attacking what you wrote.  I have alot of respect for the USMC and enjoy flying with and against you guys.  So no this is not a personal attack.  I didn't say you were ignorant, I said, "To think that HTC changed the fuel situation because of the furballers is ignorant no way around it."  I don't have a history of making personal attacks.  Some people need everything candy coated, not my style.

From what I could gather, the real reason it changed is because HTC changed the fuel burn model and had to change the fuel pork model because now you can't do anything with 25% fuel. Thus HT moved it to 75%. His reasons why 75% and not 50% are his own.

This is classic furballer mentality. Not that it's wrong or anything, but just clearly defined furballer mentality. The error in thought is that if you are flying a bomber, you are not "fighting", when in reality the bomber pilots are contributing equally if not more than the fighter pilots are; the difference is even more obvious in AH2 btw.

You are saying it is wrong, otherwise there isn't an error in thought.  You are correct, there is no error in thought, we just have different goals.  I am talking Air Combat and you know that.  Flying a bomber is not Air to Air combat.  It is Air to Ground and does impact the "War Effort".
And when you are talking about the "War Effort", I couldn't give a crap.  I and many others don't care about the reset.  Big freaking deal.  It has been proven the main deciding factor in winning the war is numbers, plain and simple.  The funny thing is that no fuel porking reduces the ability of the country with the numbers to stop the other countries from defending themselves and thus minimizes the impact of numerical superiority and evens things out a bit better.

I am here to get in a fighter and fight other pilots.  So when you say "But the true weapon to turn the tides in those situations was bombers".  In regards to me you  are wrong because my goal is not to "Win the War" it is to get into AtoA fights during the few hours I have to fly.  I could care less about turning the tides, I just want to ride the waves  

When people pork fuel they are stopping the fight.  When fuel is porked across your countries whole front then the fighting is over and so is this game.  People that want to return to fuel porking want to stop the fight so they can easily take a base or not have to up fighters to defend their own base.  In either case they don't want to fight.

Any squad or group that was worth their weight and any good could capture a base without capping it.

Yeah if it's totally undefended.  Gee thats fun.  Sign me up lol:D .  If you have one guy upping you need to have someone capping.

I have nothing against the War guys.  That's their thing and thats cool.  I even participate once in a blue moon lol.  What I have a problem with are the guys that have a problem with people that just want to furball.  When people make derogatory statements about furballing ( Air Quake ) or say HTC changed things just for furballers, then that tells me they have a problem with us.

[JRCrow]

Originally posted by straffo
If you want to taste the effect of the 25% go offline get a Yak9U with 25% shot all the drones and land.

Good luck

I use to do it alot in AH1, though I am sure it would be a bit worse now.