Why are some people such dweebs?

[MarkVZ]

I see rooks moving in on bish 21, so I grab a fighter to defend.  Right in front of me is this B26 sitting on the runway waiting for someobdy to pop up. (lyijy)  I get shot down numerous times before I can even roll.  There was a goon inbound, and I knew the B26's nose ammo is extinguished quickly, so I keep trying.  No time to launch from another base.  Finally I taxi over and blow this dweeb to bitts, and we intercept the goon.  This person then whines that he had to do it because it's too easy to strafe troops.  
  I would like to see either the ability to select which end of the runway you start on, or disabling the enemies guns on the ground when on another field.  I see nothing wrong with vulching, but this was just lame.


------------------
Mark VanZwoll
33rd Strike Group

[Fishu]

What I know, we are missing field closure here.
You can bomb every single building out of field but still one guy can come up numerous times and shoot troopers while rolling up (not even several CAP fighters can prevent that)

So I ask, where from you get your unlimited planes from potato field and how do you suddenly raise from death in matter of seconds? thats kind of BS also.

More field captures than I can remember, have end up short just because 1-3 guys comes up below 10 CAP planes and kills +30 paratroopers while *STILL* rolling on the field.
Thats not any fairer either against attacker, why should we give fair times for defender which uses his own abuse of unlimited planes?

IMO, I wan't to be able to close field and fast! we get over this vulch / c47 / defending problem..

One of my suggestions is to split runway into three parts, and when one is destroyed, one class of fighters is disabled at the field (when all 3 parts gone, field is officially closed)

[v355_Spike]

Ya i agree. When a field is totally blasted, dont seem right that the guys can just keep taking off.

Seems like after a particular amout of damage field should be inactive. If guys what to defend, they gotta fly over to it.

My 2cents, Let's Flyyyyyyy

------------------
SgtSpike
v355 Fighter Group
Steeple Morden Strafers

[Minotaur]

I have thought about this a few times as I vulched the same person for 5th time.

I suppose at this piont it has more to do with testing the game / server, than gameplay.

Mino

[MarkVZ]

I agree with the field closure thing, I just didn't see the realism in some uberbuff sitting on our runway blasting planes as they came up.  Have you ever heard of this happening in real life?  In real life fighters wouldnt keep taxiing to a place right in front of him to take off!  This is why I think we should be able to select the end of the runway, (or which runway for bomber fields) to take off from.  To close a field, however, should take alot (and I mean alot) of bombs, maybe 10,000lbs like at the HQ, directed at the runways or something.  We should be able to crater the runway, so that planes can not roll over it without collapsing their gear. (Ever see a P51 taxi over a 20 foot deep hole?)
  However I still believe that a properly capped field will get taken over.  Setting up some sort of vulching pattern for these 10 fighters would ensure nobody gets rolling.  Also, it has alot to do with the 47 pilot.  I laugh when I see a 47 try to capture our feilds, dropping their troops from 5,000 feet.  When I fly goon misions, I go on the deck and try to land right next to the map room to release, also trying to put my plane between the fighters and my men, so that by the time they kill me my men are already there.  I think the main problem here is not that troops are too easily killed, but the lack of strategy and organization on the part of the team trying to capture the base.  

------------------
Mark VanZwoll
33rd Strike Group

[Hangtime]

Yup.. Mino I think you are right regarding the current system being used as a yardstick for server testing. At least I hope thats why we have the current situation. Hate to think that this situation will continue much longer now that the trike geared AC are showing up.

Seems that the 'strategic' implications of not having the ability to fully close the field are aggravating to the nth degree to the players that enjoy that aspect. I've flown several perfectly executed C47 missions that failed now that the B26 is there; parked, slashing the troops to ribbons as they touch down.

On the other hand; I've on many (too many)occasions 'parked' my p51 in a close figure eight pattern over the end of the runway, rolling into the 'tactical' aspect of runway supression; destroying the poor souls desperately trying to reup and save their field.

This is not nearly as enjoyable as a good hard fight in the canyons; or defending bombers or running a high cap... and multiple kills obtained by gunning stationary fighters leaves me feeling uncomfortable. It is however, absolutley necessary for strategic success.. can't capture the field without it as the sim stands now.

My guess is it will change.. I hope soon.

Hang



------------------
PALE HORSES
"I looked, and behold; a Pale Horse, and it's riders name was Death, and Hell followed with him" Rev 6.8

[lister]

Actually, I got blasted by the exact same guy when going up at a field today, also in a B26, and I just thought 'Hmm, nice idea'   I was fairly POed at the time because both rooks and bishops were allied and destroying the knight resistance of an awesome 6 people, but it was still a smart idea.

Later on today, a co-ordinated attempt to take a rook field ended in failure when a rook N1K popped up and killed a troop before we could get him. Makes me want to try the B26 strategy myself.

Field closures would be nice, either that or having pilots have to run to the runway from the tower in order to take off... let's see how THEY like being strafed (G)



------------------
lister

XO, Red Dragons
(Aces High Division)

 http://www.reddragons.de

[HaHa]

HT likes the fields staying open and I agree with him. The reason it is good, is due to the fact that HUGE furballs tend to occur at these fields when they can't be closed. i.e. upwards of 20-30 planes. If they could be closed then any smoe with a b17/b26 and another smoe with a c47 could capture a field.. that is very dull.

However, I do think it could be improved and have mentioned time and time again the implementation of a plane attrition system. i.e. 50 p51s, 40 spits, etc.. available at a field and the "queue" regenerates at a certain rate.. if the attacker destroys enough planes from that field then no more planes will be available (until they are regenerated 1 at a time, regeneration rate "could" be affected by bombing aircraft factories etc..). This would stop everyone from flying uber planes.. but HTC doesn't seem to like the idea  

[BBGunn]

If a field has been captured all remaining defending pilots should get in the 'joy bus' (hehe) a go to another friendly field.  Recapture efforts starting from another field makes sense but not planes popping up over and over on the already blitzed one.  That's dis-knee land stuff.

[bod]

Saw this dude just a few minutes ago doing it again.  

When people are shooting the planes just as they pop up, then there won't be much furballing going on, and the server test have therefore failed due to this.

Something should be done to prevent it.

Bod

[Dinger]

Um.
"Real Life" arguments. DOn't work.  The "proper field capture" strategy has about as much to do with RL™ as parking at the respawn point, or traditional vulching.

[Pongo]

I dont like the park the b26 trick either. But they are vulnerable to bombs... And it is perfectly reasonable considering the game the way it is designed.
But...
Paras should capture bridges
Bridges should lead to objectives.
Objectives should be caputured by ground troops.
Ground troops should be supported or greatly aided by air supperiority
Air supperiority is ensured by heavily capped and suppressed air bases.

HTC knows all this but they are doing the best they can.  They are of course focusing on the fighter game. And in the absence of infanty to take ground(bases) the fighters and now bombers are used as infantry.
The marauder should have its nose guns turned off on the ground I would say, but that in itself is kind of a fudge.

[Kirin]

quick & easy solution to the problem:

Disable guns on all aircrafts that are on the ground. Keeps B26 from sitting at the respawn point and defenders from shooting paras while still on ground. What you think?

There nothing wrong with vulching and there nothing wrong with strafing paras *WHILE AIRBORNE*


Kirin out

[Cobra]

One thing to consider when arguing against the continual re-spawning at a capped base..

The other side of the coin would then dictate that the attackers..once shot down by the defenders cannot re-spawn from their base as well.  I know some will argue that the attackers have to travel a distance and all that, so the defenders already enjoy some sort of an advantage.  But if taken to its logical conclusion then once an attacker is shot down, he should not be able to re-up so quickly to re-join the attack.

I believe we should be able to close the bases.  I also believe that 1 bomber should not be able to close the base as it is now. I also believe the ack should be a little less accurate but more plentiful so that higher alt ack is added and more lower stuff, including .50 cal machine nests.

So yes, have the ability to close a base, but also have the ability to thin out the ranks of the attackers, or at least make them divert resources from another battle area.  I think then you will see folks have the incentive to live through a sortie instead of flying and shooting until they are dead, and then just go get another plane.  It should be for both sides, attackers and defenders.

I am one of those guys that defends a base to the bitter end..continually re-spawning (stupid competitive streak hates to loose any kind of ground).  But I would welcome the ability to close a base and to inflict attrition on the attackers as well.

The B-26 thing that started this thread, I have experienced it...from the same person..I was releasing paras from a capped field (barracks were still up).  I myself don't know if the para thing is a lame move or not...still debating that one (but leaning that it is a bit gamey), so I cannot say the 26 move is dweebish.  What is dweebish is to complain about any kind of "gaming" behavior if you are also blurring the lines with a move like the 26 runway move.

------------------
Member of the Flying Elvis's...AH's most elite parachute team...

[bloom25]

I agree with most of you.  If you destroy everything at a field, why should a figher be able to take off at the last minute, fly for 20 seconds, and ruin all the planning that went into a mission.  Fields should be closed after everything is destroyed.