Why are some people such dweebs?

[Fishu]

Kirin,

Idea is good, but planes like spitfires can take off after couple hundred yards of rolling.. and when you know you can as well crash while trying to strafe para or get killed by fighter, its almost same.
Too fast way to kill paras..

[Hristo]

How about paras firing back ?

[jarbo]

Hristo, right on the money there.......i would love to see paras firing back when their feet hit the ground.

Didn't HT disable the ground shoot option for B17s...couldn't he just do the same for the B26?

Jarbo
of the Buccaneers

[Hristo]

Thanks, Jarbo. Actually, I was even thinking that paras should be able to fire all the way, from the point they open chute until they hit the tower.

However, this might lead to some stupid tactics. C 47, spotted by a fighter, drops its paras and starts to circle around them, hoping they will hit attacking fighter.

Also, field defense C 47 could drop many paras on the runway and have multiple acks instantly.

Hmm, this needs thinking  

[pzvg]

Of course in WB there are runway craters, and
Fields can be closed. Result? fields could be taken by a couple of bombed up 190's
(personal experience) I think that a bombed runway should be usable by only short field fighters, which would stop buffs doing anything there. As for guns on paras, only on the ground, historically it was impossible to hit anything from a chute,
(personal experience again)
and the gameplay problems are self-evident,
And HT, maybe we could try bombed out fields
have only 25% fuel and ammo, which might make trying to defend from them highly unattractive (just an idea, if there's a hole in the logic, lemme know) I'd really like hardstands around the fields, hit all of them, and no planes are available at the field (even if bldgs and ack are still up)
a small field would have about 6-8 dispersal
areas, which would make it hard to get them without effort. The idea being not only could you close a field, but a combined strike could leave the closest enemy field
unable to sortie, which would finally make people think about base defense and give counter-air the role it was supposed to be filling. Now I have no freakin idea how hard that would be to code, so feel free to tell me to shut up and siddown   but hey, the internet was meant for exchanging ideas
(before the megacorps and porn sites buried it)  

------------------
pzvg- "5 years and I still can't shoot"

[blur]

There was a recent post that contained a film called Fishu vs. Daniko. The messages that appear in the text buffer may shed some light on the mysterious B-26 dweeb. I suggest we take him out behind the Rook HQ and beat the toejam out of him.  

[SC-Sp00k]

On many threads there are issues concerning the right and wrongs of aircraft FM's. Everyone wants perfection or the virtual sim realities of it with the aircraft.

But then we see these threads (some) which support the idea of open respawning fields.

We know that when a field has been neutralised in real life with something as devasting as a bombed runway that it can be repaired by support ground personnal. But aircraft in the meantime cannot use the runway until it is.

If we demand (wrong word but fits the theme ) perfection in the air with our FM's. It surely makes sense to be consistant when we apply it to whats happening on the ground.

So if the Dogfights occur to protect a field under attack them let them. An easy way of doing it without having to allow the field to be as good as it was had it not been attacked with aircraft allowed to use its runways, is to have the field damage time controlled.

Hence if the runway is nuked by an overhead bomber, like the Dars, the runway is unusable.

Yes I hear you say already this is the case. Fishu's suggestion then has merit. Split the multi runways into sections. Each with its own damage points. Extend the damage life of a runway.

Hence the defending fighters can still get off to defend the remaining runway/s and the attackers can still pursue their goal to close all runways and ultimately close the field.

Bombers on damaged runways have guns disables until wheels leave the ground and bombers on usuable runways have the ability to "shoot from the hip"

I also like the idea of secondary objectives given ie para's taking bridges to support land attacks.  This would allow better use of the rockets and ground attack weaponary.

Some AA guns and a mob of marauding 51's, some high cap over the attackers and inbounds intent on knocking them down and it'll be fun fun fun  

------------------
SC-Sp00k
Sqn Ldr
SSC
http://www.picknowl.com.au/homepages/oneshot/main.htm
**Its not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog.**
Skeleton Crew

[Phantom121]

Craters should prevent aircraft from from rolling through them.  However cratering a runway should not and does not close an airfield. All WWII aircraft were capable of taking off and landing on grass fields (and most did).  A perfectly good landing in the grass near a field should not be a ditch. Most lame is a fighter strafing a runway with guns and destroying it. A short delay before respawn at same field might help. But coordinated strafing has become very effective - I must salute the Rooks on their vulching prowness.  I like defending bases to the bitter end and used to be able to get off the ground and kill a few attackers at least once out of 3 tries but lately I hace not been able to launch even after 15 or more tries.  No more for me.  If heavily capped - I will go to nearly by base and attack from altitude.  Coming down on group of fighters "capping a field" makes multiple kill sorties much easier.