HTC: The answer to our ditching problems!

[Jackal1]

Originally posted by Arlo
Jackal .... if elected I promise to maintain the status quo while I enjoy myself immensely at the taxpayer's expense. I won't even attempt to conceal the fact.

My mottos:

"Change is bad unless it's something I think needs changin'."

"Couldn't hoit!"

"You could do worse, yaknow. Probably have, if you think about it."

  Before we get you elected be sure to watch the 3 CD set training films narrated by Bill C. entitled " Of Interns and Cigars".

[Jackal1]

Originally posted by TBolt A-10

HT,
Just a suggestion...

...leave the messages as they are now, but count a "safe landing" as any landing that occurs within the boundaries of the airfield.  

.........Or he could just leave them as they are and when we come limping in for a landing and collapse a gear to go skidding off the runway, we could just stick another  pin into our "Dale" voodoo doll.   ......................Errrrrr rrrr ummmmmm........everyone does have one of them, don`t they?
.
.
.
.
. DOH! I just looked and I have been sticking the wrong doll. I`ve been using the "Roy" doll.
  That`s why I heard the leg broke off off Skuzz`s BBQ pit the last time he used it.

[TBolt A-10]

I hope I'm never your enemy, Jackal.  

[Mak333]

JB73 - its possible.  The questions is:  Is HTC capable of coding it?

[hitech]

And the real answere for why it is not changing.

Landing is suppose to be a goal, wanting to survive and make it back to base, and acctualy land on the runway is suppose to be a challeng. Making the area bigger just dimishises the reward for accomplishing a task. So those requesting bigger areas, are you saying you suck so bad , you can't even land your plane on a runway?

As to the fuel idea, how is screwing up and not saving gas to get back to base any different then getting damaged, infact shouldn't be the other way around?

Isn't it more of a chalange landing a plane with a missing wing piece on the base?

Vehicles are a different issue. I never have been able to come up with an solution Im happy with.

HiTech

[Mugzeee]

Not really HT.
I think it very challenging to land a plane on the grass at an feild that the NME is swarming. And it should be rewarded.
Why not got to another field? The HOARD these days are making that a rare option.
Sometimes when trying to get to another base after trying to defend the base followed by eminent capture you get cut off by 5 Rooks...oops...i mean 5 nme.
So you are forced into a hot landing at the NME caped base and PRONTO!!!
Making it inside the boundaries of the airfield and on the grass without damage to the AC would be very appropriately scored as a safe landing.
Not asking anything unreasonable in that scenario.

[hitech]

Ahh so Mugzeeee, Your saying you just want it to be easier .


HiTech

[Mugzeee]

No im not
see edit. LOL
...best to let Rooks just have at the MA at will. Why bother trying to defend till the last minute?
Thats what it has become anyway.
If Game Play isnt an issue any more..Just say so. And i will accept it.

[Jackal1]

Originally posted by hitech
Ahh so Mugzeeee, Your saying you just want it to be easier .


HiTech

[ply]

Reminds me,  when I started playing AW I would turn my plane off the runway like I learned when taking flying lessons. When I joined a squad Icy the CO was checking my score and asked me why I had so many ditches.

[Warp]

I think if you put your plane on the airfield at all, it should count as a successful flight, whether it is on the runway or not, as long as you are on the airfield.  I don't agree about ditching and then walking to base.  Being picked up by someone in a GV would be interesting though.

In real life, a pilot that wrecked his plane on landing because of damage, etc and lived was not penalized for his kills.  No one got in trouble because they tore up the belly of the plane because they had no landing gear, or only one, or half a wing...everyone was happy they even made it home alive.  

Maybe HT could add another dimension to the game...rescue units.  Send out a PT boat or an m16/m3 type vehicle to retrive downed pilots (if someone is so inclined)....very much like folks taking vehicle supplies out to his buddies during a GV fight.  I don't imagine that would be a difficult thing to do.

[Arlo]

Originally posted by Warp

In real life, a pilot that wrecked his plane on landing because of damage, etc and lived was not penalized for his kills.  No one got in trouble because they tore up the belly of the plane because they had no landing gear, or only one, or half a wing...everyone was happy they even made it home alive.  

Well now .... if a pilot never brought a plane back I'm sure there were other penalties that the game can't mimic. A desk transfer, for instance. And maybe a nickname "Lucky" - but luck only goes so far.

I think it's giving leeway that you can belly in your plane on the runway everytime and not get penalized for causing the squadron maintenance crews to have to devote 50% of their time on your planes alone.

[hitech]

Nice try mugzee, I dissagree with you and you 1. accuse me of not caring about game play and 2. Bring in the country number whine all in one sweep, I'd give it a 7.5.

HiTech

[vorticon]

yall should just be glad he doesnt make you taxi to a hanger

[TBolt A-10]

Originally posted by hitech
And the real answere for why it is not changing.

Landing is suppose to be a goal, wanting to survive and make it back to base, and acctualy land on the runway is suppose to be a challeng. Making the area bigger just dimishises the reward for accomplishing a task. So those requesting bigger areas, are you saying you suck so bad , you can't even land your plane on a runway?

As to the fuel idea, how is screwing up and not saving gas to get back to base any different then getting damaged, infact shouldn't be the other way around?

Isn't it more of a chalange landing a plane with a missing wing piece on the base?

Vehicles are a different issue. I never have been able to come up with an solution Im happy with.

HiTech

HT,
THANK YOU  for actively participating in this thread.  Your company's customer service has always been top-notch.

I figured that this was the concept that you were following when you designed the landing strategy for AH.  However, please realize that there are many times when we've flown 10+ minutes just to limp back to base on one engine, leaking fuel & oil, etc (sound like enough effort to achieve the goal you speak of?) and ended up losing the full value of several kills because the emergency landing didn't go quite right.  Now, step back to WW2...a damaged fighter plane returns to base with every desire to make it back safely - just as WE do in AH - and the plane skids off of the runway and into the grass within the airfield perimeter.  In real life, this WW2 fighter pilot would be awarded his kills and labelled a 'Hero' for getting the damaged bird back - whether he was on the runway, on a taxiway or the grass.

If you afforded us the same rewards for making the full effort to return - whether the landing was perfect or not - you would be mimicking real life in a sense.  Now, yes, there may be some people who abuse the larger landing area by making a quick 'ditch', but you know what -- these dweeb tards are already out there 'gaming-the-game' right now, and they will continue to cut corners in every way possible no matter how hard you try to control them.  But, by forcing a pavement landing, you're cheating those of us who deserve credit for making the full effort just so you can ineffectively control the gamers.
Who deserves your attention more - the harcore combat simmer or the dweeb gamer who will game-the-game anyway until he cancels his account because Doom 3 or Need For Speed - Bling bLiNg PimPin' in Da' HoOd Edition was just released?

P.S.: Oh, and HT...PLEASE take a second to read the GREEN portion of my signature, too.