Increase cost of 163

[Roundeye]

Those things are waaaay too cheap.  To the point of ruining gameplay.  It's O.K. when used for it's intended purpose (high alt rapid intercept of bombers).  But it is so abused in the MA.  It's bad enough being in a furball keeping your head on a swivel, then here comes a 163 at 600mph+    Doesn't take a whole lot of skill to scream in at warp speed on someone who is already engaged.   May as well throw in a F-16 Falcon to match.

Tonight, I saw a pile of 163s doing just that.  262s are bad enough, but not that hard to shoot down (or get them to auger or pull their wings off )  But 163s BNZing engaged fighters is just over the line.

I'd like to see them go away but the  would never end.  They were used very little in the war in real life anyway.

At least increase the cost to 500-1000 points so they are harder to get and the abuse should decrease.

[Spikes]

I wouldn't say 1000 perks...more like 400-600.

[Roundeye]

I wouldn't say 1000 perks...more like 400-600.

I could deal with that.  Anything that might help cut down the misuse.

[ian5440]

Those things are waaaay too cheap.  To the point of ruining gameplay.  It's O.K. when used for it's intended purpose (high alt rapid intercept of bombers).  But it is so abused in the MA.  It's bad enough being in a furball keeping your head on a swivel, then here comes a 163 at 600mph+    Doesn't take a whole lot of skill to scream in at warp speed on someone who is already engaged.   May as well throw in a F-16 Falcon to match.

Tonight, I saw a pile of 163s doing just that.  262s are bad enough, but not that hard to shoot down (or get them to auger or pull their wings off )  But 163s BNZing engaged fighters is just over the line.

I'd like to see them go away but the  would never end.  They were used very little in the war in real life anyway.

At least increase the cost to 500-1000 points so they are harder to get and the abuse should decrease.

im not sure because if 163's are coming into a furball, that team must have been getting beat so bad the fight is near the HQ so i think it isnt as bad that the 163 shows up to at least hault the "invasion".
im glad HTC only let the 163 come out of the base closest to HQ
163 piss me off but i think they are fine as is

[BaldEagl]

   I was porking the other team near their HQ and got shot down by a 163.   

I've got a better recommendation.  Don't get so close to enemy HQ.  It's not required to meet the 40%.  The 163 is already incredibly limited.

[AirFlyer]

I'd rather see the game force the gear off, that way people can taxi it half way across the map and it would stay in its intended area of use.

[lyric1]

One base, giant map, if it was your country that had 163 access I doubt we would see this post. So no perk point is enough for how little we use them. How about this idea don't fly near a 163 base?

[Wingnutt]

im not sure because if 163's are coming into a furball, that team must have been getting beat so bad the fight is near the HQ so i think it isnt as bad that the 163 shows up to at least hault the "invasion".
im glad HTC only let the 163 come out of the base closest to HQ
163 piss me off but i think they are fine as is

ive seen people.... who shall rename nameless..

up a 163, not drop the "gear".. fly it gently with flaps to another base.. re-fuel.. fly some more... refuel..  till they get a LONG way from the HQ base.. then wreak havoc at a furball.

yea, yea,, its gamey as all hell.. but it can be done, so it will be.. just like so many other things in this increasingly gamey game..

hell, i remember when bomb craters in the runway.. ACTUALLY DAMAGED AIRCRAFT THAT RAN OVER THEM... but that was removed becaue the quake players cried too much I guess..

now you just used your auto-takeoff.. then your autoclimb.. then autoloeve..fly in to the fulball with your stall limiter on... HO everyone withing D1.0 .. get killed, do it again...

[Lusche]

I'd rather see the game force the gear off, that way people can taxi it half way across the map and it would stay in its intended area of use.

And how often you see someone doing this?
I'm one of that no-life >120h/month players and in the last 3 years I have witnessed such things maybe 3 or 4 times only. I have done it myself one time to see if I can, but while I love flying the 163 I found it to be too much waste of time to repeat it regulary.

Staying away from HQ and 163 base reliably saves me from getting shot down by them.

[AAolds]

A 163 complaint!      They are only available at one base.  I'd support raising the perk cost if they were available at all medium and large airfields.

[Rich46yo]

I dont mind getting shot down by them. I am tired of getting rammed by them. Thus I dont fly HQ runs anymore. I aint about to spend 1 hour flying bombers to an HQ to get rammed 3 times by 13yos in 27 perk crotch rockets.

I dont see much enthusiasm for HQ runs anyway. I suspect having to see dozens of these silly things zinging around at 550 mph has something to do with it.

As weapons systems go I'll bet the Germans got more results from their trenching shovels then they did from these silly rocket planes.

[whiteman]

my money is your rook and it was bish 163's. wish i would have thought to up them instead of P-40s.

[SD67]

If you get your landing right you can rearm a 163 on it's skid.
I remember when bomb craters actually DID something, I miss it
In 3.5years I've NEVER seen a 163 flying with it's gear on.
If you really really don't want to see a 163 stay away from the HQ.
HQ is fixed in 3 goons time.
'nuff said.

[Ghosth]

And wingnut, do you have any idea what kind of planning, patience, and stick skills are required to work a 163 from a rear base to a forward furball?

Its not easy by any stretch of the imagination.
Yes its possibly gaming the game a bit, but then most of us do that in one way or another.

In order to be able to land, taxi, rearm, and takeoff you have to keep the wheels on. If you exceed 300 mph you'll damage the wheels. In which case you've just wasted your perks for nothing. If someone catch's you landing, or on the runway your toast, burnt toast.

The risks are high, the cost is high, I really don't see or hear of these being abused often enough to justify changing it.

[Masherbrum]

And wingnut, do you have any idea what kind of planning, patience, and stick skills are required to work a 163 from a rear base to a forward furball?

Its not easy by any stretch of the imagination.
Yes its possibly gaming the game a bit, but then most of us do that in one way or another.

In order to be able to land, taxi, rearm, and takeoff you have to keep the wheels on. If you exceed 300 mph you'll damage the wheels. In which case you've just wasted your perks for nothing. If someone catch's you landing, or on the runway your toast, burnt toast.

The risks are high, the cost is high, I really don't see or hear of these being abused often enough to justify changing it.

Ditto.