The IL

[Kweassa]

It is actually absolutely relevant.  It puts the lie to your claim a single IL can easily hold up an entire column of tanks by itself and is therefore unbalancing.

And you assume K/D is an adequate indicator as to how Il-2s are not very impressive against GVs, which shows your total lack of comprehension in this matter. I could go kamikaze one GV at a time for 5~6 times straight and I'll be able to hold off as 5~6 GVs approaching the base alone. Woop-dee-too, the K/D's probably abysmal, but who the fek cares. The job's done.

Unless the tanks are heading to the field rather than the town, an IL-2 pilot will take a good 2-3 minutes from upping just to get into position for his first run.  According to the statistics, he will take out one tank, and then die. If the enemy tank column is Wirby/Osti heavy, he may not even do that.  Then it is another 2-3 minutes to take off, climb, and set up his next run.

So?

With the possible exception of a very well coordinated GV mission led by dedicated GV squadrons, the gross majority of GV assaults to a base is participated by around 5~10 average people with mixed GV compositions with variances in priorities, GV positioning, and skill level. Leave the Wirbs/Osts alone, target the most unprotected tanks one by one, and every GV destroyed in that manner is another person set back to the spawn. The initial grouping of GVs are scattered every 2-3 minutes a single IL-2 makes flight, and after that it just gets easier and easier.

From spawn to the town takes on average 12~15 minutes drive. Repeat the 2-3 minute process for five times and effectively, enemy tanks are decimated and sent back to the spawn, which leaves only the AA GVs around the town, at which point another player can simply up a single tank and stop all of them. Or, if enemy GV players are frustrated by the repeated assault and simply quit upping tanks, you can land the IL-2 and do it on your own.

If that kind of a pattern can stop a "hefty" column of tanks, then the tankers have no clue what they are doing, which is no fault of the IL-2.

Right. Pit up the mediocre IL-2 pilots against the best case GV drivers "who have a clue". Why not the opposite? What happens if you pit some IL-2 pilots who have a clue? You still think the K/D means anything?

Now, can he keep popping the M-3 before getting slaughtered, thereby preventing a base capture?  Sure!  But then, so can any number of cannon armed aircraft, so the IL-2 is nothing special in this regard.

Hence, another stupid remark.

You up IL-2 to stop tanks from reaching the town and destroying it, so you don't have to worry about scurrying M-3s in the first place... and also, to protect the VH and the field from getting overrun, at which point there would be "no number of cannon armed aircraft" since they can't get up.

I still do not see any imbalance that the IL-2 brings that does not have a counter-balance.

That's because you view balance as a "skill" or "performance" issue, when in fact it has nothing to do with how "skillful" a pilot is, nor how well a certain plane "performs" in the K/D sense.

It's only about how the game is played, and how certain ordnance type breaks it.

[Kweassa]

Sounds like the only reason you kept the base is that the attacking force didn't have any air cover to keep the IL2s down.  I seriously doubt you would have kept the base if the opposition had a CAP in place.

ack-ack

VHs down, field overrun, and even CAP over the field.

A total vulch session in place... and only when that happens, the IL-2 can be stopped.

Good argument.

[E25280]

And you assume K/D is an adequate indicator as to how Il-2s are not very impressive against GVs, which shows your total lack of comprehension in this matter. I could go kamikaze one GV at a time for 5~6 times straight and I'll be able to hold off as 5~6 GVs approaching the base alone. Woop-dee-too, the K/D's probably abysmal, but who the fek cares. The job's done.

<Snip>

It's only about how the game is played, and how certain ordnance type breaks it.

I comprehend just fine.  You have misplaced your disdain for suicidal tactics by the players to the airframe itself.

With the possible exception of a very well coordinated GV mission led by dedicated GV squadrons, the gross majority of GV assaults to a base is participated by around 5~10 average people with mixed GV compositions with variances in priorities, GV positioning, and skill level.

Oh, no!  The attack must be coordinated for it to succeed!  The HORROR!     Please, you really think it is a better situation to have 2-3 tankers camping airfields with impunity when the ords are down?

This is no different than a single player upping (plane of choice) against 5-10 average flyers, kamakaze HOing them one by one, forcing them to re-up at their far away base for the long flight back to the fight.  That you can attrit an opposing force and string them out is not confined to GVs.


You seem to have a complaint against a certain type of game play, in which the player is allowed to up ad nauseum against an attack, using suicide tactics to break it up.  That happens irrespective of plane type.  So, I will repeat:  I do not see any advantage to the IL-2 that does not have an easy counter-balance, ergo, I see no reason for a perk.  All your blather aside, you have not refuted this point.  Take another try.

[Anaxogoras]

I think the real difference with the new Il-2 is that it completely blunts the weapon of taking out vh+ords.

[Bronk]

I think the real difference with the new Il-2 is that it completely blunts the weapon of taking out vh+ords.

And that is precisely why it was "upgraded".   Way to many pork and auger then roll gv with impunity pre 1337 IL-2.

[Rich46yo]

Right now the AH staff/planners have to build on this momentum and further enhance the land war, which would further enhance the over-all air war.

Yesterday I was flying around in M-8 Greyhounds taking out M-3s, M-16s, and WWs. I found myself yearning for M-8 speeds attached to a large High Vel tank killing gun, we need a Tank Destroyer in the game. TDs would further balance armored actions by allowing armor guys to get back into the fight quickly, and, allowing them to use the high speeds of the M-18, or M-36s, for fire and maneuver on an even more fast and lethal manner.

I'm seeing visions of missions consisting of M-18 Hellcats, M-16 quad 0.50 AA, M-8 Greyhounds, M-3 halftracks carrying troops/supplies, along with Jeeps, and the entire shebang rolling along at 45 mph to 50 mph. Simply to fast for the enemy to react quickly enough, IL-2s or not. With such a combination of speed and firepower you can not only hit an enemy fast and hard but you can also sustain it.

I use to run British set missions made up of Mossies, Typhies/Temps, Spit-16s, and with goons in Brit skin for troops. I loved this mission profile because the Mossie has a top speed at tree top of about 340 mph with wep, compared to about 317 mph for the 110s. Believe it or not but the extra few minutes a faster attack package gives you means an awful lot towards any chances for mission success. The same holds true for GVs, actually it would hold true even more so then with aircraft. Fact is when you can deliver speed, along with overwhelming firepower, you hold the cards and control the battle. "Shock and Awe" was as sound a concept in 1944 as it was in 2004.

The 37mm IL-2 has enhanced the game. It added a new dimension and created a corp of dedicated tank killers.

Want to balance things out even more? Then give us the M-18.