Wirbelwind under furballs

[Coogan]

Sounds to me as if the WW's we're taking the iniciative and going on the offense.  I see nothing wrong with that at all.

Coogan

[ScatterFire]

if you are "spawning" away from your base/town then you are not really defending your base, you are out looking for the fight or your taking the fight to the enemy. not really a tactic the individual WW is suited for.

So....

When GVers complain that IL2s, etc can easily pop them, the answer is: Bring fighter cover or bring a WW.  But when WWs are used away from their base, they aren't "fair" and its not a good tactic?

Removing fighters from the air is essential in base capturing OR suppression so your GVs and fighters can do their job.  The WWs place is ANYWHERE there are GVs or air combat happening 

the OP was talking about spawning or showing up under furballs with the implication that attacking the furballers was the intended strategy not a base capture/defense. this is what sets the scenarios apart from each other.

Frusterating the defenders by taking them out with a WW is as effective as blowing up the hangers.  More so, actually since if you can capture the base without blowing the hanger it is of more use for its new owners.  Every time someone gets pissy and goes and flies somewhere else you have a better chance of launching a base assault where a furball just existed...

if i can keep upping planes into the fight and its not a high vulch or high risk of losing the base environment, then i will preffer to up a plane. but if i think i can break a cap or better defend a base under those circumstances by upping any GV then i will. but if someone drops the FH and i can get back to the Furball by using a GV, then im here to play so thats what im gonna do.

Sax, it really boils down to if the FH are up and the base isnt being vulched then it is less likely people will rol GV's to a furball, most will jump into a A/C and go ho and pick instead

I suck in a plane  Its more frusterating to me for them to drop the GV hangers because then I have to up a plane instead.  See how that works?

I can understand a certain amount of frusteration if there is *never* an assault on that base, but it is simple good sense and tactics to clear as much air cover as possible before even deciding to make the attempt.  Even though you may not see the impending or proposed assault, unless you happen to have a spy in the other country you simply don't know the intention isn't there.  The "But they have no intention of taking the base" simply does not work.  Its no different than saying

"bombers shouldn't be able to blow up GVs because we get into good spawn camps and the other side gets made and ups flights of Lancs to clear us out.  They aren't using Lancs for what they are supposed to be used for (base destroying) so make them stop"

 

[ScatterFire]

Perhaps equalizing the icon range would help level the playing field?
I prefered the "old school" style of icons from a few years back....someone upped an Ostwind, once I got within 6.0K or so, he saw me, I saw him, and the duel was on.  Nowadays, even if I know a GV is out there, I have to get within killing range (read that he see me and opens fire at me) before I know where he is and then I have to evade and set up my attack run, lose sight of his icon, and try to reacquire him in time to get some shots off.
Current setup is tilted way towards GV'ers......not my cup of tea.

And look at it the other way around...

A Panzer is creeping through heavy woods, trying to sneak into a base.  They have camoflage set to blend in, are moving forward carefully, etc.  They might spend 1/2 hour moving into firing range.

Along comes an IL2, Mossie, Lanc, etc and all is for naught.  No matter what you do, an aircraft sees you.  You can sneak and hide from other GVs, but never, ever, ever from an aircraft.  Instead you have this big red beacon that shows up through trees, barns, hills, etc that says what you are and exactly how far you are.

If you want "fair", make it so that GV Icons are only displayed to friendlies, and that GVs only see icons of friendlies.

[caldera]

If you want "fair", make it so that GV Icons are only displayed to friendlies, and that GVs only see icons of friendlies.

I wouldn't mind no icons on enemy gvs except for ww and ow. Since their main purpose is to counter aircraft, make their icons show out to 6.0k.

That sounds "fair" to me.

[Saxman]

On the other hand, historically a ground vehicle on the move WOULD be highly visible to an overflying aircraft. It was stationary vehicles under camo netting or otherwise described that were difficult to spot.

One solution would be to have icon range for GVs dependent on what the vehicle is doing. If that tank is hunkered down in the woods and sitting still his icon doesn't show until you're very close. However once he starts rolling he makes himself a target.

[Yossarian]

Is this the new fashion?  Tonight some "clever" people were spawning wirbelwinds into our on-the-deck furball.  On two other occasions there were warnings about enemy wirbelwinds parked just downhill from a runway shooting at people as they would take off or land.  The wirbel is a great tool for defending a base against vulchers, but these other uses stink and are increasing in frequency.

I LOVE it when 'they' do this, it provides excellent cannon fodder for B-25s and the like.

[FLOTSOM]

So....

When GVers complain that IL2s, etc can easily pop them, the answer is: Bring fighter cover or bring a WW.  But when WWs are used away from their base, they aren't "fair" and its not a good tactic?i never said using them away from your base wasnt fair or a good tactic, and its hard to bring fighter cover if they already dropped your hangers. but that is a full scale invasion that you speak of, the OP was directing his comments at people who just show up at a furball in a WW to be a jackoff and not to progress their offensive campaign

Removing fighters from the air is essential in base capturing OR suppression so your GVs and fighters can do their job.  The WWs place is ANYWHERE there are GVs or air combat happening  ;)Frusterating the defenders by taking them out with a WW is as effective as blowing up the hangers.  More so, actually since if you can capture the base without blowing the hanger it is of more use for its new owners.  Every time someone gets pissy and goes and flies somewhere else you have a better chance of launching a base assault where a furball just existed...I suck in a plane  Its more frusterating to me for them to drop the GV hangers because then I have to up a plane instead.  See how that works?i dont drop any hangers, im of the belief that if you cant take a base with the hangers up and the base being defended then maybe that person(s) attacking it should just go NOE something undefended. i think dropping hangers is lame personally. but then again i dont get into base capture im into the fight. the side effect of dropping hangers, no more fight so its not fun for me any more.

I can understand a certain amount of frusteration if there is *never* an assault on that base, but it is simple good sense and tactics to clear as much air cover as possible before even deciding to make the attempt.  Even though you may not see the impending or proposed assault, unless you happen to have a spy in the other country you simply don't know the intention isn't there.  The "But they have no intention of taking the base" simply does not work.  Its no different than saying the fastest way to know is if nobody follows up with an assault of any kind on the town. drop all the hangers you want if the town still stands then your not taking the base. so if the jackoff does a bomb and bail and nobody is bothering with the town, i feel pretty secure in thinking it was just a slimebag dropping hangers cause he cant cope with the furballers being there having a fun fight.

"bombers shouldn't be able to blow up GVs because we get into good spawn camps and the other side gets made and ups flights of Lancs to clear us out.  They aren't using Lancs for what they are supposed to be used for (base destroying) so make them stop" in my book these are the same kind of scum as the jackoff dropping the FH's, if it was in my power to shoot down friendly bombers i would be happy to.

all in all i think we are actually arguing the same points, leave the hangers alone let the GVers GV and the furballers furball. if you are going to take a base then do so, but if your just being a griefer go somewhere else and leave alone those that are enjoying their fights.

 

my point was that if i cannot get into the air because the hangers are down i will take a WW back to the fight if possible, not that WW's dont have their place in the game.

[mechanic]

Spawning Flak under a furball that was careless enough to get over a spawn point....Its just one of the joys of the game. Always has been, for longer than time itself. AH1 osti could hit thing at twice the distance with ease. Its part of the game and HTC have only included things that are fun. Sure its not fun being shot by them... who chooses to be the target? Would you play Duck Hunt on the nintendo and play as the ducks? No. So dont fly over enemy spawn.

Caution: comprehension of this concept is not recomended for ages 3 or under.

[FLOTSOM]

Spawning Flak under a furball that was careless enough to get over a spawn point....Its just one of the joys of the game. Always has been, for longer than time itself. AH1 osti could hit thing at twice the distance with ease. Its part of the game and HTC have only included things that are fun. Sure its not fun being shot by them... who chooses to be the target? Would you play Duck Hunt on the nintendo and play as the ducks? No. So dont fly over enemy spawn.

Caution: comprehension of this concept is not recomended for ages 3 or under.

if you ment 3 physically then most should get it....

if you ment 3 mentally then you had better break out the cookies and cue cards with big lettering. its gonna be a long and slow process of getting your point across.