minimum aircraft sortie spawn delay for person/field

[Stalwart]

This may have already been kicked around, so please forgive...

It might be nice to have a minimum time between aircraft sorties for the same player/field.  Nothing unreasonable, just 2 minutes or even 90 seconds.   I think this could reduce some forms of dweebery without bothering anyone.

 
Stalwart

[hammer]

Just out of curiosity, what form of dweebery would be prevented by a 90 - 120 second delay between sorties?

[waystin2]

Nope.

[Knite]

So make it tougher to defend fields that are under attack because I cannot spawn quickly to try to up and help my wingmate whom I am no longer covering?   

Can't think of a good reason for this.
Sorry, no thank you.

[Rich46yo]

Its hard enough trying to defend against some of these insane, over-kill horde attacks as it is. Why would you make it harder?

I like the defense even tho its murder on my scores, "who cares right"? It already seems like I spend 1/2 the night dodging 4 cannon'ed cons with 6 k of E on my slow pathetic IL2s. With a 90 second wait the typhoons, nikis, run-90s, run-09s, would have a field and town de'acked by the time the 1st wave of defenders was able to upp again. It would simply tilt an already unbalanced battle further against you.

Its hard enough finding defenders as it is.

[Stalwart]

Just out of curiosity, what form of dweebery would be prevented by a 90 - 120 second delay between sorties?

Two types come to mind.

1) The dweeb who ups a fighter to HO inbound attackers, gets killed, then ups another, repeat, repeat, repeat...

2) The dweeb who ups, and re-ups, and re-ups an IL-2, because the fighter hanger is down and he can't be dweeb type number 1 above.

The ability to disable flight sorties at a base by taking out the fighter hanger(s) and the bomber hanger(s) mitigates some of this dweebery already.  Maybe that's enough.

[Stalwart]

So make it tougher to defend fields that are under attack because I cannot spawn quickly to try to up and help my wingmate whom I am no longer covering?   

Can't think of a good reason for this.
Sorry, no thank you.

I don't mean you have to wait 90 seconds from the time your sortie ends.  I'm talking about 90 seconds from the time your sortie starts.  If you're up covering your wingman, you would probably already be beyond 90 seconds in a sortie, right?

No, what I'm thinking of would not affect you, but it would affect the base defense suicide dweebs.    ... then again, those guys are fun to kill.

[5PointOh]

Two types come to mind.

1) The dweeb who ups a fighter to HO inbound attackers, gets killed, then ups another, repeat, repeat, repeat...

2) The dweeb who ups, and re-ups, and re-ups an IL-2, because the fighter hanger is down and he can't be dweeb type number 1 above.

The ability to disable flight sorties at a base by taking out the fighter hanger(s) and the bomber hanger(s) mitigates some of this dweebery already.  Maybe that's enough.

So you're saying you want vulching without danger?

[Stalwart]

So you're saying you want vulching without danger?

No... That's spinning what I'm suggesting.

[batch]

I wouldnt say its spinning at all......... sounds like exactly what you want........ to be able to vulch without having to worry about someone willing to do anything to break the vulch...........

exactly which side of the equation is the dweebery on?  the vulcher or the person willing to do whatever it takes to stop the vulcher?

[Stalwart]

Its hard enough trying to defend against some of these insane, over-kill horde attacks as it is. Why would you make it harder?

I like the defense even tho its murder on my scores, "who cares right"? It already seems like I spend 1/2 the night dodging 4 cannon'ed cons with 6 k of E on my slow pathetic IL2s. With a 90 second wait the typhoons, nikis, run-90s, run-09s, would have a field and town de'acked by the time the 1st wave of defenders was able to upp again. It would simply tilt an already unbalanced battle further against you.

Its hard enough finding defenders as it is.

I can certainly see this point of view.  It does make a point defense more difficult when you can't respawn Ad infinitum.  Perhaps, when one encounters the re-spawn delay that I'm proposing, one could spawn from a nearby base, grab some alt, and engaging the enemy with some energy and AC technique as an alternative.  Of course, if you survive beyond 90 seconds each sortie, you'd be free to re-up at will.

[Stalwart]

I wouldnt say its spinning at all......... sounds like exactly what you want........ to be able to vulch without having to worry about someone willing to do anything to break the vulch...........

exactly which side of the equation is the dweebery on?  the vulcher or the person willing to do whatever it takes to stop the vulcher?

OK, I can see how what I'm proposing would tilt the advantage to the vulcher.  That was not my motivation.  If what I'm suggesting was implemented, there might be fewer people being vulched.

Maybe there's a tie in here to another thread about bombing / not bombing the fighter hangers.

[batch]

again it makes little sense.......... if your suggestion is to limit the number of people being vulched? the vulcher has every advantage in the situation to begin with....... and hes vulching for a reason (either to suppress the field for a capture or he just needs a way to get easy kills) none of which is the fault of the lifter.......... any advantage the lifter has to defeat a vulcher such as HOing, spraying, ramming, whatever he is certainly entitled to and should be encouraged to use it.......... after all he is trying to defend his field from attack

suppose the same idea was suggested from the other perspective..... if your intent is to benefit the person being vulched (how I cannot see in any fashion)......... then any plane who has his nose pointed and diving toward the runway while someone is trying to lift will immediatley blow up ........ makes just as much sense to me

[Rich46yo]

I can certainly see this point of view.  It does make a point defense more difficult when you can't respawn Ad infinitum.  Perhaps, when one encounters the re-spawn delay that I'm proposing, one could spawn from a nearby base, grab some alt, and engaging the enemy with some energy and AC technique as an alternative.  Of course, if you survive beyond 90 seconds each sortie, you'd be free to re-up at will.

I dont keep re-spawning. Usually I get shot on the runway once by one of these heros and I'm out of there. If nobody else cares to defend a base with me then the enemy is welcome to it.

I just get a kick out of these threads that suggest dweebery on the part of the defense when the real dweebery is the boneheads who are incapable of leaving their 50 player , 8K , horde that makes a living shooting helpless planes on the runway. And in the 2+ years Ive been here Ive never once seen an IL2 driver doing so.

1) The dweeb who ups a fighter to HO inbound attackers, gets killed, then ups another, repeat, repeat, repeat...

2) The dweeb who ups, and re-ups, and re-ups an IL-2, because the fighter hanger is down and he can't be dweeb type number 1 above.

I guess somebody got face shot while vulching a runway with his horde.

[Stalwart]

My intention is not to give an advantage to either the vulcher or the vulched.  In fact, the whole issue of vulching did not enter my mind when I made the post.  That's just where the conversation has moved.

.......... any advantage the lifter has to defeat a vulcher such as HOing, spraying, ramming, whatever he is certainly entitled to and should be encouraged to use it..........

I accept your point of view, but I think this may be the nodus of our disagreement.  Yes, people can fly however they want.  I'm suggesting there should be a consequence for HOing, or ramming within 90 seconds of lifting.  From my point of view that is dweebery.  

I've got nothing against people lifting off under an attack.  I do it myself all the time.  I try to survive and fight, not cream myself against an attacker.  If I've survived a minute and a half, I've earned the right to re-up immediately.  On the other hand, repeatedly HOing or ramming your pilot and your aircraft seems contrary to the ethos of the Aces High community.

However, since all the posts in this thread are in opposition, I concede.  Either this is an idea who's time has not come, or there are other dimensions of the issue I need to better understand.

 
Stalwart