Author Topic: Suggestion for use of the new loadout option  (Read 330 times)

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23047
Suggestion for use of the new loadout option
« on: May 12, 2010, 07:38:59 PM »
The new loadout option,
Quote
Added the ability to disable specific weapon loadout options from a plane
seems like a very useful addition.

As an initial use of it I would suggest limiting loadouts in the Early-War and Mid-War arenas, where appropriate.

For example, the Mosquito should not have the option to carry rockets in the Mid-War arena.  I am sure other aircraft will have similar issues.

Post other loadout options that should not be available in the Early or Mid war arenas, please.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline humble

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6434
Re: Suggestion for use of the new loadout option
« Reply #1 on: May 12, 2010, 08:03:10 PM »
To me the biggest single advantage would be limiting ords to 250/less options at small, 500 lb/medium and only enabling 1,000lbers at large fields. That would separate out the "strategic" war and make defending the zone bases more important...

"The beauty of the second amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it."-Pres. Thomas Jefferson

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: Suggestion for use of the new loadout option
« Reply #2 on: May 12, 2010, 08:03:16 PM »
Any 1000lb bomb on a fighter in EWA and MWA?

4k cookie in lancs in EWA?

When was the 6-gun package on the F4F-4 introduced?



I don't know about any others off the top of my head. The major ones that came to mind were the mix-matched 109 and spits, but those were sorted out when they were remodeled.

EDIT:

To me the biggest single advantage would be limiting ords to 250/less options at small, 500 lb/medium and only enabling 1,000lbers at large fields. That would separate out the "strategic" war and make defending the zone bases more important...

I think it's a server-wide setting, not a field-specific one.

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23047
Re: Suggestion for use of the new loadout option
« Reply #3 on: May 12, 2010, 08:08:32 PM »
The 4,000lb 'cookie' was used pretty early.  Not sure when off hand, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if it is appropriate to Early War.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: Suggestion for use of the new loadout option
« Reply #4 on: May 12, 2010, 08:17:40 PM »

When was the 6-gun package on the F4F-4 introduced?


The F4F-4 rolled from the factory with 6 guns. The F4F-3 had the four-gun package. She was also a bit lighter and had a much longer range.
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Offline Ghosth

  • AH Training Corps (retired)
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8497
      • http://332nd.org
Re: Suggestion for use of the new loadout option
« Reply #5 on: May 13, 2010, 06:50:48 AM »
This looks to me like it was tailor made for events such as FSO, although as posted it will add more control to early and mid war also. Long overdue, glad to see we finally got it.


Offline Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23888
      • Last.FM Profile
Re: Suggestion for use of the new loadout option
« Reply #6 on: May 13, 2010, 07:09:37 AM »
The 4,000lb 'cookie' was used pretty early.  Not sure when off hand, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if it is appropriate to Early War.

Quote
Up until May 1941 several 4000lb HC bombs had been used by Bomber Command and by August 1941 226 bombs had been dropped with no proved failures. The bombs were formally introduced into service in January 1942 as the Mark I.
from: 4000lb High Capacity Bomb by David Boyd
Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman