Why the Icon Range Change for GV's?

[Tank-Ace]

Well I don't see also a problem with the enemy going to the flakker friend because in concept it looks quite right (I'm not saying the pilot asked one flakker to save him in RL).
 Look at it this way: if you fly over enemy territory, you take the risk of getting shot by enemy flakk, it IS less safe to fly over enemy territory, specially low.

 You know you are safer in the friendly territory
 
 So players will need to work on discipline not to follow up the runners to deep into their territory. and THEN fight on 200 calling all the names that come up to your head 

Good way of looking at it Raphael. Basicly boils down to "if you do something stupid, you face the consequences".

[Karnak]

What suggestion? Unless I missed a post of yours, all you've done is raise concerns about wirbles being overly effective.

To reduce the icon range that friendly aircraft see GVs at to the same as the range that hostile aircraft see them at.  This would be entirely transparent to GVers other than making it harder for fighters to be drug to a Wirbelwind's death bubble.

I think this would help GVs be bombed less as well because it would be a bit riskier for the aircraft due to kill shooter.

I don't think that Bob should be able to see a GV highlighted by an icon at 6000 yards when Frank can only see that at 600 yards.  I don't believe that WWII era technology provided that kind of accuracy in battlefield cooperation.  Both should be 600 yards.

[Tank-Ace]

I'd be fine with that. That wouldn't nessiarily make GV's more vulnerable, but it would make coordination much more difficult. I would also like to see killshooter turned on for ordnance eventually, so that would also prove problematic.

[Raphael]

yes! +1 to friendly icon reduced + killshot for bombs

[bmwgs]

http://i709.photobucket.com/albums/ww100/bmwgs_ah/Aces%20High/PZKpfw.jpg[/img]]

Wonder what that guy is holding up to his eyes? 



Fred

[Karnak]

http://i709.photobucket.com/albums/ww100/bmwgs_ah/Aces%20High/PZKpfw.jpg[/img]]

Wonder what that guy is holding up to his eyes? 



Fred

Looks like a device to give better depth perception.  Human eyes are only far enough apart to give depth perception out to about 50ft or so, that looks like it has a lens on each end with a separation of four or so feet.

[SmokinLoon]

I'm going to take off with eggs every flight, I guarantee I will quadruple my GV kills as soon as the patch is released.

I'll take that bet.  What is the wager?  I've noted your stats as of the last week of Jan 2012 and will note them again March 1st of 2012.   

It is going to be more difficult to bamb gv's, it isnt going to be as easy to spot them.  For some of us, it will not make much of a difference since we are able to pick out the wee black dot of a gv before the current icon range and we will still be able to do the same once the new patch arrives.  But for many, it is going to force the anti-gv jabos to slow down, make another pass (or 3), and drop off target becuase the icon crutch will not be there.

[AWwrgwy]

http://i709.photobucket.com/albums/ww100/bmwgs_ah/Aces%20High/PZKpfw.jpg[/img]]

Wonder what that guy is holding up to his eyes? 



Fred

Range Finder








wrongway

[Tilt]

http://i709.photobucket.com/albums/ww100/bmwgs_ah/Aces%20High/PZKpfw.jpg[/img]]



Fred

Yeah bring on the mobil flak which could not fire on the move (+delay between motion and gun able to fire) and perk the wirble wind and ost wind!

[TDeacon]

To reduce the icon range that friendly aircraft see GVs at to the same as the range that hostile aircraft see them at.  This would be entirely transparent to GVers other than making it harder for fighters to be drug to a Wirbelwind's death bubble.

I think this would help GVs be bombed less as well because it would be a bit riskier for the aircraft due to kill shooter.

I don't think that Bob should be able to see a GV highlighted by an icon at 6000 yards when Frank can only see that at 600 yards.  I don't believe that WWII era technology provided that kind of accuracy in battlefield cooperation.  Both should be 600 yards.

Sounds like a reasonable suggestion to me. 

MH

[Krusty]

Quite so... The only folks against it are the GV folks who want ever "power up" made available to them and only them. They make up reasons to justify this then insult anybody with a differing opinion (no matter how right it may be).

It's nothing other than the whiners taking over.

[TDeacon]

Quite so... The only folks against it are the GV folks who want ever "power up" made available to them and only them. They make up reasons to justify this then insult anybody with a differing opinion (no matter how right it may be).

It's nothing other than the whiners taking over.

In case you missed it, Krusty, right now I *am* one of the "GV folks", and approve of the reduced GV sighting ranges.  Yet, like many similar players, I am still able to see both sides of the issue.    Don't overreact here.  

MH

[Karnak]

In case you missed it, Krusty, right now I *am* one of the "GV folks", and approve of the reduced GV sighting ranges.  Yet, like many similar players, I am still able to see both sides of the issue.    Don't overreact here.  

MH

A whole bunch of "GVers" have been railing at me since I posted it, saying I am just whining about the shoe being on the other foot and such.  Krusty's point is generally accurate, though obviously individuals will have individual opinions.

[bmwgs]

Quite so... The only folks against it are the GV folks who want ever "power up" made available to them and only them. They make up reasons to justify this then insult anybody with a differing opinion (no matter how right it may be).

It's nothing other than the whiners taking over.

OK, am I a "us" or a "them" since I GV and fly?  You make it sound like players either fly or GV, when in actually many do both.



Fred

[Krusty]

Yes, many do both. Those that do both aren't the ones whining about the complete and total inability of GVs to hide in plain sight and be invulnerable to all air interference... It's the select minority of whiners that have brought this about, not you.