Author Topic: Why the Icon Range Change for GV's?  (Read 10492 times)

Offline AWwrgwy

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5478
Re: Why the Icon Range Change for GV's?
« Reply #165 on: January 24, 2012, 03:27:41 PM »
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.

It's not going to make any difference except for hiding in barns.



wrongway
71 (Eagle) Squadron
"THAT"S PAINT!!"

"If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through."
- General Sir Anthony Cecil Hogmanay

Offline ARSNishi

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 313
Re: Why the Icon Range Change for GV's?
« Reply #166 on: January 24, 2012, 04:22:57 PM »
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.
How do you make the leap that anyone who endorses this change expects or desires invulnerability from air attacks?   Is it conceivable to you that gv'ers may just want just a Tad more realism than the current, bright red drop-bomb-here-for-easy-kills icon presents??   I do both as well, I am in favor of this change and think its funny how carelessly the "whiner" label is attached to anyone who passionately disagree's with others equally passionate opinions.

~S~  Nishizwa

Fighter Ace vet lured to the dark side, a.k.a..  -AoM-  Fear the Mighty Mitsubishi Mounted Muppet!

Nishizwa in game, Nish or Nishi will work too

Offline TDeacon

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1553
Re: Why the Icon Range Change for GV's?
« Reply #167 on: January 24, 2012, 04:36:30 PM »
That's just how Krusty is...  He doesn't like shades of gray.

MH

Offline flight17

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1612
Re: Why the Icon Range Change for GV's?
« Reply #168 on: January 24, 2012, 04:36:43 PM »
Not reading this whole thread to see if its been said, but coming from someone who does Bombing, GVing and fighters all evenly in this game... unless you do all three types of game play evenly, your opinion is useless because you will always be biased to whatever you do.

With that being said, being bombed in a tank is part of the game, GVers need to stop complaining about it. If you are worried that much about the bombs, then here is a thought for you... get a friendly air cap going... its a win-win situation. The fighters get to attack easy bombers and the gvers stay bomber free. Instead, most gvers just go and get bombs themselves and make the bombing issue even worse. two wrongs don't make a right. If you don't want to be bombed, then you or your friends cant be bombing either.

Now for the icon range itself. My biggest issue is that with this change you are making the game even gamier. It doesn't matter if I'm in a Storch or an A20, i can only see so far in both planes. Artificially giving the Storch a longer visual range while reducing all other aircraft's does not solve anything. It just makes it even more gamey and LESS realistic.

In world war two, when troops on both sides heard the faint noise of an L-bird or storch (whatever)coming , they didn't fire their anti-aircraft guns at it, they did just the opposite. They stayed silent and didn't move. The L-birds were the most feared a/c in WWII (that being quoted by multiple Germans and Japanese soldiers) because if they were spotted by the L-birds, they new ordnance of some sort was soon to come.

I think a good way to solve this issue fairly is to keep the icons the same as they are now. However, if GVs are stopped and under cover, their icon should only flash once for maybe a second when they fire. This gives them the realistic cover they would have had in RW, but gives the overhead attack aircraft the ability to get a general idea of where they are without them having the ability to exactly pinpoint them. If the GVs are moving or in the open, they should be able to be seen as normal at all times. However, when i say cover, it needs to be something thick. Parking under a single tree that is otherwise in the open, should not give the benefits of being in a patch of trees. If a line of site can be made of more than 1/2 the tank, then the above air cons should be able to see the icon as if it were in the open/moving. However, if the a/c passes over and the line of site of 1/2 the tank is broken, then the aircraft should only get to see it is if it fires. Or something along those specific lines.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2012, 04:39:33 PM by flight17 »
119th Riffle Tank Regiment leader -Red Storm Krupp Steel Scenario

Active Member of Air Heritage Inc. http://airheritage.org/

Offline Raphael

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2010
Re: Why the Icon Range Change for GV's?
« Reply #169 on: January 24, 2012, 06:17:35 PM »
flight, the relation of addition of the storch plus the icon reduce to other aircraft is a gameplay decision and not realism related. we know in real life you can see at further then that.
 it's an MMO which implies players must coop to create the game experience

 -there currently is no dynamic in the air/ground relation, its pretty static because:
 
  -there are more planes then gv's in the game which leads to the common scenario:
   -player ups a fighter holding an egg in a solo flight to go to the nearest gv fight drop the bomb to increse kill count and then move to the dogfigths to have name in lights
 
  -there isn't incentive on planning air support dedicated sorties (since anyone can just see a gv and do the above sceene)

 So the addition can fix both by giving the storch that advantage and the icon reduced in other aircraft will result in behavior/gameplay change to make it more like the real deal afterall. jabos heading to a planned target or in need of the info before acting.
 it's another place to explore in gameplay, we already have bombers and figthers. think at it as a new feature that only aces high 2 has.
Remember 08/08/2012
 Youtube videos - http://www.youtube.com/user/raphael103/featured
Game ID => Raphael
XO of Jg5

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: Why the Icon Range Change for GV's?
« Reply #170 on: January 24, 2012, 06:37:29 PM »
How do you make the leap that anyone who endorses this change expects or desires invulnerability from air attacks?   Is it conceivable to you that gv'ers may just want just a Tad more realism than the current, bright red drop-bomb-here-for-easy-kills icon presents??   I do both as well, I am in favor of this change and think its funny how carelessly the "whiner" label is attached to anyone who passionately disagree's with others equally passionate opinions.

~S~  Nishizwa
That's just how Krusty is...  He doesn't like shades of gray.

MH

No need to sugar coat it Deacon.. He's explained his position already. He's using a false argument to defend getting an "isolation bubble" around himself when in a tank.

Nishi:

It is not realistic in the slightest. Not according to physics, optics, not according to WW2 accounts, not according to P-47 pilots roaming the country side easily spotting targets and attacking them. Not according to Typhoon pilots rocketing tanks.

Not one bit of this is more realistic. It is a step towards the arcade.

The one part I don't have a beef with is making the icon disappear when under cover or near a building. Essentially it was supposed to do that anyways, and from certain angles the icon may have shown through in slivers of red. Though please NOTE there are hundreds of times a GV whiner has cried "THE ICON DID ME IN!!!" when the person that killed them said "Nope, couldn't see the icon, knew you were there and killed you"... So this was as much a crutch as any other part of this new "feature" set. Though IMO it's logical to code in.

So, yes, by your own descriptions and word choice you have shown how biased you are on the matter. The whiners are the vocal minority that cry and shout and try to change the game so they never have to interact with airplanes, ever. Your "BOMB HERE!" icon comment is so misguided and inaccurate you must be one of them, no?

I think your comments simply reinforce mine.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2012, 06:41:19 PM by Krusty »

Offline zippo

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 68
Re: Why the Icon Range Change for GV's?
« Reply #171 on: January 24, 2012, 10:27:16 PM »
No need to sugar coat it Deacon.. He's explained his position already. He's using a false argument to defend getting an "isolation bubble" around himself when in a tank.

Nishi:

It is not realistic in the slightest. Not according to physics, optics, not according to WW2 accounts, not according to P-47 pilots roaming the country side easily spotting targets and attacking them. Not according to Typhoon pilots rocketing tanks.

Not one bit of this is more realistic. It is a step towards the arcade.

The one part I don't have a beef with is making the icon disappear when under cover or near a building. Essentially it was supposed to do that anyways, and from certain angles the icon may have shown through in slivers of red. Though please NOTE there are hundreds of times a GV whiner has cried "THE ICON DID ME IN!!!" when the person that killed them said "Nope, couldn't see the icon, knew you were there and killed you"... So this was as much a crutch as any other part of this new "feature" set. Though IMO it's logical to code in.

So, yes, by your own descriptions and word choice you have shown how biased you are on the matter. The whiners are the vocal minority that cry and shout and try to change the game so they never have to interact with airplanes, ever. Your "BOMB HERE!" icon comment is so misguided and inaccurate you must be one of them, no?

I think your comments simply reinforce mine.

  Interacting?   More like 'you sit still, don't shoot at me, while I drop this bomb on you.  Then I'll go get more bombs and be back later to do it again.'  Some of these people spend a lot of time as mudmovers.  Some mostly gv, and that's what they pay to do.  Why should they pay to be a bombing target?  Yeah, campers and gv's heading toward a base should expect to see the attack planes coming.  But some gv fights are just that... people trying to have a tank fight.  They aren't trying to take a base or anything else that would interferre with the air game.  Seems that they are target rich environments for some of the players looking for easy kills.
  I think pd37 in the original post said that there were not many worthwhile targets for attack planes to go after.
That being the case, there doesn't seem to be a way to fix it as the game is currently set up.  Maybe the icon reduction will help, I don't know.  Might be a bit*h hunting troop carriers, though.

  
« Last Edit: January 24, 2012, 10:29:12 PM by zippo »

Offline chris3

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 690
      • http://www.ludwigs-hobby-seite.de/
Re: Why the Icon Range Change for GV's?
« Reply #172 on: January 24, 2012, 11:02:31 PM »
moin

i like the new icon idea, because it was to easys to bomb gvs and alot of nice tank fights were killed by Tank killers. changing the icon wil not force sombody to do not dropp bomb on tanks but the hitting the target will be not so easy anymore, so more tanks are able to survive and maybe we will get a balance between Tank hunters and people be in a tank fight.
With the old sistem the tanks were mostly not able to rech thair target un bombed, maybe now.
I like the Storch idea, i think my sqoud will often use this new tool, one is searching and the other will bomb. I think a tool like this you will not find often in the game world. wtg HTC.

have a nice day
christian

Offline SmokinLoon

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6166
Re: Why the Icon Range Change for GV's?
« Reply #173 on: January 24, 2012, 11:34:31 PM »

Now for the icon range itself. My biggest issue is that with this change you are making the game even gamier. It doesn't matter if I'm in a Storch or an A20, i can only see so far in both planes. Artificially giving the Storch a longer visual range while reducing all other aircraft's does not solve anything. It just makes it even more gamey and LESS realistic.
 

Not so.  I'm willing to bet that A20 pilots didnt carry binocs while searching out enemy tanks to bomb.  Also, the A20's knew to where within a few hundreds yards where they were going to bomb, their targets were mostly preset before launch. 

The spotter aircraft went up *looking* for the enemy.  They were flying slow enough to look, look again, and triple look, and then some, with binocs, all in the same pass. 

If anything, HTC should make the icon ranges relative to the speed of the aircraft, but then again which aircraft can fly 100mph well enough, have the same visibility, and was designed to do what the Storch did?  But more so, that is probably a major coding issue.

This is adding another dimension to AH.  Perhaps people should try it out first before performing their best imitation of Chicken Little.   :aok
Proud grandson of the late Lt. Col. Darrell M. "Bud" Gray, USAF (ret.), B24D pilot, 5th BG/72nd BS. 28 combat missions within the "slot", PTO.

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23047
Re: Why the Icon Range Change for GV's?
« Reply #174 on: January 24, 2012, 11:39:58 PM »
This is adding another dimension to AH.  Perhaps people should try it out first before performing their best imitation of Chicken Little.   :aok
Sorry, but I am not asking for the icon ranges to be extended or even kept where they are.  I just want the friendly icons to match the hostile icons as WWII battlefield cooperation wasn't nearly as precise as the icons make it.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Tank-Ace

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5298
Re: Why the Icon Range Change for GV's?
« Reply #175 on: January 25, 2012, 01:11:22 AM »
See Rule #4
« Last Edit: January 30, 2012, 11:07:37 AM by Skuzzy »
You started this thread and it was obviously about your want and desire in spite of your use of 'we' and Google.

"Once more unto the breach"

Offline ARSNishi

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 313
Re: Why the Icon Range Change for GV's?
« Reply #176 on: January 25, 2012, 10:05:13 AM »
No need to sugar coat it Deacon.. He's explained his position already. He's using a false argument to defend getting an "isolation bubble" around himself when in a tank.

False argument as determined by who?  Simply because the radioactive poster himself deemed it false?  I have a different OPINION than you, I'm not however, deeming your OPINION a false argument simply because I disagree with you.  I would appreciate being shown the same courtesy.  How do you equate advocating a shortened icon range with being desirous of an "isolation bubble"?

Nishi:

It is not realistic in the slightest. Not according to physics, optics, not according to WW2 accounts, not according to P-47 pilots roaming the country side easily spotting targets and attacking them. Not according to Typhoon pilots rocketing tanks.

Not one bit of this is more realistic. It is a step towards the arcade.

Funny how in all the actual ww2 guncam footage Ive seen, I never once saw a bright red icon... at 600 ft OR 1500 ft.  Is it actually your position that a bright red icon pointing out an enemy's position is MORE realistic?  Seriously?



The one part I don't have a beef with is making the icon disappear when under cover or near a building. Essentially it was supposed to do that anyways, and from certain angles the icon may have shown through in slivers of red. Though please NOTE there are hundreds of times a GV whiner has cried "THE ICON DID ME IN!!!" when the person that killed them said "Nope, couldn't see the icon, knew you were there and killed you"... So this was as much a crutch as any other part of this new "feature" set. Though IMO it's logical to code in.

So, yes, by your own descriptions and word choice you have shown how biased you are on the matter. The whiners are the vocal minority that cry and shout and try to change the game so they never have to interact with airplanes, ever. Your "BOMB HERE!" icon comment is so misguided and inaccurate you must be one of them, no?

I think your comments simply reinforce mine.

I too, like for things to be black and white. With that said, I'm no clearer on your position AFTER reading those 2 paragraphs than I was BEFORE reading them, matter of fact I'm perplexed and astounded by the doublespeak.  You can't have it both ways Krusty.  Are you seriously, with a straight face attempting to argue on one hand that the icons aren't used to target enemies and on the other hand complaining that their range being shortened gives GV's some sort of isolation bubble??  Whew!!  :headscratch:  Seems your comments reinforce my position....  If the bomb****'s don't need an icon to successfully target GV's, then why complain that shortening their icon range's gives them an "isolation bubble"??


For the record, I make no bones about the fact that I enjoy GVing almost as much as I enjoy flying.  I also don't mask my contempt for those who would (in an aerial combat game) choose to follow the EASIEST,SAFEST path to getting their name up in lights landing kills by dropping bombs on defenseless tanks who are just trying to have their own battle.  As I and others have stated before, tanks rushing an airfield or town, or spawn camping for that matter.... are, and should be fair game.  Those who don't challenge themselves any more than that, are the ones who put themselves in the bomb**** category as far as I'm concerned.  And they seem to be the ones complaining the loudest about the upcoming change.  I have no sympathy for their plight, because they have had it too easy for too long.  Are you one of "them"?

 :salute  Nishizwa

Fighter Ace vet lured to the dark side, a.k.a..  -AoM-  Fear the Mighty Mitsubishi Mounted Muppet!

Nishizwa in game, Nish or Nishi will work too

Offline redcatcherb412

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 610
Re: Why the Icon Range Change for GV's?
« Reply #177 on: January 25, 2012, 10:37:52 AM »
Realism .....
.

Being an intimate recipient of friendly fire from the air, this stuff happens, and happens often.

Real life use of spotters (air & ground), ground forces marking enemy position with colored smoke and
radio vectoring of air inventory is more realistic. No kill shooter for friendly kills, maybe a msg that pilot X just killed friendly
with no perk points awarded or deducted.

Eliminating GV icons for both sides would actually lend to realism.
The fact that you can use the same tank on both sides of a battle lends itself to mistakes. Shouldn't be hard to
use a marker panel when spawning a gv to indicate what side it is on. You know kinda like the town flags do now ?
In Normandy tanks had air recognition panels visible on the top of the tank to minimize friendly fire. I am sure
the recognition of the panels from a pilots view depended on the acft. speed, eyesight of the pilot and
cockpit visibility factors.

I communicated with friends of the pilot that mistakenly hit our positions with rocket fire, and their description
as to the effect it had on that pilots life after the event was chilling.
Ground Pounders ...

Offline zippo

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 68
Re: Why the Icon Range Change for GV's?
« Reply #178 on: January 25, 2012, 10:50:27 AM »
By far the most commonly killed GV is a Panzer IV, yet the Lancaster has almost three times as many kills of Wirbelwinds as it does of Panzer IV Hs.  That is too much of a difference to be a statistical blip and has to have a cause, likely due to how both the Lancaster is used and how the Wirbelwind is used.


  You're probably right as to how they are being misused....LW143  Lancasters killed 826 Wirbelwinds while  Wirblewinds killed 1283 Lancasters.   In what senario should an AA weapon with a wirble's range get a shot at a strategic bomber?  Maybe LancStuka mode?



Offline Zoney

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6503
Re: Why the Icon Range Change for GV's?
« Reply #179 on: January 25, 2012, 12:16:23 PM »
Krusty, just shut your trap man. Your constant accusations of whining and selfish posting gets annoying. And I mean REAL annoying when its comming from someone that hasn't made more than a couple GV sorties per tour in more than two years.

1) you haven't had ANY recent expierence in GV's, you're not qualified to talk about their vulnerabilities.

2) you seem to mostly play perk-free vehiles, which means you have NO expierence with how heavily they're targeted.

3) you probably got those few kills you have defending. GV's don't have a problem defending, its when they try to attack that the issues come up.

C'mon Tankace, you don't play at ALL anymore.  Are you really calling out another player who "doesn't play enough" ?

Wag more, bark less.