Author Topic: Somebody get Kranak a tissue......  (Read 3321 times)

Offline Ack-Ack

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 25260
      • FlameWarriors
Re: Somebody get Kranak a tissue......
« Reply #45 on: April 19, 2012, 12:17:06 PM »
And of course, you don't...


MH

No, I don't want the game coded to make things easier for me to kill.  I want a challenge, though it sounds like your like Tank-Ace and really don't want a challenge yourself.

ack-ack
"If Jesus came back as an airplane, he would be a P-38." - WW2 P-38 pilot
Elite Top Aces +1 Mexican Official Squadron Song

Offline TDeacon

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1553
Re: Somebody get Kranak a tissue......
« Reply #46 on: April 19, 2012, 02:33:45 PM »
No, I don't want the game coded to make things easier for me to kill.  I want a challenge, though it sounds like your like Tank-Ace and really don't want a challenge yourself.

ack-ack

Actually, no.  I just object to hypocrisy, which is what your comments looked like.  If I was wrong, I apologize.  However, we need to remember that what is a "challenge" and what is "annoying" is a matter of opinion. 

MH
« Last Edit: April 19, 2012, 02:36:15 PM by TDeacon »

Offline Tank-Ace

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5298
Re: Somebody get Kranak a tissue......
« Reply #47 on: April 19, 2012, 06:35:48 PM »
TankAce, if you want protection from aircraft, then protect yourself. When I GV, I almost always take a T34 because of it's ability to easily shoot down many aircraft. I've been playing for less than a year and already I've probably gotten nearly 100 G2A kills in that thing. You may not like it because it's not your uber perked Tiger 2 or Panther, but with a little practice, you can shoot down A20s as they climb to alt and Il2s are a joke. Your claim about tanks being helpless against aircraft with bombs is completely unfounded.

I've killed numerous aircraft with tanks as well. Including a pure dumb-luck shot at 4k on a pair of B-17's. But most of those kills are on poorly flown aircraft, usually strafers such as the Il-2 and Hurri IID. The ones I have on bombing aircraft (A-20, B-25H, etc) are with few exceptions only on the ones that possed little to no threat, and rarely before they managed to release eggs (they either missed or dropped WAYYYY too late).

For all your talk of 'nearly 100' aerial kills with the T-34, you clearly display a lack of expierience (as would be expected with a new player, and especially one that doesn't remember what things were like before the icon changes). Ability to kill aircraft that are, again, poorly flown does not mean it is capable of effective deterence, or even retaliation, in most cases.

If a plane takes a hit from the main gun any time after take off or before landing, he's made a grevious tactical error, and has forefit all rights to complain. If you fly down a tank's gun barrel, expect to be shot.



No, I don't want the game coded to make things easier for me to kill.  I want a challenge, though it sounds like your like Tank-Ace and really don't want a challenge yourself.

ack-ack


AKAK, you're not a GV'er, and thats fine, but it naturally prevents you from having usefull imput on the topic. Even if you USED to GV (I'm not going to go through 10+ years of statistics for you, and I don't know what you did before AH), well we all know what time does to memories and expirences.

Your one post that is actually relevent to the topic is irrelevent to the game. Who cares what the real life attrition rates of GV's to aircraft were when there are MANY more AA units to provide cover, MUCH greater abundance of ord, we have communications much better than those in WWII that let us coordinate, Spitfires fighting P-51's, Hurricane I's flying around with 262's, more tanks than were produced dying each month........ and hell, that flourecent icon that displays nationality, range, and plane type kind of hurt any 'realism' arguments.

So, when you have a fair bit of recent GV expirence, then you'll understand what we're talking about. But untill then, kindly refrain from accusations of wanting EZ mode gamplay.
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 Ack-Ack

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 25260
      • FlameWarriors
Re: Somebody get Kranak a tissue......
« Reply #48 on: April 19, 2012, 08:40:26 PM »

AKAK, you're not a GV'er, <snipped the rest of the drivel>

I can comment because like you, I am a paying customer and I do occasionally hop in a GV.  True, not as much as I used to in past years but I still ocassionally like to hop into one when things get boring.

Also, since you said since I am not a dedicated GVer, I can't post in this thread, well then the same can be said to you when you post in aviation themed threads.  Since you were not a dedicated or skilled flyer then you should refrain from posting in aviation themed threads since it naturally prevents you from having any useful input in the topic.

I also stand by my previous comment...you want to code the game so GVs are virtually immune to being attacked by aircraft while being freely to engage aircraft at will without any risk to yourself. 

Try and deny it all you want but it's the common theme of your posts.

ack-ack
"If Jesus came back as an airplane, he would be a P-38." - WW2 P-38 pilot
Elite Top Aces +1 Mexican Official Squadron Song

Offline Butcher

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5323
Re: Somebody get Kranak a tissue......
« Reply #49 on: April 19, 2012, 08:55:00 PM »
I can comment because like you, I am a paying customer and I do occasionally hop in a GV.  True, not as much as I used to in past years but I still ocassionally like to hop into one when things get boring.

Also, since you said since I am not a dedicated GVer, I can't post in this thread, well then the same can be said to you when you post in aviation themed threads.  Since you were not a dedicated or skilled flyer then you should refrain from posting in aviation themed threads since it naturally prevents you from having any useful input in the topic.

I also stand by my previous comment...you want to code the game so GVs are virtually immune to being attacked by aircraft while being freely to engage aircraft at will without any risk to yourself. 

Try and deny it all you want but it's the common theme of your posts.

ack-ack

If you look at his kill stats even at the height of his tanking, its pretty below average for 90% of the veteran tankers.
JG 52

Offline Tank-Ace

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5298
Re: Somebody get Kranak a tissue......
« Reply #50 on: April 19, 2012, 09:28:22 PM »
I never said you couldn't comment, or anything to that effect. I said your imput isn't usefull because you lack expirience. Perhaps I should rephrase that: Because you have limited recent expirience in GV's (less than I do in fighters), your imput is of limited value because you don't fully understand what is being said.


And I stand by what I said. Theres a difference between imunity and a fair chance. Aircraft having difficulties locating GV's that are stopped under cover and running a decent risk of being shot down if a flacker is nearby hardly constitutes 'immunity'.

Yeah, I respond in jest to those asking for excessive vulnerability of GV's with equally or more excessive requests for invulnerability. Does that mean I really want to be invulnerable? No.
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 Zexx

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 65
Re: Somebody get Kranak a tissue......
« Reply #51 on: April 23, 2012, 01:26:51 PM »
I think that Situational Awareness is the key factor in this discussion. While  I am a relatively new player to the game.. I have played the earlier versions enough form the mindset that the Icon settings Ground vehicles as they are now nearly reflect true detection ranges. As a Soldier withe the Air Defense Artillery branch of the US Army I can tell you that SA plays a huge effect even more so in this game. Realistically, An ADA crew would likely spot an Attacking Aircraft long before that Aircraft will even realize that it is there(without all the Modern bells and whistles), unless that vehicle and crew are in the open (with out cover and concealment). The practical detection range for most ADA units is roughly 5 miles  with a 2 mile engagement when using ballistic ammo. A spotter aircraft or vehicle enhances detection ranges often by terrain association.

At the start of the War the Germans were superior in the use cover and concealment ( and incidentally the first ones to use camouflage universally across the Wehr Macht.) What does this mean? it means that the Allies had to develop T.T.P's to detect, engage, and destroy those units. These T.T.P's (Tactics, Training, and Procedures) included nuances such as irregular outlines from near by terrain, object Shine(from headlamps and Windscreens/Shields not covered), or (as one mentioned earlier in the Wishlist thread), and Visible tracks; to finally dust or smoke from movement or firing . You're not  going to see most units until they "open up" on your, or  you detect them first. I think that applies here to an extent. This is why most C.A.S mission were, and should be flown in Tandem, and GV missions should always have an over watch, and why the Storch is a brilliant add to the game. Alternately,this is why " the Herring bone" is used as a defensive measure against air attack by ground units in Convoy, and individual units are spread out so as not to give away other units adjacent, but close enough to lend supporting Mass volume of fires.

I can tell a friendly unit at 800m to 1200m through Bino's or gunner optics If I know what to look for (icons negate this in game with respect to friendly positions as a form of SA). that being said, with the untrained eye that distance is reduced significantly and even negated under cover or concealment. Therefore i think the Icon ranges should be left as is. This opinion maybe due to my relative "newness' to being a GV'er, but again I think the icon ranges are more 'realistic' when it comes to a Ground to Air or Air to ground engagement.
Yes there is a Huge learning curve in flying. It starts on Take off and ends on the glide slope for landing. In short The grade arc is the difference you take between being in the sky or in a mountainside.