idea for the great GV battles at a tank town,to prevent massive bombing

[Chalenge]

. . . fly a fighter for like 25 mins only to see that lancaster bailing when you get into icon range.

More like ten minutes in Luftwaffe iron. Watching them bail is still better than watching them bomb while you are in the tower, because its just too high to climb.

[Karnak]

The balance of power is probably fine. IRL, any plane flying straight at an AA gun would be shot down. Same in game...

Too bad I can't see them to not fly at them and Bob can see them from 6000 yards out to run straight to them.

If I let all runners go I would get far fewer kills.  In addition, given the thing I fly, letting them go is often tantamount to offering my six to a more agile aircraft, not a great thing for my long term survival.

More wirbs, more aircraft, and dumber pilots. Of course more of you will be shot down. But that's some of your fault, not entirely the game's.

No idea what you mean here.

I agree on the friendly icon thing to a certain extent. Maybe 1.25 x the view range of enemies, just to represent radio contact.

Radios were quite limited.  I highly doubt that your random Bf109 pilot could talk to your random AA gun or that your random P-51 pilot could talk to a the M4 Sherman below him.  Icons should be just as limited for friendly aircraft as they are for enemy aircraft.  Icons for friendly GVs should remain as they are currently.

[Shifty]

IRL, any plane flying straight at an AA gun would be shot down. Same in game...

Really? Somebody better tell those American and Japanese divebomber pilots who sunk warships with all their masseed AA guns firing at them and flew home to tell
about it that they really got shot down. While you're at let the Luftwaffe pilots that survived attacking mass bomber formations and the Stuka pilots
on the Eastern front. Those idiots told us for years that they survived.  

[Chalenge]

. . .Radios were quite limited. . .

I'll say! The F4U1 had a nasty habit of electrical disturbances above 30,000 feet, which led to radio static that made any communication impossible. This was also true for the P47Bs and Cs, because it was an issue with the ignition system arcing at high altitudes.

[Tank-Ace]

Too bad I can't see them to not fly at them and Bob can see them from 6000 yards out to run straight to them.

If I let all runners go I would get far fewer kills.  In addition, given the thing I fly, letting them go is often tantamount to offering my six to a more agile aircraft, not a great thing for my long term survival.

I'm not saying the runner issue is fine. But in terms of aircraft out hunting GVs vs GVs ability to shoot them down, it's fine.
 

No idea what you mean here.

I mean there's no reason anyone should expect to survive what amounts to a suicide charge. Everyone should suck it up and accept the fact that they will have to think from now on.

Radios were quite limited.  I highly doubt that your random Bf109 pilot could talk to your random AA gun or that your random P-51 pilot could talk to a the M4 Sherman below him.  Icons should be just as limited for friendly aircraft as they are for enemy aircraft.  Icons for friendly GVs should remain as they are currently.

Like I said, just make it slightly longer. Just because they're on the same side, they'll have a better idea of what's in the neighborhood.

Or we could make storchs increase the icon range for friendly forces.

[Tank-Ace]

Really? Somebody better tell those American and Japanese divebomber pilots who sunk warships with all their masseed AA guns firing at them and flew home to tell
about it that they really got shot down. While you're at let the Luftwaffe pilots that survived attacking mass bomber formations and the Stuka pilots
on the Eastern front. Those idiots told us for years that they survived.  

Oh yes, and swarms of dive bombers trying to overwhelm defenses at 10k+ is completely the same as your stupid arse flying straight at a Wirbelwind at 1000 ft....

Also, difference between attacking a bomber stream with a fighter doing 450mph+, coming in at an off angle, while the bomber is also moving.

Don't twist things. It doesn't strengthen your case.

[Shifty]

Oh yes, and swarms of dive bombers trying to overwhelm defenses at 10k+ is completely the same as your stupid arse flying straight at a Wirbelwind at 1000 ft....

Also, difference between attacking a bomber stream with a fighter doing 450mph+, coming in at an off angle, while the bomber is also moving.

Don't twist things. It doesn't strengthen your case.

You're the one trying to make a case not me. Referring to somebody as a stupid arse means you don't have the ability to debate a subject intelligently. You're a child who has to resort to insults. Who said swarms of dive bombers? Oh yeah that was you not me. You might do a little research every now and then before just making foolish statements. Then take a peek in the mirror if you're looking for somebody to refer to as a stupid arse. 

[coombz]

You might do a little research every now and then before just making foolish statements.

I doubt that habit is one he is likely to change


also GVs are for ladies 

[Debrody]

More like ten minutes in Luftwaffe iron. Watching them bail is still better than watching them bomb while you are in the tower, because its just too high to climb.

Leave me alone with your mindless lamentation. Thanks.

Or... i would resub only to duel with you and post the film here. Is it a fair deal?

(what a punk, geez)

[Tank-Ace]

You're the one trying to make a case not me. Referring to somebody as a stupid arse means you don't have the ability to debate a subject intelligently. You're a child who has to resort to insults. Who said swarms of dive bombers? Oh yeah that was you not me. You might do a little research every now and then before just making foolish statements. Then take a peek in the mirror if you're looking for somebody to refer to as a stupid arse. 

Valid point, you're not making a case, per se. Luckily what I said also applies to making a point, a statement of fact, and many other situations.

Or it could mean flying straight at a Wirbelwind is inarguably stupid, and those expecting to survive such an act are inarguably less intelligent. If you've done such a thing, then you sir are less intelligent, and therefore the term "stupid" would apply to you.


And yes, even 10 dive bombers would count as a 'swarm'  when compared to the single P-51 flying at the wirb. But of course you wouldn't take things in the intended manner. Oh no, that would be much too simple and logical. Much better to intentionally misunderstand for the sake of an argument.

[Chalenge]

Leave me alone with your mindless lamentation. Thanks.

Or... i would resub only to duel with you and post the film here. Is it a fair deal?

(what a punk, geez)

@Hitech- perma-ban this one (Debrody). PLEASE!

[Shifty]

Valid point, you're not making a case, per se. Luckily what I said also applies to making a point, a statement of fact, and many other situations.

Or it could mean flying straight at a Wirbelwind is inarguably stupid, and those expecting to survive such an act are inarguably less intelligent. If you've done such a thing, then you sir are less intelligent, and therefore the term "stupid" would apply to you.


And yes, even 10 dive bombers would count as a 'swarm'  when compared to the single P-51 flying at the wirb. But of course you wouldn't take things in the intended manner. Oh no, that would be much too simple and logical. Much better to intentionally misunderstand for the sake of an argument.

You keep thinking I'm trying to prove a point because I have some dog in the hunt with your bombing GVs argument. I don't. So approaching me with a chip on your shoulder is your first mistake. I only go after GVs when they are firing in an airbase I'm using. Attack aircraft did not always attack in swarms, and attacking an AA by flying straight at it did not always mean the plane was shot down. There are volumes and volumes of instances where attacking aircraft were not shot down. Yes flying into the teeth of an AA gun is not wise, but it is never been always fatal. My post was simply trying to point out to you that IRL as you used the term there are a lot of guys that got away with exactly what you said they couldn't IRL. Careful making a concrete IRL statement when making a point unless you're sure what happened IRL or actually lived the experience IRL. I happen to agree with you that Tank Town should be left to tanks. However you guys that roll up on airbases and start shooting the place up have no room to whine. Never take a tank to an airstrike. 

[Tank-Ace]

You keep thinking I'm trying to prove a point because I have some dog in the hunt with your bombing GVs argument. I don't. So approaching me with a chip on your shoulder is your first mistake. I only go after GVs when they are firing in an airbase I'm using. Attack aircraft did not always attack in swarms, and attacking an AA by flying straight at it did not always mean the plane was shot down. There are volumes and volumes of instances where attacking aircraft were not shot down. Yes flying into the teeth of an AA gun is not wise, but it is never been always fatal. My post was simply trying to point out to you that IRL as you used the term there are a lot of guys that got away with exactly what you said they couldn't IRL. Careful making a concrete IRL statement when making a point unless you're sure what happened IRL or actually lived the experience IRL. I happen to agree with you that Tank Town should be left to tanks. However you guys that roll up on airbases and start shooting the place up have no room to whine. Never take a tank to an airstrike. 

It seems to me you came out of the gate with a chip on your shoulder. Can't accept the point of the post (which was valid) and simply correct me, or say it wasn't always fatal IRL. Instead the sarcasm comes out.

I think we both didn't handle things in the best possible way. Agree to drop it?

But let me rephrase;

If you expect to survive a stupid move, you deserve to die, because it is in fact a stupid move. Flying at an AA gun is that type of mistake, and their lethality is largely supported by historical events.

Point being don't while like a brat about cause and effect.

[Zacherof]

@Hitech- perma-ban this one (Debrody). PLEASE!

Why?