Perked load.

[Tracerfi]

Heck yeah, why stop there......you want fuel..it's perked, you want ammo....it's perked...want to take off ...its perked...soon we'll have to pay to fly 

*cough* he is a bishop no one cares *cough*

[Tilt]

I would agree to the sensible use of perk deposits for ordinance. I'd leave he definition of sensible to HTC.

But it would be a deposit. I.e you don't buy ordinance....... Instead you increase the perk deposit of the ride by choosing certain ordinances.

I would support the re classification of all fighters to score as "attack" (and  attack only) every time ordinance is chosen.

I would then support the introduction of "attack perks" in addition to fighter/bomber/vehicle perks.

[HawkerMKII]

*cough* he is a bishop no one cares *cough*

and you are??? oh who cares

[Zacherof]

Bish smell

[Zoney]

After reading this entire thread I am at a loss to understand why those asking for perked ordinance loads belive that taking something away makes the game any better.

Is it because you are GV'ers and are tired of being bombed ?

I don't have a pony in this race because I very seldom, maybe once a month, up a fighter with ords.

I do see many threads pop up where some folks want to take something from other folks who enjoy what is being attempted to remove.

[Lusche]

After reading this entire thread I am at a loss to understand why those asking for perked ordinance loads belive that taking something away makes the game any better.

Once upon a time AH removed the player's ability to freely fly F4U-C's all the time. By introducing the perks they took something away.
And made the game better by bringing back some diversity.

[Wiley]

What this wish looks to me like it would do is pretty much eliminate the average rank and file hordeling taking 1k bombs.  Would a horde of ponies or jugs with 500lbers and rockets be that much less effective?  Would it swap over to 110s with 500lbers being the new horde ride of choice?

Removing the current path of cheapest perks and least resistance just means the next easiest thing would become the next choice.  I don't think it's likely they're going to go, 'No more 1k bombs for our horde of P51s?  Let's up well planned missions involving escorted formations of B-17s!'

I just don't see it making an improvement to gameplay.

Wiley.

[Rob52240]

A 500 pounder has more than enough to kill a Wirble or anything short of a Tiger with a near miss.  Now actually seeing where the Wirble is, that's another topic.  I miss the old GV icon days. 

Good grief.

A 500# bomb is more than enough to kill a tiger as long as it lands nearby.

[Zacherof]

Then obviously all bombs must be taken from fighters accept 250 pounders

[Karnak]

Bf110s are easier to stop than P-51s.  Also, it takes longer to apply the damage from cannons than from bombs and rockets.

[Rob52240]

Then obviously all bombs must be taken from fighters accept 250 pounders

Good Grief.
Those need a direct hit, or within a horse shoe to kill a panzer.

[Kingpin]

After reading this entire thread I am at a loss to understand why those asking for perked ordinance loads belive that taking something away makes the game any better.

Is it because you are GV'ers and are tired of being bombed ?

I don't have a pony in this race because I very seldom, maybe once a month, up a fighter with ords.

I do see many threads pop up where some folks want to take something from other folks who enjoy what is being attempted to remove.

Nothing is being "taken away" or "removed" by this suggestion, Zoney.  You still have the option of using what you want.   It's just like choosing to fly a tempest, -4 Hog or 262 -- you simply pay for the advantage they give.

In this case the suggestion is having to pay a few perks for the choice (advantage) of using 1000lb bombs on a fighter. You are still only "depositing" those perks, as you get them back when you land.  The idea is to have a cost deterrent for those who use (or mis-use, as the OP is suggesting) that load-out on fighter aircraft, especially when they are used so often in a kamikaze style of play.

As Wiley suggests, this is likely to encourage some players to chose something else (the next best thing), but that next thing is likely to be less overwhelming.  So I think this would actually improve game-play, as the mass Pony/Jug raids would be slightly less effective, and possibly less common.

I for one would much rather see hordes of 110's porking bases than hordes of Ponies and P-47s porking bases or playing CV kamikaze.

On a side note: Adding the ability to perk various load-outs, and show that cost in the hanger, could be an interesting feature in the game in general.  It could allow for a wider array of available load-outs (or aircraft features) offered in the hanger, with the traditional or more historically used (higher production) items being free and the more obscure or advantageous ones coming at a cost.

<S>

[Zacherof]

Good Grief.
Those need a direct hit, or within a horse shoe to kill a panzer.

Or they can gives us nukes

[Wiley]

In this case the suggestion is having to pay a few perks for the choice (advantage) of using 1000lb bombs on a fighter. You are still only "depositing" those perks, as you get them back when you land.  The idea is to have a cost deterrent for those who use (or mis-use, as the OP is suggesting) that load-out on fighter aircraft, especially when they are used so often in a kamikaze style of play.

And I'm all about that.  Bomb and bailers and jabocide are the only two things I wish I could just obliterate from the game.  Ganging, hoing, whatever else doesn't bother me, but suicide bombers just annoy the crap out of me for some reason.

As Wiley suggests, this is likely to encourage some players to chose something else (the next best thing), but that next thing is likely to be less overwhelming.  So I think this would actually improve game-play, as the mass Pony/Jug raids would be slightly less effective, and possibly less common.

The hordes of P51s or 47s I generally see are large enough to strafe down the entire field and town if they so chose.  Reducing them from 2x1000 to 2x500 I don't think would have a measurable effect on their effectiveness.  I sincerely doubt they'd be less common.  The hordes would likely just need to be bigger to pick up the slack.

Wiley.

[HawkerMKII]

Yeah lets take away the 1k bombs on jabos, then the OP will be back in here saying perk all bombs cuz the hordes are upping 100 buffs to horde a base

Try porking ords...it does help