Put Planes back in the GV game

[Megalodon]

[waystin2]

As much as I love my Hurri IID this is not a good idea.

[Tank-Ace]

Just noticed this.

I have seen a Tiger II drive off concrete exactly twice in my Aces High career. One was me, the other was somebody I killed with a Firefly.

And I get the feeling you don't GV a whole lot. On CMA in particular, Tiger II's actually see decent usage off base, since they're the only thing that have a prayer of surviving those enemy Jadgpanthers on the other ridges.

They're usually used when odds of enemy air support are lower than usual (not at all unreasonable, given that there is 0% chance of escaping enemy air support in the highest perk, most conspicuous vehicle in the game), and the result is you flyboys all have an biased perspective on what things are like. You almost always encounter Tiger II's when you're attacking a base, but are almost never around when they are used offensively.

You GVers are the biggest group of risk adverse players in the game, and you get more special treatment then any other group in the game too.

I could name a few fighter jockeys who could far out do any GV'er for risk aversion.

You get a commander who can survive being strafed while sticking halfway out the turret.

And nobody is arguing against letting the commander be wounded  by fire (provided you give us a way to button the tank up).

You get reduced icon range

We get more realistic icon range. By rights, nobody shouldn't have any enemy icons at all, and you flyboys are generously granted information WELL beyond that provided by WWII IFF systems.

magical boxes of insta-repairing supplies

And you can rearm and gas up your aircraft in 30 seconds. Think very carefully how far you want to take that line of complaint.

Star Trek transporters to take you directly into the fight,

A necessary concession, given that it could easily take upwards of an hour to get to combat otherwise. You flyboys also have bases spaced every 30 miles or so, instead of every 300 miles.

and the ability to sit on concrete, score kills, and instantly tower out when you see a bomb/tank shell coming towards you.

An unfortunate side effect of the landing system, not an intentional concession. Don't try to twist things; even GV'ers want to get rid of this. However to date, nobody has been able to come up with a satisfactory plan.

I think giving players the ability to spawn IL2's/Ju87G2's from vehicle bases is perfectly reasonable considering all of that.

You would be unintelligent, in that case.

I would go even further and say it would be reasonable to remove aircraft icons for GV's

Only if aircraft get no GV icons, and friendly aircraft are still displayed for wirblwinds and AA vehicles.

place a fifteen second delay on the .ef command while in a vehicle

Do the same for aircraft

add a thirty second timer to vehicle supplies.

You can also land from your rearm pad, we can't land just anywhere if we need supplies.

[Ack-Ack]

I'm aware of this. However it's not what the Stuka was DESIGNED to do.

Bombing hangers would probably be the closest thing in game to what it was actually designed for.

It was designed to attack ground targets, regardless if it was a bunker, a building, a ship, a tank, a truck or people.  The Stuka (when it was combat field tested) was used to attack ground vehicles during the Spanish Civil War, amongst other targets.  When used in the flying artillery role (as it was during the Blitzkrieg), it often bombed and strafed ground vehicles, both military and civilian.

ack-ack

[ReVo]

We get more realistic icon range. By rights, nobody shouldn't have any enemy icons at all, and you flyboys are generously granted information WELL beyond that provided by WWII IFF systems.  

No, you get special treatment because you cry more then anybody else. I would be fine with no icons personally.

And you can rearm and gas up your aircraft in 30 seconds. Think very carefully how far you want to take that line of complaint.  

Yes, I can fly all the way back to my airfield and gas up/rearm in 30 seconds. I can't repair ANY damage, much less crash-land in a field and have a vehicle drive up and instantly bring my plane back to life. It's absurd that somebody can knock out your turret/tracks/engine and you are able to instantly repair the damage and continue fighting as though those hits never happened. A delay on repair time is pretty reasonable, but you won't admit that because it would mean you couldn't abuse the mechanic anymore.

Don't try to twist things; even GV'ers want to get rid of this. However to date, nobody has been able to come up with a satisfactory plan.

Fifteen second delay seems perfectly reasonable to me. For aircraft it seems a bit silly since I can't sit on the tarmac and fight, score kills, and abuse a mechanic in my perk tank to avoid any risk of death.

[RotBaron]

No, you get special treatment because you cry more then anybody else. I would be fine with no icons personally.

 

Special treatment?  What kind, how so?  Maybe just different treatment, because it's an entirely different aspect. You are in the loud minority that GVrs are too this too that and waaaaah they get supplies. Suck it up Nancy, without them the LWMA would have 30peeps at times and all the Bish sitting in the tower figuring out how they can horde with only 13players. That what you want?

 

[Vinkman]

Maybe vehicles should have to pull into a hangar to tower. 

[Tank-Ace]

No, you get special treatment because you cry more then anybody else. I would be fine with no icons personally.

As RotBaron noted, its different, not special.

The only similar aspect that tank combat shares with air combat is that you want to shoot your opponent. If you treat two completely different things as the same, obviously it won't work for one of them.

Yes, I can fly all the way back to my airfield and gas up/rearm in 30 seconds. I can't repair ANY damage, much less crash-land in a field and have a vehicle drive up and instantly bring my plane back to life. It's absurd that somebody can knock out your turret/tracks/engine and you are able to instantly repair the damage and continue fighting as though those hits never happened. A delay on repair time is pretty reasonable, but you won't admit that because it would mean you couldn't abuse the mechanic anymore.

You also can't be immobilized in the air, hanging there helpless until someone brings you supplies either. You also can't be shot from in excess of 4000yds either.

When you rearm, you also have that nice curtain of field ack to help keep your whiney little arse safe. It forces people to think twice out to 6.5k, while GV's have nothing of the sort. You're also guaranteed to be back at your base, when 50% of the time for a GV, they've spawned in and returning to base is so impractical as to be impossible.

You also seem to be completely ignorant of the fact that an engine or track hit is damn near a death sentence already, unless there happens to be supplies already within range. Now you're saying I should wait for supplies to drive up, wait another 30 seconds for it to be fixed while under shell fire?

Fifteen second delay seems perfectly reasonable to me. For aircraft it seems a bit silly since I can't sit on the tarmac and fight, score kills, and abuse a mechanic in my perk tank to avoid any risk of death.

Then once again, you prove your low IQ. You're sitting nice and safe at your field, likely 15 miles from an enemy, outside of gunnery range of most enemies, and protected from any within close proximity by your field ack.

You also have no need to defend yourself, while we do. The fact that you cannot recognize this is simply astounding to me. It also makes me wonder how you managed to learn ACM, when you think the game should conform to your own unreasonable wishes.

[Tank-Ace]

Maybe vehicles should have to pull into a hangar to tower. 

Why? Its no different than aircraft landing on the runway, and then disappearing. They should be in the hanger to have even a modicum of safety, yet they disappear the instant they stop moving.

[Karnak]

Why? Its no different than aircraft landing on the runway, and then disappearing. They should be in the hanger to have even a modicum of safety, yet they disappear the instant they stop moving.

Why?  Because aircraft aren't the ones grossly abusing a game mechanic in order to fight without risk.

Come back and talk again when that has changed.

[Tank-Ace]

Why?  Because aircraft aren't the ones grossly abusing a game mechanic in order to fight without risk.

Come back and talk again when that has changed.

Okay, valid point. Still, I don't think this should be the only change if we're going to change the landing requirments.

3k  is plenty enough separation from aircraft for a landing. Considering it will take a Panzer about 10 minutes to cover 5k, assuming they go in a strait line, and don't have to climb any hills, dodge trees, and assuming the aircraft don't come closer.

Would also increase use of perk GV's offensively.

[ReVo]

Good old Jager simply wants to continue abusing the broken mechanics because it benefits him. It would break his little heart if he logged on one day and found that his Tiger II wasn't 100% invulnerable while sitting on concrete, it would also break his little tanker heart if he couldn't have somebody spread supplies out around him so he could take multiple crippling hits and keep on fighting like nothing happened.

[Karnak]

I agree that GVs need a better system for landing so that they can be used offensively without the safe assumption that it is a one way trip.

[ReVo]

I agree that GVs need a better system for landing so that they can be used offensively without the safe assumption that it is a one way trip.

Fifteen second delay to .ef for GV's seems perfectly reasonable to me.

[hitech]

I agree that GVs need a better system for landing so that they can be used offensively without the safe assumption that it is a one way trip.

Let me know if you come up with one.

HiTech