What is Vehicle quadrant??

[+Kilroy+]

The real problem is that you GV'ers became so used to sneaking around with impunity from air attack that you are all crying bloody murder when HTC introduces a measure to increase the ability for aircraft engage GV's. All you pansies do is sneak bases or ambush other players - usually some form of spawn camp whack-a-mole, and then land your kills to get kudos form your equally cowardly cohorts. All glory and no guts.

The real problem is meaningless posts on a thread about quadrant radar and it's merits. The fact that this poster has never driven a gv goes without saying but the question is, what could be his possible reason for wanting to add to this thread, given the fact by his own admission - unless he includes himself in the group of pansies - he is obviously uninformed about the subject. A chance to snipe back at the figurative main gunner does indeed seem a likely reason to post here.

[toddbobe]

BTW the range of the vehicle radar is adjustable for observer,vehicle,plane and flack independently.

Also the quadrant is my first attempt at displaying some type of info that vehicles are in the area. I've wanted to add some type of display since AH3 was released, the reason is because of the increased tree density making if difficult to even know if a vehicle is in the area.

I'm convinced that more info was needed simply showing that a vehicle is some where to be found to fight in visible range. So any suggestion how to display that a vehicle is in the area(3 - 5 mile radius), with out giving a precise location will be considered.

HiTech

Sir:

May I suggest the V-dar for the M8 and Jeeps only. How and increasing the range of sound of GV's. I offer this because it has a counter measure. I will often fly over a friendly GV so my engine noise will cover the sound of the friendly GV. I think this will encourage teamwork.

Todd

[Devil 505]

The real problem is meaningless posts on a thread about quadrant radar and it's merits. The fact that this poster has never driven a gv goes without saying but the question is, what could be his possible reason for wanting to add to this thread, given the fact by his own admission - unless he includes himself in the group of pansies - he is obviously uninformed about the subject. A chance to snipe back at the figurative main gunner does indeed seem a likely reason to post here.

I don't GV in this game because there is hardly ever any dynamic aspect to doing it. You either set up an ambush and farm easy kills or feed the tards camping your spawn. It's lame either way and it has been lame long before you showed up here to be the poster child for dirtbag GVing.
 

[perdue3]

If you had any recent experience playing GVs in this game (I don't see any recent melee arena activity at all for "perdue3"), you would know that it's not that simple.  In general, planes versus GVs is like squirrel hunters versus squirrels in this game (with a very few exceptions).  GVs *have* to be able to hide, or be in a horde, or they die to planes.  In contrast, single players can always count on landing kills in AH3, regardless of numbers, and without being in a group of other players. 

Again, I don't see any game time for "perdue3" under the last 3 camps.  Do you play under another handle (or do you play at all)???

My ingame ID is perdweeb. I have played GV's this tour.

[Halo46]

I don't GV in this game because there is hardly ever any dynamic aspect to doing it. You either set up an ambush and farm easy kills or feed the tards camping your spawn. It's lame either way and it has been lame long before you showed up here to be the poster child for dirtbag GVing.

Sorry dude, you continue adding zero to the arguments concerning the OP. You and your CO have only hostile comments about how others play, nothing else. You should tone down or better yet, contribute. Now, there are three of us not contributing to the discussion. I will try to change that.

I find this attempt laudable, but the execution deplorable. Another measure is going to have to be thought of in my opinion. This, the HUD, and the people with nothing nice to say are factors keeping me from renewing my subscription. Just a bad players opinion about the game.

[TDeacon]

I don't GV in this game because there is hardly ever any dynamic aspect to doing it. You either set up an ambush and farm easy kills or feed the tards camping your spawn. It's lame either way and it has been lame long before you showed up here to be the poster child for dirtbag GVing.

You actually make a good point there.  GVing in AH3 can and should be improved to encourage active maneuvering and tactics by GVs.  However, HTC for reasons I don't understand has been modifying the game to make this less and less possible.  I could go into detail if you are interested.  Note however, making GVs easy meat for planes is not the answer. 

[Devil 505]

Sorry dude, you continue adding zero to the arguments concerning the OP. You and your CO have only hostile comments about how others play, nothing else. You should tone down or better yet, contribute. Now, there are three of us not contributing to the discussion. I will try to change that.

I find this attempt laudable, but the execution deplorable. Another measure is going to have to be thought of in my opinion. This, the HUD, and the people with nothing nice to say are factors keeping me from renewing my subscription. Just a bad players opinion about the game.

I've offered constructive criticisms of the GV game in the past and made suggestions to remedy the imbalance found in how aircraft interact with GV's. My suggestions were met with complaints from GV'ers worried that their EZ mode play style would be ruined by them. So yeah, I am relishing their current cries about the vehicle quadrant. If I had my way, they'd be off far worse.

[molybdenum]

I've offered constructive criticisms of the GV game in the past and made suggestions to remedy the imbalance found in how aircraft interact with GV's. My suggestions were met with complaints from GV'ers worried that their EZ mode play style would be ruined by them. So yeah, I am relishing their current cries about the vehicle quadrant. If I had my way, they'd be off far worse.

Few players that habitually drive GVs use them exclusively, or even mostly. Yet GVing is an important part of the game to them. So you're in favor of pissing off a segment of the population that contributes to the AH community as a whole (land, sea, and air) despite our current low game population? Is that really what you want?

[Devil 505]

You actually make a good point there.  GVing in AH3 can and should be improved to encourage active maneuvering and tactics by GVs.  However, HTC for reasons I don't understand has been modifying the game to make this less and less possible.  I could go into detail if you are interested.  Note however, making GVs easy meat for planes is not the answer.

Except GVing in AH2 was not much different that it is now. The AH3 trees only make it easier to be successful in going unseen than before. Otherwise, the camp or be camped mentality has always been present. It's been this way since I started and actually tried learning how to GV. I very quickly realized that the GV game does not jive with my beliefs about combat or fun gameplay. Things became even worse when the Storch was introduced and the icon rules changed.

I watched the air war stagnate at it's lowest level - GV hunting. It became rare to see an Il-2 or A-20 when there used to be many. It was too difficult to spot the GV;s in general and the Wirbelwinds had a field day blasting the low level GV killers and the fighters trying to engage them. And soon there was nobody hunting the Il-2's or A-20's because there were none to be found in the first place. I think HiTech hoped that change would encourage dynamic use of GV's in open battle, but it just enabled further use of them in camping and sneaking.  As a result of the icon change was that suddenly base capture via GV became a viable option at airfields and what was usually done with missions of easy meat pony or P-38 raids followed by goons became M3 troop rushes following a colliope leveling town with rockets.

So I agree that making GV's easy meat for planes won't help stimulate GV battles of tactics and maneuver, but it would generate more air combat when we need that the most.

[hotard]

This is the biggest pile of crap in the game. Might as well just put flashing lights on the gv's who was whinning for this anyway?

[Devil 505]

Few players that habitually drive GVs use them exclusively, or even mostly. Yet GVing is an important part of the game to them. So you're in favor of pissing off a segment of the population that contributes to the AH community as a whole (land, sea, and air) despite our current low game population? Is that really what you want?

You misinterpret my desire to make it harder for GV'ers to do their thing as some desire to grief them. What I want, is to restore the basic level of the air war that was lost when the GV icon rules changed.

There are 2 separate facets to my dislike of GV'ing

1. Ambush Whack-a-mole tactics are lame

2. GVing has become the driving force in the overall war effort at the determent of the air war.

I can't fix number 1. But it was possible to break a spawn camp with enough aircraft.

Now with item 2, reverting the icon rules back to the old way would be a good first step, but I'd also heavily perk the Wirbelwind. Putting a target on the backs of the GV'ers is a good thing for the overall game as it would encourage more air attacks against GV's and more fighter cover to defend them.

[Dundee]

The real problem is that you GV'ers became so used to sneaking around with impunity from air attack that you are all crying bloody murder when HTC introduces a measure to increase the ability for aircraft engage GV's. All you pansies do is sneak bases or ambush other players - usually some form of spawn camp whack-a-mole, and then land your kills to get kudos form your equally cowardly cohorts. All glory and no guts.

Really constructive ......with all the childish name calling....then again you might be a child

[1stpar3]

I am torn on this. It was very seldom occurrence that I couldnt find a GV, but it did happen. Saw a few pretty good ideas on TWEAKS for this. This evening, on most bases with Vehicle spawns and GV activity, it was SUPER easy to know which spawn the GVS were coming from. Most of the spawn points directly lined up with the "quadrant" that would light up. So, maybe use the "quadrant" in same way as "dar bar"? 2 GVs and one section lights up...1 more and 2 light up? Now if there was a way to randomize which quadrant lights up first, as to not give away exact spawn to check first? Its only been 2 days, jury is still deliberating, but in no way a hung jury. This sure does cut down on ALL the wasted man hours wondering if the base is flashing because of attack...or CYBRO doing his thing! Maybe even have the "Quadrant" light up with landed C47s? YUP, sneaky little buggers NOTAR a KRILLEN parked a Goon, and I couldnt find it. So with full disclosure, thats why I ask  Flew right over him, and I spot GVS all the time, BUGGERS

[27th]

God forbid you actually risk getting killed in a combat game.   

God forbid you make any sense. Stay on topic.

27th

[+Kilroy+]

I don't GV in this game because there is hardly ever any dynamic aspect to doing it. You either set up an ambush and farm easy kills or feed the tards camping your spawn. It's lame either way and it has been lame long before you showed up here to be the poster child for dirtbag GVing.

505 guy, you've asked for this. In answering my statement about meaningless posts, you further define yourself as being completely uninformed on the subject. FYI "I don't GV" translates into "I have no direct knowledge of GV," on a thread that is essentially about GV's. How would you convince people that you know how "an ambush" is "set up"? That it isn't in reality (virtual reality) as hard to accomplish as the people who supposedly do it feel it is? The term "feed the tards camping your spawn," must be some sort of personal slang, there are so many possible interpretations that it is meaningless, thus contributing to the meaningless post observation.
 Since you are unaware of the gv aspect of the game, it raises the assumption that you are misinformed about the extreme variety and depth of the game. This statement in particular:

What I want, is to restore the basic level of the air war that was lost when the GV icon rules changed.

demonstrates that you are unwilling to embrace the new AH and want to revert to some simpler, halcyon version of the game, likely because you feel overwhelmed and unable to master these new aspects.
 Creating a personal conflict can seem like a valid diversion from one's perceived inadequacies and the attempt to address me with a derogatory term can be better understood from that perspective.

The only reason that I can see for 505 posting here is an affectation for negative attention and since he provides nothing in return for these carefully considered sentences, this is his last reply.

God forbid you make any sense. Stay on topic.

He would first have to be on topic, in order to stay there.