What is Vehicle quadrant??

[The Fugitive]

First, I wouldn't use a film to prove anything unless you have the pilots view. Using your film while in a vehicle and jumping into his plane only shows they circled. Its how I locate vehicles always. With out seeing what views the divebomber was using you dont KNOW what he was looking at. Some people are good at divebombing. Some people were good at avoiding combat in a combat game. It looks like this change may have helped change that. Only time will tell.

[Lusche]

It's interesting the biggest vocal opponent to this is the one that would literally sit under a bush for an hour to avoid detection. 

I am not.


But by the way, aren't you the one who just asked for the SB's not to flash when an enemy is near?

[waystin2]

I am not.


But by the way, aren't you the one who just asked for the SB's not to flash when an enemy is near?

Lusche you answer when you are not called.  Rest easy Snail.     The SB is a separate flight/Map issue and can be discussed there, it has nothing to do with GV's.

[+Kilroy+]

First, I wouldn't use a film to prove anything unless you have the pilots view. Using your film while in a vehicle and jumping into his plane only shows they circled. Its how I locate vehicles always. With out seeing what views the divebomber was using you dont KNOW what he was looking at. Some people are good at divebombing. Some people were good at avoiding combat in a combat game. It looks like this change may have helped change that. Only time will tell.

You can use films for whatever you like. It is extremely difficult to quantify into demonstrable examples what is clear in game. Based on that, you can clearly see the F6F flying well above tree top. When Snargly's wirble kills the A-20 in the foreground below, they are barely visible. This is obvious in the video.
 You know how to dive bomb. You find a target, you identify ground markings and you climb up, usually looking back to maintain visual contact with the location, turn and dive on it.
 Watch how these guys do it. They circle high, making slight course corrections. Look at the F6F. At 00:13, he makes a course correction, as if he were on a north/south course, and his indicator was showing I was in the southwest quadrant, so he turns toward me. As he passes, the indicator would then swing to show me in the northwest quadrant. At 00:17 he makes the reverse of the move, as if to again line up the quadrant. When it swings to the east of his position he knows he has passed me and can begin his circling climb. At 00:30 while in a circling climb, he makes a slight course correction, again at 00:41, to make sure the dar quadrant rotates on his clipboard as he climbs to confirm I am directly beneath him. At 00:48, right after that course correction, like a ballistic warhead, he goes into as steep a dive as possible, towards what? Do I have a big glaring strobe on my hood? Apparently, as we'll see. At 00:54, right at the edge of his gunsight, my tank appears, watch the video, it is unmistakable. The ONLY way he could have known to dive from that altitude exactly there was the indicator.

It's interesting the biggest vocal opponent to this is the one that would literally sit under a bush for an hour to avoid detection.  This is the type of player it was introduced for. 

What is interesting is that you would take it upon yourself to assign motive to someone else's actions. Project much? You are mistaken in my case, I will let HiTech speak for himself. If I'd intended to avoid detection, I would play Minecraft, next?

[Delirium]

Why do GV operators want to compete independently against aircraft? Has anyone ever read a history book?

Before the GV community attacks me about the new quadrant, armor would frequently use roads and only use overland movement for attack or hiding. In AH, GVs can go full speed over any terrain and this gives them an unfair advantage.

[waystin2]

You can use films for whatever you like. It is extremely difficult to quantify into demonstrable examples what is clear in game. Based on that, you can clearly see the F6F flying well above tree top. When Snargly's wirble kills the A-20 in the foreground below, they are barely visible. This is obvious in the video.
 You know how to dive bomb. You find a target, you identify ground markings and you climb up, usually looking back to maintain visual contact with the location, turn and dive on it.
 Watch how these guys do it. They circle high, making slight course corrections. Look at the F6F. At 00:13, he makes a course correction, as if he were on a north/south course, and his indicator was showing I was in the southwest quadrant, so he turns toward me. As he passes, the indicator would then swing to show me in the northwest quadrant. At 00:17 he makes the reverse of the move, as if to again line up the quadrant. When it swings to the east of his position he knows he has passed me and can begin his circling climb. At 00:30 while in a circling climb, he makes a slight course correction, again at 00:41, to make sure the dar quadrant rotates on his clipboard as he climbs to confirm I am directly beneath him. At 00:48, right after that course correction, like a ballistic warhead, he goes into as steep a dive as possible, towards what? Do I have a big glaring strobe on my hood? Apparently, as we'll see. At 00:54, right at the edge of his gunsight, my tank appears, watch the video, it is unmistakable. The ONLY way he could have known to dive from that altitude exactly there was the indicator.
What is interesting is that you would take it upon yourself to assign motive to someone else's actions. Project much? You are mistaken in my case, I will let HiTech speak for himself. If I'd intended to avoid detection, I would play Minecraft, next?

Pre quadrant you have actually yakked on 200 about telling Waystin2 that I am not moving until he leaves or some sort of drivel.  Hiding... Next?

[The Fugitive]

You can use films for whatever you like. It is extremely difficult to quantify into demonstrable examples what is clear in game. Based on that, you can clearly see the F6F flying well above tree top. When Snargly's wirble kills the A-20 in the foreground below, they are barely visible. This is obvious in the video.
 You know how to dive bomb. You find a target, you identify ground markings and you climb up, usually looking back to maintain visual contact with the location, turn and dive on it.
 Watch how these guys do it. They circle high, making slight course corrections. Look at the F6F. At 00:13, he makes a course correction, as if he were on a north/south course, and his indicator was showing I was in the southwest quadrant, so he turns toward me. As he passes, the indicator would then swing to show me in the northwest quadrant. At 00:17 he makes the reverse of the move, as if to again line up the quadrant. When it swings to the east of his position he knows he has passed me and can begin his circling climb. At 00:30 while in a circling climb, he makes a slight course correction, again at 00:41, to make sure the dar quadrant rotates on his clipboard as he climbs to confirm I am directly beneath him. At 00:48, right after that course correction, like a ballistic warhead, he goes into as steep a dive as possible, towards what? Do I have a big glaring strobe on my hood? Apparently, as we'll see. At 00:54, right at the edge of his gunsight, my tank appears, watch the video, it is unmistakable. The ONLY way he could have known to dive from that altitude exactly there was the indicator.
What is interesting is that you would take it upon yourself to assign motive to someone else's actions. Project much? You are mistaken in my case, I will let HiTech speak for himself. If I'd intended to avoid detection, I would play Minecraft, next?

I have 11 sorties in attack mode this month, 5 vehicle kills (one of which was you). ALL of these sorties were BEFORE the "quadrant" update. What is shown in the videos is what I have done all this time WITHOUT the quadrant add-on. I think your blaming too much on this change.

I still havn't seen the the update in action but hope to get online today. Maybe some guys have begun to use it more as a target finder, but Im thinking that is what it's purpose is. Learning how to defeat this purpose is now in the hands of the GVers. Im thinking there will be a lot more hide and move type drives now, maybe more teamwork with wirbs running with the heavies as cover.
All to make more action/combat.

[Lusche]

You guys are fixated a lot of the aircraft vs Gv aspect.
Now that the quadrant has been reduced to 200yards, it's much less of an issue.

What remains is the impact on pure GV combat. And I'm still very pessimistic in it's impact in terms of 'quality' (yes, a very ambiguous term).
Even when on the move, you can detect and easily pinpoint an enemy tank totally out of sight up to 6k away. And that's not only those "hiders" you all seem to be fixated upon. Let's give an example:
A few weeks ago I was fighting in my M18. Was two of us defending a town vs a sustained, Gv only attack of 4-5 enemies. One of us stayed back at the town. Considering their numerical superiority, I decided to venture out in a M18. Highly mobile but extremely fragile. The only way to employ this vehicle is shoot& scoot. And so I did, putting up ambush after ambush, quickly relocating and greatly changing my lines of approach, sometimes hitting them from the left, then from the right again.
With the GV quadrant, that would hardly have been possible. They could have easily seen me flanking, no matter how far out of sight I'd been driving. They could have determined my direction down to a few degrees, thanks to the sharp boundary between the quadrants. They would have easily noted how I switched from their right to their left side.
Yes, I could adapt to that - by not choosing a M18 anymore, but a much better armored vehicle and sit back at the town to slug it out again. Or even better get back to planes to simply bomb them.

You don't have to think much anymore, you don't have to 'look' for the enemy that much anymore, and combat tactics based on outwitting and maneuvering are much less feasible.
The new terrains introduced quite a problem in vehicles finding each other for combat and have caused a massive reduction in vehicle diversity. The quadrant, implemented as is,  would be a bad way to fix that problem (if this was the intention at all).

And I'm not even talking about the 'gamey' aspect on looking your map for a 'radar' picture in a WW2 tank instead of looking out of your hatch...

[TDeacon]

Why do GV operators want to compete independently against aircraft? Has anyone ever read a history book?

Before the GV community attacks me about the new quadrant, armor would frequently use roads and only use overland movement for attack or hiding. In AH, GVs can go full speed over any terrain and this gives them an unfair advantage.

There are several other similar posts I could have quoted, but I had to pick one, so I picked yours ...

Historical GV combat (or for that matter air combat) wouldn't be fun to play within the time constraints available in an MMO.  We don't have historical units, command structure, time progression, etc. etc.  We are playing in a sandbox with our planes and tanks, and that's OK. 

Now keeping in mind that we are playing in a sandbox, WRT to "combat" between AC and GVs, except possibly for AA vehicles, there is no "combat" involved.  As I stated in another post, AC versus GV (except for Wirbles) is more like deer hunters versus deer.  Fun for the hunters, but not for the deer.  When you guys comment as if you don't understand this, it's kind of hard to take you seriously. 

MH

[Delirium]

As I stated in another post, AC versus GV (except for Wirbles) is more like deer hunters versus deer.  Fun for the hunters, but not for the deer.  When you guys comment as if you don't understand this, it's kind of hard to take you seriously. 

Ok, we agree on this. Historically (and today), armor that is seen from the air is generally not long for this world.

That said, why do you want GVs to be able to operate with full autonomy in an environment that is dominated by aircraft?

edit: Personally, I don't like the vehicle quadrant feature. I would rather have aircraft spotting tell tale signs of armor moving among tree lines (such as deep tracks and cleared trees and brush). Without that feature available on a static terrain, I don't see what alternative Hitech had.

[The Fugitive]

I wonder if this addition was spurred on by exit polls of new players? Maybe one of the answers given most often was "When in a GV I get killed before I know anyone is around"

From a guy that doesnt GV often I can tell you it is very frustrating to be hammered time after time without ever seeing the enemy. Sound doesn't seem to give out positional info like it use to, trees are so abundant that you need a chainsaw to get around, tracers are wonky, planes flying over head drown out all sounds other than the planes, and so on.

I would think GVing would be the action most new players are going to stick with at first. Air to air has a steep learning curve, and bombing is a bit boring. Gvs on the other hand is only a few keys to drive and shoot and can most easily be done with a mouse as your controller. But if your getting blown away time after time with out knowing how and so cant correct it why would you stay?

[redcatcherb412]

And I'm not even talking about the 'gamey' aspect on looking your map for a 'radar' picture in a WW2 tank instead of looking out of your hatch...

But the jeep mounted ground radar arrays would be impressive .   

I found I do attack bases less, especially GV bases. When a storch ups and marks you within 10 seconds with no hunting around, just flies straight to you for an acft to bomb or marked for a tank. It's not worth the drive. I ended up just taking the ditch or capture instead of playing the bobbing apple in the barrel target time after time. At least the GV to GV isn't as gamey as the hunter has to keep running around and give away his position. Easy to track by sound and you have a 50/50 chance to nail him first. It seems the plan was to reduce ground attacks and that may have worked.

[Becinhu]

I haven’t even used the quadrant feature. In order to use it you must fly with your clipboard up. I dont want to cut my fov in half to use it. My only issue with gvs is that they can sit out in the open and they are virtually invisible until you can icon them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Devil 505]

Now keeping in mind that we are playing in a sandbox, WRT to "combat" between AC and GVs, except possibly for AA vehicles, there is no "combat" involved.  As I stated in another post, AC versus GV (except for Wirbles) is more like deer hunters versus deer.  Fun for the hunters, but not for the deer.  When you guys comment as if you don't understand this, it's kind of hard to take you seriously. 

MH

Except it is not that easy for planes to kill GV's in this game. It is very difficult to fly a search pattern, spot a GV and attack without losing your target while turning into your attack run. The icon ranges are too short to consistently attack GV's successfully from the air.

Furthermore, the in terms of the total MA dynamic, and to use your hunter/deer analogy - GV's are not even the deer. They are the shrubs the deer need to feed on so the hunters have enough deer to hunt.

So, if anything, GV's are still not easy enough to kill to have a healthy MA.

[1stpar3]

It DOES take some practice! Like anything else though, once you get it down..it IS fairly easy to attack GVs from Planes. I practice every day. Its what I really like to do, and not with 1000 pound bombs. 250 is more than enough to kill just about any GV in the game....if you put it on them. I do it every day