Originally posted by Hooligan
Re-arming is simply a GAME mechanism that allows you to get longer streaks and muck with your score/stats. Allowing re-arm doesn't really have any adverse effect on the simulation per se... i.e. by allowing it you don't create unrealistically fast turn around times when there would be none otherwise.
Hooligan
I'm sorry Hooligan, but I disagree. The re-arm pad does affect the simulation/game. Example: On missions a field is taken, and the entire field is down. Now the capturing force can land at a field which has been secured for all of 30 seconds, hit the re-arm pad, and load up to move onto the next base. Re-upping a fighter from this field is impossible due to the FH's being down. So in reality, you're getting a fully rearmed a/c from an enemy field in 30 seconds. So IMO the rearm pad DOES affect the gameplay.
I contend that if you can rearm an entire aircraft from an enemy field that has been in your possession for 30 seconds, then you should be able to move ammo about a bomber from guns of the same type, within the same time frame.
Now neither case is historically accurate. There was no such thing as fighters landing at captured bases within minutes of their capture and being ready to fight on within 30 seconds. But if we have one that affects gameplay, why not the other? Personally, I think the movement of ammo inside a buff is much more realisitic than that of re-arm pads.
I agree with the above point that both guns should be disabled during the rearm process, and that only guns of the same type can share ammo. But I still believe 30 seconds to reload is MORE than fair considering the other features in this game that are not historically accurate.
