>1. Disabling buff guns has nuthing to do with carbombing, does >it? I have never advocated enabling bombs at ground level. >This, I guess is necessary so the vulcher doesnt feel cheated >when he zooms in for an unchallenged kill, only to be surprised >by a big explosion.
Carbombing and ack gunning from the field were all tactics used when guns wer enabled all the time and bombs were armed the instant they were released. I never said you advocated carbombing, did I? I included it because it was the scenario we all faced at one time. Ack starring and carbombing were used togther.
>2. The sight of 40 buff forms on the field scares YOU, not me. I >can kill them with a bomb. If somebody is dumb enuff to try to >strafe them, then they deserve to die.
LOL! You know not what you speak of. I'm not scared of 40 buff formations on a field because if that happened, the server would probably crash. If it didn't, I certainly wouldn't go anywhere near it...and that's exactly the point being made here. Upping 40 buff formations to sit and protect a field is ridiculous. If it doesn't kill the server, it would kill the frame rates and completely stop any attack on the field. That's as one sided as it gets...oh wait, you, you like flying buffs, so I can see how YOU'D like this. If we are going to have such silly abilities, HT might as well make nukes for us all to carry too.
>However, I concede to you, the server crashes and the frame >rate hit would be a problem with this. I also refined my >suggestion to disabling buff guns until takeoff, and then you >have them until tower.
>Now, no more frame rate or server crash problem.
>No more carbombing problem.
Not a problem until 40 buff formations roll enough to to hop into the air and back down on runway and stop. VOILA, instant ack star.
>I am saying that deacking and strafing an nme airbase with a >buff form is possible, and some fool may even think that he is >getting away with something by doing it.
So label me a fool...I've deacked plenty of fields with a low flying buff before.
>But what I said to you was, IF..IF..IF.. you advocate disabling >buff guns on the ground when landing because somebody might >deack a field and land the buffs and then strafe the town, I >challenge you to try it, aside from the strafing part, since the >guns are disabled at landing too.
So what are you getting at here? I don't know why you bring this up, I never said anyhting about landing at an enemy base and playing ack star. I specifically addressed, and continue to address, the ack starring at friendly bases as a means of base protection and how crazy it was when we used to be able to do that.
>In fact, if you are able to deack a field with a buff form, just fly >above it at 500 feet and let the guns rip, then answer me >this...Why would you want to land and strafe, when the 500ft >strafe is 100 times more effective?
I don't know...you tell me, you are the one that keeps bringing this up as if it were one of my points of contention (which I never said anyhting about before).
>Q. I should have my guns when I land so I can defend myself >from the maniac suicide speed freak vulcher who doesnt want >me to land my 4 kills, 3 of which are him. He know I am >defenseless on the ground and may decide to take advantage >of that. Dont tell me I have to fly until he runs out of gas or I >need to plan my attack better. My airplane is crippled and I cant >make it any further. Do you agree or disagree that i should have >my guns?
>If you disagree, then why?
100% disagree. Why should the rest of the arena suffer because YOU want your guns on the ground when you are in a crippled buff?
What about crippled fighters trying to land? Afterall, it's not fair their guns can only shoot in one direction and are fixed. Why don't we make everyhting in the landing pattern invulnerable to bullets? It's not fair a fighter can take advantage of a low slow plane? Please. A lot of my deaths are the result of trying to land at a field where enemy fighters are present. It happens to everyone, not just to buffs.
>Tilt, that is a good idea, but i am geting the feeling that 'vulcher >protection' is the real order here, since all these supposed >impossible situations that would result of 'guns enabled on the >ground' can be fixed by killing the bomber hangars in >preparation for base capture.
BS! These are not "supposed" situations, they are fact, have been here in the past...anyone that's been here for a while can tell you that. Supposed my arse. This sounds more to me like a buff flyer whining than anyhting.
If the bomber hangars are so easy to kill before an attack, then go try it yourself. Wait, let's turn on guns on the ground first, then you go give it a try and see....
