Author Topic: Suiciding the CV en masse! -film, and <S> FrankB and AKPanthr (Read 1949 times)

snocone · « **Reply #30 on:** May 19, 2003, 02:33:10 PM »

this is why i spend most of my time in the ct now, much better fights

as far as cv killin is concerned, it is easy to do without being suicidal if you have some patience. get a stuka with the big bomb, climb to 15k because cv defenders usually arent that high. position yourself behind the carrier and dive towards it. as soon as you see the ack start to shoot at you ease your sight about 3 ship lengths ahead of the boat and release. this is a sure fire way of doing without suiciding, works every time for me, and only takes 2 runs. oh no, ive said too much. i will probably get flamed for posting.

you kids play nice

Shiva · « **Reply #31 on:** May 19, 2003, 04:47:45 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Grimm
Perhaps if the AAA on CVs were less a threat, maybe turned down or less guns were installed a person might be more likely to survive an attack.

I think that the guns on the CVBG should be increased to the historical numbers carried on the ships, and they should all be made player-controllable.

However, the guns would be grouped into batteries, and the player is the gun director for the battery. They have a gunsight similar to the existing AAA sight, and designate a target; the guns fire with an accuracy that increases with the amount of time that the gun director has been tracking the same target and decreases the more the target maneuvers. If a battery is not manned, or the gun director is destroyed, the battery will fire automatically, but at a significantly reduced accuracy (add a random number to the aiming angles).

This lets a dedicated group take over a CVBG's AAA capacity and direct it, while reducing its immediate lethality enough to make attacks less suicidal.

Toad · « **Reply #32 on:** May 19, 2003, 05:14:39 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by beet1e
Oh, right! Does this mean that Mr. Toad is back in Realism Mode?

It isn't a question of realism. It's a question of modeling.

Those of you who have flown the Early War birds that are equipped ONLY with .30 rifle caliber machine guns intuitively understand that the pintle gun modeling is incorrect.

If you get behind a slow F4U in your Hurri I and begin to paste him with 8 .30 rifle caliber mg's from 250 yards, you'll still use a huge amount of ammo from 8 guns before his wing or tail falls off.

Yet that same F4U can roll in on a tank and the single .30 rifle caliber pintle gun will take his tail off with a a short burst.

Certainly not selective realism. Not realism per se at all... it's modeling. There's no way a .30 pintle gun should be more deadly to aircraft at longer ranges than 8 .30 rifle caliber mg's are at shorter ranges.

Yes, I'm available to test/film in the DA for anyone that cares to examine the issue further.

However, I think it's intuitively obvious to those that have flown the Early Birds.

Your comparison to death/re-upping is simply too bogus to even bother with. And you knew that when you wrote it.

Please do try to be at least a bit serious, OK?

T0J0 · « **Reply #33 on:** May 19, 2003, 05:40:15 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Yeager
Its all about gameplay and the typical AW dweeblet enjoying his 10 minutes online

Another ex-AW cheap shot...You one classless MFer Yeager...

hazed- · « **Reply #34 on:** May 19, 2003, 06:44:23 PM »

dieing should in my opinion be more detrimental to the player than a slightly lower score.

You need some sort of restriction or penalty imposed for excessive wasting of resources

again this wont or cant be done until we have the AH2 setup where it looks as though we will be much more accountable for our actions.Keep crashing planes and they start to let you fly old versions only

Now this would be a terrible thing in an MA enviroment but in AH2 it seems you will be flying in groups with set goals meaning a suicidal hits of a target doesnt do you any good because you have to start all over again.Do well , SURVIVE and you gain rank and access to better planes/weapons etc.

until AH2 there isnt going to be any changes to AH as far as i know. It would be great to try some new stuff like a different perk system or some sort of penalty for suiciders but it just aint gonna happen is it? why moan about them when you know they wont stop unless they are forced to by the game.

SunKing · « **Reply #35 on:** May 19, 2003, 06:54:02 PM »

very entertaining thread thank you.

Like I said before Laz and Rude need to host a H2H server. Build a small map with close fields, choose only the early war planes they like and have at it. Nothing but furballing. You two will NEVER be happy in the MA, face it.

Toad · « **Reply #36 on:** May 19, 2003, 07:13:16 PM »

Funny thing is, Rude and Laz are happy in the MA. They just do what they like to do and ignore the generalissimos.

As do I.

beet1e · « **Reply #37 on:** May 19, 2003, 07:18:48 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mr. Toad
It isn't a question of realism. It's a question of modeling.

Those of you who have flown the Early War birds that are equipped ONLY with .30 rifle caliber machine guns intuitively understand that the pintle gun modeling is incorrect.

If you get behind a slow F4U in your Hurri I and begin to paste him with 8 .30 rifle caliber mg's from 250 yards, you'll still use a huge amount of ammo from 8 guns before his wing or tail falls off.

Yet that same F4U can roll in on a tank and the single .30 rifle caliber pintle gun will take his tail off with a a short burst.

Certainly not selective realism. Not realism per se at all... it's modeling. There's no way a .30 pintle gun should be more deadly to aircraft at longer ranges than 8 .30 rifle caliber mg's are at shorter ranges.

Yes, I'm available to test/film in the DA for anyone that cares to examine the issue further.

However, I think it's intuitively obvious to those that have flown the Early Birds.

Your comparison to death/re-upping is simply too bogus to even bother with. And you knew that when you wrote it.

Please do try to be at least a bit serious, OK?

Awwwwww... I've upset you.

No need to get willied.

The first question that springs to mind is why on earth would you, of all people, WANT to shoot a PNZR's pintle gun? In your exclusive air to air combat missions of little importance, you should be focussing on other planes, and not sullying your hands by bothering with mere PNZRs.

After all, those PNZRs are only good for attacking other GVs, or buildings, thereby facilitating field capture. You have no interest in GVs. You have no interest in buildings. And you have no interest in field capture. So why all the flap about pintle guns, which has reached such proportions that you've started a thread about it in the Gameplay forum? I realise that the guys who whine the most about modelling/gameplay and STRAT are those guys who - erm... - have no interest in strat

but don't you think this recent obsession about pintle guns is taking it a bit far? Don't worry about PNZRs and pintles. They're not the boogeymen you fear. Their only purpose is to kill strat targets and other GVs. So best you leave 'em alone, eh?

Urchin · « **Reply #38 on:** May 19, 2003, 07:36:12 PM »

Right before I stopped playing in GVs at all, I had a revelation. I stopped trying to shoot strafing planes with the pintle gun, and started trying to shoot em with the MAIN gun. Worked pretty well too

. I think that may be the source of some of these "a 7.92 took my tail off with 1 hit" claims... the Co-ax is a 7.92 too, and I use that to range the main gun shell on strafing airplanes. I bet I'm not the only one that does it either.

A plane with Hizookas will disable a Panzer IVs turret before the pintle gun can do any damage to the plane.

nopoop · « **Reply #39 on:** May 19, 2003, 10:37:39 PM »

Beet1e I really don't think we're that far apart. You had a taste of the "steamroller" that is rolling most nights primetime USA.

The steamroller pretty much dominates the arena. It takes away from the "classic" strat guy such as your self along with the "fight" guys such as myself and the others in this post.

I would submit that the steamroller hurts the classic strat guy more then us fighters. We're a minority in the grand scheme of things. We find alittle corner and do our thing. What get's the feathers ruffled is EVEN if we find the "little" corner where the fight is happening the hero's find the spot, ruin the fight..

Found the "fight" tonight. Great times, four up from the squad, off the coast of an enemy base taking on all comers until fuel and ammo became a concern. to those that came out for the fight.

Good fight, the best in awhile. Off and away in those little corners we sometimes find..

Yeager · « **Reply #40 on:** May 19, 2003, 11:19:47 PM »

Another ex-AW cheap shot...You one classless MFer Yeager...
=====
Whatever.....game was hell of a lot more enjoyable before AW died. Anyone who flew the game before the mass-dorks invaded will speak up on this. I knew the moment I heard that AW was going tits up that AH was gonna get flooded by the cheap skates and turn into the kiddy playland it is today. Ooooh lets play KING OF THE HILL!..... Take that however you want.

What you wanted to say was that buff gunners in AH are too difficult to kill, correct?
====
Not really. I wanted to say that B17s in the game blow up way too easily. Didnt quite make that point. Sorry.

Hey, Why not raise it more yet... like a hundered Bucks a month. That will do even more to eliminate dweebs.
====
Those are your words. Not mine. All I would say is that the game was far better, and far more enjoyable for me when everyone who played the game cared to pay $29.95 I would go back to that structure in a heartbeat if it even remotely brought back that game. Thats just dreaming though, the damage has already been done in my perspective. I still play and enjoy the game but only in a minor way compared to the way it used to be.

FWIW, Ive meant some really good people that came over from AW. I only speak of the larger trend that happened with the massive influx of new players in such a short period of time and how that changed the game in a really negative way.

Again, take that however you want to. Im just pissing on it.

Toad · « **Reply #41 on:** May 19, 2003, 11:21:36 PM »

Nah, you don't upset me. I'm used to instructing. Some students are just quicker than others and thus more fun to work with. Some are deliberately obtuse and contrary which appears to amuse themselves. You work with what you have, I guess.

I'll shoot at a GV if there's nothing else to work on. After all, the fight's the thing. I play to hear the guns shoot. If you don't shoot, this game is pretty boring, IMO. If there's no aircraft to fight, might as well strafe tanks as auger.

And again, you're being silly, deliberately I assume. I'm reasonably sure that most of the players want things modeled as accurately as possible. The various top speed threads serve as examples.

The pintle gun's leathality seems way, way off. Not to mention the invincibility of the guy standing in the hatch under a hailstorm of fire. It's not a show stopper for me, but I believe it is there.
Want to spend some of your building battling time in the DA investigating this hypothesis? Let me know.

Urchin... about a month ago I strafed a tank in an IL-2. Got one pass in before he noticed me and lit him up with cannon for about two seconds. I was opening up at about 600 yards. Next pass at about 1K out I heard "pingpingpingpingpingpingpingp ingpingpingping" for about a second and my tail fell off.

Sure didn't hear anything but a brief burst of light hits on a previously undamaged IL2. Of course, those are pretty light duty unarmored aircraft.

As I said, I'm willing to use some play time to research this. Let's see if I'm wrong.

sax · « **Reply #42 on:** May 20, 2003, 12:36:02 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by beet1e
Awwwwww... I've upset you. No need to get willied.

The first question that springs to mind is why on earth would you, of all people, WANT to shoot a PNZR's pintle gun? In your exclusive air to air combat missions of little importance, you should be focussing on other planes, and not sullying your hands by bothering with mere PNZRs. After all, those PNZRs are only good for attacking other GVs, or buildings, thereby facilitating field capture. You have no interest in GVs. You have no interest in buildings. And you have no interest in field capture.

Actually the 13th Tas did and still do participate in field captures , we just don't do it by steamrolling or porking fuel.
It's not we don't know how it's just not as fun or challenging as it used to be.
Toad is just pointing out the differences between then and now. The latest updates and releases haven't necessarily made AH better.
All you really need to see here is that the # of strat comments on the BBS has increased. Must be an indicator of some sorts that some changes might help.
Don't matter in the long run anyways if HT dosen't think it's broken:)

Sixpence · « **Reply #43 on:** May 20, 2003, 01:15:24 AM »

Beetle, this was mentioned before too. I think one of the solutions given was adding an assault group for each task group. This would be made up of cruisers and destroyers that would come close to shore and free the CV to stay well off shore. I think having to bring the CV close enough to launch ltv's is what dooms it.

I hate to lose a CV, it's the one field they can't pork the fuel at;)

beet1e · « **Reply #44 on:** May 20, 2003, 04:50:26 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by nopoop
Beet1e I really don't think we're that far apart. You had a taste of the "steamroller" that is rolling most nights primetime USA.

Of course we're not far apart! I've just been exchanging views with Urchin the MA numbers reducing thread, and despite the fact that I'm a "building battler", it is clear that the steamroller problem affects us both.

Some people hold the belief that jabo pilots are only building battlers. They don't realise that there are a lot of fights to be had in the course of capturing or defending a field. Even I got 340 kills in fighters in Tour 39. I clearly remember one sortie in which I had to drop ord from my F6F to go and save a squaddie in trouble. With that done I continued to the target field to provide CAP and keep the cons off other inbound jabo. I got 12 kills in that sortie, and was RTB when some bastige I had killed once or twice decided to make it a grudge match by upping a steamroller to chase me down on my way home. In this case it was a 190D9 steamroller. On other, similar occasions, a guy who has lost a fair fight with me will re-up in a different plane to chase me down. Can you guess which one? Of course you can. The LA7, what else...

Mr. Toad!

Quote

Nah, you don't upset me. I'm used to instructing. Some students are just quicker than others and thus more fun to work with. Some are deliberately obtuse and contrary which appears to amuse themselves. You work with what you have, I guess.

I'm not your student.

But in your quest for selective realism, we have a problem with the PNZR pintle gun. So be it. Some issues in AH are realism issues, some are modelling issues as you have already pointed out, but then there are gaming issues. If the pintle were to be changed, what do you think might happen? The pintle gunners would get vulched every time. Don't worry about the pintle. It's only use is to pop at fighter pilots who have been stupid enough to try to strafe it. The maximum angle of the pintle means that it cannot be brought to bear upon a plane directly overhead trying to bomb it. The other pintle use is to kill troops on the run as they try to get to the map room, but you wouldn't want to know about any of that.

Quote

I'm reasonably sure that most of the players want things modeled as accurately as possible.

ROFL! Oh yeah? So why all the conga lines? Why the steamrollers? Why the suicide runs to the CV? Why all the suicide fuel porkers? Why are the planes I kill most continue to include Spit ix, P51D, LA7 and N1K tour after tour? Why do so many players want it to be 1945 every day? Oh... I was forgetting. These aren't modelling issues, they're realism/gameplay issues. Sometimes it's hard to tell the difference. This selective realism™ gets confusing.

SAX - in the paragraph you quoted, I was using the word "you" to mean Toad himself!