Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Gato on March 23, 2006, 02:51:31 AM
-
It seems with every update AH is becoming more of a furballers paradise. The strat system is next to nothing now and bombers are hampered more and more. Bombers and GVs now have gun recoil, do the fighters? If you don't think fighters had the recoil, look at old film and see just how clear everything was until the guns were fired. Then everything is a blurr.
Why can't we have two arenas, one just for those who only want to furball and could care less about winning a map. The other for everyone else, with a strat system where both fighter and bomber get equal treatment. I know this has been talked about before, but I just wanted to bring it up again. I think a little parity would be nice. Don't get me wrong, I fly fighters, man guns and drive GVs as well as bombers. I think they all should have an equal footing as they all have a place in the game.
Maybe I'm asking too much, but this is a wishlist forum. And this is not any more out there than some other wishes.
-
Gato take a look into the Axis vs Allies room, it is more historically setup, has fantastic maps and is good for some ground pounding,
As for the main arena being split up i would have to disagree, furballing is part of base defence.
Everytime the luftwaffe upped a bombing mission to pork Great Britain a whole bunch of spit and hurricane "dweebs" upped to stop them.
Why should Aces High be any different from the real war?
don't get me wrong i like doing it all fighters, bombers and GV's its all fun.
Bruv
~S~
-
So equal footing is booting the rest of us to another arena? :rolleyes:
-
I fail to see how moving furballers to a different arena fixes some of the problems fundamentally underlying your whine... er... complaint. Removing furballers fails to render strat useful, nor does it "fix" hampered bombers. In essence, you wish to punish those who do not play your way even though they do nothing to you. Those are some sour grapes.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
It seems with every update AH is becoming more of a furballers paradise. The strat system is next to nothing now and bombers are hampered more and more. Bombers and GVs now have gun recoil, do the fighters? If you don't think fighters had the recoil, look at old film and see just how clear everything was until the guns were fired.
AH Fighters have always had the same head shake when firing guns that the bombers and GV's do now. So your saying that since we now added the same effect to GV's and bombers, hence putting them on par with the fighters, we are ignoring them.
HiTech
-
The problem is the strat-guys are getting punish because they don't want to be furballers. Furballers complain that the strat-guys are ruining their fun so now the strat-guys can't take the fuel down. Furballers complain that the strat-guys are now taking the FH down so then HTC adds bomb calibration. Furballers complain that the FH are still going down so they want the FH hardened. Furballers complain that the bomber are too deadly to shoot down from the six so HTC adds gun shake to the bombers gun. Same thing happened to the osti. They were too deadly for the furballers so HTC added randomization to the shooting and now there's gun shake. When a furballer complains, changes are made for the sake of "realism" – who ever heard of a fighter getting downed by a bomber or ack? When the strat-guys complain, they are just "trying to punish those who do not play their way."
I want balanced play, not coddling. A single fighter shows up at a base and straffs the troops down while the base ack is completely up and ruins the start-guys fun. But that seems to be okay because troops and supplies do not have any impact on the furballers. Looks like we have a ways to go before things are "on par."
Sour grapes? I have a truckload.
-
If you are hitting factories, cities, and HQ you are doing strat.
Now if you are porking fields, by this i mean any structure which can be dropped on a field. = Tactical targets
For this reason i feel we need a new name . I propose TacTard.
When you see those dive bombing lancs going for the CV open up on 200 with " well the Tactards just ruined fun at base X'.
Or when you see the Tiffy auger into the side of an ammo bunker try on 200 " hey TacTard if ya pull back on the stick you go up." or some such.
As for strat I have no problem with guys lvl bombing strat targets I mentioned.
Hell I have no problem with them going to alt and and hitting tactical targets with lvl bombing.
My problem is with the dive bombing Lancs, 24s, and 17s.
Also the pork auger Tactards piss me off. They are usually Gv dweebs that get killed from base defenders multiple times. So they up a Tiffy or a 190d and pork ords then auger.
Cmon get a few friends together and coordinate Have some friends hit ords while you up a gv sheesh.
Sorry for the rant but some things peeps do just piss me off.
Bronk
-
Hmmm. Based on the race to the reset mentality that is clearly growing, and the lack of extended furballs due to hangers or carriers going down, I'd suggest that the bomber/strat guys aren't suffering too bad.
Box after box of both high and low alt 24s hitting 41 last night VH, ack, everything down. Those of us that tried to get up had the fighter escort to contend with along with low level buffs with gunners, not that the FH's stayed up too long.
I'm a lousy stick but I like to have at it in fighters. In my imaginary world I'm a fighter pilot. But even that is dying with the never ending stream of HO and run LA7s.
Finding once decent turn and burn fight a night is about all I can hope for in AH these days and chances are it won't last long because one side or the other will wreck the FH's anyway so it means a long flight to get to the fight where it's more then likely going to be the base capture horde at work anyway.
Bottom line is I'm having a hard time feeling bad for the "race to the reset" crowd.
If that's what they want to do, it's their dime but please don't whine that the gameplay for that crew is being hindered.
-
I have to admit, there's something inately hilariously about people who whine and complain about something two days after its release rather than giving themselves at least a week or two to adjust to it. I guess it's easier to pout on the forums than it is to suck it up and make the minor adjustments to how they play.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
What would really rock is a Spanish Civil War fighter set, terrain and dedicated arena. :D
-
Originally posted by Bruv119
Gato take a look into the Axis vs Allies room, it is more historically setup, has fantastic maps and is good for some ground pounding,...
The AvA is not for base capture resets. That porks the arena!
There's no war to win in the AvA; but most MA players migrating there don't understand that after you roll up a few bases you're expected to switch sides and capture them back if you can.
Bombers are great in there for plinking base ack and strat to start a fight, sinking the CV when it's parked off the end of the runway or squad missions. Unfortunately bombers are too often abused and get pulled from the AvA planeset. :(
-
I really don't want to have to have a second MA and AvA is not the same. It just seems that the MA is going toward fighters and far away for bombing or strategy. There is very little for bombers to do, really. A viable strat system is what is needed. This would give the bombers something other than just hitting the hangers, troops and ord. Those items can be taken down by fighters now.
It seems when this all started, it was a complete warfare system, with fighters, bombers, GVs and ships. But the further along we go, the more it seems major parts of the system are falling by the wayside. It is a fight without strategy. You just get a gang of guys to take a base. It might have bombers to take down the hangers or not. But that is as far as the planning goes. Sure, if you have the horde, you take the map. But that has nothing to do with strategy. :eek:
Okay, the gun recoil is in fighters and now bombers. That is parity and we can get used to it. But the recoil on the osti, from what I've heard, is way over done. :rolleyes:
Each plane, vehicle has a place in the game, or at least should have. Fighters can either be in fighter or attack mode and hit any target around. The bombers, on the other hand have very few and when the hangers are taken down by them, the fighters often complain. "Bombers killed my furball" What is left for the bombers to do??? Taking down the factories is to slow the resupply of the bases, but I really don't see it effecting it much, if any.
I have seen several good ideas to help boost the role of the bombers, but the question becames "Will it ever happen?" At this point, I'm not sure it will. :(
Fighter guns have a convergence up to 650 and the bombers guns are set at 500 with a "shotgun" effect. So for the guys who call the bomber guns "laser" and complain, I can't see it. In a fighter I take bombers down all the time.
So, in short, I'm still looking for parity on all fronts.
-
Originally posted by hitech
AH Fighters have always had the same head shake when firing guns that the bombers and GV's do now. So your saying that since we now added the same effect to GV's and bombers, hence putting them on par with the fighters, we are ignoring them.
This leaves the question of whether it is appropriate or not. Is it appropriate that the guns of a very large aircraft (a bomber) cause it to vibrate the same as those of a much lighter aircraft? The only consideration I've ever heard for mounting fixed as opposed to flexible guns is the fixed ones are much lighter and take up less room. Never heard anything about fixed vibrating less or flexible vibrating more. Even if you take bombers out of the equation, how appropriate is it to be shaken so much by the coaxial gun on a multi ton Tiger. Or how appropriate is it for the Ostwind, essentially a Panzer, to be shaken as much as the Yak when firing the same cannon?
Regardless of how you feel about bomber guns shaking or not, there is one clear result. Bomber guns have had their effective range cut another 200. As a result even less skill is required to down a bomber than before. Fighters using lame attack vectors on bombers will still get shot down of course and that means they'll still whine about bomber guns being too good. I can't help but wonder what the next degradation of bomber capability will be. Small wonder many of the fighter crowd are gloating.
Hopefully HTC will fix this mistake. If so, sooner would be better than later.
-
HT got there before me :rolleyes: :D
the fighters always had gunshake, and the GV's and bombers didnt. we should be the ones complaining, not the whining bufftards lol. drives me up the wall when i see complaints like this that bombers are badly neglected and undermodelled, etc, because in actual fact, they are more effective than in real life just so they can stay alive in the MA.
if you fly in formation with a few guys, all with boxes of buffs, it is SOOO hard for fighters to kill you, because when the guns work together, it's a hailstorm. and that's just with ju88s!!!
the fact is that the gunnery on the bombers is excellent because otherwise they wouldnt last 2 seconds in the game. AH is far from real life, but that doesnt mean that we cant make it more realistic, afterall, this isnt supposed to be an arcade game. making guns shake is a cool feature! dunno why you guys complain. as far as i have noticed, it doesnt affect the gun ballistics at all, just makes the gunsight vibrate. the guns are just as deadly, and they've become more real. that's the reason a lot of people play this game, to go back to those days and really experience it. AH does that so well, but unfortunetly all the rush for the reset guys dont care about history, or sitting in the piot's shoes, they care about getting perk points:rolleyes:
just relax a little man. we are here for fun, not ranks or points. next time you hop in a b17 or a fighter, or a whatever, stop thinking about who you want to kill, how many wtgs you want to get, imagine yourself as a real pilot, you'll have far more fun!
-
Originally posted by Dead Man Flying
I fail to see how moving furballers to a different arena fixes some of the problems fundamentally underlying your whine... er... complaint. Removing furballers fails to render strat useful, nor does it "fix" hampered bombers. In essence, you wish to punish those who do not play your way even though they do nothing to you. Those are some sour grapes.
In the desire for another MA, I would wish one with AH1 settings and all current rides and the other to be as it is now. I fail to see how this would be moving furballers to another arena or punishing them. They would still have the current MA with all the settings they enjoy. I'm certain they would not feel sad about losing those who want to play differently than they do. In fact it would do much to eliminate the source of most of their whines.
In point of fact it would allow for two different styles of play and enhance HTC's marketability. If you get tired of one style, move to the other. Nobody said furballers couldn't be in whichever arena they want to be in this scenario.
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
So equal footing is booting the rest of us to another arena? :rolleyes:
How would it be booting anybody anywhere? You'd have the arena you want and we'd have the arena we want.
-
One question the fine and smart people that blame everything on furballers. Do you really think a furballer could give a rats behind about your bombers? The fact that they are furballers means that they would not ever attack a buff unless they were bored out of their mind, and therefore, they could not care less if your guns shake or not. More over, they will not be found vulching a field unless they are looking to die and up again, so why on earth would they complain about the GV guns?
Now, who does get hurt by buffs? The win the war strat guys and the score potatos. If they can't kill them on time, they will kill the FHs and eventually the town resulting in the loss of a base. If they cant get them before they hit HQ, radar will be lost. If Osties can kill you form 2K out you guys cant vulch or drop troops.
Sounds like the complans are coming from the same retards that complain about the furballers.
ChopSaw, try teh DA. There is a field where you can bomb HQ all day long with out having to wory anout any furballers
-
Originally posted by MachNix
The problem is the strat-guys are getting punish because they don't want to be furballers.
Yeah, we really care about what you do
Furballers complain that the strat-guys are ruining their fun so now the strat-guys can't take the fuel down.
And that stops you from doing what?
Furballers complain that the strat-guys are now taking the FH down so then HTC adds bomb calibration.
HT actually made it easyer than it used to be
Furballers complain that the FH are still going down so they want the FH hardened.
And you are being punished how?
Furballers complain that the bomber are too deadly to shoot down from the six so HTC adds gun shake to the bombers gun.
Furballers don't attack bombers. They furball.
Same thing happened to the osti. They were too deadly for the furballers so HTC added randomization to the shooting and now there's gun shake.
Osties don't furball (last time I checked)
When a furballer complains, changes are made for the sake of "realism" – who ever heard of a fighter getting downed by a bomber or ack? When the strat-guys complain, they are just "trying to punish those who do not play their way."
Finally, a true statement
I want balanced play, not coddling. A single fighter shows up at a base and straffs the troops down while the base ack is completely up and ruins the start-guys fun.
Guess what! It was a strat guy that did that. You guys are really whining about yourselfs
:rofl :rofl
-
Dedalos,
As always you do not disappoint. Your grasp of the discussion is tenuous as is your grasp of what is meant by "strategy". Additionally, it might be helpful if you actually quoted someone rather than manufacturing quotes to suit yourself.
-
I just went to the HTC home page to review the TV ad. (It's been some time since I've seen it on TV and paid attention to the content) From the ad, I find I'm wrong! It talks about using the radio to coordinate tactics, but then it says "learn the skills of dogfighting and control the skies". So the GVs and bombers are just there and the fighters are the real important planes.
IF dogfighting is the important center piece of the game, then strategic targets and ground vehicles have little to do with the over all game. How sad Here I always thought it was the use of both fighters and bombers which "controlled" the skies. When you control the skies, then the ground forces could finish the job and win the "war". Looking at it this way, there is no need for new maps or winning the map. Just get up in a fighters and shoot people down, end of story. Hey, they could make a map with just 3 bases per side and be done with it. Don't let anyone take the bases or hangers down.
-
Point of order. Bombers don't control skies. Bombers rain down death and destruction on ground (and sea) targets. Unless the enemy fighters control the skies.
And .... everyone gonna just ignore Spain? As usual? ;) :D
-
Originally posted by Gato
....Looking at it this way, there is no need for new maps or winning the map. Just get up in a fighters and shoot people down, end of story. Hey, they could make a map with just 3 bases per side and be done with it. Don't let anyone take the bases or hangers down.
Now you're getting it. And the 3 bases is an excellent idea!
-
Gato if you haven't done so already, go sign up for the Karelia scenario.
Fly Friday Night Squad Ops and Close Escort.
The MA is for practice to get ready for the real events.
-
Originally posted by Arlo
And .... everyone gonna just ignore Spain? As usual? ;) :D
Say, do you have a tactical map or link to one showing the bases?
-
Originally posted by Easyscor
Gato if you haven't done so already, go sign up for the Karelia scenario.
Fly Friday Night Squad Ops and Close Escort.
The MA is for practice to get ready for the real events.
Sorry, would be nice, but I can't fly on Friday night. Otherwise I would, but also my squad is only 7 large right now.
-
Not many squads sign up for FSO without flying with another squad for a while. If you can break free, just post a request for an invite in the FSO forum and one of the existing squads will pick you up. No problem. Close Escort is a walk-on event runing Sunday afternoon your time and Karelia is Saturday afternoons. You asked for a better setup, it's available, now it's up to you. :)
-
If there was a arena for furballers and one for the base taking porking dweebs, the furball arena would be more crowded then the base taking porking dweeb arena.
Buffs still are to dominant in AH. A few boxes of buffs flying at 20k can walk into a base unopposed and ruin a fight which is what Ive seen lately. All sides rolling up buffs just to kill bases and hardly even bother trying to furball.
A small % of buffs can ruin the fight for the furballers.
My $.02.
-
Originally posted by Hoarach
If there was a arena for furballers and one for the base taking porking dweebs, the furball arena would be more crowded then the base taking porking dweeb arena.
Buffs still are to dominant in AH. A few boxes of buffs flying at 20k can walk into a base unopposed and ruin a fight which is what Ive seen lately. All sides rolling up buffs just to kill bases and hardly even bother trying to furball.
A small % of buffs can ruin the fight for the furballers.
My $.02.
And a darn good value it is. Given your statements, it's obvious you wouldn't miss us. Thank you for your support of the two arena idea.
-
Originally posted by Easyscor
Not many squads sign up for FSO without flying with another squad for a while. If you can break free, just post a request for an invite in the FSO forum and one of the existing squads will pick you up. No problem. Close Escort is a walk-on event runing Sunday afternoon your time and Karelia is Saturday afternoons. You asked for a better setup, it's available, now it's up to you. :)
Last time I checked, the ack in Karelia stayed down for 10 to 15 minutes and there was ack hiding inside mountains that couldn't be shot. Is that fixed then? I did like a lot about Karelia.
If you're talking about AvA being what we'd like, most of what I've seen in there is for furballers. In one scenario nothing stayed down for more than a minute and 45 seconds. Factories, ack, everything.
-
Originally posted by Easyscor
Say, do you have a tactical map or link to one showing the bases?
I used this, blowing it up and comparing it to contemporary maps:
(http://www.libs.uga.edu/flyers/images/map.jpg)
I had something fairly worked out but that was on the machine my ex confiscated.
-
Originally posted by ChopSaw
I fail to see how this would be moving furballers to another arena or punishing them. They would still have the current MA with all the settings they enjoy. I'm certain they would not feel sad about losing those who want to play differently than they do. In fact it would do much to eliminate the source of most of their whines.
[/b]
On the contrary, furballers and win the war folks rarely cross paths in the game already, but they do intermingle socially. What you are proposing would fracture the Aces High community by forcing friends and squadmates to fly in different arenas. The way to eliminate most of the whines is to simply stop whining. A good way to start would be to stop posting threads like this one.
In point of fact it would allow for two different styles of play and enhance HTC's marketability. If you get tired of one style, move to the other. Nobody said furballers couldn't be in whichever arena they want to be in this scenario.
You can do that right now in one single arena without splitting up the community. I fail to see how your proposal actually improves anything.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Let's define a couple of terms for the convenience of discussion:
- Furballers = guys who fly in fighters. They primarily enjoy shooting at other fighters, but also like to occasionally shoot at bombers, gv's and boats. They don't really care too much about taking bases though many of them feel that's okay. They don't like getting shot down. Either by gv's or bombers. They seem to feel the only one that should have a good chance of shooting them down is another fighter. They don't like being inconvenienced by things like having their fuel reduced to 25%, the maps fields separated a decent distance, their HQ taken down (even partially) by a single bomber or even 4 formations of bombers, their fighter hangers taken down, their furball busted up by bombers operating as "flying flack platforms", heavy bombers which "fly too high and too fast" (their complaint, believe me), new bombers introduced (such as the B-29), etc, etc. As a result they advocate (otherwise defined as a whine) and applaud changes to gv's and bombers which reduce the effectiveness of same. Changes such as the remodeling of bomber gun convergence from AH1 to AH2, the remodeling of the way bombs drop from AH1 to AH2 and of course there's the way Ostwind and Bomber guns shake now.
- Win the War Folks (WWF's) = People that can be found in gv's, bombers, boats and even fighters. These people like the multi dimensional aspects of strategy. They like taking fields, winning the war and feeling like there's a chance for strategy and skill to win out over a larger number of players. They would like to see things like the strategy system rebuilt to something like it's former interest level. That would mean an HQ that can be taken down, fields back to the spacing they had in AH1 (spaced wider apart than they are now), the ability to reduce a fields fuel supply to 25%, a hardening of strat targets (ordnance, fuel and troops) to the point it requires ordnance (rockets, bombs or ground level size cannon) to destroy them, perhaps the addition of a real ammo bunker (one that is tied to the amount of ammunition a vehicle can up with), a return to an Ostwind model that doesn't make people sick, a return to effective guns on bombers, etc., etc.
Originally posted by Dead Man Flying
On the contrary, furballers and win the war folks rarely cross paths in the game already, but they do intermingle socially. What you are proposing would fracture the Aces High community by forcing friends and squadmates to fly in different arenas. The way to eliminate most of the whines is to simply stop whining. A good way to start would be to stop posting threads like this one.
Rarely cross paths? How is that possible? We're in the same arena. We fight each other (in friendly fashion and otherwise) all the time. What you call social intermingling is perhaps what got the "all" channel reduced to a salute only channel and now has channel 200 heavily moderated. The only intermingling I see in game is between like minded individuals with similar interests. My proposal wouldn't change that. I see a heck of a lot more intermingling on these threads than I do in game and that wouldn't be changed. My proposal would force nobody to separate. Not friends and especially not squad mates. How many of the Blue Knights would want to go to the WWF arena? If any separation occurred, it would be due to a persons own choice as to how they want to play.
Eliminate whines……that's interesting. You mean like the whines of fighters claiming bomber guns or Ostwind guns are too good and should have something done to them to decrease their effectiveness? You mean like the whines of fighter pilots who don't want to be bothered learning how to shoot bombers down and complain until the guns of the bombers are made less effective and then continue to complain about them because they're still getting shot down? You mean the whines from fighter pilots who say bombers shouldn't be in formation, shouldn't have as much effect on the game as they did, shouldn't have even as much effect on the game as they do now, should have their fuel multiplier increased to force them to fly lower and slower, etc? You mean whines like that? Some of which HTC has acted upon and looks like they'll continue to act upon, eventually incorporating a good portion of all the whines fighters post.
The fact of the matter is HTC (HT, Pyro, Skuzzy, etc.) reads this bulletin board. They look at and consider the ideas and desires of their customers. More of their customers are furballers than WWF's. HTC rightfully desires to retain as many customers as they can. Evidently they feel the way to do this is to fulfill the desires of most of their customers. This is their right. It's their business and they can run it any way they wish. Unfortunately this means a loss of diversity. Loss of diversity most commonly results in eventual loss of customers. My proposal would retain diversity, cost them little and in fact save them money by retaining customers and maybe even drawing more. Right now there are a lot of WWF's losing interest in a game that seems to be emphasizing fighters more and more at the expense of everything else. If those customers are lost, that would definitely fracture the AH community. Doubt this? Take a look at the thread "Headshake", . Read what Moil says. Tell me that doesn't sound like the Ltar's are dissatisfied customers and then tell me what really dissatisfied customers do with their business.
If you feel that having two arena's (one for Furballers and one for WWF's) is going to fracture the AH community, then you should be worried about the eventual release of ToD. That's going to be a separate arena. I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess you're not worried about ToD, so why would you be worried about my proposal?
Originally posted by Dead Man Flying
You can do that right now in one single arena without splitting up the community. I fail to see how your proposal actually improves anything.
While there are two styles of play in one arena, current set up favors one over the other and it looks like it's going to keep favoring it. Two MA style arenas would allow for different setups so that both WWF's and Furballers could have what they want.
-
Originally posted by ChopSaw
Last time I checked, the ack in Karelia stayed down for 10 to 15 minutes and there was ack hiding inside mountains that couldn't be shot. Is that fixed then? I did like a lot about Karelia.
The shore batteries were removed. :( They couldn't fix them in time for the scenario.
-
Originally posted by Arlo
I used this, blowing it up and comparing it to contemporary maps:
I had something fairly worked out but that was on the machine my ex confiscated.
Check your PMs.
-
Originally posted by Easyscor
The shore batteries were removed. :( They couldn't fix them in time for the scenario.
Too bad, I liked them. Hope you guys get them back.
What about the ack question, though? Hiding in mountains? Popping up in 10 or 15 minutes?
-
Originally posted by ChopSaw
This leaves the question of whether it is appropriate or not. Is it appropriate that the guns of a very large aircraft (a bomber) cause it to vibrate the same as those of a much lighter aircraft? The only consideration I've ever heard for mounting fixed as opposed to flexible guns is the fixed ones are much lighter and take up less room. Never heard anything about fixed vibrating less or flexible vibrating more. Even if you take bombers out of the equation, how appropriate is it to be shaken so much by the coaxial gun on a multi ton Tiger. Or how appropriate is it for the Ostwind, essentially a Panzer, to be shaken as much as the Yak when firing the same cannon?
Regardless of how you feel about bomber guns shaking or not, there is one clear result. Bomber guns have had their effective range cut another 200. As a result even less skill is required to down a bomber than before. Fighters using lame attack vectors on bombers will still get shot down of course and that means they'll still whine about bomber guns being too good. I can't help but wonder what the next degradation of bomber capability will be. Small wonder many of the fighter crowd are gloating.
Hopefully HTC will fix this mistake. If so, sooner would be better than later.
Apparently the fact that almost all bomber guns were either handheld
or in a small turret escapes you. Fighter guns are generally mounted
much further away from the operator.
-
Originally posted by ChopSaw
Additionally, it might be helpful if you actually quoted someone rather than manufacturing quotes to suit yourself.
I did, try reading. Just because the quotes are stupid, it does not mean someone did not write them. The may sound stupid, but what do you expect?
-
What I find quite imussing is the resons we do stuff. The shake was added because it was a previous oversight. Finaly had the time to get around to it.
2nd it was not added to make gunning more dificult. It was added soly to add some imersion. Just as you do not notice the shake in the fighters. After a few weeks of playing you will also not notice the shake in the gunners. But when a change happens, it just sticks out.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hitech
What I find quite imussing is the resons we do stuff. The shake was added because it was a previous oversight. Finaly had the time to get around to it.
2nd it was not added to make gunning more dificult. It was added soly to add some imersion. Just as you do not notice the shake in the fighters. After a few weeks of playing you will also not notice the shake in the gunners. But when a change happens, it just sticks out.
HiTech
yup. i dont understand why everyone makes such a fuss over it. personally, i like the gunshake, for that exact reason, more immersion, makes the game more fun.
-
Last night was the perfect example for me. Lots of us 'furballers' fighting between the three fields in the center of the map. 100 other fields out there to capture.
Guys start upping buffs. We asked them nicely to please not pork fightertown. The response I got after asking one of them why he wants to pork fightertown was....wait for it.....'because I can."
It had nothing to do with strat, it was just to tick people off. There was a steady procession of these guys continually buffing fightertown 'because they can'.
It had nothing to do with strat, winning the war, teamwork, etc. Nothing. It was just to irritate a bunch of people who were having fun and with fightertown, staying out of the way of the strat guys.
-
Originally posted by Rino
Apparently the fact that almost all bomber guns were either handheld
or in a small turret escapes you. Fighter guns are generally mounted
much further away from the operator.
And here I thought the guns on bombers were mounted in heavy motorized turrets. Small light things were they? Huh. Even waist gunners had bracing for the guns. Nobody can fire a .50 machine gun hand held. At least not unless they want to spray the sky.
No comments on the Ostwind or coax of the Tiger?
-
Originally posted by dedalos
I did, try reading. Just because the quotes are stupid, it does not mean someone did not write them. The may sound stupid, but what do you expect?
In the past you have taken substantial license, and considerable pleasure, in altering quotes on other threads. There were no names associated with the quotes. The quotes are not found on this thread. The conclusion can only be you've manufactured them or at best paraphrased them from memory. In any case, the response to your posting should be obvious to anyone who reads it.
-
You make so many fundamentally wrong assumptions in your response, Chopsaw, that it is not even worth going over it to try point it all out. Instead, I will make two key points that you should try absorb before posting again.
First, the arena is not "split" into furballers and war wagers. Hardcore furballers and war wagers represent minorities of the overall game population, and most players do a little bit of everything. Unfortunately, these two minorities often conflict because their goals fundamentally differ from one another, but everybody else really doesn't care.
Second, what you propose fractures the community because it forces players to choose between two artificially-determined styles of play. You would eliminate the social element of the game to satisfy some perceived cleavage in the player base. Perish this notion immediately, because HiTech has repeatedly stated that he opposes splintering the community into different arenas. It's not going to happen.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
More of their customers are furballers than WWF's.
HA!
Yeah, you've been around a long time.
-
Originally posted by ChopSaw
In the past you have taken substantial license, and considerable pleasure, in altering quotes on other threads. There were no names associated with the quotes. The quotes are not found on this thread. The conclusion can only be you've manufactured them or at best paraphrased them from memory. In any case, the response to your posting should be obvious to anyone who reads it.
As I said. Try reading. The name is on the first quote. The quotes are form MachNix. Look it up. In the past I have done what you said only with people I know and that I knew they would see the joke. Who is making things up now ehh? See, you are so tied up in your little furball whaaaas that you could not see something for what it was
-
Originally posted by ChopSaw
Ouups. My appologies dedalos. I went back and read the actual words this time. I appologise. Those quotes were real and stupid :aok
No problem Chop, it was just an honest mistake
:p
-
Buffs upping in FT is pointless. There is a furball alliance in there. The fighter pilots on the side with the buffs flying in do not protect them. They let the opposition to shoot down the buffs without even the slightest idea of protecting them. This is how it should be in FT buffs should not be allowed to pork everything in FT. There is a reason why its called Fighter Town.
-
Originally posted by hitech
What I find quite imussing is the resons we do stuff. The shake was added because it was a previous oversight. Finaly had the time to get around to it.
2nd it was not added to make gunning more dificult. It was added soly to add some imersion. Just as you do not notice the shake in the fighters. After a few weeks of playing you will also not notice the shake in the gunners. But when a change happens, it just sticks out.
Fighters don't notice gun shake because they're rarely zoomed all the way in and when they are they aren't tracking while firing. It's easy to accommodate something barely noticeable. Bombers notice it because we are zoomed all the way in. It's the only way we can hit the guy on our six who's throttled back at d1.0. The guy who has guns that are better focused than ours and therefore more effective at that distance. Immersion or not, the shaking reduces the effectiveness of bomber guns a little bit more. We're estimating it reduces our effective range another 200 and that's saying nothing of what it does to tracking.
Bomber guns aside, your response still doesn't address the issue of the Ostwind. Immersion? Many of them have to stop before they upchuck. I guess that really does get them into what they're doing, but it has little to do with WWII simulation immersion. The difficulty in tracking targets, caused by the shaking, has severely decreased their accuracy and all that any non-gver's offer is derisive laughter and gloating. And what the heck is going on with the coaxial guns on the tanks?
Shaking may not have been added to make gunning more difficult, but that's what it has done. Even if bombers accommodate it, it's going to hurt our accuracy and make tracking more difficult than it already was. There's no way the Ostwind drivers can accommodate it unless they stay out of zoom and that is going to hit their accuracy.
Shaking guns aside, when you look back over all the changes made from AH1 to now, immersion does not seem to be the single driving force. Hardening of HQ's? Minimum field fuel set to 75% changed from 25%? Spacing fields closer together? Changing the way the bombs drop to effectively decrease their ability? These changes indicate a trend and that trend does not have immersion as its sole goal.
What would be the problem with having an arena WWF's could better enjoy in addition to the current one?
In many respects a nice update. I especially like the addition of the Jeep. The shaking? Not so much.
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Last night was the perfect example for me. Lots of us 'furballers' fighting between the three fields in the center of the map. 100 other fields out there to capture.
Guys start upping buffs. We asked them nicely to please not pork fightertown. The response I got after asking one of them why he wants to pork fightertown was....wait for it.....'because I can."
It had nothing to do with strat, it was just to tick people off. There was a steady procession of these guys continually buffing fightertown 'because they can'.
It had nothing to do with strat, winning the war, teamwork, etc. Nothing. It was just to irritate a bunch of people who were having fun and with fightertown, staying out of the way of the strat guys.
I'm not entirely sure what your point is. Some bomber guys are bad? Nobodies interested in strat? The only thing bombers are good for is griefing fighters? What? Why didn't you just shoot them down before they did whatever it was they did? I would have. Nothing better than griefing a griefer.
-
Originally posted by ChopSaw
Nothing better than griefing a griefer.
Really? Then you would have no problems with Guppy35 taking down ordnance at those bases in order to quell the onslaught of bombers, right? Or would that unfairly hinder the war effort?
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Originally posted by Morpheus
HA!
Yeah, you've been around a long time.
If you started playing in 2004, I've been in the game longer than you. I played AH1 and took a vacation because of hardware problems.
-
Actaully, I started in fall of 2002.
The simple fact that you have been around since AH 1 (as you have stated) and still think that there are more furballers than WTF ever you call them... says enough to me to tell me you dont know much.
-
Originally posted by ChopSaw
My appologies HT. I now understand that I was wrong. I also understand that the people that are really good with those guns (like 999 and tatertot) don't use the zoom function.
I promisse I will try to get beter instead of crying about furballers all the time.
Wow, nice to have you back Chop
-
Originally posted by Dead Man Flying
You make so many fundamentally wrong assumptions in your response, Chopsaw, that it is not even worth going over it to try point it all out. Instead, I will make two key points that you should try absorb before posting again.
First, the arena is not "split" into furballers and war wagers. Hardcore furballers and war wagers represent minorities of the overall game population, and most players do a little bit of everything. Unfortunately, these two minorities often conflict because their goals fundamentally differ from one another, but everybody else really doesn't care.
Second, what you propose fractures the community because it forces players to choose between two artificially-determined styles of play. You would eliminate the social element of the game to satisfy some perceived cleavage in the player base. Perish this notion immediately, because HiTech has repeatedly stated that he opposes splintering the community into different arenas. It's not going to happen.
I believe my proposed model took into account most of your observations. The proposed second arena (WWF arena) would no more fracture or splinter the community than AvA does now or ToD will do. It is obvious HiTech does not fear another arena splintering the community.
Again, the proposal would force no one to do anything. The current arena would remain as it is now with all its attractions. There would be no reason for people to go to the second arena if they're happy with current settings. The second arena would be much the same as in AH1, hopefully with the addition of a couple of items such as hardened bunkers. People would be free to come, go or stay as they pleased.
Currently WWF's are being forced to play in an arena with settings we find frustrating and which have greatly reduced the multidimensionality we crave and had, to a larger extent, in AH1. When frustration is high enough people find other things to do. While my proposal would not fracture the community, it would give the frustrated somewhere in AH to go rather than driving them completely out.
The problem isn't in conflict of styles of play in one arena. It's in the way the settings of the current arena support one style of play at the expense of the other.
-
Chop, there is an arena for furbaling. Its called the DA. It is always empty now. Maybe there are not as many furballers out there as you think?
Second, flying buffs and crying about furballers every single day is not multidimentional.
You could have asked HT to remove the gun shake because of 1000 different reasons. Instead, you blamed furbalers for it. Can you please point us to a thread where the furballers are asking for the guns to shake? Did people complain the guns are too acurate? Yes. Those were the the strat players. Furbalers could not care less if a buff is in the area or not. But, you could not accept that. As I said before, you guys complin about yourselfs in here.
-
Originally posted by Dead Man Flying
Really? Then you would have no problems with Guppy35 taking down ordnance at those bases in order to quell the onslaught of bombers, right? Or would that unfairly hinder the war effort?
That's right. I wouldn't have a problem with it. However, that's more the tactic a strat person would use and less of what a furballer would. I'd think a furballer would have more fun just shooting down the bombers before they could do anything and after the bombers had spent a bunch of time getting to the fight. Furballers could also call upon their strat friends to take the ordnance out for them.
You seem to be suggesting I would be opposed to taking down ordnance because I fly bombers. Nothing could be further from the truth. Taking down ordnance is strategy. I like strategy. If I don't want somebody bombing ordnance, I guess I'd better get myself into a fighter and shoot them down.
What you see as hindering the war effort, I see as part of the war effort.
-
i wonder what ChopSaw's handle used to be?
-
I believe my proposed model took into account most of your observations. The proposed second arena (WWF arena) would no more fracture or splinter the community than AvA does now or ToD will do. It is obvious HiTech does not fear another arena splintering the community
Wow, quick on the uptake I see.
The MA is the MA. Anything goes here. Mkay?
AvA is for those who wish to participate in a historically matched plane set.
If you do not know what ToD/CT will be then you've got a problem.
Fact is, the MA has been the same for years now. Do not think you are going to change it with one big long whine/sob story about how the poor war winners are being overlooked in this terrible place called the Main Arena.
What is the war to you? Really now. Think about this for a minute.
If its just fighting buildings and blowing the holly hell out of them, then go do that off line. Right? Because I garrantee you that if there ever was this (queer) "WWF" arena, that's all you people would be doing, fighting and blowing up buildings. War winners go out of their way to avoid fighter confrontation at all costs to drop their bombs on buildings. So what would happen is you'd have all two, or three sides (which ever you want) on different sides of the map, racing to grab land and blow up as many buildings as possible to "Win The War".
In my opinion the "war" is the whole picture. Not just bombers, bombs and goons... As you make it seem. The war includes all players, players who are just looking for a red icon to shoot, players who are out in a fighter deffending a base (purposfully shooting down a particular plane), those who are attacking a base... Simply put, everyone.
So what I suggest you do is take this "I want what I want, the way I want it... NOW... Because the way things are now doesnt make me happy.".... WHINE... And can it. Because this is a horse that has been beaten for years. And the same answer is given out, by Hitech everytime. Care to take a guess at what that answer is? :)
-
Has something fundamentally changed in the past few months I haven't been around? What's all this about Win the War fellows using "strategy and cooperation"? Don't they still just blow up the FHs over and over again for eight hours or so, leave the VH alone, and never take the base? Or have they finally figured out this doesn't work?
Scratching my head here...
:p
-
No, vudak. Its still the same. :)
-
Originally posted by Furball
I just wish bombers were only available off line
:O
-
Originally posted by dedalos
bomber pilots turn me on
really?
-
Originally posted by Vudak
Has something fundamentally changed in the past few months I haven't been around? What's all this about Win the War fellows using "strategy and cooperation"? Don't they still just blow up the FHs over and over again for eight hours or so, leave the VH alone, and never take the base? Or have they finally figured out this doesn't work?
Scratching my head here...
:p
:rofl
-
Originally posted by dedalos
Chop, there is an arena for furbaling. Its called the DA. It is always empty now. Maybe there are not as many furballers out there as you think?
Second, flying buffs and crying about furballers every single day is not multidimentional.
You could have asked HT to remove the gun shake because of 1000 different reasons. Instead, you blamed furbalers for it. Can you please point us to a thread where the furballers are asking for the guns to shake? Did people complain the guns are too acurate? Yes. Those were the the strat players. Furbalers could not care less if a buff is in the area or not. But, you could not accept that. As I said before, you guys complin about yourselfs in here.
You have the opportunity to read what I actually designate a furballer to be. You will find the designation rather broader than the one you use. In short, I designate them as people who like fighter aircraft and have little interest in anything other than fighter versus fighter. The are not necessarily people who are only interested in furballs, but they do have a tendency to enter them.
You are as aware as I of the complaints fighter folk have against the accuracy of bomber guns. You're one of them that complains. You are also aware that one of the suggestions which is commonly repeated to nerf the bomber guns is to introduce the effect of recoil to the bomber guns.
You're wrong, of course. Furballers, even the pure furballer, does care about buffs in the area. If nothing else the complaint is against the buffs for downing hangers. Who do you think is in the fighter shooting at buffs? Other buff drivers?
-
Originally posted by Furball
i wonder what ChopSaw's handle used to be?
Crin
-
Originally posted by dedalos
Chop, there is an arena for furbaling. Its called the DA. It is always empty now. Maybe there are not as many furballers out there as you think?
Second, flying buffs and crying about furballers every single day is not multidimentional.
You could have asked HT to remove the gun shake because of 1000 different reasons. Instead, you blamed furbalers for it. Can you please point us to a thread where the furballers are asking for the guns to shake? Did people complain the guns are too acurate? Yes. Those were the the strat players. Furbalers could not care less if a buff is in the area or not. But, you could not accept that. As I said before, you guys complin about yourselfs in here.
I think where this is all getting mixed up is in how people define things. As I see it, a Furballer is one who flies fighters and nothing else. He wants to get kills on any plane he can get to and most of the time will fly till he dies or is out of ammo/fuel, then he will RTB, or wants to land all the kills he has and get his name in lights. The WWF will use any plane/vehicle which is there to get the job done for taking a base and in the end, winning the map. They will take down buildings or the people who stand in thier way. Then there are the general players who do a little of it all. These people change mindsets to what they are doing at the time, either furballing or WWF. There is a fouth group in there who just want to blow stuff up. They try to aline themselves with the WWF, but really they are like the furballers and don't really want anything other than to kill buidings.
So now, if we can agree as to who is who in all this, maybe some of the "name calling" can stop and get to the real meat of the subject.
I started this tread in the hopes of airing some real ideas to help improve the gameplay. Not to get into a "who is at fault for what" and name calling. Maybe my hopes were to high.
I have been in and out of this game for many years now. I left before AHII came online, so I don't know what all went on with it then. There have always been different points of view and I don't think that will ever change. SO why can't we agree to disagree on some things and work together to make this the best game it can be for as many people as possible. Hitech reads this treads and as you have seen, replies in some. IF we can come up with some viable ideas to help HTC make the game better, then why don't we?
-
Originally posted by Morpheus
What is the war to you? Really now. Think about this for a minute.
If its just fighting buildings and blowing the holly hell out of them, then go do that off line. Right? Because I garrantee you that if there ever was this (queer) "WWF" arena, that's all you people would be doing, fighting and blowing up buildings. War winners go out of their way to avoid fighter confrontation at all costs to drop their bombs on buildings. So what would happen is you'd have all two, or three sides (which ever you want) on different sides of the map, racing to grab land and blow up as many buildings as possible to "Win The War".
In my opinion the "war" is the whole picture. Not just bombers, bombs and goons... As you make it seem. The war includes all players, players who are just looking for a red icon to shoot, players who are out in a fighter deffending a base (purposfully shooting down a particular plane), those who are attacking a base... Simply put, everyone.
So what I suggest you do is take this "I want what I want, the way I want it... NOW... Because the way things are now doesnt make me happy.".... WHINE... And can it. Because this is a horse that has been beaten for years. And the same answer is given out, by Hitech everytime. Care to take a guess at what that answer is? :)
In the past I've flown fighters predominately. In the future I may do so again. I enjoy all aspects of the game, not just the bombers I predominately fly now. I say this because you seem to be under the impression I only care for bombers and destroying buildings with them.
Am I to understand you didn't like AH1? You thought it was just about blowing up buildings and avoiding fighters? You thought it was just about "bombers, bombs and goons"? I didn't and don't. As said before, the WWF arena would be more like AH1 in terms of strat system and some settings. Why would you fear the mere idea of that as a threat?
It's amazing how much your opinion of war being the "whole picture" is exactly the way I see it. Just in case you suspect I’m being sarcastic, I'm not. We really do see war the same way including all the examples you indicated. What you fail to note is that my comments are directed at the partially crippled strat system and the tendency of HTC to make changes to accommodate fighters at the expense of the other players whom you yourself have just mentioned. Currently under the microscope are bomber guns, the Ostwind and to a lesser extent some of the other gv guns.
Having said all that, I now respond to your suggestion of "can it". Imagine, if you will, what my suggestion might be as to where you can shove the can. Mkay? :)
-
:)
-
Originally posted by ChopSaw
And here I thought the guns on bombers were mounted in heavy motorized turrets. Small light things were they? Huh. Even waist gunners had bracing for the guns. Nobody can fire a .50 machine gun hand held. At least not unless they want to spray the sky.
No comments on the Ostwind or coax of the Tiger?
Don't know why I even bother with you..but not everything was
American...and even American stuff was very close to the operator.
Ever see a dorsal mount? The gunner stands BETWEEN the twin 50s.
I'm SURE a buff expert like your self might have noticed the recoil
evident in the waist/cheek/nose mounts. Heck, a tripod mounted 50
cal can't absorb all the recoil generated, much less a post mount.
One last thing..the gunners decidedly DID spray the sky, the objective
was not to pad their egos with kills, it was to protect the bomber crew
by keeping the enemy at as far a distance as possible.
-
Originally posted by ChopSaw
I'm not entirely sure what your point is. Some bomber guys are bad? Nobodies interested in strat? The only thing bombers are good for is griefing fighters? What? Why didn't you just shoot them down before they did whatever it was they did? I would have. Nothing better than griefing a griefer.
Because of KS I cant shoot down my own country's buffs. :furious
If KS was off I wouldnt let a single buff off the ground and disable ord at every base.
And because of the buff porking dweebs in FT, them rooks took the bish base in FT. Bish need to take the base in FT before knights lose theirs as well. Donut is no fun without FT. :furious
-
Originally posted by Rino
Don't know why I even bother with you..but not everything was
American...and even American stuff was very close to the operator.
Ever see a dorsal mount? The gunner stands BETWEEN the twin 50s.
I'm SURE a buff expert like your self might have noticed the recoil
evident in the waist/cheek/nose mounts. Heck, a tripod mounted 50
cal can't absorb all the recoil generated, much less a post mount.
One last thing..the gunners decidedly DID spray the sky, the objective
was not to pad their egos with kills, it was to protect the bomber crew
by keeping the enemy at as far a distance as possible.
I don't know why you bother either. From what you say, you know everything there is to know and everyone else is always wrong. I did a little search on you and your postings. It seems that in most of them you know what is right and everyone else is wrong or you are just trying to make a "smart" comment.
It also seems you have a thing for Chopsaw. I found you in many of the same treads as him. This is not a flame, just what seems to be fact, at least to me.
Please, we, or at least I am trying to find ways to make everything work so everyone can have as much fun in AH as can be.
As for the gun recoil, that seems to be a done deal, hitech put it in and I don't think it will change, so move on, please.
If we can't find something worthwhile in this area, then maybe it's time for this tread to be closed!
I try to look at all sides and I would hope everyone else would too. I just seems things are moving in one direction and limiting what another group can do in the game. I think this will, in the end, hurt the game and limit the people who play it. I don't want to, what was the phase used "pee in ----- pool"?
Now, I'm not sure if this will get edited in part or whole as a flame, I hope not. It is not meant as one, just as a reminded of what we are trying to talk about. And I mean this to everyone.
-
The problem is the strat-guys are getting punish because they don't want to be furballers.
I call BS ... prove it.
Furballers complain that the strat-guys are ruining their fun so now the strat-guys can't take the fuel down.
I call BS ... prove it ... another Urban Myth.
Furballers complain that the strat-guys are now taking the FH down so then HTC adds bomb calibration.
I call BS ... prove it ... another Urban Myth.
Furballers complain that the FH are still going down so they want the FH hardened.
I call BS ... prove it ... another Urban Myth.
Furballers complain that the bomber are too deadly to shoot down from the six so HTC adds gun shake to the bombers gun.
I call BS ... prove it ... another Urban Myth.
Same thing happened to the osti. They were too deadly for the furballers so HTC added randomization to the shooting and now there's gun shake.
I call BS ... prove it ... another Urban Myth.
When a furballer complains, changes are made for the sake of "realism" – who ever heard of a fighter getting downed by a bomber or ack?
I call BS ... prove it.
Sour grapes? I have a truckload.
So go make some whine ... we'll send ya some cheese.
-
As I see it, a Furballer is one who flies fighters and nothing else. He wants to get kills on any plane he can get to and most of the time will fly till he dies or is out of ammo/fuel, then he will RTB, or wants to land all the kills he has and get his name in lights.
You are so very wrong ... it explains your confusion and posts.
You will find the designation rather broader than the one you use. In short, I designate them as people who like fighter aircraft and have little interest in anything other than fighter versus fighter.
You too are so very wrong ... what is interesting is that you have broadened your definition to suit the argument ... and what is surprizing is that your next sentence gets it right ...
The are not necessarily people who are only interested in furballs, but they do have a tendency to enter them.
You see ... we do fly around are TRY to create one ... when one is in full bore ... there is nothing else that really interests us ... those that occasionally drop into a furball when flying a fighter ... is not a real furballer.
-
You could have asked HT to remove the gun shake because of 1000 different reasons. Instead, you blamed furbalers for it. Can you please point us to a thread where the furballers are asking for the guns to shake? Did people complain the guns are too acurate? Yes. Those were the the strat players. Furbalers could not care less if a buff is in the area or not. But, you could not accept that. As I said before, you guys complin about yourselfs in here.
No truer words have been spoken.
We could CARE LESS about bombers enroute to wherever it is that they are going. Personally I avoid them like the plague.
But ... now that the .50 cals are jumping around like they should, you need some sort of scapegoat to hopefully apply the thumbscrews to HT's softer side and villify the furballers as the cause of your angst.
Find another whipping post ... it's getting real old having the strat players blame all their woes on the furballers ... you guys obviously don't really know or understand how HT operates. Go to a con sometime ... you will know what I am talking about.
Hint ... he tends to go in the opposite direction of a squealing whine with a dastardly smile on his face ... :t
So ... if we furballers were such whiners ... HT would be compelled to IGNORE US (with a smile on his face).
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
As I see it, a Furballer is one who flies fighters and nothing else. He wants to get kills on any plane he can get to and most of the time will fly till he dies or is out of ammo/fuel, then he will RTB, or wants to land all the kills he has and get his name in lights.
You are so very wrong ... it explains your confusion and posts.
You will find the designation rather broader than the one you use. In short, I designate them as people who like fighter aircraft and have little interest in anything other than fighter versus fighter.
You too are so very wrong ... what is interesting is that you have broadened your definition to suit the argument ... and what is surprizing is that your next sentence gets it right ...
The are not necessarily people who are only interested in furballs, but they do have a tendency to enter them.
You see ... we do fly around are TRY to create one ... when one is in full bore ... there is nothing else that really interests us ... those that occasionally drop into a furball when flying a fighter ... is not a real furballer.
Okay, so I'm wrong. Give me your definition so I have an understanding of how you view it. Come on, I'm truely trying to understand all the points of view here. Maybe I have been wrong thinking "Furballers" complain about bombers, but in the game, it sure seems that way.
When I'm in a bomber, I'm trying to move things in the direction for my country to win the map. When I'm in a fighter, the goal is still the same, just in a different fashion.
I remember back in AHI all the fighter guys (notice I didn't say furballers this time) complained that the bombers took the fuel down to 25% and they couldn't fly the planes the distance they wanted. When I came back to the game about a year ago, the fuel could not be taken down that low, the only thought that comes to mind is that the fighter guys got their way. Just a note, in those days I didn't fly a bomber that often, but saw the 25% as a fact and went on with life.
It just seems there is little need for bombers in the game as it is now. Everything that can be taken down, can be done in fighters. It sort of leaves the bomber guys out in the cold with little to do. So they take down the hangers and then if nobody helps by takeing the base, they are called "porkers" and said to be hurting the gameplay.
Now, if I have this all wrong, please correct me and let's get on to making things better for everyone. Remember, the goal of war (or a war game) is to win. The goal of games is to have fun.
-
Furballers are in it for the fight and the fight only. A "furball" is 10 or more fighters mixing it up every which way but loose ... taxing their SA to its fullest and hopefully are able to leave the furball with a few pelts hanging from their belt. They more ... the merrier.
I remember back in AHI all the fighter guys (notice I didn't say furballers this time) complained that the bombers took the fuel down to 25% and they couldn't fly the planes the distance they wanted. When I came back to the game about a year ago, the fuel could not be taken down that low, the only thought that comes to mind is that the fighter guys got their way. Just a note, in those days I didn't fly a bomber that often, but saw the 25% as a fact and went on with life.
How quickly we forget ... it wasn't the bombers that were causing the problem with the fuel ... it was the endless waves of suicidal Typhoons and P-38s that caused much of the angst. Their only intention was to fly to the target ... wack all the fuel and auger doing it.
This is what I posted in a different thread ... maybe it will shed some light for you ...
Between the over-whelming numbers of Rooks at the time, porking everything in sight, and the infamous Bish Typhoon pork and auger dweebs, there was no fuel to be had. If you flew a Pony ... everything was A-OK, but if you flew early war rides, as Toad pointed out, you were SOL due to the small gas tanks.
Between the every so "hip" (at the time) fuel porking and the introduction of AH II with a 2x fuel burn multiplier, those in power at HTC decided to stop fuel porking.
-
It just seems there is little need for bombers in the game as it is now. Everything that can be taken down, can be done in fighters. It sort of leaves the bomber guys out in the cold with little to do.
And how is this new ? This is the way it has been since I started to play over 5 years ago.
You bomber jocks will have more than enough to do once Combat Tour is released. There will be flocks and flocks of bomber missions with crediable targets ... just be patient, cause for the near future ... ain't nothing gonna happen in the MA to change the bomber roll.
-
Originally posted by Rino
Don't know why I even bother with you..but not everything was
American...and even American stuff was very close to the operator.
Ever see a dorsal mount? The gunner stands BETWEEN the twin 50s.
I'm SURE a buff expert like your self might have noticed the recoil
evident in the waist/cheek/nose mounts. Heck, a tripod mounted 50
cal can't absorb all the recoil generated, much less a post mount.
One last thing..the gunners decidedly DID spray the sky, the objective
was not to pad their egos with kills, it was to protect the bomber crew
by keeping the enemy at as far a distance as possible.
(sigh) I don't know why you bother with me either. I really don't. I'm just not worth it. Bad, ChopSaw, bad bomber pilot!
Who said I was a buff expert? Not me and certainly not anybody else. I don't think everything is or was American, but those are the bombers I fly in AH and comment on. As far as I can see the chin guns on 17's are not post mounted. They're on a remote turret. On the 24's the nose guns are mounted on a huge platform. The cheek and waist guns…..okay, you may have a point for shaking, but you can't man the cheek guns (though they fire now, thank you HTC) and hardly anyone mans the waist guns.
I've seen a tripod mounted, liquid cooled, 50 caliber machine gun do its thing. It didn't seem to have any trouble getting its projectiles into the target and, bye the way, with considerably more damage done than currently seems to be modeled in AH.
When I say "spray the sky" I mean it in the "oh god somebody help me shut this thing off and then get me to a hospital" sort of way. When you said hand held, I envisioned somebody standing with the gun cradled in their arms or on a loose sling. Silly of me. Must have been before coffee. I realize now you were saying they're controlled by hand at the grip while mounted on a post. The vibration may be historically accurate, but we do away with a lot of other historical accuracies to make the game play work. I think the shaking guns on bombers is one of them (despite the fact it may have been introduced as a genuine desire to improve immersion) and I really think that's the case with the Ostwind and to a lesser extent the coaxial guns on tanks.
Spraying the sky to ward off aircraft doesn't work as well in AH as it may have in real life. Nobodies afraid of dying. Here we have to disable the aircraft or at the very least get enough hits on it to worry the fighter pilot. It's a little harder now with the shaking. The shaking of the bomber guns wouldn't be a big deal in itself. It's just one more thing to add to the list. Lack of ability to set convergence, lack of ability to focus the guns of all 3 bombers on a single target unless the target is within a certain range and how the gun solution for bombers was changed to un-focus the guns and create more of a dispersal pattern. It just seems to keep piling up.
-
Originally posted by Hoarach
Because of KS I cant shoot down my own country's buffs. :furious
If KS was off I wouldnt let a single buff off the ground and disable ord at every base.
And because of the buff porking dweebs in FT, them rooks took the bish base in FT. Bish need to take the base in FT before knights lose theirs as well. Donut is no fun without FT. :furious
Umm….healthy attitude? Sounds like some of those "buff porking dweebs in FT" might have had something in mind other than simply ruining the fun for fighters. Maybe not.
-
im sure this has been said before:
there are two types of people in this game, those that can fly fighters, and those that wish they can fly fighters.
-
Originally posted by Furball
im sure this has been said before:
there are two types of people in this game, those that can fly fighters, and those that wish they can fly fighters.
It has also been said, "Those that can do, those that can't, play games and believe they can"
-
All I do is shoot down stuff in a Spit 5.
Karaya
-
SlapShot,
You can call "bs" and claim "urban myth" all you wish. The evidence is plain to all who have read the threads. It is also clear to those who have witnessed the transformations this game has gone through since AH1. Let's take just one example from your "bs/urban myth" list. Minimum fuel at a field. Used to be 25%, now is 75%. Why? Well it sure wasn't gv's, boats or bombers that found it distressing to have 25%. Who do you suppose that leaves? The change was made to 75%. Why, if not because of the complaints?
It was a common complaint by furballers/fighters…or whatever you would like to call them. On another thread you, yourself, indicated it was a legitimate complaint. From your description of the last days of AH1, I agreed. I believe the solution we both found acceptable was to harden the bunkers to the point that they couldn't be taken down without difficulty by some guy in a Typhoon and to return the 25% fuel minimum under that condition.
The designation/definition/description I came up with for Furballer was for the sake of convenience in discussion. Of course I broadened my definition to suit the discussion. I stated I was doing it before I did. It was only for the discussion regarding having two separate MA's and I wasn't trying to pull anything. If you read what I've written without thinking I've got it in for you and your squad, you might develop insight into what I'm saying instead of taking snatches of it to flame about. However, for your sake and those like you I'll use something like "group one" next time.
As far as furballers not complaining about bombers? Come on. Even in this thread you've got a guy complaining about buffs ruining fun at Fighter Town. Sure seemed like he's a furballer to me.
Personally, I don't use "furballers" as a whipping post. I note the changes that are made to the game, the complaints that are made and who makes them and who the changes make happy. The furballers, strat guys, bombers, gver's, etc., all have points of view and desires. As I've pointed out in the past, I like furballers in the game. I do what I can to cooperate with them and support them when they have a goal other than simply running up personal scores. Personally, I also try to leave them alone if that's what it looks like they want. At the very least they are pretty sky decorations.
I'm not sure about your familiarity with HT's personality. I'm sure you believe you're correct. However, again, I note the complaints made, who makes them and the changes that occur. Please don't tell me fuballers aren't whiners. We've both seen otherwise.
I hope you're right about ToD/CT. As I've told you before, I have my doubts and hopes, we'll just have to see.
-
Originally posted by Furball
im sure this has been said before:
there are two types of people in this game, those that can fly fighters, and those that wish they can fly fighters.
Your statement is showing a little prejudice there, dear.
There is something else that's been said; There are those that choose to think, strategize and use flexible tactics. You might have heard of the term tactician. Then there are those that are a simple situation of hand eye coordination. You know….first person shooter junkies.
Personally, I don't wholly subscribe to the sentiment in that. As I've said before, I like fighters, have flown them before and probably shall again. It's just that right now I'm interested in other things.
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
All I do is shoot down stuff in a Spit 5.
:) You're such a liar. You keep telling me, in other threads, what a hot Hurricane pilot you are. I'll bet you fly more than those two.
-
"The US 8th Air Force shot down 6,098 fighter planes, 1 for every 12,700 shots fired. But actual numbers were doubled roughly. "
Make it closer to 3,049 fighters, and 25,400 shots fired and you almost have the right number.
The Allies in the ETO lost 11,000 Heavy Bombers alone, this does NOT count Medium bombers. IRL, the waist gunners were useless (I've read too many books, and heard this from WWII bomber pilots themselves).
If you want "more accurate guns" that already exceed RL expectations. Then, concede to us the implement of more potent ack. It is common knowledge that the flak was more deadly toward the rear of the formation or on the return. Make it random at first, the longer a strat buffer sticks around, the quicker he may find himself/herself in the tower.
Karaya
-
Originally posted by ChopSaw
:) You're such a liar. You keep telling me, in other threads, what a hot Hurricane pilot you are. I'll bet you fly more than those two.
All I did was say I CAN and have shot down buffs in the Hurricane IIC.
Karaya
-
In the past I've flown fighters predominately. In the future I may do so again. I enjoy all aspects of the game, not just the bombers I predominately fly now. I say this because you seem to be under the impression I only care for bombers and destroying buildings with them.
The thing is here, and I find it very amusing... is that you aren't bringing anything new to the table here. Everything, EVERYTHING, you've said in this thread has been talked about for years now. My suggestion to you is that you use the search feature and take the time to investigate past whines, before you further clutter this board with more, useless whines.
Am I to understand you didn't like AH1? You thought it was just about blowing up buildings and avoiding fighters? You thought it was just about "bombers, bombs and goons"? I didn't and don't. As said before, the WWF arena would be more like AH1 in terms of strat system and some settings. Why would you fear the mere idea of that as a threat?
What ever gave you the idea that I did not like AH1? FWIW, I think AH1 was far better than AH2 is. That is in my opinion. 4-5 years ago, there weren't so many newbs running around screeming holly hell when they found something with the game they didn't like.
It's amazing how much your opinion of war being the "whole picture" is exactly the way I see it.
In your eyes maybe. It's tough to see the whole picture with blinders on though, isn't it? ;)
What you fail to note is that my comments are directed at the partially crippled strat system and the tendency of HTC to make changes to accommodate fighters at the expense of the other players whom you yourself have just mentioned.
Again, I'm still waiting for you to bring something to the table here that is of use. Fairy tails twisted to your agenda and deluded "facts" (aka bull*****)simply will not work here. The strat system has been in need of repair since AH2 was released. It was not done to, nor was it ever intended to "punish" those who enjoy bombing buildings.
Having said all that, I now respond to your suggestion of "can it". Imagine, if you will, what my suggestion might be as to where you can shove the can. Mkay? :)
Another sad example of how you think you can "get things done" around here. I imagine its the same with your real life problems too. If you have one that is.
-
I think all fighters should be removed from the game. Also we should add the B29.
-
Morpheus,
What I find amusing is your attempt to bury a discussion by saying it's been talked about before and denigrating those that wish to discuss it. This is your idea of bringing something new to the table? If it is, I have to say I've seen it before. So has everyone else. Didn't work then, won't work now and will never work. Posing as the old hand who knows all to satisfy your ego and silence those whose ideas you disagree with is pretty old stuff. Nobody knows like you do the things you know and you know it all? :lol Please. My suggestion to you is to find a new tactic. One that works.
The only blinders I see are the ones you attempt to pull over peoples eyes to try to get them to step in what you fondly think of as reasoning. Derisive comments, dismissive remarks, out and out lies, erroneous characterizations and a pathetic attempt to bait people will not work and (bends down, speaking slowly and gently as to a child with a learning disability) those things are not reasoning and they are not substitutes for truth or facts. Bring something new to your act. The old one is failing.
If you don't care for what I write I have another suggestion for you. Don’t read it. I'm sure that's simple enough for you. Far easier than whining about what others write. Far easier than telling them to "can it".
My suggestion to readers of these threads is to reach your own conclusions, come up with your own ideas and discuss them on these forums without being overly concerned by individuals with a special interest agenda trying to shout you down or intimidate you with name calling tactics.
Regards,
ChopSaw
-
Originally posted by SuperDud
I think all fighters should be removed from the game. Also we should add the B29.
While I can't agree with the elimination of fighters, I can agree with adding the B-29.
-
Let's take just one example from your "bs/urban myth" list. Minimum fuel at a field. Used to be 25%, now is 75%. Why? Well it sure wasn't gv's, boats or bombers that found it distressing to have 25%. Who do you suppose that leaves? The change was made to 75%. Why, if not because of the complaints?
It was a common complaint by furballers/fighters…or whatever you would like to call them.
I told you why the change was made and again posted it in this thread. It was a combination of "pork 'n auger" dweebs rendering the MA useless for most along with the new 2X fuel burn multiplier that caused HT to make the change. It was the "fighter" crowd that was complaining, but not all who fly fighters are "furballers" .... so ... the urban myth that it was the "furballers" that caused the change is just that ... MYTH.
On another thread you, yourself, indicated it was a legitimate complaint. From your description of the last days of AH1, I agreed. I believe the solution we both found acceptable was to harden the bunkers to the point that they couldn't be taken down without difficulty by some guy in a Typhoon and to return the 25% fuel minimum under that condition.
Yup ... that is what we agreeded on ... now you can wish in one hand and crap in the other ... and I can tell you which one will come true first.
The designation/definition/description I came up with for Furballer was for the sake of convenience in discussion. Of course I broadened my definition to suit the discussion. I stated I was doing it before I did. It was only for the discussion regarding having two separate MA's and I wasn't trying to pull anything. If you read what I've written without thinking I've got it in for you and your squad, you might develop insight into what I'm saying instead of taking snatches of it to flame about. However, for your sake and those like you I'll use something like "group one" next time.
I don't think that you have it in for me and our squad ... what I care about is that people get the truth and not the fluff for the sake of convenience. People will read the fluff and believe it to be true ... when I see it, I speak up against it. Nothing more.
As far as furballers not complaining about bombers? Come on. Even in this thread you've got a guy complaining about buffs ruining fun at Fighter Town. Sure seemed like he's a furballer to me.
And rightfully so. There is nothing more that I hate than a GRIEFER.
Fighter Towns were designed just for that ... so that people who want to just "fight" can do so and not be in the way of what anyone else cares to do in the game.
But, some bomber griefers can't help themselves. The feel the need to go and pee in the fighter pool ... and for what reason(s) ... none, except for the fact that it will destroy the fun of those who want to use the area for what it was designed for.
Anyone that bombs fighter hangers at Fighter Town are the biggest stunninghunkS in all of AH.
Personally, I don't use "furballers" as a whipping post. I note the changes that are made to the game, the complaints that are made and who makes them and who the changes make happy. The furballers, strat guys, bombers, gver's, etc., all have points of view and desires.
Well ... when noting the changes ... who makes the complaints ... and what changes make who happy ... try to be less myopic.
I'm not sure about your familiarity with HT's personality. I'm sure you believe you're correct. However, again, I note the complaints made, who makes them and the changes that occur. Please don't tell me fuballers aren't whiners. We've both seen otherwise.
Well ... I have spent some time with him (and Pyro) at the last 2 cons and I can tell you that HT is not easily persuaded and neither is Pyro. HT is the type of guy that will get turned off so fast at meaningless high pitched whines, and how the whine is delivered, is crucial ... even if the idea/whine has merit, if your deliverly is wrong ... he will ingnore the idea/whine "just because".
HT is not some geeky coader that folds under pressure ... if that were true, he would have been out of business long ago. So the urban myth ... those who whine the loudest ... get results ... "busted" ... it will usually get you the opposite reaction from what I have seen.
-
Originally posted by ChopSaw
Fighters don't notice gun shake because they're rarely zoomed all the way in and when they are they aren't tracking while firing. It's easy to accommodate something barely noticeable. Bombers notice it because we are zoomed all the way in. It's the only way we can hit the guy on our six who's throttled back at d1.0. The guy who has guns that are better focused than ours and therefore more effective at that distance. Immersion or not, the shaking reduces the effectiveness of bomber guns a little bit more. We're estimating it reduces our effective range another 200 and that's saying nothing of what it does to tracking.
Bomber guns aside, your response still doesn't address the issue of the Ostwind. Immersion? Many of them have to stop before they upchuck. I guess that really does get them into what they're doing, but it has little to do with WWII simulation immersion. The difficulty in tracking targets, caused by the shaking, has severely decreased their accuracy and all that any non-gver's offer is derisive laughter and gloating. And what the heck is going on with the coaxial guns on the tanks?
Shaking may not have been added to make gunning more difficult, but that's what it has done. Even if bombers accommodate it, it's going to hurt our accuracy and make tracking more difficult than it already was. There's no way the Ostwind drivers can accommodate it unless they stay out of zoom and that is going to hit their accuracy.
Shaking guns aside, when you look back over all the changes made from AH1 to now, immersion does not seem to be the single driving force. Hardening of HQ's? Minimum field fuel set to 75% changed from 25%? Spacing fields closer together? Changing the way the bombs drop to effectively decrease their ability? These changes indicate a trend and that trend does not have immersion as its sole goal.
What would be the problem with having an arena WWF's could better enjoy in addition to the current one?
In many respects a nice update. I especially like the addition of the Jeep. The shaking? Not so much.
You seem to playing a different game than I am?? I find zero problem with head shake in ANY of the vehicles fully zoomed in. I also find that bomber guns are MUCH more accurate at distance than fighters (not a whine just a fact). I find that getting the angles on a bomber almost impossible for more than one pass due to their HIGH speed and ability to kick just alittle rudder to spoil the pass. Does this mean I cannot kill bombers, no it doesn't but then again I am not whinning about it either.
It has already been covered in this thread about abuses of the bombers to which I note you have made NO comment, I would love to see the screams if HT addresses some these abuses.
-
i like it when rose petals are sprinkled on my bed the morning after a thunderstorm.the air is crisp and sweet.my dog is lying in the dying cockroach position jerking and making small peeps,surely dreaming about the squirrel that was a little too fast and had climbing capabilities.not fair he peeps,not fair.
-
Originally posted by ChopSaw
Morpheus,
The only blinders I see are the ones you attempt to pull over peoples eyes to try to get them to step in what you fondly think of as reasoning. Derisive comments, dismissive remarks, out and out lies, erroneous characterizations and a pathetic attempt to bait people will not work and (bends down, speaking slowly and gently as to a child with a learning disability) those things are not reasoning and they are not substitutes for truth or facts. Bring something new to your act. The old one is failing.
Lies? Really now? Care to point out where I was lying? I know for a fact that you can't. But I dare you to try.
My suggestion to readers of these threads is to reach your own conclusions, come up with your own ideas and discuss them on these forums without being overly concerned by individuals with a special interest agenda trying to shout you down or intimidate you with name calling tactics.
Is this not what I did? My conclusion is that you are full of it. And only care to "improve" the game in ways that suit your adgenda. One that doesnt include the "whole picture" ie the entire player base. What's good for you may not be good for someone else. So you want to split the MA up. You still haven't brought up something that hasn't been said in the past, that is possitive in regards to splitting the MA up. Like I said, already, this has been talked about and whined about by a few players like you for years now. And its helarious how it just doesnt sink in.
If you don't care for what I write I have another suggestion for you. Don’t read it. I'm sure that's simple enough for you. Far easier than whining about what others write. Far easier than telling them to "can it".
Guess what ace? This is a public board. And this is just as much my game as it is yours. If I see someone attempting to selfishly taylor things he does not like to suit his needs then you can bet your bellybutton I will say something. If you dont like that, then start your own board, and whine about it there. That way you can keep those who disagree with your crap, out.
What I find amusing is your attempt to bury a discussion by saying it's been talked about before and denigrating those that wish to discuss it.
Im glad its amusing to you. LOL really I do. Denigrating? I am helping you son. Dont waste your time on this topic. Because, like I said, its already been talked about. Its a closed case. How do I know this? HT has said it dozens of times in the past. That's how.
Posing as the old hand who knows all to satisfy your ego and silence those whose ideas you disagree with is pretty old stuff. Nobody knows like you do the things you know and you know it all? :lol Please. My suggestion to you is to find a new tactic. One that works.
Is that how it all came off to you? That's unfortunate. I deffinatly do know that I could teach you a thing or two about this game. Lesson 1, never give a rats bellybutton about what other people say to you. Time to stop hanging on the words of others and use your own head. I know its difficult, but if you try you might be able to handle it.
This is your idea of bringing something new to the table? If it is, I have to say I've seen it before. So has everyone else. Didn't work then, won't work now and will never work.
Funny, I didnt know I was saposed to bring something new to the table here. This was your "big idea". :lol The same "Big Idea" that was brought dozens of times over the past several yeras.
Love Morph
-
Originally posted by Boxboy
It has already been covered in this thread about abuses of the bombers to which I note you have made NO comment, I would love to see the screams if HT addresses some these abuses. [/B]
That are many more abuses of bombers NOT memtioned in this tread which also should be looked at. Things like dive bombing lanc, just to name one. But that is not what this tread was to be about.
BTW, anyone who uses a plane in a manner which the plane should not be used for is an stunninghunk in my book too. I don't care what plane it is! IF someone is going around to spoil the fun of other players, that is also wrong ! When I'm in a bombers, I work toward taking down the opposing teams ablity to wage war there and take the base. Or to stop/ slow down the advance and save bases for my country. I never pork to just pork. But I know there are some who do and that is sad indeed.
I didn't start this tread for personal attacks or even to label players. It seems when we label a player as one thing or another, someone else sees it different. So it is a waste of time and effort.
My goal for this tread was for real ideas on how to make the game play better for everyone. Why must everything be a combat? Why can't we cooperate? We have over 70 different planes/vehicles in the game (accorting the the TV ad), a game system to use them all. But, the role for bombers in it is now so limited they have only few targets to hit. When they are down, the fighters complain. Not all fighter players are furballers, but it was easier (and wrong I guess) to lump them all together for the sake of difference in battle tactics in the game. A fighter can find a fight anywhere, but the bombers ARE NOT fighters and have very limited targets.
So, for this tread, I had and have a personal agenda! At least I'm open about it. The agenda: To find and discuss ways to make the game better for ALL, not just fighters, bombers or GVs.
So, one more time, I ask you. Please can we get on with it?
-
Well for my money the bomber in this game has several use's such as land grab. They neutralize a base so it can be taken. They kill strat targets to help take bases. They kill CV's to prevent base capture. They kill V bases to prevent ground attack. All of these are non-grief use's.
They can also be used in a grief roll to kill Fighter town, dog fite, dive bomb, kill fiter hangers with no base taking planned etc.
so all in all the bombers have MUCH more they can do than do fighters.
-
[Quoate]Originally posted by SlapShotI told you why the change was made and again posted it in this thread. It was a combination of "pork 'n auger" dweebs rendering the MA useless for most along with the new 2X fuel burn multiplier that caused HT to make the change. It was the "fighter" crowd that was complaining, but not all who fly fighters are "furballers" .... so ... the urban myth that it was the "furballers" that caused the change is just that ... MYTH.[/quote]
Yes you did tell me why the change was made to increase the minimum fuel at fields to 75%. You saw me acknowledge that and say that I agreed with it. So what's the problem? We even agreed upon the solution. Increase the hardness of the bunkers or in some other way change them so that a single pass with fighter cannon couldn't take them down. I even specified they shouldn't be able to be taken down with anything less than ordnance or heavy cannon (bombs, rockets or ground based cannon by which I meant tanks, LVT4's or ships). Under those hardened conditions you agreed the field fuel could/should be returned to 25% to revitalize the strat system. Again this was something we both agreed upon. We also agreed in that thread that we should wait until ToD/CT was out (you wanted to wait until 6 months after it had been out) before requesting the change back to 25% fuel. The reason given for this was HTC has enough to do getting that out and doesn't have time for changes to the MA. With the recent update we can see that isn't the case. In this thread I didn't even suggest the current MA be changed to 25%. I suggested an entirely new and additional arena which would have settings more to the liking of strat people, more in line with AH1. I suggested this because there seems to be resistance to these types of settings within the group of people that includes furballers. Not composed entirely of, but included in.
A copy of what I posted to this thread on 3/2406 7:28 AM:
"- Furballers = guys who fly in fighters. They primarily enjoy shooting at other fighters, but also like to occasionally shoot at bombers, gv's and boats. They don't really care too much about taking bases though many of them feel that's okay. They don't like getting shot down. Either by gv's or bombers. They seem to feel the only one that should have a good chance of shooting them down is another fighter. They don't like being inconvenienced by things like having their fuel reduced to 25%, the maps fields separated a decent distance, their HQ taken down (even partially) by a single bomber or even 4 formations of bombers, their fighter hangers taken down, their furball busted up by bombers operating as "flying flack platforms", heavy bombers which "fly too high and too fast" (their complaint, believe me), new bombers introduced (such as the B-29), etc, etc. As a result they advocate (otherwise defined as a whine) and applaud changes to gv's and bombers which reduce the effectiveness of same. Changes such as the remodeling of bomber gun convergence from AH1 to AH2, the remodeling of the way bombs drop from AH1 to AH2 and of course there's the way Ostwind and Bomber guns shake now."
I thought I was very clear in pinpointing the origin of complaints against 25%. I took pains to indicate the complaints came from a group of people that include but are not entirely composed of pure furballers. I used the term furballers, being very clear to indicate what that term included, for the purpose of the current discussion, a group of people whose interests were not exclusively those of a pure furballer. Those who see themselves as furballers seem to cling to a more narrowly defined image despite my efforts. In the future I'll use other terminology. Terminology that doesn't elicit such a knee jerk reaction.
I do not perpetrate urban myths or any other form of untruth.
[Quoate]Originally posted by SlapShotYup ... that is what we agreeded on ... now you can wish in one hand and crap in the other ... and I can tell you which one will come true first.
Ummm…….I'm not really sure what you're saying here. In light of that I believe I'll refrain from response.
[Quoate]Originally posted by SlapShotI don't think that you have it in for me and our squad ... what I care about is that people get the truth and not the fluff for the sake of convenience. People will read the fluff and believe it to be true ... when I see it, I speak up against it. Nothing more.
I don't deal in fluff nor do I have a good reaction to those that do. I deal in truth.
[Quoate]Originally posted by SlapShotAnd rightfully so. There is nothing more that I hate than a GRIEFER.
Fighter Towns were designed just for that ... so that people who want to just "fight" can do so and not be in the way of what anyone else cares to do in the game.
But, some bomber griefers can't help themselves. The feel the need to go and pee in the fighter pool ... and for what reason(s) ... none, except for the fact that it will destroy the fun of those who want to use the area for what it was designed for.
Anyone that bombs fighter hangers at Fighter Town are the biggest stunninghunkS in all of AH.
Obviously I agree with your sentiment. You can see that in my response to the Fighter Town post. I advised griefing the griefer. I was asked if I'd have a problem with ordnance being taken down to inhibit the griefer and responded that I would have no problem with it at all. I still think it would be more fun to let the griefing bomber spend a ton of time getting into position and then shooting him before he can do anything, but everyone has their preferences.
What I was trying to show, and thought was obvious, was that furballers do complain about bombers. Not just in Fighter Town. They also complain about the same situation outside of Fighter Town. However, outside of Fighter Town their complaint may be against somebody who isn't intent upon ruining their fun. In those situations the bomber may be intent upon assisting what he sees as an attempt to take a field.
[Quoate]Originally posted by SlapShotWell ... when noting the changes ... who makes the complaints ... and what changes make who happy ... try to be less myopic.
I've written elsewhere in this thread what I believe to be the source of the complaints which cause changes. I had hoped it would be obvious to everyone that they are exactly the same source as you list. It is not pure furballers as they see themselves narrowly defined. It's apparent it was a mistake to use the term given the over reaction and misinterpretation that's been focused on it. Again, despite my attempt to indicate that it was not pure furballers that I was indicating. There was nothing myopic about my expanded definition. It included all the people you, yourself, told me of.
[Quoate]Originally posted by SlapShotWell ... I have spent some time with him (and Pyro) at the last 2 cons and I can tell you that HT is not easily persuaded and neither is Pyro. HT is the type of guy that will get turned off so fast at meaningless high pitched whines, and how the whine is delivered, is crucial ... even if the idea/whine has merit, if your deliverly is wrong ... he will ingnore the idea/whine "just because".
HT is not some geeky coader that folds under pressure ... if that were true, he would have been out of business long ago. So the urban myth ... those who whine the loudest ... get results ... "busted" ... it will usually get you the opposite reaction from what I have seen.
So you spent some time with him (HT) and Pyro at two conferences. I'm not sure that gives you enormous incite into what makes them or any of the rest of HTC tick. On the other hand I'm not prepared to say you don't know what you're talking about. Perhaps it would be best to say you've had opportunity to meet them and understand them that exceeds my own.
At no time did I imply the whines of ……fighter guys?.....were meaningless, high pitched, loud, improperly delivered or merit less. I also did not imply HT or anyone else at HTC was a "geeky coder who folds under pressure". I specifically stated he is a businessman. His business is AH. He listens to his customers and attempts to satisfy them. "Fighter guys" (a term which include those who call themselves furballers) compose the majority his customers. It is natural for HTC to see the input from that majority and attempt to satisfy them. It is the number of people issuing input, not the loudness of it, that persuades HTC. Hopefully HTC also looks at reasoned arguments for changes which may not reflect the wishes of the majority, but nevertheless attempt to improve the game. This maintains and increases the diversity and interest of the game, thereby increasing it's marketability an increases subscribers. I believe ToD/CT is evidence of this.
-
Originally posted by Boxboy
You seem to playing a different game than I am?? I find zero problem with head shake in ANY of the vehicles fully zoomed in. I also find that bomber guns are MUCH more accurate at distance than fighters (not a whine just a fact). I find that getting the angles on a bomber almost impossible for more than one pass due to their HIGH speed and ability to kick just alittle rudder to spoil the pass. Does this mean I cannot kill bombers, no it doesn't but then again I am not whinning about it either.
It has already been covered in this thread about abuses of the bombers to which I note you have made NO comment, I would love to see the screams if HT addresses some these abuses.
We do indeed seem to be playing a different game. Zoom a tanks main gun in fully, fire the coaxial machine gun and witness head shake. That's on a multi ton vehicle. A post on Headshake (url shown below) from a guy who's fired a real coaxial gun on the Bradley indicates there should be no shake. Zoom in with the Ostwinds 37 mm main gun, fire the gun and witness head shake like nobodies business. Now try to track a plane while firing at it with the Ostwind while zoomed. Read the posts on the thread in General Discussion titled Headshake (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=1990871#post1990871). Pay particular attention to who is making those posts and how it's actually making them nauseous. If these don't apply to the game you're playing, then you're playing another game.
Stating bomber guns are more accurate at distance than fighters is just not true. In point of fact, it is the opposite. You'd have to specify the technique you used to come to that determination for me to comment further. I and others used the .target command while flying fighters and bombers. In addition I've contacted Skuzzy at HTC asking for details. His reply indicated the bomber guns fired in a more dispersed fashion. Like a shot gun pattern, if you will. Test results from the .target command tests show the results of this dispersal in bomber guns and a lack of it in fighter guns.
You'll have to be specific when you say, "abuses of bombers", in order for me to comment on the ones you have in mind. I will, however, respond to one which I guess you might have in mind. The use of heavy bombers as dive bombers? I happen to be an advocate for the elimination of this. I've proposed, on another thread, that F6 be the only position from which bombs may be dropped. Additionally, I've proposed an inclinometer lock out be used as well. Between the two I'd hoped dive bombing would be made impossible or just not feasible. HT posted and stated that players would simply find a way to dive bomb even with these changes. A way around. If you've an idea that would limit it and not penalize level bombers, I'd like to hear it.
-
:lol
-
Originally posted by Morpheus
Fairy tails twisted to your agenda and deluded "facts".
You attempt to pass this off as truth. That's what people call lying.
Originally posted by Morpheus
Is this not what I did? My conclusion is that you are full of it. And only care to "improve" the game in ways that suit your adgenda. One that doesnt include the "whole picture" ie the entire player base. What's good for you may not be good for someone else. So you want to split the MA up. You still haven't brought up something that hasn't been said in the past, that is possitive in regards to splitting the MA up. Like I said, already, this has been talked about and whined about by a few players like you for years now. And its helarious how it just doesnt sink in.
See? This is exactly what I was explaining to you. Erroneous characterization, lies, dismissive remarks, derisive remarks, and a pathetic attempt to bait someone all bundled up in what you fondly think of as reasoning. The goal of intimidation and shouting your opponent down with abuse is easily seen as well.
My proposal attempts to improve the game for the two main categories of people in the game. Strategy minded folk and non-strategy minded folk. That includes the whole picture. It is not an attempt to "improve the game in ways that suit my own agenda". The allegation that it is, is erroneous characterization, pathetic baiting, lying and an attempt to twist the facts to suit yourself. That last is also called lying.
The topic may have been raised before and it will probably be raised again. Hey, you know what? There are new people everyday to the game. There are also people that have played the game that are new to the forums. Not everyone has the "superior experience" that you do. This may be a new idea for them. There are also people who would like to re-examine a topic from time to time or people who think developing situations warrant a re-examination. Not all are as intolerant as you.
Originally posted by Morpheus
Guess what ace? This is a public board. And this is just as much my game as it is yours. If I see someone attempting to selfishly taylor things he does not like to suit his needs then you can bet your bellybutton I will say something. If you dont like that, then start your own board, and whine about it there. That way you can keep those who disagree with your crap, out.
Oh, gosh. (blushes) I'm not an "ace". I'm nowhere near that good. Not like you. Hmmm…..busy little guy, aren't you. So many allegations. Lets see…..I believe this game is more mine than it is yours, I'm a selfish tailor of things to suit my own needs, I object to you stating your opinion, I'm a whiner, I want to keep those who disagree with me off the boards and apparently I should be placing wagers on my ass. Have I got all that right? See? Once again I direct you to derisive comments, dismissive remarks, lies, erroneous characterizations, and a pathetic attempt to bait people I've indicated this is a public board and people should be free to post on it without being concerned about people like you trying to shut them up when you disagree with them. I think you should post ideas rather than abuse, but what can be done about it? Nothing. It's a public forum and that means we're going to run into people like you. People who want to shut up people with ideas they don't care for.
You suggested I not write because you didn't like it. I suggested it might be better for you to not read it if you didn't like it. Nothing more. I did not suggest that it isn't a public forum. You did. I advised people to reach their own conclusions and post without fear of being treated badly by people like you. You suggested I not write because you didn't like it. Expressly, you told me to "can it". That suggests you believe this to be your own private forum or you believe yourself to be a moderator of the forums. Perhaps your suggestion to create a new forum is best self applied.
Originally posted by Morpheus
Im glad its amusing to you. LOL really I do. Denigrating? I am helping you son. Dont waste your time on this topic. Because, like I said, its already been talked about. Its a closed case. How do I know this? HT has said it dozens of times in the past. That's how.
Yes. Denigrating. To criticize in a derogatory manner, to speak damagingly of….. to denigrate. If you're attempting to aid me in a fatherly fashion, it's a very peculiar one. I can't tell you how revolting, on so many levels, I find that image. I doubt you're old enough for me to be your son. My real father is well into his 90's.
My time is my own to spend as I see fit. That seems obvious, but your comments seem to indicate you have a somewhat different view. This topic may be a closed case or it may not. I'd have to take your word for that. I believe we've covered why that might not be my inclination. Even if it is a "closed case", closed cases have a way of opening sometimes. Time, and of course HTC, will tell.
Originally posted by Morpheus
Is that how it all came off to you? That's unfortunate. I deffinatly do know that I could teach you a thing or two about this game. Lesson 1, never give a rats bellybutton about what other people say to you. Time to stop hanging on the words of others and use your own head. I know its difficult, but if you try you might be able to handle it.
I'm sure you could teach me some tricks of the game. However, I believe I've amply illustrated my knowledge of what you describe as "Lesson 1". I've been applying to you.
Originally posted by Morpheus
Funny, I didnt know I was saposed to bring something new to the table here. This was your "big idea". The same "Big Idea" that was brought dozens of times over the past several yeras.
Love Morph
Well first you say I shouldn't post unless I bring something new to the table, then you bring your old tactics to the table. So I commented on what I saw as a hypocrisy. Uh….what's a yaras?
As far as your "love" goes…….I'm suspicious of your motives. I'm not making an accusation here, but just let me be clear. I'm straight. No offense intended if you're not, I'm just saying.
Finally in response to your insinuation a couple of posts ago that I have no life. I do have a life. I've got a cat and everything.
-
Well first you say I shouldn't post unless I bring something new to the table, then you bring your old tactics to the table. So I commented on what I saw as a hypocrisy. Uh….what's a yaras?
It's not my job here to bring anything new to the table. What my job is, is to let you know that your "new Idea" is really only some old whine thats been chewed up and spit out dozens of times.
As far as your "love" goes…….I'm suspicious of your motives. I'm not making an accusation here, but just let me be clear. I'm straight. No offense intended if you're not, I'm just saying.
Darn, and here I thought.... with you making the connection between you and I, and that we look at the "war" and what it is about, in the same way... I thought you were maybe trying to come closer to me and into my life. Oh well.
My proposal attempts to improve the game for the two main categories of people in the game.
LOL you just dont get it do you thick head?
Improve the game for who? You? Maybe. Me? No.
See the point I'm trying to get across to you big guy? Do you see why HT laughs at this "big idea" of yours? LOL wow, some of you newbs really are thick skull'd.
-
Originally posted by Boxboy
Well for my money the bomber in this game has several use's such as land grab. They neutralize a base so it can be taken. They kill strat targets to help take bases. They kill CV's to prevent base capture. They kill V bases to prevent ground attack. All of these are non-grief use's.
They can also be used in a grief roll to kill Fighter town, dog fite, dive bomb, kill fiter hangers with no base taking planned etc.
so all in all the bombers have MUCH more they can do than do fighters.
Killing strat targets (troops, ammo bunkers, formerly fuel bunkers) isn't so much a tactic which assists taking bases as it is a tactic to inhibit an enemy from taking bases.
I've already responded to griefing as pertains to Fighter Town, FH hangers and using heavy bombers for dive bombing. Uh…using them to dog fight? I assume you mean the use of them as "flack platforms" to bust through a furball. I've heard that it's possible and that it goes on. I tried to bust a vulch cap once and it worked with minor success, but only because the fighters cooperated. I couldn't really chase them down. They had to come to me and try to shoot me down before I could get guns on them. For my money a bomber is a fairly easy target for fighters, particularly when there are about half a dozen of them. I've heard 999000 and Tatertot use the tactic to good advantage. Since I've never seen them do it I can't comment on the practice. Even so it sounds like a legitimate grief you have and I'd like to hear any ideas you might have to remedy the problem.
-
Im sorry, didn't you say you had a life?
-
Originally posted by Morpheus
It's not my job here to bring anything new to the table. What my job is, is to let you know that your "new Idea" is really only some old whine thats been chewed up and spit out dozens of times.
Your job here? I didn't know you had a job here. Typifying your input as a job seems to support the idea that you believe these to be your forums and/or see yourself as a moderator. Until I hear differently, I'll assume that's presumptuous of you.
Originally posted by Morpheus
See the point I'm trying to get across to you big guy? Do you see why HT laughs at this "big idea" of yours? LOL wow, some of you newbs really are thick skull'd.
:lol Big guy? Geez, you just won't stop with the sexual innuendo. I'm not aware that HT is laughing at my idea. I can understand you not liking what I write, but what makes you think, aside from that, I'm a newb?
-
Originally posted by Morpheus
Im sorry, didn't you say you had a life?
Back at you "son", "ace", "big guy", "sir".:D
-
This thread's like Kweassa meets August... :confused:
-
Originally posted by Vudak
This thread's like Kweassa meets August... :confused:
In what way?:huh
-
Originally posted by ChopSaw
In what way?:huh
Page after page after painfully boring page of text, with no rationale, no reason, no logic, no facts, and no knowledge of the subject matter.
In that way.
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
Page after page after painfully boring page of text, with no rationale, no reason, no logic, no facts, and no knowledge of the subject matter.
In that way.
Kweassa is a very fine writer. Perhaps the writting is simply beyond the educational range of hubsononfire. Who knows? Characterizing Kweassa's writing as "painfully boring", "without rationale", "without reason", "without logic", "without facts" and "without a knowledge of subject matter" speaks more to hubsonfire's lack of intellect and intolerance than anything else. Being grouped with Kweassa as a writer is high praise and I don't believe I deserve the honor. Sadly, considering hubsonfire is the source, it is praise from an uninformed person.
With the exception of one, all the Blue Knight squad seem to post in the same fashion. Instead of offering reason, they thump their chest and sneer at those not sharing their narrow viewpoint. Rather than rationale and facts, they offer ridicule. :lol I haven't seen tactics like that since high school. One can only assume they see themselves as elite, above the common player. They certainly seem to look down with intolerance on a good many people.
I'd still like to hear from Vudak on this. The person to whom my question was directed.
-
Belive this one has run it course. So play nice Kiddies.
HiTech