Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Slate on October 03, 2008, 01:57:23 PM
-
It annoys me that I can't Bomb GV's untill I'm so close the Bomb is inefective. This has made the Wirblewind very deadly and has cost many aircraft. It was not always that way. Ground detail setting is maxed out at 3 miles. At least a dot of a vehicle should be seen at altitude. :mad:
-
Icon is visable at 1.5k, if you put it in ground vis mode, I have no problem seeing the "dot" at around 3k.
-
How do you put it in ground vis mode?
-
The wheel on my joystick. :lol
I don't remember what the game command is (shift f4?)
-
I almost thought you said Alt-F4 :lol I'll check it out Thanks
-
In full vis mode I can spot a vehicle dot in open terrain from 5-7K although it's much harder than it used to be.
-
In full vis mode I can spot a vehicle dot in open terrain from 5-7K although it's much harder than it used to be.
True, but if a vehicle is in open terrain with a con above him, he might as well pitch in for the chairs in the tower. :lol
-
Seems you're having graphics problems then. I can easily see a GV sitting on a base from about 4K out. If the icon vis range was any farther out it would stick out like a sore thumb all the better.
-
I might have some Graphics problem. The Horizon at sea is chopped and not uniformed.
-
Slate, that's what ground vis mode looks like. Hit shift + F1 to get back to full vis mode.
-
My framerates actually drop if I use ground vis mode, even though the mountains & such in the distance are no longer visible. I believe it shows more ground clutter though (if you are in a GV).
-
I do believe the GV icon distance for airplanes should be extended, to 2 or 2.5K. Right now, by the time the icon appears, you are almost where you want to be releasing your bomb and pulling up, and almost within range for wirbels.
I think making dive-bombing slightly easier in this way would be better for "balancing" air and ground power in the MA than the current solution of allowing anyone who can vaguely fly a plane straight and shoot to up unlimited 37MM Il2s and strafe sitting-duck tanks. :devil
-
Thanks I'll set full vis mode and try it. I also have trouble reading Spikesx posts, somehow I just can't Focus :O :D
-
I do believe the GV icon distance for airplanes should be extended, to 2 or 2.5K. Right now, by the time the icon appears, you are almost where you want to be releasing your bomb and pulling up, and almost within range for wirbels.
I think making dive-bombing slightly easier in this way would be better for "balancing" air and ground power in the MA than the current solution of allowing anyone who can vaguely fly a plane straight and shoot to up unlimited 37MM Il2s and strafe sitting-duck tanks. :devil
First the complaints about the range being too far, now too short. Sigh, HTC can't make anyone happy.
-
IMHO GV's are very easy to see...if you know where to look! :salute
-
First the complaints about the range being too far, now too short. Sigh, HTC can't make anyone happy.
Well, from a real-world standpoint, I can't understand why you'd be able to identify that dot anywhere from 3-6 thousand yards away as "109/Yak/Spit/" etc, but would need to be 1500 yards or closer to identify that dot in the field as "Tiger".
-
Try hitting ENTER 3 times for No Cockpit art..It's amazing how good your view is then. :devil
-
Try hitting ENTER 3 times for No Cockpit art..It's amazing how good your view is then. :devil
:rofl :rofl
-
I do believe the GV icon distance for airplanes should be extended, to 2 or 2.5K. Right now, by the time the icon appears, you are almost where you want to be releasing your bomb and pulling up, and almost within range for wirbels.
I think making dive-bombing slightly easier in this way would be better for "balancing" air and ground power in the MA than the current solution of allowing anyone who can vaguely fly a plane straight and shoot to up unlimited 37MM Il2s and strafe sitting-duck tanks. :devil
Your kidding I hope. Even I can bomb a GV and I'm the worst bomber in the game. I think its too easy, and for a better balance the icon range should be shorten to .5k or less. There is no way a GV can hide from a plane in the game.
Fred
-
they killing your motor in ground mode makes it much easier to find them
-
they killing your motor in ground mode makes it much easier to find them
:huh
-
Your kidding I hope. Even I can bomb a GV and I'm the worst bomber in the game. I think its too easy, and for a better balance the icon range should be shorten to .5k or less. There is no way a GV can hide from a plane in the game.
Fred
I am not. Dive-bombing requires you to get a little alt, the number of bombs is limited, and hitting is exponentially harder when the target is rolling, so I think it is very fair to GVs. I see no reason why if our pilots eyes are good enough to identify by type an aircraft 3-6K away why he must get to 1.5K to identify a large tank.
Also, I am prejudiced in favor of dive-bombing as the tank killing method vrs. attack planes with tank-busting guns. The former was more common in WWII than the latter, I think the clear superiority of the Il2's 37MMs over other method's of armor destruction in AHII is an aberration.
-
Yes "shift-f4" will put you in ground vis mode.
Its kinda strange (in ground vis mode) that sometimes I can see the little silver dot of a GV from quite a distance, but other times I justabout have to be on top of it to see it.
Most of the time when I am attacking a GV from the air (the only way I can do it sucessfully) I try to spot their cannon or ack fire.
I'm not very good at attacking from altitude, so I come in pretty low on the deck, when range says "600" with 1000 lbs--they are dead. (most of the time).
Typhies Rool, :rock
Boner
-
I am not. Dive-bombing requires you to get a little alt, the number of bombs is limited, and hitting is exponentially harder when the target is rolling, so I think it is very fair to GVs. I see no reason why if our pilots eyes are good enough to identify by type an aircraft 3-6K away why he must get to 1.5K to identify a large tank.
Also, I am prejudiced in favor of dive-bombing as the tank killing method vrs. attack planes with tank-busting guns. The former was more common in WWII than the latter, I think the clear superiority of the Il2's 37MMs over other method's of armor destruction in AHII is an aberration.
I understand that your prejudiced towards the bombing, but being a regular GVer, I'm more partial to GVs. If a GV other than the flacks had some type of defense against bombing, then I can see your point. A tank has no real defense against a plane. I know there is the pintle gun, and at times the main gun can be used, I have downed planes with both, but it is few and far between. The only real defense a GV (excluding flacks) has against being dive bombed is the ability to hide. In this game it is impossible for a GV to hide from an air con.
I can hear the argument now, get someone to ride shotgun with a Wirble, but we all know that many times your basically on your own. To be honest with you I would settle for a 50 cal on the tanks, at least we would have some chance of defending ourselves.
I agree with you, we are looking at this from two different angles, and interests. What is the solution that will work for both of us? I have no idea, so until then I just work with what I got. :salute
Fred
-
I can hear the argument now, get someone to ride shotgun with a Wirble, but we all know that many times your basically on your own. To be honest with you I would settle for a 50 cal on the tanks, at least we would have some chance of defending ourselves.
If it didn't have a 50 on it in WW2, it won't have a 50 on it in the game.
Pretty simple in this game really--pick your poison. :D
-
Previously there has been a concern (at least somewhat valid, IMHO) that it was too easy to pork ords and blow the VH at an airbase and just over-run it with vehicles, and the airplanes couldn't do a thing about it. Yes, I know some could whack gvs effectively with a HurrIID or the like, but most could not. Also there was a not totally invalid concern that wirbel hordes in particular were abit unbalancing in that situation.
The solution to this problem we have been presented with is the heavy gun package on the Il2. But its overkill, it makes destroying/crippling GVs about as difficult as vulching, swings the balance too far the other way. So it needs a light perk at least. One big part of my reason for saying this is that while strafing with the Il2 is the vastly easier method in AHII, historically during the war most attack planes were designed to take down GVs with ordinance, must have been some reason for this.
OTOH, the fact that one suicide 190 could easily run in NOE and strafe down ords at field was always a bad idea. And once again, I cannot see why an airplane should be identifiable at 6K but a VH cannot be identified until 1.5K, and I think the icon range on GVs needs to be outside the guns range of WWs, for obvious reasons.
I understand that your prejudiced towards the bombing, but being a regular GVer, I'm more partial to GVs. If a GV other than the flacks had some type of defense against bombing, then I can see your point. A tank has no real defense against a plane. I know there is the pintle gun, and at times the main gun can be used, I have downed planes with both, but it is few and far between. The only real defense a GV (excluding flacks) has against being dive bombed is the ability to hide. In this game it is impossible for a GV to hide from an air con.
I can hear the argument now, get someone to ride shotgun with a Wirble, but we all know that many times your basically on your own. To be honest with you I would settle for a 50 cal on the tanks, at least we would have some chance of defending ourselves.
I agree with you, we are looking at this from two different angles, and interests. What is the solution that will work for both of us? I have no idea, so until then I just work with what I got. :salute
Fred
-
If it didn't have a 50 on it in WW2, it won't have a 50 on it in the game.
Pretty simple in this game really--pick your poison. :D
Might want to check this website http://militaryhistory.about.com/od/vehiclesarmor/p/M4Sherman.htm
Clearly states .50 cal as secondary armament.
Fred
-
Might want to check this website http://militaryhistory.about.com/od/vehiclesarmor/p/M4Sherman.htm
Clearly states .50 cal as secondary armament.
Fred
The firefly variant didn't, the brits mounted a .30. Gl finding a photo with a .50 on it.
-
I can clearly see gv's a 3.5, farther if they are moving... In f1 mode...
Its the little sparkle they have, as they move across the terrain, that gives them away..
German vehicles, Tig, Pnz, Wir, Ost, 251, stick out like little golden candies..
The green vehicles, sitting still in a FOREST, (not a single tree) are tougher to spot..
But a low pass always finds them... By juggling your game sounds you can find sneaky M3s
hiding in barns, etc... GV'ers should remember, that engine sound will give you away, even
to airplanes.. And your gunfire can be seen from 5k or more...
Besides, there are usually friendlies putting gunfire on them anyway.. So you select your
target before you even set up your Divebomb run... Informed by your buddies on the radio
as to target type, Icons don't matter very much...
Look close, you'll see them.. Once you have a practiced eye, they jump right out....
RC
-
The firefly variant didn't, the brits mounted a .30. Gl finding a photo with a .50 on it.
Guys, I'm really not trying to get into a pissing contest here :D. Its just I'm not a Military Historian, so out of curiosity I google things I don't know. Check this site out concerning the Sherman Firefly http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_Firefly . It clearly state that there is a .50 cal gun. Maybe I got the wrong year of the tank or something :D
Fred
-
Guys, I'm really not trying to get into a pissing contest here :D. Its just I'm not a Military Historian, so out of curiosity I google things I don't know. Check this site out concerning the Sherman Firefly http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_Firefly . It clearly state that there is a .50 cal gun. Maybe I got the wrong year of the tank or something :D
Fred
Image from your link.(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/af/ShermanFirefly.jpg)
Point out the .50 pls.
That and wiki is a good starting place, however it is riddled with inaccuracies.
-
Image from your link.(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/af/ShermanFirefly.jpg)
Point out the .50 pls.
That and wiki is a good starting place, however it is riddled with inaccuracies.
I can only go by what I read...I can find a bunch of pictures of Shermans with no machine gun. Since were looking for machine guns in the pic. you posted,,,show me the .30 cal.? ;)
Fred
-
I can only go by what I read...I can find a bunch of pictures of Shermans with no machine gun. Since were looking for machine guns in the pic. you posted,,,show me the .30 cal.? ;)
Fred
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/874_1174588211_firefly_4.jpg)
:D
Edit: Now lets see one with a .50. :aok
-
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/874_1174588211_firefly_4.jpg)
:D
Edit: Now lets see one with a .50. :aok
I don't know how to post pictures, but go to www.cybermodeler.com/armor/m4/m4_gallery.shtml and look at the bottom row of pictures. The pictures are labeled as M4's and by the looks of the main gun its a Firefly. I have no idea when the pictures were taken.
Bronk, you are starting to take this a bit personal. I made the following statement in an earlier post "To be honest with you I would settle for a 50 cal on the tanks, at least we would have some chance of defending ourselves.". I never said they did, but when I was told they didn't, just our of curiosity, I did a simple Google search, and in Wiki, two different sites stated they did. Now you come back wanting me to prove that they did, when in fact you have not showed any sources, other than a couple of pictures, that they didn't.
I clearly stated that I am not a WW2 expert in anything. I just did a simple search out of curiosity. I then get told that my source is inaccurate. I was asked to find a picture, and I think I did. I'm not really sure, because I can hardly tell one tank from another, but the picture is labeled an M4 and the gun sure looks like a Firefly's gun, and I am pretty sure thats a .50 on top.
Bronk it sure looks like your wanting to start something out of nothing, and I have grown tired of this subject. This will be my final post, right or wrong. I will concede to you they didn't mount 50's on Fireflys, because for the most part I really don't care. I was just a bit bored this morning, and played around on the Internet a bit. :salute
Fred
-
You asked so I posted. Not starting anything. Just letting you know that it's been gone over before though.
Bottom 2 are eazy8s.