Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Dastrdly on July 02, 2009, 11:26:34 AM

Title: 163s
Post by: Dastrdly on July 02, 2009, 11:26:34 AM: 163 gotta be the funnest plane in the game but rarely available, especially with the huge maps we now see 99% of the time. even when enemy fronts close on HQ the 163 is always at an untakable base giving enemy forces little incentive to attack.

would be nice to see it spread out to a few more bases surounding HQ. would take little effort on HTC part to achieve too

please please please :D
Title: Re: 163s
Post by: Saxman on July 02, 2009, 11:29:40 AM: Quote from: Dastrdly on July 02, 2009, 11:26:34 AM
163 gotta be the funnest plane in the game but rarely available, especially with the huge maps we now see 99% of the time. even when enemy fronts close on HQ the 163 is always at an untakable base giving enemy forces little incentive to attack.

would be nice to see it spread out to a few more bases surounding HQ. would take little effort on HTC part to achieve too

please please please :D

No.
Title: Re: 163s
Post by: jay on July 02, 2009, 11:36:56 AM: if key word "if" good replacement jet to have other than the 262 is the HE 162 and "some" prop planes but im no expert so...
Title: Re: 163s
Post by: Tmac7 on July 02, 2009, 11:40:00 AM: No thank you i'd rather not have them available unless they are needed to save HQ
Title: Re: 163s
Post by: Larry on July 02, 2009, 02:40:40 PM: IMO they should be at bases nearest to all strat targets not just HQ.
Title: Re: 163s
Post by: Saxman on July 02, 2009, 02:47:57 PM: Quote from: Larry on July 02, 2009, 02:40:40 PM
IMO they should be at bases nearest to all strat targets not just HQ.

Leave 163 as it is, and restrict 262s to Zone bases.
Title: Re: 163s
Post by: Larry on July 02, 2009, 02:58:52 PM: And while we are add it lets restrict ever other plane as well.
Title: Re: 163s
Post by: Ack-Ack on July 02, 2009, 05:16:57 PM: What I want to know, what in the flight modeling has changed for the ME 163 in the next update.

ack-ack
Title: Re: 163s
Post by: moot on July 02, 2009, 06:03:39 PM: More thrust and higher fuel consumption is what it sounds like.
Title: Re: 163s
Post by: Motherland on July 02, 2009, 06:27:11 PM: It also seems to lock up faster, although I haven't flown it a whole lot.
Title: Re: 163s
Post by: waystin2 on July 02, 2009, 06:46:26 PM: Quote from: Saxman on July 02, 2009, 02:47:57 PM
Leave 163 as it is, and restrict 262s to Zone bases.

Me like!
Title: Re: 163s
Post by: stodd on July 02, 2009, 09:27:09 PM: Mabey make the 163 base "capturable", thus giving the attackers more of a reason to risk running into them. This would also give the defenders more action without increasing the 163's operation range.
Title: Re: 163s
Post by: Saxman on July 02, 2009, 09:55:57 PM: 163 bases were capturable once upon a time. Imagine the base right next to HQ in enemy hands, and the enemy being able to roll 163s from it. Yeah, it was as nightmarish as it sounds.
Title: Re: 163s
Post by: E25280 on July 03, 2009, 05:51:44 PM: Quote from: Saxman on July 02, 2009, 02:47:57 PM
Leave 163 as it is, and restrict 262s to Zone bases.
:huh

262s are already limited by their perk price. There is no need to restrict them to certain bases.

IMO the 163 should be made available in more bases, if not everywhere. To limit their use, the perk price should be tripled.
Title: Re: 163s
Post by: Saxman on July 03, 2009, 06:34:03 PM: Quote from: E25280 on July 03, 2009, 05:51:44 PM
:huh

262s are already limited by their perk price. There is no need to restrict them to certain bases.

IMO the 163 should be made available in more bases, if not everywhere. To limit their use, the perk price should be tripled.

Considering the ease with which perks can be farmed this would be absolutely disastrous.