Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Vudu15 on April 11, 2010, 12:13:25 AM
-
Yall know those vbases that are out there all by themselves, why couldn't we have a rearm pad solely for aircraft at that vbase and only at certain vbases,
that fell under this category? and to counter this if the troops and supps for the field are dwn so is the rearmpad?
-
I think the current way of having someone drop off vehicle supplies before the hangars are taken down or supplies is disabled is suffice enough imo. tc21 out!
-
Yall know those vbases that are out there all by themselves, why couldn't we have a rearm pad solely for aircraft at that vbase and only at certain vbases,
that fell under this category? and to counter this if the troops and supps for the field are dwn so is the rearmpad?
Because it's not an airfield? If a plane landed outside your house could you refuel it? Why not?
wrongway
-
I hear this a lot in the MA...
Think of it this way: in real life airfields have a motor pool (garage and gv repair and supply station), but airfields are not just anywhere.
GV bases are for gv's, airfields are for both. Aircraft have far more technical requirements than gv's.
I vote a solid NO for adding re-arm pads to gv bases.
-
It would be nice to land at a Vbase to throw in a bit of fuel, but yes I know why would a vbase have aircraft fuel.
-
Free yourself from score and names in lights...it will be very relaxing.
-
nope
-
Doomed to dweebdom then I guess :D
-
Attacking Vbases is difficult enough as is: The defender can sit & listen for your tanks, he can spot in god mode from manned ack & tower, he can safely land and reup and has easier access to supplies.
Rearm pad would give him much better aircover availability as well.
And also GV fights without bombing A-20s or blasting Il-2 are hard enough to get right now. Rearm pads on Vbases wouldn't help with that.
-
I hear this a lot in the MA...
Think of it this way: in real life airfields have a motor pool (garage and gv repair and supply station), but airfields are not just anywhere.
GV bases are for gv's, airfields are for both. Aircraft have far more technical requirements than gv's.
I vote a solid NO for adding re-arm pads to gv bases.
True fuel in real life for these aircraft would not be a normal thing on a vbase but ammo and possably ords would be, the time i run into the need for this: a vbase is bout a grid froma good guy field but the enemy's field is less than half the distance and your friendly gvs are being bombed and would like aircover. Another thing I like to do is up a hurri1 ora Brewster and just spot for the gv guys cause i know they appreciate it, but of course fuel is then the issue. another limitation would be to make it for only certain aircraft if you wanted to get that crazy with it...and I know its strange but it is a game.
-
True fuel in real life for these aircraft would not be a normal thing on a vbase but ammo and possably ords would be, the time i run into the need for this: a vbase is bout a grid froma good guy field but the enemy's field is less than half the distance and your friendly gvs are being bombed and would like aircover. Another thing I like to do is up a hurri1 ora Brewster and just spot for the gv guys cause i know they appreciate it, but of course fuel is then the issue. another limitation would be to make it for only certain aircraft if you wanted to get that crazy with it...and I know its strange but it is a game.
Someone with more knowledge may have to back me up on this but I imagine that bases and fields in WWII that did not support aircraft did not carry ammunition in the proper manner to load into aircraft. Second, I highly doubt tank forces were hauling around 1000 lbs bombs (just in case, ya never know).
We know why you want it, to make it easier for you. Sorry, that's not how it works.
-
Yall know those vbases that are out there all by themselves, why couldn't we have a rearm pad solely for aircraft at that vbase and only at certain vbases,
that fell under this category? and to counter this if the troops and supps for the field are dwn so is the rearmpad?
NO
-
Someone with more knowledge may have to back me up on this but I imagine that bases and fields in WWII that did not support aircraft did not carry ammunition in the proper manner to load into aircraft. Second, I highly doubt tank forces were hauling around 1000 lbs bombs (just in case, ya never know).
We know why you want it, to make it easier for you. Sorry, that's not how it works.
I agree on that! :aok
-
Well I can see you hard headed guys have some problems goin on up there, and your name must be Hitech on top of that. but ya know I'm usually shooting down ground attack a/c but if you want to get bombed guess that your or darn problem. Funny you guys bring something up its a great idea, or just a bad idea. I bring something up I'm trying to make the game "easier".
-
No.
-
Don't be offended we don't like your idea. Keep on expressing your ideas about improving the game but expect an honest response from this community.
:salute
-
It would be nice to land at a Vbase to throw in a bit of fuel, but yes I know why would a vbase have aircraft fuel.
I'll suggest this again. It'd be nice to have a fuel truck that could be driven, perhaps with other GV's (as fire support) out to ANY old place on the map at which, terrain permitting, aircraft could land and refuel. Likewise for an ammo truck. Think about it. Your squaddies could set up a commando supply dump to enable daring raids. Then you'd bounce too hard coming down to land, bend your prop, and make all their efforts futile - but it'd still be cool.
I'd recommend they model some kind of terrain roughness if they adopt such a feature, just to add some risk for putting down in, for example, a freshly plowed field.
-
Nope.
-
I'll suggest this again. It'd be nice to have a fuel truck that could be driven, perhaps with other GV's (as fire support) out to ANY old place on the map at which, terrain permitting, aircraft could land and refuel. Likewise for an ammo truck. Think about it. Your squaddies could set up a commando supply dump to enable daring raids. Then you'd bounce too hard coming down to land, bend your prop, and make all their efforts futile - but it'd still be cool.
I'd recommend they model some kind of terrain roughness if they adopt such a feature, just to add some risk for putting down in, for example, a freshly plowed field.
That would be awsome and totally negate a need for the whole rearm pad. :D anyhow reason I say this either idea would be cool, I spend most of my time running from barely defended field to barely defended field and hate seeing my gv guys get swarmed and shot up or being bombed dont know how many of you guys do that but Ive shown up at a field to, "thank god some air support several times". any how I like the fuel and ammo truck idea way better. But first well actually have to get them to add some more of anything. Two thumbs up for that idea :D :aok :aok
-
Nope.
One pro, one con... Please elaborate, Waystin. My guiding principal here is physicals.
It is entirely possible to do mobile refuel/rearm or even to do rapid construction on a runway (consider those perforamted steel sheets used by the US in WWII). Therefore, I'd like to see it as a potential element of the game, but only to the extent that its difficulty/vulnerability (and I expect both to be significant) is also depicted accurately.
After all, what would be mor efun that dropping on a fuel truck with 20 mils blazing? It'd smash real pretty, I bet.
-
Don't be offended we don't like your idea. Keep on expressing your ideas about improving the game but expect an honest response from this community.
:salute
So Jayhawk are you gonna give a real reason or maybe a story or account of something that happened to you as to why this would be a bad idea......cause...I....ah.... havent seen you any of the times that Ive been the only guy helping defend one of these vbases. And you use the word "we" an awful lot. where are these other guys?
-
One pro, one con... Please elaborate, Waystin. My guiding principal here is physicals.
Hello Godzilla,
First let me say anything new to blow up is awesome. With that said your elaboration as to why no rearm pads are needed at V-bases is simple, you can already land safely there, so land it. Isn't that enough? I would not want to see V-bases turned into forward/extended airbases by folks landing and re-upping to get more ords or to extend kill streaks. I am a lander and not a re-armer type so it really would not add much to the game for myself.
:salute
Way
-
So Jayhawk are you gonna give a real reason or maybe a story or account of something that happened to you as to why this would be a bad idea......cause...I....ah.... havent seen you any of the times that Ive been the only guy helping defend one of these vbases. And you use the word "we" an awful lot. where are these other guys?
lol ok, well my reason we don't need it: It doesn't make sense, it's a vehicle base. I chose not to type it because others already had and there was nothing more I could convey, this has been asked before and rejected before.
I don't know what "you not seeing me defending a vbase" has to do with anything.
Oh and...
I think the current way of having someone drop off vehicle supplies before the hangars are taken down or supplies is disabled is suffice enough imo. tc21 out!
Because it's not an airfield? If a plane landed outside your house could you refuel it? Why not?
wrongway
I hear this a lot in the MA...
Think of it this way: in real life airfields have a motor pool (garage and gv repair and supply station), but airfields are not just anywhere.
GV bases are for gv's, airfields are for both. Aircraft have far more technical requirements than gv's.
I vote a solid NO for adding re-arm pads to gv bases.
Attacking Vbases is difficult enough as is: The defender can sit & listen for your tanks, he can spot in god mode from manned ack & tower, he can safely land and reup and has easier access to supplies.
Rearm pad would give him much better aircover availability as well.
And also GV fights without bombing A-20s or blasting Il-2 are hard enough to get right now. Rearm pads on Vbases wouldn't help with that.
I agree on that! :aok
No.
Nope.
"WE"
-
no to re arm pads and also take away the ablity to land at gv bases while your at it
-
Thinks all re arm pads should go................. add AC supplies as a separate supply logistic ....only available when hangers/ord/fuel are up.
-
Now I could go for that's a little unrealistic but what works for gvs will definitely work for me. But I digress I wanted it solely for defense of the contested vbases where friendly airsupport cannot easily get and most of the time these are also pivotal bases that if lost are hard to get back, especially when outnumbered.
Anyhow this has met a lot of opposition and Ive seen only one reason really as to way worried about people and there kill streaks. it always seems to go to that any how you could place tons of limits on what could rearm there. No ords of course and no a/c that can be designated in the "attack" role meaning no IL2s just fighter but then you could have limits there too such as no a.c over say 20 eny as an example. seeing as I'm flying 20+ eny a/c any way really wouldn't affect the way I fly. Or we could try this out would be way funner.....and isn't that way we play this game?.......for fun?
I'll suggest this again. It'd be nice to have a fuel truck that could be driven, perhaps with other GV's (as fire support) out to ANY old place on the map at which, terrain permitting, aircraft could land and refuel. Likewise for an ammo truck. Think about it. Your squaddies could set up a commando supply dump to enable daring raids. Then you'd bounce too hard coming down to land, bend your prop, and make all their efforts futile - but it'd still be cool.
I'd recommend they model some kind of terrain roughness if they adopt such a feature, just to add some risk for putting down in, for example, a freshly plowed field.
-
no no and no
-
I wish aircraft could pull into the hangar and you could get a piece of 100 mile per hour tape over the bullet hole and have your engine refilled with oil after meeting up with the ho-tard and have your wing tip replaced from meeting up with the ram-tard.
-
Hello Godzilla,
First let me say anything new to blow up is awesome. With that said your elaboration as to why no rearm pads are needed at V-bases is simple, you can already land safely there, so land it. Isn't that enough? I would not want to see V-bases turned into forward/extended airbases by folks landing and re-upping to get more ords or to extend kill streaks. I am a lander and not a re-armer type so it really would not add much to the game for myself.
:salute
Way
Thanks for that. However, I'm not asking for anything for V-Bases. I'm a dodgy hijacker, you see. What I really want is the ability to set up mobile a/c rearm/refuel via GV's equipped for the purpose. That was a physical possibility during the war and would lend an interesting effect. I don't tie the idea to V-Bases at all. Just pick and empty field with suitable terrain, drive fuel and ammo trucks to that field, then refuel/rearm your squaddies when they land that field.
-
You sir are dangerous thinking! :aok
-
I am with Godzilla on this one...............
Rearm pads in general seem a game anachoronism to me. A left over from when such devices were needed.
The major gripe I have is that they do not pay any head to the fields logistic status. Rearming and refueling ability should be limited by the ordinance and fuel logistics remaining on the field just as they are in the main hanger.
For me this should also apply to field supplies and, should they ever come, also aircraft supplies.
However aircraft supplies should only be available from fields that have aircraft hangers and vehicle supplies only available from fields that have vehicle hangers.
However then temporary air fields can be set up (by players dumping ac supplies) where ever there may be a stretch of flat treeless ground not too far from AC field spawn points.
-
No way are we getting Nukes so don't ask!...... :mad:
oh sorry different thread.... Still a NO! :D :devil
-
No way are we getting Nukes so don't ask!...... :mad:
oh sorry different thread.... Still a NO! :D :devil
gimme nukes