Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: surfinn on January 30, 2011, 09:55:40 AM
-
I would like jeeps with two 5 gallon Aircraft fuel cans as a ord option. Can't tell ya how many times I've had to take a ditch within sight of the runway with a perfectly good air craft. It would also make some very interesting tactical possibilities.
-
Ugh no! that is why you have to pay attention to the fuel gauge on your aircraft. Alos pay attention to your E6B. You can also cut rpms back and make it home. Just leanr fuel management.
BigKev
-
Maybe the ability to tow you back to base, I would agree with. Probably not the gas can thought. But if you can find a jeep or M3 driver that would tow you back to the runway, that would be cool.
-
Actually you know what. The more of think of this the more I think it is a fabulous idea. Imagine running out of fuel and being able to land somewhere. Have a squaddie drive you a jeep with some fuel fill her up and then take off again on the uneasy terrain and make it back to base. It would get especially interesting if this was all attempted with enemies looming or even enemy tanks around. :lol
I do think however, that a jeep fuel reload should only reload you 25% fuel regardless of how many reloads you get. For example, if you land at a spawn, a jeep should not be able to reload you, end sortie, spawn reload you again. 25% cap on it.
Either way I see no reason why a jeep shouldn't be able to refuel an airplane and it would add nothing but fun to the game which is a big +1 for me. On top of that, it would not be very difficult to code. Probably some writing involved, but pretty basic concepts to add this into the game.
+1111
-
Could a jeep actually transport 25% of fuel for any aircraft?
How many gallons is that for a plane like a 51, or a typh, or an F4 etc.? Not even to mention attack bombers like A20's, 25's, etc that would carry much more fuel?
Would you need several jeeps to make the 25% amount?
-
Ugh no! that is why you have to pay attention to the fuel gauge on your aircraft. Alos pay attention to your E6B. You can also cut rpms back and make it home. Just leanr fuel management.
BigKev
+1 to what BigKev says.
-1 to this idea.
It's an extremely rare case that this would be used and it would take up too much time coding which can be used for more valuable things. Learn fuel management!!
-
+1 to what BigKev says.
-1 to this idea.
It's an extremely rare case that this would be used and it would take up too much time coding which can be used for more valuable things. Learn fuel management!!
It really wouldn't take that much time at all to code I don't believe. If a jeep is within 5 yds of landed airplane the jeep clicks refuel aircraft. If pilot accepts refuel it takes 30 seconds, just like on the rearm pad. All the tools to do this are already in the game in one shape or the other.
-
+1 :aok
-
why not just call it a successful landing if you ditch anywhere within dar circle. after all why waste time with jeeps.
semp
-
I think this is a pretty cool idea....+1
-
It really wouldn't take that much time at all to code I don't believe. If a jeep is within 5 yds of landed airplane the jeep clicks refuel aircraft. If pilot accepts refuel it takes 30 seconds, just like on the rearm pad. All the tools to do this are already in the game in one shape or the other.
You have a jeep fetish don't you?
+1 for more variety
-
add a fuel tanker to the game :D
-
Can you imagine shooting the thing with fuel in it? :D
-
+1 if you shoot the jeep and it turns into a small mushroom cloud :aok
:salute
BigRat
-
add a fuel tanker to the game :D
now thats thinking
(http://www.aircraftresourcecenter.com/Gal3/2101-2200/Gal2141_Buffalo_Chua/02.jpg)
-
while im on a roll, screw vehicle sups, Tracked? add a recovery vehicle such as a bergpanther ( due to it being able to tow all of the in game vehicles)
(http://www.achtungpanzer.com/images/bergev.jpg)
need fuel?
(http://www.tracks-n-troops.com/AMC/MC72066.jpg)
ammo?
(http://www.markwolf.name/panzer/images/KarlMunition.jpg)
and please for give me for only suggesting german vehicles, I am just posting things that I know
-
-1
-
Actually you know what. The more of think of this the more I think it is a fabulous idea. Imagine running out of fuel and being able to land somewhere. Have a squaddie drive you a jeep with some fuel fill her up and then take off again on the uneasy terrain and make it back to base. It would get especially interesting if this was all attempted with enemies looming or even enemy tanks around. :lol
I do think however, that a jeep fuel reload should only reload you 25% fuel regardless of how many reloads you get. For example, if you land at a spawn, a jeep should not be able to reload you, end sortie, spawn reload you again. 25% cap on it.
Either way I see no reason why a jeep shouldn't be able to refuel an airplane and it would add nothing but fun to the game which is a big +1 for me. On top of that, it would not be very difficult to code. Probably some writing involved, but pretty basic concepts to add this into the game.
+1111
While we're at it we need to add "case of Scotch" to the Jeep's load out option, maybe a case of Glenlivet that can be ferried out to a pilot or GVer stranded in the field. Once they receive their hooch, the funnystuff happens, such as wobbly head (similar to black out with PW, but not quite all the way blacked out), blurry and doubled vision, random control movements, reversed control inputs for no reason, and best of all model uncontrolled silly giggling from the pilot every time someone speaks on range or squad vox.
-
While we're at it we need to add "case of Scotch" to the Jeep's load out option, maybe a case of Glenlivet that can be ferried out to a pilot or GVer stranded in the field. Once they receive their hooch, the funnystuff happens, such as wobbly head (similar to black out with PW, but not quite all the way blacked out), blurry and doubled vision, random control movements, reversed control inputs for no reason, and best of all model uncontrolled silly giggling from the pilot every time someone speaks on range or squad vox.
I would give a +1 to that too if the alcohol got injected directly into my veins.
-
I would like jeeps with two 5 gallon Aircraft fuel cans as a ord option. Can't tell ya how many times I've had to take a ditch within sight of the runway with a perfectly good air craft. It would also make some very interesting tactical possibilities.
I say let him have it.
I mean how far could you get with 10 gallons of gas anyway. What enough to start the engine, throttle up, and then have it shut down.
It would probably take a good size squad of jeeps to get a fighter a couple of hundred yards to the base to get his landing.
-
I say let him have it.
I mean how far could you get with 10 gallons of gas anyway. What enough to start the engine, throttle up, and then have it shut down.
It would probably take a good size squad of jeeps to get a fighter a couple of hundred yards to the base to get his landing.
Good point for most aircraft, but for the low performance birds 10 gallons could easily get you several miles. I.E. I-16, Zeke, Brewster.
Oh. And -1.
-
I'm willing to bet the guys voting -1 are just afraid someone will land off in the wilderness and they won't get their little kill. "but but but...he went down!" - yeah, he ran out of fuel, but he managed to find a clearing, line up and come in, get someone to work with him and fuel him up while he sits there, makes for TWO targets that can't really fight back (come on - jeep? Really?). The Jeeps are almost useless right now....give them a better role.
Is a change, gives me more targets, gives me a chance to fix an error of judgment on fuel, gives me a reason to drive the jeep
:cheers:
-
Good point for most aircraft, but for the low performance birds 10 gallons could easily get you several miles. I.E. I-16, Zeke, Brewster.
Oh. And -1.
if you do it right, even for these birds you may be able to stretch out a sector at most. That is of course if you dont get shot down first
-
I believe 321, thats why he's asking for it. Not to get back to the fight but so he could go literally a hundred yards to the tarmac. for that I say
+1
-
I believe 321, thats why he's asking for it. Not to get back to the fight but so he could go literally a hundred yards to the tarmac. for that I say
+1
the exact reason i posted :aok
-
My apologies, I took your reply to say '-1 because I can't go very far on it :cry'
-
The Jeeps are almost useless right now....give them a better role.
This.... is a very good point. But again, why did you run out of the fuel in the first place? I can see two reasons.
- Poor fuel management and/or planning.
- Unanticipated fuel leak.
In the case of the former, I see no reason to go through a lot of trouble to implement something which was a direct result of poor airmanship. In the case of the latter, those ten gallons will leak out before you're airborne which makes it pointless. I can see only one case where this would be useful... Perked sortie just shy of the runway due to a fuel leak. Ten gallons gives you enough to taxi to the tarmac. But guys, seriously, this is a rare rare case...
-
This.... is a very good point. But again, why did you run out of the fuel in the first place? I can see two reasons.
- Poor fuel management and/or planning.
- Unanticipated fuel leak.
In the case of the former, I see no reason to go through a lot of trouble to implement something which was a direct result of poor airmanship. In the case of the latter, those ten gallons will leak out before you're airborne which makes it pointless. I can see only one case where this would be useful... Perked sortie just shy of the runway due to a fuel leak. Ten gallons gives you enough to taxi to the tarmac. But guys, seriously, this is a rare rare case...
what if you planned to RTB and got jumped by the 10 20k cons that seem to be circling every fight? what if by the time you were finally able to egress, your fuel was just shy of what u needed to land? happens more than you think. good idea +1
-
Part of the challenge is to take enough fuel. If you're running out of fuel, load more before you roll. If you're still running out load a DT. If you're STILL running out -- well either you're flying for 2 hours or you're just not doing it right for most planes.
Part of the challenge of getting your name in lights IS to get back safely. Not to get back 10 feet from the field. Not to ditch in all but name, and have somebody cart some gas to you....
Let me ask you this: Would you still want this if as SOON as you loaded the gas it counted you as ditched, gave your kill to the last guy to shoot you, and computed the score then and there?
No, you would not. The ONLY reason you want this is because you're aiming for score.
P.S. I'm of the opinion most folks that screw around with light fuel -- i.e. 25% -- are taking their own individual gambles. If they gamble they can find a fight and get back before running out, it's THEIR FAULT if they lose that gamble. They shouldn't be rewarded for losing the gamble and running out of gas somewhere away from the field.
-
To be honest I usually take 100% in an A-5, this way I have been able to survive most fuel leaks, accept those pesk double tank hits
-
"...jeeps with two 5 gallon Aircraft fuel cans...
For a typical WWII aircraft piston engine, that would last about this long: *cough* ;)
Nope. The line has to drawn somewhere. And that somewhere has been defined as the edge of the pavement.
-
SNIP
Krusty, You are a squaddie, and have no doubt heard of my normal rides even if I haven't flown with you that often. I don't care about score. I just like landing if I'm RTBing. There is nothing more annoying than taking 100% in a Spit 1 or something, flying just beyond where you should, then gliding home to touch down just off tarmac! I wouldn't mind if it calculated my score there and then and did all the rest of whta you said, I just want to land :( I like being wheels down on tarmac!
:salute
-
I think it would be much faster if your jeep just picked up the pilot and ran him/her back to base.
or if the jeep brought the pilot (1) 5" rocket with a saddle.. :rolleyes:
-
I hear ya Macleod, I do. However most of these folks are requesting it because they took spit16s up with 25% and a DT, or 109K4s with 25%/DT, trying to get any unrealistic edge they can. Or they loiter around far too long looking for picks just to get 2 kills to land in the text buffer.
I know there are pilots like you, and sorry if I hurt the ol'e feelin's there, but in general for the benefit of all those other players, I would say I don't like the idea. I've even had it happen to me many a time. It sucks. I'll curse about it. However I'd rather not have the instant "do-over" features that most folks request on this forum.
-
can i have a do-over?
-
Part of the challenge is to take enough fuel. If you're running out of fuel, load more before you roll. If you're still running out load a DT. If you're STILL running out -- well either you're flying for 2 hours or you're just not doing it right for most planes.
Part of the challenge of getting your name in lights IS to get back safely. Not to get back 10 feet from the field. Not to ditch in all but name, and have somebody cart some gas to you....
Let me ask you this: Would you still want this if as SOON as you loaded the gas it counted you as ditched, gave your kill to the last guy to shoot you, and computed the score then and there?
No, you would not. The ONLY reason you want this is because you're aiming for score.
P.S. I'm of the opinion most folks that screw around with light fuel -- i.e. 25% -- are taking their own individual gambles. If they gamble they can find a fight and get back before running out, it's THEIR FAULT if they lose that gamble. They shouldn't be rewarded for losing the gamble and running out of gas somewhere away from the field.
Blah Blah Blah.
My only reason for liking it is that it would be fun. Fun Krusty, that is all. This is a game last time I checked.
-
Either way I see no reason why a jeep shouldn't be able to refuel an airplane and it would add nothing but fun to the game which is a big +1 for me. On top of that, it would not be very difficult to code. Probably some writing involved, but pretty basic concepts to add this into the game.
+1111
I think Grizz is just trolling for the idea of having more Jeeps as targets for his 262.... :salute
-
I think Grizz is just trolling for the idea of having more Jeeps as targets for his 262.... :salute
No way, I'd be the one in the jeep riding out fuel to my squaddies that are ditched out miles from base. Actually I don't think my squaddies even know how to land on pavement, let alone terrain, so nvm.
Speaking of which.. actually getting your bird down on uneasy terrain without busting your prop is a challenge in itself, then having to have a buddy drive you out fuel. Then taking off again. It would be challenging in itself, plus a lot of fun being able to help your buddies out, especially in hostile territory.
-
I drove a D9 with a rad hit through TT on indisls (sp*) to the v base :rock
-
what if you planned to RTB and got jumped by the 10 20k cons that seem to be circling every fight? what if by the time you were finally able to egress, your fuel was just shy of what u needed to land? happens more than you think. good idea +1
So when you're 15 miles from the base you turn back when your effective range is 15 miles? That's poor planning and certainly does no warrent a crutch implemented. Try conservative flight planning for a change. Maybe you'll make it back despite multiple unplanned deviations.
People keep asking for increased margins to land their score. "Make it the whole field." "Make it the dar ring." "Make it so you can have extra gas given to you." What is so wrong with the boundaries we have now? They are challenging and that makes it fun. If this is implemented, where do the crutches end? "I want a mechanic in the jeep to repair my bent prop. Also have them bring me ammo. Also have them bring a giant industrial fan which will give me a headwind/reduced takeoff roll (because who knows what this terrain you landed on is like)." Yeah I'm being sarcastic, but I'm just illustrating a point. In real life could a jeep bring the aircraft some fuel? Sure, why not. Does it belong in this game? I doubt it. If it were voted to be implemented should it take priority over ANY other addon the game is in need of (more equipment perhaps??)? No, it should not... I'm sorry but this wish is frivolous.
-
what if you planned to RTB and got jumped by the 10 20k cons that seem to be circling every fight? what if by the time you were finally able to egress, your fuel was just shy of what u needed to land? happens more than you think. good idea +1
So when you're 15 miles from the base you turn back when your effective range is 15 miles? That's poor planning and certainly does no warrent a crutch implemented. Try conservative flight planning for a change. Maybe you'll make it back despite multiple unplanned deviations.
People keep asking for increased margins to land their score. "Make it the whole field." "Make it the dar ring." "Make it so you can have extra gas given to you." What is so wrong with the boundaries we have now? They are challenging and that makes it fun. If this is implemented, where do the crutches end? "I want a mechanic in the jeep to repair my bent prop. Also have them bring me ammo. Also have them bring a giant industrial fan which will give me a headwind/reduced takeoff roll (because who knows what this terrain you landed on is like)." Yeah I'm being sarcastic, but I'm just illustrating a point. In real life could a jeep bring the aircraft some fuel? Sure, why not. Does it belong in this game? I doubt it. If it were voted to be implemented should it take priority over ANY other addon the game is in need of (more equipment perhaps??)? No, it should not... I'm sorry but this wish is not needed.
-
what if you planned to RTB and got jumped by the 10 20k cons that seem to be circling every fight? what if by the time you were finally able to egress, your fuel was just shy of what u needed to land? happens more than you think. good idea +1
So when you're 15 miles from the base you turn back when your effective range is 15 miles? That's poor planning and certainly does no warrent a crutch implemented. Try conservative flight planning for a change. Maybe you'll make it back despite multiple unplanned deviations.
People keep asking for increased margins to land their score. "Make it the whole field." "Make it the dar ring." "Make it so you can have extra gas given to you." What is so wrong with the boundaries we have now? They are challenging and that makes it fun. If this is implemented, where do the crutches end? "I want a mechanic in the jeep to repair my bent prop. Also have them bring me ammo. Also have them bring a giant industrial fan which will give me a headwind/reduced takeoff roll (because who knows what this terrain you landed on is like)." Yeah I'm being sarcastic, but I'm just illustrating a point. In real life could a jeep bring the aircraft some fuel? Sure, why not. Does it belong in this game? I doubt it. If it were voted to be implemented should it take priority over ANY other addon the game is in need of (more equipment perhaps??)? No, it should not... I'm sorry but this wish is frivolous.
-
Triple Post :noid
-Penguin
-
You have a jeep fetish don't you?
+1 for more variety
I'm the jeepvert sir.. :D
Blah Blah Blah.
My only reason for liking it is that it would be fun. Fun Krusty, that is all. This is a game last time I checked.
THIS IS NOT FUN SIR!!!!!! THIS IS SERIOUS BUSINESS!!! HERITIC!!! BLASPHEMER!!!!!! How DARE you want to have fun in a game. Fix your priorities sir.. quickly. ;)
-
There's an old addage somewhere, I don't recall the originator of the quote but it goes something like: "When that which you love stops being a challenge, it also stops being fun" or perhaps something like "When you don't have to work for the reward you stop having fun".
Deadstik posted it quite nicely, as well.
-
I'm willing to bet the guys voting -1 are just afraid someone will land off in the wilderness and they won't get their little kill. "but but but...he went down!" - yeah, he ran out of fuel, but he managed to find a clearing, line up and come in, get someone to work with him and fuel him up while he sits there, makes for TWO targets that can't really fight back (come on - jeep? Really?). The Jeeps are almost useless right now....give them a better role.
Is a change, gives me more targets, gives me a chance to fix an error of judgment on fuel, gives me a reason to drive the jeep
:cheers:
Wow no point in me saying it now. :neener: :P :banana: :aok :D
-
So when you're 15 miles from the base you turn back when your effective range is 15 miles? That's poor planning and certainly does no warrent a crutch implemented. Try conservative flight planning for a change. Maybe you'll make it back despite multiple unplanned deviations.
People keep asking for increased margins to land their score. "Make it the whole field." "Make it the dar ring." "Make it so you can have extra gas given to you." What is so wrong with the boundaries we have now? They are challenging and that makes it fun. If this is implemented, where do the crutches end? "I want a mechanic in the jeep to repair my bent prop. Also have them bring me ammo. Also have them bring a giant industrial fan which will give me a headwind/reduced takeoff roll (because who knows what this terrain you landed on is like)." Yeah I'm being sarcastic, but I'm just illustrating a point. In real life could a jeep bring the aircraft some fuel? Sure, why not. Does it belong in this game? I doubt it. If it were voted to be implemented should it take priority over ANY other addon the game is in need of (more equipment perhaps??)? No, it should not... I'm sorry but this wish is frivolous.
You are completely missing the point. Yes it was bad planning to run out of fuel, yes you deserve to rot out in the desert. The point is though, that adding this to the game would create a new element of fun, that is, driving out fuel to your buddies in the wilderness. How far would a squaddy drive fuel to their ally that is the question. :lol
I personally think it is great, I can imagine all sorts of entertaining scenarios that could happen as a result. "grizz um... I'm parked 15 miles off base, please drive me some fuel i have 12 kills" :rofl
It would be lots of fun, that is what it is all about, and is definitely realistic.
-
You didn't land safely, you don't deserve "12 kills landed by so-and-so" in the buffer.
Like I said, if you COULD do this, if it were added, but removed your name from the buffer (regardless) would you still do it? More likely than not, no. Your squaddie wouldn't be calling for help if it didn't get his name in lights. He'd just tower and reup like a normal ditch.
-
This.... is a very good point. But again, why did you run out of the fuel in the first place? I can see two reasons.
- Poor fuel management and/or planning.
- Unanticipated fuel leak.
In the case of the former, I see no reason to go through a lot of trouble to implement something which was a direct result of poor airmanship. In the case of the latter, those ten gallons will leak out before you're airborne which makes it pointless. I can see only one case where this would be useful... Perked sortie just shy of the runway due to a fuel leak. Ten gallons gives you enough to taxi to the tarmac. But guys, seriously, this is a rare rare case...
Load it into the tank that's not shot to hell. ;)
You didn't land safely, you don't deserve "12 kills landed by so-and-so" in the buffer.
Like I said, if you COULD do this, if it were added, but removed your name from the buffer (regardless) would you still do it? More likely than not, no. Your squaddie wouldn't be calling for help if it didn't get his name in lights. He'd just tower and reup like a normal ditch.
I would do it. I don't get my name in lights for kills very often anyways, but I would like the extra perknesshessies for landing :P :PI drove a D9 with a rad hit through TT on indisls (sp*) to the v base :rock
and this....this just made me lol
Again, the jeep go boom quicky quicky - plane on ground not shoot back - this make easy target for boom boom :x :x :x
win/win everybody :D
Me likey bouncy! me likey bouncy!
-
You didn't land safely, you don't deserve "12 kills landed by so-and-so" in the buffer.
Like I said, if you COULD do this, if it were added, but removed your name from the buffer (regardless) would you still do it? More likely than not, no. Your squaddie wouldn't be calling for help if it didn't get his name in lights. He'd just tower and reup like a normal ditch.
It's not about name in the lights, it's about successfully completing the sortie...and the comradery...and the adventure of it all...
Heck if someone wished for "I want jeeps to bring supplies to tracked tanks and heal them" half the people in the wishlist would -1 that wish to its grave. But wait... we have that feature..
This would be a fun feature to add to the game with zero downside. If there is a downside please explain what it is. It makes it easier to score which nobody cares about to begin with? :rofl People that have no friends will be at an unfair disadvantage? :D :noid
-
You didn't land safely, you don't deserve "12 kills landed by so-and-so" in the buffer.
Oh but since i belly landed and tore both my wings off on the concrete I do ? :rofl
-
Speaking of which.. actually getting your bird down on uneasy terrain without busting your prop is a challenge in itself, then having to have a buddy drive you out fuel. Then taking off again. It would be challenging in itself, plus a lot of fun being able to help your buddies out, especially in hostile territory.
BIG +1 ...And Im really glad grizz is here so Im not the only one who has a clue! ...Because it's a challenge! Because its FUN!
It really wouldn't take that much time at all to code I don't believe. If a jeep is within 5 yds of landed airplane the jeep clicks refuel aircraft. If pilot accepts refuel it takes 30 seconds, just like on the rearm pad. All the tools to do this are already in the game in one shape or the other.
Think you over thought this one though. All he has to do is make vehicle sups accepted in an a/c on the ground. Instant fuel. But I like the fuel tanker idea and we had one, I just cant find where they parked the dam thing anymore. It just needs an engine now.
I hear ya Macleod, I do. However most of these folks are requesting it because they took spit16s up with 25% and a DT, or 109K4s with 25%/DT, trying to get any unrealistic edge they can. Or they loiter around far too long looking for picks just to get 2 kills to land in the text buffer.
I know there are pilots like you, and sorry if I hurt the ol'e feelin's there, but in general for the benefit of all those other players, I would say I don't like the idea. I've even had it happen to me many a time. It sucks. I'll curse about it. However I'd rather not have the instant "do-over" features that most folks request on this forum.
"sorry if I hurt the ol'e feelin's" but all of you who are assuming that everyone who kicks your bellybutton has been flying with 25% are just overestimating your abilities and compensate by assuming such things. I dont think it happens quite as often as its touted. I certainly dont fly with low loadouts or fail to pay attention to my fuel status and I have frequently ended up short of base.
It happened frequently in RL as well. Pilots and crews went to great lengths to retrieve an aircraft if possible. Even going so far as to take them apart. So this is NOT gamey or an instant "do-over" by any stretch of an intelligent mind.
And the further away we have to drive (if implemented) to rescue the plane the more interesting it gets!
I also didnt notice where the OP said anything about getting his name in lights. Though we should at least get full points for doing it! This is actually a perfect compromise to the "landing on runway" argument.
Oh but since i belly landed and tore both my wings off on the concrete I do ? :rofl
Now that you mention it, after we get to refuel off base, Im asking for a flatbed truck with a crane to pick me up if I belly it off base :) Drone operated that is.
You didn't land safely, you don't deserve "12 kills landed by so-and-so" in the buffer.
Like I said, if you COULD do this, if it were added, but removed your name from the buffer (regardless) would you still do it? More likely than not, no. Your squaddie wouldn't be calling for help if it didn't get his name in lights. He'd just tower and reup like a normal ditch.
First of all, like grizz said, landing off base is MORE challenging than on base much of the time. So if you can put a plane down in flyable condition, then it WAS a safe landing reguardless of retarded logic to the contrary.
Secondly, like you say, more often than not people wont do it, lights or no lights. Because its time consuming. PLUS I have yet to see anyone point out that it's more likely that this would be a 2 man rescue than a one. The guy in the jeep will likely have a hard time finding his buddy without someone directing from the air in some cases.
So why dont you tell us how this is going to hurt you? Are you afraid you wont get your kills? Or does it hurt your feelings when others do land kills?
Grizz and MarineUS have made everypoint that really needs to be made here.
-How is this different from a tank instantly fixed with sups?
-How is smashing your plane to bits on a runway and still getting kills considered "a safe landing" or "skilled flying" but landing in a dangerous and vulnerable spot and still making it home is not?
-What's it to you if someone else wants to spend the time?
-It's more targets to shoot at. Easy ones at that.
-It is in NO WAY an easy or gamey feature. It takes time (probably a minimum of 10 minute wait) and luck (to survive that long)
-Its easy to implement. vehicle sups dropped near a/c. --> Load Supplies. Done!
-This is actually a perfect compromise to the "landing on runway" argument.
Pilots from all over the world have been given their countries' highest military awards for their actions after ditching. Many of the greatest fighter pilot stories are about those events. Including things like landing a fighter in enemy territory and squeezing a downed pilot into a cockpit made for one. Or taking an entire ground crew out to a beached b26, removing all excess weight and then flying it off of an area no one thought was long enough.
Most of us play this game to capture the essence of being a pilot. You cant do that by denying real life possibilities. And for hitech, I dont think there is a single flight sim out there that has this feature. Use it to distinguish us from the rest.
-
It's not about name in the lights, it's about successfully completing the sortie...and the comradery...and the adventure of it all...
This is the only reason I play, nothing better than helping a squaddie get home kills or no kills.
-
It happened frequently in RL as well. Pilots and crews went to great lengths to retrieve an aircraft if possible. Even going so far as to take them apart. So this is NOT gamey or an instant "do-over" by any stretch of an intelligent mind.
Wrong... Having it happen in less than a second? Totally gamey.
In real life, that day was done, the mission over, the job complete. Pilot was on the ground safe and was given a lift back to his airfield. Ground crew might have taken days to get the plane back safely, if not longer.
It wasn't a simple "Sit there, hold on, okay, take off now" mockery that's been requested here.
P.S. I have to laugh at your comments along the lines of "Grizz gets it! It's the CHALLENGE!" --- when it's been clearly established the challenge is to make it back to the runway. Which you FAILED the second you needed resupplying in the field. Challenge failed, try again (i.e. start the next challenge)
You lose at pacman you don't sit there hogging the machine after you're done for.... You put in another quarter or the folks in line behind you kick you off the machine to use it next.
-
Wrong... Having it happen in less than a second? Totally gamey.
In real life, that day was done, the mission over, the job complete. Pilot was on the ground safe and was given a lift back to his airfield. Ground crew might have taken days to get the plane back safely, if not longer.
It wasn't a simple "Sit there, hold on, okay, take off now" mockery that's been requested here.
P.S. I have to laugh at your comments along the lines of "Grizz gets it! It's the CHALLENGE!" --- when it's been clearly established the challenge is to make it back to the runway. Which you FAILED the second you needed resupplying in the field. Challenge failed, try again (i.e. start the next challenge)
You lose at pacman you don't sit there hogging the machine after you're done for.... You put in another quarter or the folks in line behind you kick you off the machine to use it next.
How is it gamey? How long do you think it should take to put 20 gallons into an aircraft. Shorter or longer than it takes for a jeep to repair a tank tread or a damaged turret or shot out engine, because that takes less than 5 seconds in aces high. How long should it take to rearm 100% fuel and full ord, because that takes 30 seconds in aces high. I could name a dozen things that are actually gamey. Nothing is gamey about driving a jeep out to the location of a bingo aircraft and filling it up with fuel.
When did this stop being fun for you krusty? Do you only post here out of habit?
-
Just for the record there are some people I'd drive out to and some I wouldn't. Guess it'd be a good way to find out who likes you.
I'm with Grizz on this one. If the only 'downside' is they get 'their name in lights' turn it off but give them credit for the 'kills' for those who give a rats behind about that kind of stuff. Take it further and score it as a ditch.
-
We should just be able to fly through power-ups.
Same thing.
It wasn't done IRL unless out of desperation, not to get your name in lights.
wrongway
-
If u can do it for GV's u should be able to do it for AC's. The gaminess argument holds no water when one can drive up to a tank on it's back, have a invisible man open a door, drop off a magical box and the tank is instantly upright. End of discussion. Wrongway and Krusty can now return to the photos of the HTC attendants at the latest con for the completion of their nightly arousal.
-
Considering the GV modeling in this game is a far far distant shadow of the fidelity of the air game, you cannot make that comparison.
What you propose is to arcade-ize the flight portion of the game.
-
This refuel thing is a very good idea. The mechanism is actually coded in thegame, f. e. the veichle supplies. +1
-
Yep, a lot of arguments against it but it is adding an extra aspect to the game, really what could it hurt to have a fuel truck or even jeep/m3 fuel supplies driven out to the aircraft. It would give the GVers something to do other than get bombed by main gunning aircraft on the ground waiting for fuel.
-
See Rule #4
-
what if you planned to RTB and got jumped by the 10 20k cons that seem to be circling every fight? what if by the time you were finally able to egress, your fuel was just shy of what u needed to land? happens more than you think. good idea +1
or what about a fuel tank that is hit never thought about that
-
-1
-
If u can do it for GV's u should be able to do it for AC's. The gaminess argument holds no water when one can drive up to a tank on it's back, have a invisible man open a door, drop off a magical box and the tank is instantly upright. End of discussion. Wrongway and Krusty can now return to the photos of the HTC attendants at the latest con for the completion of their nightly arousal.
Tankers actually get out of their tanks and fix them. Pilots and their aircraft, not so much.
wrongway
-
Tankers actually get out of their tanks and fix them. Pilots and their aircraft, not so much.
wrongway
So you're saying that the magical vehicle supplies that fix all things tank damage related in the click of a mouse are more realistic than a parked plane being refueled, because tankers get out of their tanks and pilots cannot? Why can't the jeeper walk over to the aircraft and refuel it. It isn't rocket science to refuel an airplane..
-
So you're saying that the magical vehicle supplies that fix all things tank damage related in the click of a mouse are more realistic than a parked plane being refueled, because tankers get out of their tanks and pilots cannot? Why can't the jeeper walk over to the aircraft and refuel it. It isn't rocket science to refuel an airplane..
Yes. That's what I'm saying.
GV supplies represent a tank crew repairing their damaged vehicle, often under fire but not always. It happened.
Pilots who run out of fuel and managed to safely land walked home. Their life doesn't depend on flying back if they're down. They don't care if their names are in lights or not. They're thankful to be alive and walking.
wrongway
-
Yes. That's what I'm saying.
GV supplies represent a tank crew repairing their damaged vehicle, often under fire but not always. It happened.
Pilots who run out of fuel and managed to safely land walked home. Their life doesn't depend on flying back if they're down. They don't care if their names are in lights or not. They're thankful to be alive and walking.
wrongway
Well put. There's all sorts of arguments people could make here on either side. What this ends up boiling down to is the kind of gameplay we want. To me, it's a superfluous addon. This is primarily a combat flight simulator, not "The Sims: Airplane Edition."
I respect the arguments made in favor of this... (but I respect the ones made against it more) :neener:-------> -1
-
Yes. That's what I'm saying.
GV supplies represent a tank crew repairing their damaged vehicle, often under fire but not always. It happened.
Pilots who run out of fuel and managed to safely land walked home. Their life doesn't depend on flying back if they're down. They don't care if their names are in lights or not. They're thankful to be alive and walking.
wrongway
So a tank crew can fix a tread/turret/broken engine in the click of a button but a jeep crew cannot refuel a perfectly operable aircraft...
I am missing the logic entirely here wrongway. Maybe you can explain it in a different way so it makes sense to stupid ol' me.
-
It will never make sense, read his name!
-
I like the OP's idea, but feel a refueling truck would make more sense. :D Could you 'magine the explosion after strafing that son of a bish!
-
So a tank crew can fix a tread/turret/broken engine in the click of a button but a jeep crew cannot refuel a perfectly operable aircraft...
I am missing the logic entirely here wrongway. Maybe you can explain it in a different way so it makes sense to stupid ol' me.
It's already been explained. In the war, crews would work on immobile tanks which were in the field of battle. For aircraft the pilot would walk away from the aircraft and not return to it. This wish is not something that was exercised, whereas the tank supplies did happen.
-
It's already been explained. In the war, crews would work on immobile tanks which were in the field of battle. For aircraft the pilot would walk away from the aircraft and not return to it. This wish is not something that was exercised, whereas the tank supplies did happen.
Well I've never heard of a p38 intentionally landing upside down before yet all the sapp guys do that...
-
Well I've never heard of a p38 intentionally landing upside down before yet all the sapp guys do that...
Not so sure that is intentional though :)
JUGgler
-
I'm also not so sure on the historical legitimacy of tank turrets shooting down aircraft...
The point is, if something is physically possible to be achieved within the physics of the ww2 combat universe then there is no reason it should not be available to be used UNLESS it hinders gameplay or fun for others. I have seen no evidence that this would cause anything but additional fun for those that wanted to use it, fun for those that get to attack the entire refueling operation, and an additional way for players to build teamwork and friendships <3.
-
I'm also not so sure on the historical legitimacy of tank turrets shooting down aircraft...
The point is, if something is physically possible to be achieved within the physics of the ww2 combat universe then there is no reason it should not be available to be used UNLESS it hinders gameplay or fun for others. I have seen no evidence that this would cause anything but additional fun for those that wanted to use it, fun for those that get to attack the entire refueling operation, and an additional way for players to build teamwork and friendships <3.
I wish I could be someone else, in a different squad, so that I could say "there is only truth in this statement". But alas, I am me, and you will all think it's only because it was written by a friend and a squaddie that I endorse this statement, but that is not the reason. I endorse this and agree with this because it is reasonable, balanced and above all else true.
If it adds fun, was possible in WW2, and encourages teamwork, then it should be coaded.
-
Dont worry Sunbat.. Grizz hates me and I still endorse the idea for the aforementioned reasons ;)
-
+EleventyBillion
Sorry Krusty, as far as I'm concerned you're just flat out wrong on this one. Nothing gamey about GVs refeuling aircraft, no more so than a box of supplies magically repairing, with the click of a button, a tank that has had its tracks blown off, engine shot out, and turret destroyed.
Look - many things in this game are in place because......:drumroll:......It's a GAME!
You think heavy bombers like Lancs and B-17's dive bombed tanks in WWII?
Why can aircraft rearm ordinance on a "rearm pad" at a field with no ords?
How many WWII aircraft had radar displays on a magical "clipboard" in the cockpit that rivals present day AWACS?
It's not about "getting your name in lights." That argument is a cop-out, in my opinion. Like Grizz said, it's about adding another entirely new element to gameplay for GVing missions. Successful refuels of a ditched aircraft would earn you GV perks just like resupplying a field would.
Hell, I think it should be expanded to be much bigger than just refueling aircraft with a Jeep (or M3 or 251 for that matter) but give us RESCUE missions! Think about it: People have asked for the PBY-5 Catalina, now we can rescue a downed airman at sea. The evil red icons will have another slow moving target to attack.... and likewise the friendlies have something else to defend and fight to protect. The text bar could read "XXXXXX has been rescued" and you would avoid the "You have been captured" message. Heck, I'd drive a Jeep or fly a goon or PBY as far as I had to in order to pick up and "rescue" a downed squaddie," and I'd have a blast trying to keep from getting killed in order to do so.
In the same vein as what MUZIK said, some of the most heroic actions in the history of warfare have been conducted by aircrews and ground forces in efforts to rescue other downed airmen or ground troops who fell behind or were shot down.
In my opinion, it has nothing what-so-ever to do with getting your name in lights and everything to do with adding additional challenges and possibilities to the game. To say otherwise is to completely and totally miss the point. :old:
-
So you're saying that the magical vehicle supplies that fix all things tank damage related in the click of a mouse are more realistic than a parked plane being refueled, because tankers get out of their tanks and pilots cannot? Why can't the jeeper walk over to the aircraft and refuel it. It isn't rocket science to refuel an airplane..
Yeah. but Krusty said no :headscratch:
I like the OP's idea, but feel a refueling truck would make more sense. :D Could you 'magine the explosion after strafing that son of a bish!
A 6x6 with some 55 gallon drums in the back would do the job.
-
+EleventyBillion
Sorry Krusty, as far as I'm concerned you're just flat out wrong on this one. Nothing gamey about GVs refeuling aircraft, no more so than a box of supplies magically repairing, with the click of a button, a tank that has had its tracks blown off, engine shot out, and turret destroyed.
Look - many things in this game are in place because......:drumroll:......It's a GAME!
You think heavy bombers like Lancs and B-17's dive bombed tanks in WWII?
Why can aircraft rearm ordinance on a "rearm pad" at a field with no ords?
How many WWII aircraft had radar displays on a magical "clipboard" in the cockpit that rivals present day AWACS?
It's not about "getting your name in lights." That argument is a cop-out, in my opinion. Like Grizz said, it's about adding another entirely new element to gameplay for GVing missions. Successful refuels of a ditched aircraft would earn you GV perks just like resupplying a field would.
Hell, I think it should be expanded to be much bigger than just refueling aircraft with a Jeep (or M3 or 251 for that matter) but give us RESCUE missions! Think about it: People have asked for the PBY-5 Catalina, now we can rescue a downed airman at sea. The evil red icons will have another slow moving target to attack.... and likewise the friendlies have something else to defend and fight to protect. The text bar could read "XXXXXX has been rescued" and you would avoid the "You have been captured" message. Heck, I'd drive a Jeep or fly a goon or PBY as far as I had to in order to pick up and "rescue" a downed squaddie," and I'd have a blast trying to keep from getting killed in order to do so.
In the same vein as what MUZIK said, some of the most heroic actions in the history of warfare have been conducted by aircrews and ground forces in efforts to rescue other downed airmen or ground troops who fell behind or were shot down.
In my opinion, it has nothing what-so-ever to do with getting your name in lights and everything to do with adding additional challenges and possibilities to the game. To say otherwise is to completely and totally miss the point. :old:
Yeah. but Krusty said no :headscratch:
A 6x6 with some 55 gallon drums in the back would do the job.
In that case, implement it as Krusty suggested, even take it one step further, get refueled off the rearm pad and the sortie is over.
Do whatever you like after refueling. No name in lights. It's a cop out.
wrongway
-
Cop out of what? What if you have no kills and still want to land, why not? God forbid we mix it up a little, take a break from the norm " But, but, the Spixteen drivers will get his name in lights and he doesn't desrve to have fun the way I think he should" Some of you would squeak if you got hung with a new rope.
-
Naaa. I'm going back to my power-ups idea instead.
Fly through the "Ring-o-Fire" and get extra fuel.
Take more gas. Plan better. Or :cry.
:P
wrongway
-
I hear ya Macleod, I do. However most of these folks are requesting it because they took spit16s up with 25% and a DT, or 109K4s with 25%/DT, trying to get any unrealistic edge they can. Or they loiter around far too long looking for picks just to get 2 kills to land in the text buffer.
I know there are pilots like you, and sorry if I hurt the ol'e feelin's there, but in general for the benefit of all those other players, I would say I don't like the idea. I've even had it happen to me many a time. It sucks. I'll curse about it. However I'd rather not have the instant "do-over" features that most folks request on this forum.
Krusty's spot on, remember this is somewhat a combat simulation still, if i run out of gas, well i run out... but i always try to factor in some reserve to get back to the AF
-
Naaa. I'm going back to my power-ups idea instead.
Fly through the "Ring-o-Fire" and get extra fuel.
Take more gas. Plan better. Or :cry.
:P
wrongway
Not really a power up. Just adding to a feature we already have :aok
-
See Rule #4
-
It's already been explained. In the war, crews would work on immobile tanks which were in the field of battle. For aircraft the pilot would walk away from the aircraft and not return to it. This wish is not something that was exercised, whereas the tank supplies did happen.
It did happen. Not only did it happen, It happened A LOT. They didnt have clipboards with radar maps that told them where everything was. Getting lost was OUTrageously common in aviation in those days. Running out of fuel as a result was also. And it probably happened on many occassions EXACTLY like the OP asked for it, WITH A JEEP AND A FEW GAS TANKS.
In the US, "Operational accidents" (which included countless incidents of running out of gas) were so bad they caused almost as much damage and loss as the enemy. (It was the same on all sides) So they created Grandpa Pettibone. In the following link, theres even a few bits in this one about running out of gas. And because I already know how your simple lil brain works, before you get the brilliant idea of stealing Pettibones wisdom for your argument, just remember it doesnt make you any less WRONG!
http://www.history.navy.mil/nan/gramps/Gramps%20intro,%20features%20%20and%20pix/Gramps%2020%20years.pdf
The day of Erich Hartmanns first contact with the enemy he got lost and LANDED his 109 120 miles from his base!
Here's one, read John P kessler. Not full details, but obviously he landed, refueled somehow, and flew his aircraft back to base!
http://books.google.com/books?id=EkUc5FEoaIsC&pg=PA157&lpg=PA157&dq=fighter+pilot...out+of+fuel...landed+in+a+field&source=bl&ots=ALEIVErjt_&sig=xxvdb1qsndvhS6e_bXnNhoz97WQ&hl=en&ei=3zhKTZT-LpSosAPGks3LCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&sqi=2&ved=0CCkQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q&f=false
Youre wrong and you dont have a clue what you are talking about so just keep hiding behind ---> "hitech said no" because you're incapable of valid arguments. Hitech said this game was about air combat. These things were an INEXTRICABLE part of air combat. In RL it wasnt fun in the moment but after the fact, I bet some of those guys wouldnt have traded their adventures for anything. In AH it would be fun!
-
i personally don't care one way or another, I would like a new hit animation tho so when this fuel jeep blows up, it should leave a fire behind like the big fire plume from a base object for about a minute :)
but the other thing is I think everyone overestimating how often it would be used.. I pretty much never run out of gas. I take 100%+ in everything except bombers.. are people really running out of gas all the time? I think the only time I can remember running out of gas is in a corsair with a tank hit. fuel jeep aint gonna help there.
-
People seem to think that some would take advantage of this by running minimal fuel and then having squaddies re-fuel them in the sticks all the time.
I don't think it would take long for that sort of behavior to wear thin with most squads. "Ahh so and so ran out of gas AGAIN? Man, I ain't bringing him any this time, I got strafed the last two times I tried. Let's draw straws (so to speak)"
I seriously believe that this would be used as an "emergency only" option, and would provide a little more immersion in the game.
When I rtb, I do it with the intent of landing my plane. Whether I have 0 kills or enough to get my name up isn't the issue. I do it so my little cartoon man can walk over to the club and get a dance with a nurse and a cold beer.
+1 for a fueling option.
-
People seem to think that some would take advantage of this by running minimal fuel and then having squaddies re-fuel them in the sticks all the time.
I don't think it would take long for that sort of behavior to wear thin with most squads. "Ahh so and so ran out of gas AGAIN? Man, I ain't bringing him any this time, I got strafed the last two times I tried. Let's draw straws (so to speak)"
I seriously believe that this would be used as an "emergency only" option, and would provide a little more immersion in the game.
When I rtb, I do it with the intent of landing my plane. Whether I have 0 kills or enough to get my name up isn't the issue. I do it so my little cartoon man can walk over to the club and get a dance with a nurse and a cold beer.
+1 for a fueling option.
Given the number of people who "care" about their score I think the RESCUE attempt would be more common than the refuel mission, keeing that "You have been captured" message from popping up.
:noid
+1 to Jeeps with fuel, and PBY-5s for rescues ! :banana:
-
In that case, implement it as Krusty suggested, even take it one step further, get refueled off the rearm pad and the sortie is over.
Do whatever you like after refueling. No name in lights. It's a cop out.
wrongway
You seem to be very passionate about the "name in the lights" system. Get there much?
-
As long as the jeep driver <more likely an M-3> has to search for the safely landed bird. And has to spend about
15-20 minutes refueling it, why not? Refueling even a fighter with a hand held jerrycan doesn't sound like my kind of
fun. Especially since you'd have to use a funnel and they don't flow all that well.
I spent over 20 years refueling all types of aircraft, and I'm damned glad I had a fuel truck with a pump to do it with.
I remember having to fuel an old CH-47 over the wing and it took about 30 minutes with a truck to do it. Doesn't sound
like much till you realize you're holding about 70 pounds of fuel hose over your head to reach the front tanks :D
-
You seem to be very passionate about the "name in the lights" system. Get there much?
Actually, no. And not due to running out of fuel. :neener:
So, since "name in lights" don't matter, is there any other reason for a jeep to be wandering the countryside with fuel?
People seem to think that some would take advantage of this by running minimal fuel and then having squaddies re-fuel them in the sticks all the time.
I don't think it would take long for that sort of behavior to wear thin with most squads. "Ahh so and so ran out of gas AGAIN? Man, I ain't bringing him any this time, I got strafed the last two times I tried. Let's draw straws (so to speak)"
I seriously believe that this would be used as an "emergency only" option, and would provide a little more immersion in the game.
When I rtb, I do it with the intent of landing my plane. Whether I have 0 kills or enough to get my name up isn't the issue. I do it so my little cartoon man can walk over to the club and get a dance with a nurse and a cold beer.
+1 for a fueling option.
I do run with minimum fuel often and rarely have an issue because I plan accordingly.
Your linked examples above are A. what not to do and B. the exception to the rule.
It took Kessler an entire day to get fuel and get back to base? From somewhere in England? Make you wonder what else he was doing. :cheers:
Hartman was also shot down and captured and managed to make it back to friendly lines. Not typical.
Nowhere does someone drive out with fuel. They scrounge.
Youre wrong and you dont have a clue what you are talking about so just keep hiding behind ---> "hitech said no" because you're incapable of valid arguments. Hitech said this game was about air combat. These things were an INEXTRICABLE part of air combat. In RL it wasnt fun in the moment but after the fact, I bet some of those guys wouldnt have traded their adventures for anything. In AH it would be fun!
Hitech didn't say no. He rarely commits either way. Why should he? I didn't say no. I said, "why not." IE, why it shouldn't.
Ditching short of your airfield is part of air combat. Either you didn't plan your flight correctly or, an emergency occurred which ended your sortie before you planned. toejam happens. Do you really think Hartman wouldn't trade getting shot down or having to ditch for landing successfully as planned?
Follow Grandpa Pettibone's advice and plan for the "emergencies".
wrongway
-
Your linked examples above are A. what not to do and B. the exception to the rule.
It took Kessler an entire day to get fuel and get back to base? From somewhere in England? Make you wonder what else he was doing.
Hartman was also shot down and captured and managed to make it back to friendly lines. Not typical.
Nowhere does someone drive out with fuel. They scrounge.
Ditching short of your airfield is part of air combat. Either you didn't plan your flight correctly or, an emergency occurred which ended your sortie before you planned. toejam happens. Do you really think Hartman wouldn't trade getting shot down or having to ditch for landing successfully as planned?
Follow Grandpa Pettibone's advice and plan for the "emergencies".
A Youre wrong B youre wrong again!
It said Kessler celebrated xmas and spent the night off base! It's now plainly obvious why you dont know what youre talking about.
It aslo said he refueled, not "scrounged" so Im pretty sure they sent someone to refuel him.
And if you were suggesting that because it took a whole day to get back to base that you have a good argument, that one was blown out of the water by the vehicle sups instant fix. How does any tank crew field repair an engine that has taken a cannon round? Or a turret that has been pierced by tank round? Does a box of vehicle supplies have scotch tape to put the 5000 pieces of human being back together?
Hartmann was shot down 11 times!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Something else you obviously didnt know. And more than once behind enemy lines. That's just one pilot out of thousands, still not typical? There are hundreds if not thousands of stories just like his. You need to read more!
And #$%$ NO, the only thing hartmann would change was his years in a gulag!
-
As long as the jeep driver <more likely an M-3> has to search for the safely landed bird. And has to spend about
15-20 minutes refueling it, why not? Refueling even a fighter with a hand held jerrycan doesn't sound like my kind of
fun. Especially since you'd have to use a funnel and they don't flow all that well.
I spent over 20 years refueling all types of aircraft, and I'm damned glad I had a fuel truck with a pump to do it with.
I remember having to fuel an old CH-47 over the wing and it took about 30 minutes with a truck to do it. Doesn't sound
like much till you realize you're holding about 70 pounds of fuel hose over your head to reach the front tanks :D
Ok since it would take 20 minutes to refuel a plane assuming there was a pump, we should assume that even the easiest field repair on a battle damaged tank would take a couple hours to fix. Great idea! lets make it right.
-
A Youre wrong B youre wrong again!
It said Kessler celebrated xmas and spent the night off base! It's now plainly obvious why you dont know what youre talking about.
It aslo said he refueled, not "scrounged" so Im pretty sure they sent someone to refuel him.
It actually says, "Spent Christmas Eve listed as missing and broke. But with the help of others managed to celebrate. After fueling the next morning (traditionally Christmas Day) returned to base where all his Scotch and cigars had already been split up."
I guess the guys in the jeep with the fuel forgot to mention to those coveting his stuff that Kessler was alive and near by.
Hartmann was shot down 11 times!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Something else you obviously didnt know. And more than once behind enemy lines. That's just one pilot out of thousands, still not typical? There are hundreds if not thousands of stories just like his. You need to read more!
And #$%$ NO, the only thing hartmann would change was his years in a gulag!
Thousands of pilots shot down behind enemy lines managed to get back to friendly forces to fight another day??
OoooKay.....
I enjoyed the Grandpa Pettibone link.
:salute
wrongway
-
Muzik, I have an easy solution for you.
First spend an extra half hour or so waiting in the runup area pretending to runup and tweak your engines.
Second, ensure you pretend to adjust mixture controls during your flight. I'm sure this will not disturb your ACM one little bit.
Third, if your tank is offered resupply, please simulate your estimated repair time before scarfing them up.
This way you can have your sim, and the rest of us can play our game. Win-Win!
-
It took Kessler an entire day to get fuel and get back to base? From somewhere in England? Make you wonder what else he was doing. :cheers:
Obviously you couldnt understand why Kessler didnt make it back to base until the next day even when it was explained very clearly he celebrated xmas with some locals that he pressumably contacted on landing.
It actually says, "Spent Christmas Eve listed as missing and broke. But with the help of others managed to celebrate. After fueling the next morning (traditionally Christmas Day) returned to base where all his Scotch and cigars had already been split up."
I guess the guys in the jeep with the fuel forgot to mention to those coveting his stuff that Kessler was alive and near by.
Thousands of pilots shot down behind enemy lines managed to get back to friendly forces to fight another day??
OoooKay.....
It wouldnt be the first or last time a pilots stuff was split among his peers because they thought he was dead. Did it ever occur to you that he had no way of getting word to them until the next morning? DUDE, maybe his cell phone was broke in the landing!
And finally, I would be happy to research this for you if you would like to put a considerable bet on it!
Muzik, I have an easy solution for you.
First spend an extra half hour or so waiting in the runup area pretending to runup and tweak your engines.
Second, ensure you pretend to adjust mixture controls during your flight. I'm sure this will not disturb your ACM one little bit.
Third, if your tank is offered resupply, please simulate your estimated repair time before scarfing them up.
This way you can have your sim, and the rest of us can play our game. Win-Win!
Rhino, did you need help figuring out what thread your in?
-
I love lamp
Um ok?
-
Think this would make for a fun expedition, Especially for GVers, Nothing more fun then running jeeps around but this would atleast allow them to server a purpose :)
-
Wow this thread got a lot more debate than I thought it would. Supporters of the idea I thank you, you have outlined my arguments far better than I could. Those against the idea idea I say think of the possibility's. I really like the idea of a jeep or m3 loaded with fuel blowing up in a spectacular way. Hopefully AH will look at this and weigh in on the discussion.
-
Some how I doubt they will.... too many other things that are way more important. People have been asking for very easy additions that are significant in plane set and have never gotten a response nor a nod. However it would be nice if the spooky wizard from emerald city jumped out from behind the curtain and said "boo" more often to weigh in.
-
Just browsed the thread, but here is the only thing I can think of...
"HEELP, I NEED FUL, SUM1 PLEZ BRING SOME!"
Only to arrive and see he broke his prop on landing.
Although, it could be entertaining to watch the spontaneous jeep races when a big name guy asks for fuel. It's like the Ankle Humper 500. :joystick:
-
Some how I doubt they will.... too many other things that are way more important. People have been asking for very easy additions that are significant in plane set and have never gotten a response nor a nod. However it would be nice if the spooky wizard from emerald city jumped out from behind the curtain and said "boo" more often to weigh in.
I would agree except that I do not believe this would take many man hours to set up. All the required elements are already in the game in need of slight modification.
-
Just browsed the thread, but here is the only thing I can think of...
"HEELP, I NEED FUL, SUM1 PLEZ BRING SOME!"
Only to arrive and see he broke his prop on landing.
Although, it could be entertaining to watch the spontaneous jeep races when a big name guy asks for fuel. It's like the Ankle Humper 500. :joystick:
buaHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA AAA :salute
-
Actually you know what. The more of think of this the more I think it is a fabulous idea. Imagine running out of fuel and being able to land somewhere. Have a squaddie drive you a jeep with some fuel fill her up and then take off again on the uneasy terrain and make it back to base. It would get especially interesting if this was all attempted with enemies looming or even enemy tanks around. :lol
I do think however, that a jeep fuel reload should only reload you 25% fuel regardless of how many reloads you get. For example, if you land at a spawn, a jeep should not be able to reload you, end sortie, spawn reload you again. 25% cap on it.
Either way I see no reason why a jeep shouldn't be able to refuel an airplane and it would add nothing but fun to the game which is a big +1 for me. On top of that, it would not be very difficult to code. Probably some writing involved, but pretty basic concepts to add this into the game.
+1111
Only problem is that this guy named Grizz would roam the skies in his 262 using stuck aircraft as bait for jeeps.
-
Could a jeep actually transport 25% of fuel for any aircraft?
How many gallons is that for a plane like a 51, or a typh, or an F4 etc.? Not even to mention attack bombers like A20's, 25's, etc that would carry much more fuel?
Would you need several jeeps to make the 25% amount?
i think 3 minutes of fuel under full load is fair. Maybe even 2 minutes.
-
We should just be able to fly through power-ups.
Same thing.
It wasn't done IRL unless out of desperation, not to get your name in lights.
wrongway
Since when is this game about RL?there's no punishment for "dieing", I'd think field commanders would be tickled to be able to drive 5 miles to save a plane.I assure you, it's happened wheather towed or refueled.On the RL note,,you could set up a remote mouse trap near the nads, when you die, trap trips. *shrugs*
-
revisited, I think all the replies here are positive. Would really like to hear from Ht on it.
-
I'm +1 for this!!!
-
revisited, I think all the replies here are positive. Would really like to hear from Ht on it.
He's laughing too hard to type.
wrongway
-
you and krusty don't count;) your arguments against are clearly AC biased;) score stands at +10 right now for the idea.
-
seems like a win :P
-
Gamey in the strictest sense, yes.
Within the boundries of what Hitech and Pyro have placed in the game for us to play with, yes.
Do I want to drive a jeep up a 15k mountain side to find your plane landed next to the Swedish Bikini Team nudiest colony, no.
If they allow this with a jeep, also do it with a C47 and make the fuel cargo load drop the same amount as the jeep drops. Just put the honus on the C47 driver to get the single parachute package dropped in the pickel barrel or he has to make more trips or land and taxi within the same distance the jeep has to.
Is Grizz worried about his score, no. I think he has mastered much of this game, is bored, and is looking for entertainment.
-
Is Grizz worried about his score, no. I think he has mastered much of this game, is bored, and is looking for entertainment.
You are providing all the entertainment I need. :lol
-
Gamey in the strictest sense, yes.
Within the boundries of what Hitech and Pyro have placed in the game for us to play with, yes.
Do I want to drive a jeep up a 15k mountain side to find your plane landed next to the Swedish Bikini Team nudiest colony, no.
If they allow this with a jeep, also do it with a C47 and make the fuel cargo load drop the same amount as the jeep drops. Just put the honus on the C47 driver to get the single parachute package dropped in the pickel barrel or he has to make more trips or land and taxi within the same distance the jeep has to.
Is Grizz worried about his score, no. I think he has mastered much of this game, is bored, and is looking for entertainment.
i'd rather only it for the jeeps but seems fine to me