Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: DeadStik on August 15, 2011, 07:07:21 PM
-
I'm pretty sure it has been discussed, but I'd like to revisit it to gather some opinions. This is directed towards aircraft.
To "land successfully" the requirement is to put your aircraft on the tarmac/runway/asphalt/concrete/(whatever you want to call it). In an overwhelming amount of cases this involves raising the gear, kissing the concrete with the belly and skidding to a screeching halt. I'm having trouble seeing how in certain cases this is a "successful landing." A lot of people use the argument of "any landing you walk away from is a good landing" and while this bears some truth to it in a primitive sense, I wouldn't say it always constitutes this as such. Although I believe accomplishing a "landing" in this fashion is an excellent feat when you've had a landing gear shot to pieces or had other challenging handicaps, I fail to see how it should be the norm. People land their aircraft gear up regularly and it seems to have become a more and more popular phenomenon over time. Not that I could ever blame anyone - I mean, it's much quicker and therefore typically safer depending on the situation. I even find myself doing it regularly when I'm feeling gamey [sic].
Now, I would never want this game to introduce features which only ruin gameplay and the experience for players. We're all paying costumers and should be able to pipe in an opinion for whatever issue has surfaced. Having said this, (and this is not in the form of a wish, it's just a general discussion) how would others feel if there was a reward for landing with the wheels on the tarmac as opposed to another section of the aircraft. My initial thought would be to add a penalty for NOT landing in this fashion, but that would of course "ruin gameplay" for some people. Instead of adding a punishment, how about an incentive? Although different people play for different reasons, I would put some money down that the majority of people who play AH are the sort who like immersion. Having aircraft land on the belly for no reason other than to expedite their next sortie is (obviously) not realistic.
How would the community react if a feature was added which added a 5% (initial number) perk bonus to your normal earnings for the sortie?
My whole point here is that people are not going to land gear down unless they have a reason to. One reason could be that they are afraid of the belly landing. Another could be that they actually feel guilty for destroying a perfectly good aircraft (even if it's represented by a bunch of zeroes and ones). I would think that the amount of people landing gear down for these reasons are scarcer than I'd like to admit to myself. If an incentive to land properly is added, perhaps we'd see more people landing this way. I'd love to see this. I hope a lot of others would like to see this. And even if others don't care to indulge themselves, the people who do favor a proper landing would be rewarded for their extra effort.
I'd love to hear thoughts and opinions on this.
-
...
My whole point here is that people are not going to land gear down unless they have a reason to. One reason could be that they are afraid of the belly landing. Another could be that they actually feel guilty for destroying a perfectly good aircraft (even if it's represented by a bunch of zeroes and ones). I would think that the amount of people landing gear down for these reasons are scarcer than I'd like to admit to myself. If an incentive to land properly is added, perhaps we'd see more people landing this way. I'd love to see this. I hope a lot of others would like to see this. And even if others don't care to indulge themselves, the people who do favor a proper landing would be rewarded for their extra effort.
I'd love to hear thoughts and opinions on this.
I've been playing AH for right at 10 years, now, and I can count, on one hand, the number of times I've intentionally landed with undamaged gear up.
I still revel in the feel AH has, from taking off to landing.. and especially with one of the add-on sound packs.
And I don't come close to some sub-cultures in the game that are purists.
-
What are your thoughts about adding incentive?
-
I have flown the spits for many years, I cant land them for crap with wheels down. squadies laugh at me because of this and have tried to guide me in the right direction but it's of no use. not ashamed of me nor do i feel sorry. i land most of my other airplanes with wheels up, not because i cant land them wheels down, but because it allows me to go back up in the air about 2 or 3 seconds faster. you want to call it an unsuccessful landing, go ahead, i dont care. for me it will be the same as the time i shot this guy's plane's wing and tail off and he got a ditch. he started with his haha you didnt killed me. i replied yes I did i took off your wing and tail off and in my book that's a kill. dont really care about what the "system" says.
semp
-
People land their aircraft gear up regularly and it seems to have become a more and more popular phenomenon over time. Not that I could ever blame anyone - I mean, it's much quicker and therefore typically safer depending on the situation. I even find myself doing it regularly when I'm feeling gamey [sic].
As I said, the point wouldn't be to punish people for anything. The point is to reward those who complete the sortie as the aircraft is designed when it's capable of doing so. This idea wouldn't hurt you at all.
-
I have flown the spits for many years, I cant land them for crap with wheels down. squadies laugh at me because of this and have tried to guide me in the right direction but it's of no use. not ashamed of me nor do i feel sorry. i land most of my other airplanes with wheels up, not because i cant land them wheels down, but because it allows me to go back up in the air about 2 or 3 seconds faster. you want to call it an unsuccessful landing, go ahead, i dont care. for me it will be the same as the time i shot this guy's plane's wing and tail off and he got a ditch. he started with his haha you didnt killed me. i replied yes I did i took off your wing and tail off and in my book that's a kill. dont really care about what the "system" says.
semp
speed mate... speed and flare is the way to go to land spits... :D..(this coming from a guy you pawned) :rofl :rofl
deadstick... i wonder if your reference to the number of people "doing it" is based on real stats or just the company you're in? :headscratch: i always try to land the plane with undercarriage down (even tho sometimes i tend to forget watching all the gauges..esp on a badly damaged plane)... i would only belly land my plane, in desperate situations...could it be that the reason the "others" do it is cause they can't land properly? the toughest part about flying in real life isn't the ability to dogfight, or take off , or steer on runway or even use ATC commands..... it is to land..... all flying schools in life stress on this very aspect of flying..how good can flying be if you can't even land properly and safely?....landing is an art form in my opinion...be it with undercarriage down or up...
in my opinion, it doesn't matter if you land on the belly or on wheels... as long you get down safe... and of cos land kills... and to be fair belly landing takes skills too...its really up to the player if he wants to fly it as a simulator or as a cartoon game...its his $14.95...
-
This is just another instance of the game going down hill. Only time I land with gear up is when damaged or being vulched (another gamey sport). There is no longer a "right way" of doing anything in the game. That term is politically incorrect. You can tell by all the clowns that will show up and complain about what "I" think is the right way to play. :P
Semps a good example (nothing bad semp, just making a point). He said he can't land a spit to save his life. Why? Most likely he hasn't put in the time to learn how to do it correctly. Why do people need to fly in hordes? Most likely they haven't put in the time to learn to fight on there own and need all the help they can get. Most of the players today are playing a game. The object isn't pretending to be a WWII fighter/bomber/GV driver, it's winning the game. To them it's more important to get back in the air that 2 or 3 seconds faster.
Personally I like playing a fighter pilot and fighting it out. Score is un-important, winning the war is un-important. Landing, gives me that small feeling of accomplishment of bringing one back and landing it. If that means I have to taxi to a hanger, I'm ok with that too. Incentive? I have thousands of perks in all categories, don't need them. For a newer player, it might be the carrot that helps bring that small aspect back into the game. It's a easy enough thing to learn. It doesn't really take that much more time, and it gives you some easy perks. Sure, why not give it a try.
-
Personally I think it's a non-issue. At times I land-gear up, when damaged or have to exit fast to prevent me from being deceased. Other times I land with gear down and a more leisurely fashion. In a B-17, my usual bomber, I'll even land, stop and shut down the engines individually and then exit.
-
I never land with gear up unless the gear is damaged. Never.
I don't see it happening much either. Maybe the original poster needs to hang out with a less gamey class of pilots... :bolt:
-
"a successful landing is one you can walk away from, a great landing is one where you can use the plane again" :D
-
1.5x perk bonus for gear down landing, instead of the current 1.25x for any "successful landing" :aok
-
"a successful landing is one you can walk away from, a great landing is one where you can use the plane again" :D
i doubt the op is the type that goes to rearm pad... he would prob rather up a new brand new plane..
-
1.5x perk bonus for gear down landing, instead of the current 1.25x for any "successful landing" :aok
+ 1,000,000,000 :aok :aok
-
I've been playing AH for right at 10 years, now, and I can count, on one hand, the number of times I've intentionally landed with undamaged gear up.
I still revel in the feel AH has, from taking off to landing.. and especially with one of the add-on sound packs.
And I don't come close to some sub-cultures in the game that are purists.
+1
-
I land wheels up for the sake of having a quick landing and getting up again. I can land wheels down, I just choose to not. gamey? maybe a little, but its preference.
something like this would be a good idea:1.5x perk bonus for gear down landing, instead of the current 1.25x for any "successful landing" :aok
i would land wheels down more if this were in effect. whats .25X what i already earned? not much... but enough to get me to land wheels down not up. :cheers:
-
I take it as a matter of pride being able to land what ever it is I'm flying in the virtual skies. As a matter of fact one of the ways I get use to a new flight model is to do take offs and landings. I also try to do the landing the way it's suppose to be done, i.e. three point landings for tail draggers, correct speeds and flap setting etc.
Being able to land the plane and taxi is probably more important to me, than it is to the average MA player. Since I pretty much only fly scenarios, FSO, and similar events where it can be a real benefit to re-arming, as opposed to re-planing.
-
I only land gear up when one or both mains are damaged.
Doing it because you are in a hurry is full on dweeb mode.
-
I've been playing AH for right at 10 years, now, and I can count, on one hand, the number of times I've intentionally landed with undamaged gear up.
I still revel in the feel AH has, from taking off to landing.. and especially with one of the add-on sound packs.
And I don't come close to some sub-cultures in the game that are purists.
Well I've been here for 10 years and I can count the times I've intentionally landed with the gear down!
-
what about the 163, kinda hard to land with gear down :D
-
Well I've been here for 10 years and I can count the times I've intentionally landed with the gear down!
Ya, but nobody expects you to land wheels down... That's just silly talk! :D
-
Well I've been here for 10 years and I can count the times I've landed with the gear attached!
Fixed. :aok
-
Well I've been here for 10 years and I can count the times I've intentionally landed with the gear down!
amateur.... :D
this is how you do it... and i keep my gear... :neener:
and to be fair, I had to create my own damage. :noid
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,318573.msg4145650.html#msg4145650
neener, neener, I can drive backwards, and park... almost... :joystick:
-
I like to belly land into the Vehicle Base indestructible. I AM WHATS WRONG WITH ACES HIGH.
-
"Any landing you can walk away from is a good one"
I don't think it matters.
-
during a vulchfest, landing with the gear up, is the only way to survive! you need to be able to stop quickly, before someone shoots you on the ground(yes, there are dweeby people that will do that), therefore its a necessary tactic.
-
I'm a newbie but I always land gear down unless it's been shot off...
Has everyone been laughing at me trundling along on my wheels? :(
-
Subscriber since 2006 here, and I've never landed gear up if undamaged. I can certainly see the merit of doing so if trying to land at a hot airfield, but unless I'm flying on fumes I'd rather try for another pass than belly in. After all, don't you know what those prop strikes do to the engine? Your crew chief will murder you in the face.
As for landing Spits, I did have some trouble at first but that's why you can use C and V to brake separately. Jamming on the spacebar is a guaranteed way to spin out on the tarmac.
-
Sinces its been mentioned I think gears up cant even be compared to these vulch-fest conga line-fests we still see way to often. Ive seen them go on for 20+ minutes with no, or very little, effort to actually take the base. Usually there is a self-apointed Air General calling out who can take what helpless plane on the runway, him most of all. And thats it, running up easy perks against planes sitting or taxiing on the de-acked runways. Then they land to the chorus of attaboys as if they actually accomplished somthing. And Im not talking noobs here. Or did you think you make top ranks without vulchfests, spawn camping, and milk running ?
And against such a vulchfest I'll land an IL2 belly down every time just to deny these heros an easy kill. In fact I'll even sit on the runway and wait till some vulcher is almost on me before clicking off. Theres a difference between a contested, fair fight and a vulchfest. If your trying to land at a base being shamelessly vulched then you dont owe anyone an explanation for anything.
I remember once some dimwit in a P-51 followed my 17s across 3 sectors staying 2,000 out and refusing to attack. When I aproached my base he dissapeared and I figured he just went home so I put gears down and started rolling in. While I was rolling, with guns turned off by game, who do you think appears buzzing the runway shooting up my bombers ? After refusing to fight cleanly for 3 sectors? After that smelly episode I changed my mind about belly ups. Honestly we have some players who think you owe them an easy kill no matter what.
-
yeah, yeah, bullhockey, bullhockey, my line:
I don't care so much about the successful landing rule. It's acceptable. OTOH, last week, I shot up an F4F to the extent that he had to ditch in the ocean. I figured I'd get the kill. Wrong. It went down as a ditch for him. I'm not sur eif this was due to proximity to his CV or what. I'd like to know the rules of this. I owned that ponkety-ponk and forced him down. I should've just shot him where he sat.
-
Maybe HTC could add another 1-2 point/perk levels to give credit to those who land "properly"? I think it shows something when a person takes the time to land an aircraft in a proper manner. It isnt like we have to taxi on up to the hanger and go through the shut down checklist.
It is just one of those gamey things the flash-bangers do.
-
The snobbery and the worrying about what others are doing in this game and how they are doing it is getting ludicrous.
-
Personally I think it's a non-issue.
Quoted For Truth.
-
It seems strange people demanding realism from flight, damage, and gunnery modeling when they won't even attempt to fly with realism.
The perfect solution would be a finite amount of planes available.
You belly in and you've removed one example of a certain plane either permanently or for a week.
You belly in 26 times and find you have used up the last model of your preferred ride.
It would be difficult to code.
-
I have always liked the idea of getting additional points based on how undamaged your plane is when you return it to base. That goes from battle sustained damage and obviously, engine, and snapped wing damage when you land.
I'm one of the worst habitual belly landers in this game, it's quick and easy, and also because I have no incentive to land with my gear. Until there is incentive to land wheels up, I will continue to XBOX land.
-
If you don't do it now there's no amount of points or incentive that will make you do it in the future.
-
Well I've been here for 10 years and I can count the times I've intentionally landed with the gear down!
Wait are we talking about landing? Or "landing"?
:)
-
If you don't do it now there's no amount of points or incentive that will make you do it in the future.
Really Krusty?
-
Yep. If you want to get back to the fight sooner you will circumvent things that keep you from doing that. If you make it a punishment to do anything other than take time and land properly, people will avoid the punishment.
Landing is an immersion/fun/preference deal for any individual player. There's already a major perk multiplier for landing on the tarmac, yet most people mindlessly furball until they are dead because it's faster than flying back to land (quite a few have mentioned this is the best way to get a higher score). Make it a punishment to "land wrong" and all of a sudden they'll just bail or auger because it's faster and avoids the penalties.
So if you're not already landing with your landing gear NOW, no punitive additions to the game will change that. You'll just change and adapt, but you won't be forced to do something you don't want to do.
-
Adding incentives for landing with the gear down sounds like a solution in search of a problem. Is the game truly affected negatively because landing with gear up has become rampant?
-
Agree there.
-
Fly however you want to fly.
Just be warned if you aspire to fly real airplanes in the future that if you develop bad landing procedure habbits in this game (or good ones for that matter)... Such experience may become a habbit that is either good or is bad and needs to be unlearned.
Make a habbit of doing a simple landing gear/flaps/fuel check to confirm that you are configured for landing.
Make a good approach and wheel or 3 point landing in the touch down zone at an appropriate airspeed
Keep the aircraft centered exactly down the runway while you roll out to a stop
It may not be the same as the real deal but its still good practice to get in the habbit of having good habbits for anyone with interest in real world flying.
-
Yep. If you want to get back to the fight sooner you will circumvent things that keep you from doing that. If you make it a punishment to do anything other than take time and land properly, people will avoid the punishment.
I'd land with wheels down if I earned more points for landing an undamaged airplane.
-
I always try to land with the wheels down. I usually also land without power, 1) because I never learned how to do it "right" (sorry Rolex, you did teach me how to not ground-loop though), and 2) its good practice for when you're dead stick. I'll goose a little power if I don't think I'm going to make it, but usually I'm coming in too fast and killing off airspeed until right over the runway. I also like to practice taxiing to the refueling station if I have one kill and an undamaged aircraft. I can't do that with a belly landing. That's a skill that I need in scenarios that I would forget if I didn't practice.
What gets me the most is when I'm landing kills for "name in lights" and I forget that I have a damaged landing gear. When that happens I usually end up barely off the concrete with a broken wing and/or prop and fairly pissed off.
Of course sometimes it isn't the end of the world: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3aDYMCOeOk
-
EDIT: Responding to Grizz, before boilerdown posted:
How does that justify "wheels down" earning more points than, say me with 1/2 wingtip gone, 1 flap out, 1 elevator missing, no rudder, and coming in belly landing after getting 5 kills?
There's no way to enforce it because there's no way to tell if it was intentional or if it was for extrenuating circumstances. The game cannot read the hearts and minds of the players to determine if they're cutting corners or pulling off a miraculous save.
-
EDIT: Responding to Grizz, before boidown posted:
How does that justify "wheels down" earning more points than, say me with 1/2 wingtip gone, 1 flap out, 1 elevator missing, no rudder, and coming in belly landing after getting 5 kills?
There's no way to enforce it because there's no way to tell if it was intentional or if it was for extrenuating circumstances. The game cannot read the hearts and minds of the players to determine if they're cutting corners or pulling off a miraculous save.
It's pretty simple Krusty, if you land with damage you should receive less points than if you land a 100% unwounded bird. Both score points & perk points, the weight of that difference I do not know but I think it should be taken into account. It would also make sense from a real life perspective, just because you landed a plane missing half its parts on the concrete, I hardly think the crew chief would value that the same as bringing a bird back wheels up, with no damage on the grass next to the concrete do you?
So per your example, if you landed with 1/2 wingtip gone, 1 flap out, 1 elevator missing, no rudder, coming in for a belly landing, yeah it would still count as a "successful land", but you wouldn't get as large as a point & perk point bonus multiplier for all the damage you accrued earning those 5 kills. And how this relates to belly landing, since belly landing an otherwise clean bird would damage it, this would be a carrot as well to land with a gear.
-
What you describe is wholly unfair.
In real life a ground crew would be mad if you came back with nothing to show for it and pranged your kit. If you came back shot to hell they'd give you all the help you need, having just escaped death.
In this game, it is far more honorable (more points-worthy) to land a damaged plane than to "belly in" an undamaged one, or even to land normally with no damage.
Your rewards are disproportionate to their worth, IMO.
-
EDIT: Responding to Grizz, before boilerdown posted:
How does that justify "wheels down" earning more points than, say me with 1/2 wingtip gone, 1 flap out, 1 elevator missing, no rudder, and coming in belly landing after getting 5 kills?
There's no way to enforce it because there's no way to tell if it was intentional or if it was for extrenuating circumstances. The game cannot read the hearts and minds of the players to determine if they're cutting corners or pulling off a miraculous save.
I would imagine in that case you land on the belly because you don't think you can pull it off on the wheels. If you thought landing your heavily damaged aircraft on the wheels was worth the risk for the extra points, you would do it. But if you think there's no way in hell you'll pull that off, you wouldn't. Its that simple. Also, there should be points for not getting shot up to the point that you didn't land properly.
I for one like Grizz's idea. It makes sense. Note however that I land wheels down already and I may be biased.
-
Points for not getting shot? Fat chance. This is a game that encourages combat. That means going into harm's way to kill the bad guys. Giving points for doing nothing is a bad thing. Repeat: It's a BAD thing. It will lead to undesirable player behavior and simply train people to avoid combat and run away.
EDIT: Just so everyone knows: I land with gear any time I can. I'll limp home 100 miles with no kills just because I want to land it. I do this and still think Grizz's idea is terrible.
-
Can you ever just make your point and not turn everything into debate team?
If you want more realism, here's my suggestion:
Concrete is for landing wheels down. The brass doesn't like it when aircraft divot up their tarmac with belly landings. Each airbase shall therefore have a designated patch of grass where belly landings must be performed for a "successful" landing. Landing not on wheels on concrete shall be counted as a ditch, landing wheels down on the grass is still counted as a ditch. If you want to successfully land belly up, you must land in the designated grassy area to the right or left of the runway.
-
Your rewards are disproportionate to their worth, IMO.
How can the rewards be disproportionate relative to their worth if I said I did not know what the actual level of point differences based on damage should be?
-
EDIT: Just so everyone knows: I land with gear any time I can. I'll limp home 100 miles with no kills just because I want to land it. I do this and still think Grizz's idea is terrible.
Lol how is my idea terrible? It makes perfect sense to a logic wielding BBS warrior. It makes as much sense as getting more points for landing on concrete with black and white boundaries as opposed to 1 inch to the left of the boundary. It makes as much sense as getting rewarded for landing at all. If you want to make the "this is about promoting combat" argument, then why don't we get rid of landing bonuses all together? Once combat is over, just crash and get a new plane. Sound stupid? You're right it is stupid, so you might want to rethink your stance on that one.
The goal is to balance realism/immersion, combat, and subsequently quality game play. There is nothing that detracts from combat about providing a little bit of incentive to players to land correctly, it would however, add to realism and immersion.
-
Lets be clear here though, I am just arguing for the sake of arguing out of boredom and to keep my skills sharp. I know that HTC isn't going to modify this, even though they should. And this is coming from the most flagrant belly lander in the game, me.
-
I normally land wheels down when in a hurry.(Pilot wound and avoid vulch)
Sometimes I land that way just to hear these sounds. Doubt you have them since I made them just for me ;)
http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?wxtpf5cahzt6ncf
http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?k8fjtrfarqveswy
-
...
How would the community react if a feature was added which added a 5% (initial number) perk bonus to your normal earnings for the sortie?
...
+1
I'm usually in favor of anything on the "realistic" end of any given spectrum. I'm not sure if perkies would be an effective incentive, but I guess that's pretty much the coin of the realm.
-
And this is coming from the most flagrant belly lander in the game, me.
Hmmm ... that might be the only thing I can beat you at at this point.
-
Just think of how much it would suck landing several kills but not getting full credit because your gear was shot off.
-
It may not be the same as the real deal but its still good practice to get in the habbit of having good habbits for anyone with interest in real world flying.
It took a while but I ALMOST always land my 109's without bending the prop or scraping a tip. It's a satisfying thing.
-
Just think of how much it would suck landing several kills but not getting full credit because your gear was shot off.
Define full credit. You'd still get your name in the lights, successful land, no death, and plenty of bonus points for landing, but instead of getting the full amount like a 1.5 multiplier that might range between 1.4 and 1.5, depending on how much damage you came back with. So instead of getting 25 perks with a full healthy bird, you get 23 with some significant damage. Would that be the end of the world to encourage players to actually use their gear?
Oh the humanity, having an incentive to actually use your landing gear in a full realism aviation game!
-
deadstick... i wonder if your reference to the number of people "doing it" is based on real stats or just the company you're in?
My reference for this came from seeing people doing this on a regular basis because they could. I see it all the time.
in my opinion, it doesn't matter if you land on the belly or on wheels... as long you get down safe... and of cos land kills... and to be fair belly landing takes skills too...its really up to the player if he wants to fly it as a simulator or as a cartoon game...its his $14.95...
And I stressed these points, which is why I propose it would be a small incentive bonus. This is as opposed to a penalty for landing improperly.
Landing, gives me that small feeling of accomplishment of bringing one back and landing it. If that means I have to taxi to a hanger, I'm ok with that too.
...
Sure, why not give it a try.
I agree completely! Taxiing to hanger is the cherry on top! I feel people who want to be "gamey" should be allowed to be so. However, I also feel that good habits which are congruent with good aviation habits should be encouraged as well. I'm not talking about using "checklists" or anything along those lines. We're talking about the simple task of landing! For some, it can be challenging. So, let's add some incentive to encourage good stick/rudder usage in the air and all the way to the ground! :aok
"a successful landing is one you can walk away from, a great landing is one where you can use the plane again" :D
Great quote! Love it!
i doubt the op is the type that goes to rearm pad... he would prob rather up a new brand new plane..
Hey hey, that's not true. I use the rearm pad frequently and enjoy the full process. It's always fun in external view watching the gear compress under the added weight of the reload.
I land wheels up for the sake of having a quick landing and getting up again. I can land wheels down, I just choose to not. gamey? maybe a little, but its preference.
something like this would be a good idea:i would land wheels down more if this were in effect. whats .25X what i already earned? not much... but enough to get me to land wheels down not up. :cheers:
I land wheels up for the quick landing and when the field is "hot" too. It's nice to hear that despite this, you'd be prone to land wheels down if incentive were added! Thanks!
"Any landing you can walk away from is a good one"
I don't think it matters.
While this is true and I did mention it, I fail to see how it should be the "norm" and if people can be encouraged otherwise we'd see fewer planes grinding to a halt with a fully functional gear in the wheel wells.
Maybe HTC could add another 1-2 point/perk levels to give credit to those who land "properly"? I think it shows something when a person takes the time to land an aircraft in a proper manner. It isnt like we have to taxi on up to the hanger and go through the shut down checklist.
It is just one of those gamey things the flash-bangers do.
This is exactly my point. It's an incentive to land well, not a punishment for landing gear up. I can't stress this enough! Thanks for the post.
The snobbery and the worrying about what others are doing in this game and how they are doing it is getting ludicrous.
That's not really what it's about. If this were a snob issue, I'd be saying, "People who land gear up should be given a ditch." I'm not denying that landing gear up is a "successful" landing. I'm merely suggesting there be reward for flying the aircraft well. People might exclaim that people will just take off and land to gain perks, but of course the idea here is to add a % bonus to whatever you already have stored up. If you want to land gear up, please do so. I won't judge you or look down on you.
Let me present this: Let's say you and another both take off in identical aircraft with identical loads and you both log separate kills of equal value under your own merit. You grind the metal into the runway to a stop and he takes the time to land with the rubber. You both get rewarded equally. So the other guy then thinks, "Why did I even bother to land properly? Next time I'll just skid it in." Next thing you know, everybody is gear up which leads to an unrealistic premise that landing on the belly is the norm.
"Aces High takes the art and science of vintage WW1 and WW2 air combat and sets it in a high intensity online multiplayer environment."
This is copy-paste from the home page of the game. How is having a community of belly landing aviator wannabes preserving the beauty and the "art" of WW2 aviation? Food for thought.
-
Let me present this: Let's say you and another both take off in identical aircraft with identical loads and you both log separate kills of equal value under our own merit. You grind the metal into the runway to a stop and he takes the time to land with the rubber. You both get rewarded equally. So the other guy then thinks, "Why did I even both to land properly? Next time I'll just skid it in." Next thing you know, everybody is gear up which leads to an unrealistic premise that landing on the belly is the norm.
"Aces High takes the art and science of vintage WW1 and WW2 air combat and sets it in a high intensity online multiplayer environment."
This is copy-paste from the home page of the game. How is having a community of belly landing aviator wannabes preserving the beauty and the "art" of WW2 aviation? Food for thought.
Nailed it! :aok
-
I assume since Krusty has stopped posting, that he has conceded defeat.
-
When do we start really dying?
The beauty of it, is that you can provide as much cartoon realism or as little as you want in your imagination, cause nothing in this game is real other then the people sitting at their computers pretending.
If you need a perk or point motivation to look for that kind of motivation, I'd suggest you lack imagination.
-
The only time I belly land is when I see someone coming in to strafe me and I'm already committed to the landing. I'll drop a flap, get in the air, raise gear and flop back down.
Either way, complaining about someone belly landing is so petty it is laughable. How does that affect your game play in any fashion? Maybe just for spite, I'll take off and let my airspeed rip off my landing gear instead. Hopefully, it will bring the complaints to a crescendo.
-
What about an incentive to rearm your aircraft? That might make for some more "wheels down" landings
-
:huh Gentlemen... I am in awe of the way some of you can find the tiniest little things to look down upon people for. Might I suggest future topics for tearing people down to be things such as using a HOTAS? They give people a gamey advantage because the controls in the real thing weren't nearly that conveniently placed. Other topics might include improper flap usage on taking off or landing. Clearly these things are degrading the pure, wholesome gaming experience you desire...
As to the idea about a bonus for landing gear down, I like it. I'd say it should be very small though, no more than 10%. I also am in favor of a modifier based on damage. You're not 'costing' your side the materiel to repair your aircraft, that should be worth something. Landing with no damage means effectively, you made no mistakes.
Wiley.
-
Either way, complaining about someone belly landing is so petty it is laughable. How does that affect your game play in any fashion? Maybe just for spite, I'll take off and let my airspeed rip off my landing gear instead. Hopefully, it will bring the complaints to a crescendo.
I agree it is petty. But, who ever complained about someone belly landing Delirium?
This is a classic example of a knee jerk soap box reaction without even reading the contents of the thread.
-
I agree it is petty. But, who ever complained about someone belly landing Delirium?
This is a classic example of a knee jerk soap box reaction without even reading the contents of the thread.
it seemed like a veiled complaint to me too :headscratch:
and I may be even more of a belly lander then you, I always belly land, simple reason for that though...I don't know where my gear lever is..... :rofl
no seriously, I do always belly land, but I can land wheels down, just easier to belly land and get back in the air faster..gamey....well I am playing a game :uhoh
I guess if I rearmed every sortie it would cut my sortie per death score.....
oh wait I don't give a crap about score/rank
carry on :old:
-
If flying non-realistic is ok then HTC shouldn't be required to model planes to historical performance.
-
But, who ever complained about someone belly landing Delirium?
The original poster did.
it seemed like a veiled complaint to me too :headscratch:
Glad I wasn't the only one.
-
The original poster did.
I just reread it and did not feel like he was whining about anything, in fact he made an effort to say even he lands belly up plenty of the time. What piece of his OP specifically was "petty"?
-
wow even if no perks are awarded i will still land with wheels up anytime i feel like it (except the spit even if i wanted to I cant :rofl) . hell you can keep the points too, only reason I even attempt to rank low is to get control of the cv.
it's stupid how some of you guys try to "regulate" other players by changing some silly rules that most other guys dont really care about. why dont you guys go after the bombers that go off the map to avoid getting shot down. that's more detrimental to the game than some silly "must land with gear down" rule.
semp
-
Warble warble warble!
To be crystal clear: This post was never created to criticize people's habits or to look down upon any other player. This post exists to see the population's reception (or lack thereof) to adding an incentive to land; not to punish anyone! People seem to get offended by this notion as if you assume this would change your experience. Compliance would be strictly voluntary. We could argue the definition of a successful landing for eternity since perspective is involved, but I don't think we could argue that during WW2 aviators would not regularly put aircraft down on their bellies on the runway (with an operational gear). So next argument is that "we aren't WW2 aviators, we're nerds with computers." Sure, that's true, but isn't a "high fidelity" game with an emphasis on the "art" of WW2 aircraft supposed to support and encourage a healthy level of realistic habits? Next I hear the "it's my $14.95 and I'll play how I like." Well of course. I would never ask you to do otherwise. This wish doesn't effect you so why are you so bothered by it?
-
wow even if no perks are awarded i will still land with wheels up anytime i feel like it (except the spit even if i wanted to I cant :rofl) . hell you can keep the points too, only reason I even attempt to rank low is to get control of the cv.
So you would be butthurt if you knew players were receiving a slight perk increase because they were returning their airplanes in mint condition, where you chose to tear your wings off and snap your propeller off on the concrete? Is that what you are saying?
I wonder if the players that never land are butthurt that the players that are landing their planes are receiving a bonus. How is this any different?
Landing with a gear getting you more points than crash landing. Oh the humanity! :rofl You guys make me laugh.
-
I think what some of us are saying, apparently not to clearly, is it won't change a thing for us.
If HTC feels it's important enough to change, it won't matter to me either. I idea of 'realism' can be overdone in something that isn't real. This never will be real.
How many squads go out and return in formation. Have you ever seen fighters land like they did for real? Once in a while some of the squaddies and I will either in pairs or a flight of four, try and do the fighter break, where on landing you come across the field and at spaced intervals break off into the pattern and try and get the birds on the ground as soon as you can. Watch any of the old films and that's what they 'really' did. Other then it looked good in a screenshot and it was fun to try and make it look real, we didn't need any points or perks to give it a try.
What people put into the game to add to the immersion is really on them. Folks know my MA approach. If i get back at all it's generally wreckage.
One of the things I enjoy in scenarios is trying to do it closer to the 'truth'. Staying 'alive' matters. Getting back matters. One of the fun things back in DGS was the 38s in my group coming back to the field together and putting it down and then taxiing in, lining the birds up and shutting down together. We got no points, and didn't do it for any reason other then it looked good and added to the immersion.
Again, if HTC wants to give folks incentives for it, it won't change a thing for me :)
-
So you would be butthurt if you knew players were receiving a slight perk increase because they were returning their airplanes in mint condition, where you chose to tear your wings off and snap your propeller off on the concrete? Is that what you are saying?
I wonder if the players that never land are butthurt that the players that are landing their planes are receiving a bonus. How is this any different?
Landing with a gear getting you more points than crash landing. Oh the humanity! :rofl You guys make me laugh.
well if I say that i would still land wheels up even if i got no points anyway. why would i be butthurt if somebody got points landing wheels down? isnt it the same thing? what I am getting butthurt is your silliness at trying to get extra points for doing nothing different than what you do now. because seriously what is so hard about landing wheels down? what is next, getting extra points for using flaps while landing?
semp
-
because seriously what is so hard about landing wheels down?
I have flown the spits for many years, I cant land them for crap with wheels down.
:headscratch:
-
:headscratch:
you consider it hard to land wheels down :headscratch:.
semp
-
I'd give one good reason to land wheels down as a habit right now: scenario play. There's nothing worse than getting a kill or two, surviving to rtb, coming in for a landing, then screwing it up with a bent prop or ripped -off wing. Your FSO is over at that point. I did that one night in an Italian scenario while flying a 109G-6. I and a squaddie were the only two left of our group and I was really looking forward to going back up with a fresh load of ammo. I'd already bagged a kill and an assist. However, I bent my prop. Somebody call the waaaah-mbulance.
From that point forward I started working on my flare. The clearance b/w the 109 prop tip and ground is not that much. You need to be nose high as yo touch down. Ideally, you approach nose down, then bleed speed as you deploy flaps. When your speed gets low enough and you're just over the runway, pulling back will elicit stall warning noises - from there you just stall it in to a nice touchdown.
I like the belly landing as an emergency skill for when the gear is shot up. It's a bit of an art form too - though it requires no ground maneuvering or braking. I just don't like to finish that way if I don't have to.
-
you consider it hard to land wheels down :headscratch:.
semp
Where are you getting this from? I quoted you twice. You contradicted yourself. You first said you are unable to land spits gear down, and then you go about with the argument of "how hard is it to land wheels down?" Being an aviator in the real world, I have no difficulty landing in this game or outside of it. This is one of the main reasons I play this game - the aerodynamics are modeled very accurately when compared to others I have tried. Other simulators end up having a "cartoony" feel where as AH feels so natural.
I didn't want to bring up the "aviator" fact, because people will now make false assumptions. I do not want extensive button pushing. I prefer the one button push for engine start, not having to worry about over-temping/over-boosting engines, not having to memorize and follow lengthy checklists, not having to wake up at 5AM in the morning, tugging out an aircraft of a hanger, performing a preflight, filing a flight plan, etc etc etc etc (the list goes on forever). I do, however, draw the line with the issue addressed in this thread.
This added incentive wouldn't hurt you. Why are you so opposed to it?
-
well if I say that i would still land wheels up even if i got no points anyway. why would i be butthurt if somebody got points landing wheels down? isnt it the same thing? what I am getting butthurt is your silliness at trying to get extra points for doing nothing different than what you do now. because seriously what is so hard about landing wheels down? what is next, getting extra points for using flaps while landing?
semp
I bet ya I know a plane in the hangar that you would rip at least one wing off on landing. How about next time we're on, you meet me in the tower, and then I call out the mystery plane and we take it off together and circle and land it. Since it is so easy you should have no problem doing it right? Consider it a challenge.
-
I think what some of us are saying, apparently not to clearly, is it won't change a thing for us.
If HTC feels it's important enough to change, it won't matter to me either. I idea of 'realism' can be overdone in something that isn't real. This never will be real.
How many squads go out and return in formation. Have you ever seen fighters land like they did for real? Once in a while some of the squaddies and I will either in pairs or a flight of four, try and do the fighter break, where on landing you come across the field and at spaced intervals break off into the pattern and try and get the birds on the ground as soon as you can. Watch any of the old films and that's what they 'really' did. Other then it looked good in a screenshot and it was fun to try and make it look real, we didn't need any points or perks to give it a try.
What people put into the game to add to the immersion is really on them. Folks know my MA approach. If i get back at all it's generally wreckage.
One of the things I enjoy in scenarios is trying to do it closer to the 'truth'. Staying 'alive' matters. Getting back matters. One of the fun things back in DGS was the 38s in my group coming back to the field together and putting it down and then taxiing in, lining the birds up and shutting down together. We got no points, and didn't do it for any reason other then it looked good and added to the immersion.
Again, if HTC wants to give folks incentives for it, it won't change a thing for me :)
Corky it's not about forcing change on people, it's about providing something to those on the fence that could go either way. I'm in this crowd, the crowd being, generally apathetic about landing wheels down because I'm lazy. If I had a measurable reason why I was doing it then I would.
And another example: obviously when you land kills you get more points, your name in lights, all the fighter pilot glory you could ask for, but that does not change the way you play the game, right? So why would this be any different? I would say that it would only encourage proper landings with a slight incentive. It certainly would not penalize those who did not properly land, which semp, Del, and SlapShot tried to spin it as.
-
Maybe its just me but I actually see these belly landings only very,very rarely. And I often hang out near a runway with a wirbel.
-
so glad ht wants people to concentrate on the fight and not on flying the airplane. that's why no extra points for landing undamaged airplanes, or for kill streaks. perhaps if you would come up with a good reason howt it will enhance gameplay, your wish could be granted. but as it is you want extra points for doing absolutely nothing :bolt:.
semp
-
so glad ht wants people to concentrate on the fight and not on flying the airplane. that's why no extra points for landing undamaged airplanes, or for kill streaks. perhaps if you would come up with a good reason howt it will enhance gameplay, your wish could be granted. but as it is you want extra points for doing absolutely nothing :bolt:.
semp
They provide extra points for taking the time to return to base from a fight and land your aircraft, which is non combat oriented do they not?
I want extra/adjusted points based on the condition of your aircraft when you end the sortie, not strictly more points for landing with wheels down. And before you pull the Krusty argument "This will just cause more timid flying", ah not so fast, it still becomes a risk/reward issue. 4 kills and landed damaged bird would certainly be worth more than only 3 kills and an undamaged bird.
What say you mental peons?
-
They provide extra points for taking the time to return to base from a fight and land your aircraft, which is non combat oriented do they not?
I want extra/adjusted points based on the condition of your aircraft when you end the sortie, not strictly more points for landing with wheels down. And before you pull the Krusty argument "This will just cause more timid flying", ah not so fast, it still becomes a risk/reward issue. 4 kills and landed damaged bird would certainly be worth more than only 3 kills and an undamaged bird.
What say you mental peons?
that wasnt krusty's argument, that was hitech's on a post from last year asking for killing streaks. look it up. grizz you of all people should not be trying to get extra points for doing nothing extra. you are a highly skilled player that dont need the extra advantage of "no riks for me" points.
semp
-
Hey, cool. While we're at it, let's add bonus points for flying without combat trim and with tracers disabled. It'll be like playing Doom on Nightmare difficulty!
-
Hey, cool. While we're at it, let's add bonus points for flying without combat trim and with tracers disabled. It'll be like playing Doom on Nightmare difficulty!
Oh nice of Leviathn to bring the strawman to this thread. :D
There are already advantages for flying without tracers on: the enemy cannot see your tracers.
Advantages in flight performance can be gained by turning off combat trim in certain aircraft in certain envelopes. If you know a plane well enough you can use this to your advantage.
-
Oh nice of Leviathn to bring the strawman to this thread. :D
Welcome. :)
There are already advantages for flying without tracers on: the enemy cannot see your tracers.
And the disadvantage is that it's harder to aim and, consequently, obtain kills. I was actually pretty good at aiming 30mm guns, but never with tracers disabled. That made it another matter entirely. That took it to... Nightmare difficulty!
Advantages in flight performance can be gained by turning off combat trim in certain aircraft in certain envelopes. If you know a plane well enough you can use this to your advantage.
Sure, but flying without Combat Trim is generally more difficult. Surely more perks are in order for someone willing and able to master the times where not using it proves advantageous.
-
I can see it now... Just like Bad Company 2, the middle of your screen will flash during a sortie....
"Hit without tracers, +10"
"Pulled 5Gs without combat trim, +25"
"Killed below the nose, +50"
:rolleyes:
-
Welcome. :)
And the disadvantage is that it's harder to aim and, consequently, obtain kills. I was actually pretty good at aiming 30mm guns, but never with tracers disabled. That made it another matter entirely. That took it to... Nightmare difficulty!
Sure, but flying without Combat Trim is generally more difficult. Surely more perks are in order for someone willing and able to master the times where not using it proves advantageous.
Meh, you don't have to incentivize everything in the game, lets stick to the original topic. :aok
My point was this: There should be a small portion of the landing bonus multiplier that is reserved for the health of the plane returned. I'm not really arguing purely for an incentive for proper landing based on the fact that it is "more difficult", but more so under the blanket that there should be a slight reduction in the landing bonus if you bring a plane back with damage. There already is a bonus for landing, lets make no mistake about that, I just want a portion of that bonus to be calculated based on damage to landed aircraft. Consequently, this would provide an incentive for landing correctly for those that wanted full credit.
-
What you suggest penalizes player A for player B's actions. Might as well roll a dice on landing and randomly remove points for no reason.
You cannot police thought patterns Grizz.
-
What you suggest penalizes player A for player B's actions. Might as well roll a dice on landing and randomly remove points for no reason.
You cannot police thought patterns Grizz.
How does it penalize Player A for Player B's actions? Who is Player A and who is Player B? Please elaborate.
The rest of your post does not compute.
-
It computes just fine. You're trying to enforce ways of thinking. You can't do that.
Player B shoots player A, all of a sudden player A loses points because they are damaged? It's as ludicrous as penalizing players for flying lower than 20k, or penalizing players for running out of ammo (or landing without firing any ammo at all).
-
It computes just fine. You're trying to enforce ways of thinking. You can't do that.
Player B shoots player A, all of a sudden player A loses points because they are damaged? It's as ludicrous as penalizing players for flying lower than 20k, or penalizing players for running out of ammo (or landing without firing any ammo at all).
If Player B shoots down Player A, preventing him from landing, Player A loses points because he was shot down all the same. I am baffled that you are struggling with this.
-
I know no once cares but +1 to OP
-
Rewarding a player for landing kills with less damage to his aircraft will promote timid pick tactics. Don't we have enough of that already?
-
Rewarding a player for landing kills with less damage to his aircraft will promote timid pick tactics. Don't we have enough of that already?
No it won't. More kills with damage would be much more valuable then fewer kills with no damage.
If you plan on flying a sortie to survive and rtb, how would this change the mindset of that player at all? Are you suggesting that a player who is simply trying to survive without regard to accrued damage will allow himself to get shot to hell versus the player that knows he will get more points for landing with no damage whom of which will not allow himself to get shot to hell? lol. If you let the enemy put guns on you are risking death. This would not change player behavior at all other than those who wanted a few extra points would land their plane the correct way to avoid the subsequent damage.
-
I would say that it would only encourage proper landings with a slight incentive. It certainly would not penalize those who did not properly land, which semp, Del, and SlapShot tried to spin it as.
Please show me the post where I tried to "spin it".
-
Please show me the post where I tried to "spin it".
Right here:
The snobbery and the worrying about what others are doing in this game and how they are doing it is getting ludicrous.
-
Right here:
:rolleyes:
-
No it won't. More kills with damage would be much more valuable then fewer kills with no damage.
Agree!
But it's a hypothetical argument and will never happen. Why are you guys putting so much effort into this?
Worked my way back to 6 kills and still don't care to land them. Getting 6 or more while incurring damage because you don't run from a fight is way more enjoyable than landing 2 keeping my little cartoon life safe. If I got fuel, Ammo and most of my plane parts, I"M STAYING In the Fight.
If I do make it hm .....sumpton got blowed up, planes went down and it wasn't as easy as you might think.
Thats the way I like it, ................now where's my heart medication :aok
-
No it won't. More kills with damage would be much more valuable then fewer kills with no damage.
Yes it will ... That logic may work for you and me and a hand full of others, but the amount of people who wouldn't think that way, IMHO, would be far greater.
-
I still like my original idea to add wheels incentive. Sadly there is a large divide here which means it could not be implemented as the HTC staff would never add a feature which risks losing subscribers but merely enhances some others' experience.
It seems there are a lot of players on this community which are afraid of change. Afraid of change even if the change itself has no direct or even indirect effect on their experience. I'm trying to understand why people would be so strongly opposed to this idea. The only answer which I can understand fully is that they are of the belly landing culture and would dislike the thought of others getting a fractional bonus for demonstrating good airmanship and landing properly. It is similar to the crowd of people who hate smart phones because they don't have one. I don't know what more to say about it at this point.
I grow weary and am tired from a long night of flying on the real world. Be assured, I landed with the gear down. I don't think my company would agree with me had I landed on the belly and called it a "successful landing."
-
I still like my original idea to add wheels incentive. Sadly there is a large divide here which means it could not be implemented as the HTC staff would never add a feature which risks losing subscribers but merely enhances some others' experience.
It seems there are a lot of players on this community which are afraid of change. Afraid of change even if the change itself has no direct or even indirect effect on their experience. I'm trying to understand why people would be so strongly opposed to this idea. The only answer which I can understand fully is that they are of the belly landing culture and would dislike the thought of others getting a fractional bonus for demonstrating good airmanship and landing properly. It is similar to the crowd of people who hate smart phones because they don't have one. I don't know what more to say about it at this point.
I grow weary and am tired from a long night of flying on the real world. Be assured, I landed with the gear down. I don't think my company would agree with me had I landed on the belly and called it a "successful landing."
:rofl
no they wouldn't :aok
it wouldn't make a difference to me, unlike the 12 hour change,that's only "change" htc has ever done, since Ive been here I didn't agree with.
-
I still like my original idea to add wheels incentive. Sadly there is a large divide here which means it could not be implemented as the HTC staff would never add a feature which risks losing subscribers but merely enhances some others' experience.
nobody is going to quit because you get less points for landing wheels up. and getting more points for landing wheels down doesnt enhance anybody's experience.
It seems there are a lot of players on this community which are afraid of change. Afraid of change even if the change itself has no direct or even indirect effect on their experience. I'm trying to understand why people would be so strongly opposed to this idea. because it is stupid to get points for doing nothing The only answer which I can understand fully is that they are of the belly landing culture and would dislike the thought of others getting a fractional bonus for demonstrating good airmanship and landing properly. most people land wheels down, people who land wheels up like me are a tiny minority It is similar to the crowd of people who hate smart phones because they don't have one. I don't know what more to say about it at this point. we have smart phones, because most phones now are smart phones.
I grow weary and am tired from a long night of flying on the real world. Be assured, I landed with the gear down. I don't think my company would agree with me had I landed on the belly and called it a "successful landing."
we are not pilots and we are not in the real world, this is still a game. pretty sure your company doesnt give you a high five when you lose several planes a day. or for having a drink and flying, dont even mention about going to the can and leaving your plane on auto pilot
-
nobody is going to quit because you get less points for landing wheels up. and getting more points for landing wheels down doesnt enhance anybody's experience.
It enhances it for me and for the others in favor.
because it is stupid to get points for doing nothing
False. It isn't nothing. Crashing in on the belly is more "nothing" than a proper landing. It's not a fixed bonus. It's proportionate to your normal earnings.
-
It enhances it for me and for the others in favor.
False. It isn't nothing. Crashing in on the belly is more "nothing" than a proper landing. It's not a fixed bonus. It's proportionate to your normal earnings.
I don't care either way but I'm curious why you feel points or perks would be needed if you already land em because it enhances the game for you? isn't that enough?
One of the never ending back and forth debates in this game is trying to get folks to 'play your way'. We've all been guilty of pushing our game agendas in one way or another. This seems to be along those lines.
-
Doesn't much matter at this point. This thread was not intended to be an official wish, but to see what people thought about the concept. It was originally posted in the General Discussion section as such but was moved into the Wish section. That wasn't my intent.
-
It enhances it for me and for the others in favor.
False. It isn't nothing. Crashing in on the belly is more "nothing" than a proper landing. It's not a fixed bonus. It's proportionate to your normal earnings.
how is it going to enhance something you already do. it is like asking for extra points for killing another airplane.
semp
-
how is it going to enhance something you already do. it is like asking for extra points for killing another airplane.
semp
you ALREADY get a 1.25x bonus for "landing" belly or otherwise on pavement.. should that be taken away? after all, it's getting extra points for doing nothing.
how about, landing with landing gear gets you the full 1.25x bonus, landing without gear only gives ya 1.1x ?
-
.75
-
Belly landing is a ditch no matter where it occurs.
-
Belly landing is a ditch no matter where it occurs.
uh... no
-
The plane won't be upping for another sortie for a long time........if ever, after a belly landing.
Gamers gonna game.
-
you ALREADY get a 1.25x bonus for "landing" belly or otherwise on pavement.. should that be taken away? after all, it's getting extra points for doing nothing.
how about, landing with landing gear gets you the full 1.25x bonus, landing without gear only gives ya 1.1x ?
That's been the general idea of this thread all along. Sadly people misunderstood (or didn't read my original post) what I was getting at. The thought is - x1.25 sticks for whatever on pavement, x1.30 granted for wheels.
The plane won't be upping for another sortie for a long time........if ever, after a belly landing.
Gamers gonna game.
My point exactly. The airplanes shouldn't be used as disposable cups. They get put back in the dishwasher and used again (figuratively speaking).
-
you ALREADY get a 1.25x bonus for "landing" belly or otherwise on pavement.. should that be taken away? after all, it's getting extra points for doing nothing.
how about, landing with landing gear gets you the full 1.25x bonus, landing without gear only gives ya 1.1x ?
then you will take away the points from people who's landing gear was damaged in combat and they managed to limp back to base and belly land. I think they are the one's who deserve the 1.25x just for effort.
semp
-
Gamers gonna game.
This may come as a shock to some, but Aces High actually is a game. What's been suggested isn't any more "real" than the alternative. Did real World War II pilots receive perks when they landed with wheels down? Were they punished for returning home with perfectly legitimate plane damage? Spin it as a way to promote more realistic behavior, but this proposal attempts to do so within the confines of the game in a completely gamey and arbitrary way.
-
This may come as a shock to some, but Aces High actually is a game. What's been suggested isn't any more "real" than the alternative. Did real World War II pilots receive perks when they landed with wheels down? Were they punished for returning home with perfectly legitimate plane damage? Spin it as a way to promote more realistic behavior, but this proposal attempts to do so within the confines of the game in a completely gamey and arbitrary way.
I see your point, but if HTC has gone so far to model as perfect as possible the flight charcteristics of the aircraft then behaving as real of a pilot as possible should have its merits, imo. If that means being able to roll into the hanger then so be it.
-
I see your point, but if HTC has gone so far to model as perfect as possible the flight charcteristics of the aircraft then behaving as real of a pilot as possible should have its merits, imo. If that means being able to roll into the hanger then so be it.
So then any time a pilot 'dies' in game, he loses his ID other then to have it placed on a cartoon gravestone. All Perks and Points are lost. If he bails over enemy territory and gets to the ground alive he is placed in a cartoon POW compound for as long as the war goes on. Only when the war is won is he able to actually fly again. Oh and he loses all perks and points and must start at 0 as it's a new war.
Pilot's will be permanently assigned planes as to the need of the country they fly for. While they may have dreamed of being a fighter pilot, they may end up as a co-pilot in a 4 engine bomber, or flying dive bombers. Fighter pilots will be assigned to planes available which may not always include the latest and greatest. They may be forced to go into combat in a lesser bird then their 'enemies' for the sake of their country.....
You get the idea. If we're really going to do 'realism' then let there be a cost to it as well.
That being said, I can't get past that it's a game. :aok
-
You get the idea. If we're really going to do 'realism' then let there be a cost to it as well.
That being said, I can't get past that it's a game. :aok
It is, but its a flight simulator also.. approach and landing is a big part of flight sims. that's why I dont think this is one of those "selective realism" things that hitech has mentioned before.. He already rewards people for landing.. why not reward them for landing correctly?
-
Let the records show that I do not think you should get a ditch for landing no wheels. I simply think a small portion of the landed perk multiplier (what is it now 1.25?) should be a function of damage inflicted to your aircraft.
-
It is, but its a flight simulator also.. approach and landing is a big part of flight sims. that's why I dont think this is one of those "selective realism" things that hitech has mentioned before.. He already rewards people for landing.. why not reward them for landing correctly?
no its not even close to a "flight simulator" just because there are planes and they are modeled realistically and we fly them....its a COMBAT simulator..using WW2 tools.
period.... we are not reliving ww2......it is a GAME.....a game to simulate COMBAT that happened during WW2.
I don't understand why that is so difficult for people to grasp :headscratch:
-
why are you all landing??? who cares, you get a brand new plane anyway...
-
It is, but its a flight simulator also.. approach and landing is a big part of flight sims. that's why I dont think this is one of those "selective realism" things that hitech has mentioned before.. He already rewards people for landing.. why not reward them for landing correctly?
It still comes down to the same thing. If it's important to you, then go for it. How important can it be if folks need an incentive to do it? There is nothing stopping anyone from flying their cartoon airplane any way they want.
The problem with starting something like this would be where do you stop?
-
It still comes down to the same thing. If it's important to you, then go for it. How important can it be if folks need an incentive to do it? There is nothing stopping anyone from flying their cartoon airplane any way they want.
The problem with starting something like this would be where do you stop?
But you are dismissing all the incentive related things already in the game. An incentive is currently provided for returning to base and landing on the concrete. Incentive is provided for running troops. Incentive is provided even for ranking high (Front page scores). This would simply be an additional incentive, albeit small, that is being requested. Even though my request is slightly different than the OP I still do see where he is coming from.
-
It still comes down to the same thing. If it's important to you, then go for it. How important can it be if folks need an incentive to do it? There is nothing stopping anyone from flying their cartoon airplane any way they want.
The problem with starting something like this would be where do you stop?
my point is, it's already started, there already is the incentive. HTC put the 1.25x perk bonus for landing in the game for some purpose I presume (to encourage people to land?).. Some of us simply think there is a difference in landing and being able to take back off, and landing and destroying the plane, and the perk bonus could be tweaked to reflect that.
if people don't care or need to land thats cool, any of this wouldn't matter to them anyway..
-
I may have missed it, but why do you land gear up?
HiTech
-
I may have missed it, but why do you land gear up?
HiTech
it gets down and stops "faster" :bhead
and probably because they don't know how to avoid ground loops. :noid
-
I may have missed it, but why do you land gear up?
HiTech
Reasons:
1) Faster to get to stop and end out.
2) As easy as with gear.
3) Less chance of bouncing off runway and then crash landing off side of runway for ditch. Landing no gear and skidding to a stop pretty much ensures you will get a land.
I belly land my 262 every single time unless I am rearming. In fact, I put my gear down to create more drag, get the last flap out, raise my gear and belly land. Now if that isn't gamey I don't know what is. Provide me either an incentive to land with gear or a penalty for landing without my gear and I will gladly land the airplane the proper way.
-
Provide me either an incentive to land with gear or a penalty for landing without my gear and I will gladly land the airplane the proper way.
In the long run ... who gives a crap how you land? ... why would they need to give a crap how you land?
If you want to belly land all your 262s ... why would I give a crap and why would I need to give a crap how you land? ... it's no sweat off my cojones either way. Belly landing or landing with wheels in no way effects me or others.
-
In the long run ... who gives a crap how you land? ... why would they need to give a crap how you land?
If you want to belly land all your 262s ... why would I give a crap and why would I need to give a crap how you land? ... it's no sweat off my cojones either way. Belly landing or landing with wheels in no way effects me or others.
it's not about how people play/land/whatever, it's about trying to get extra free points for yourself for doing nothing extra. it cheapens the score horeders.
semp
-
In the long run ... who gives a crap how you land? ... why would they need to give a crap how you land?
If you want to belly land all your 262s ... why would I give a crap and why would I need to give a crap how you land? ... it's no sweat off my cojones either way. Belly landing or landing with wheels in no way effects me or others.
Just because you do not "give a crap" how I land does not validate why there should not be a game mechanic/incentive that puts focus on a proper and safe landing.
I've already explained my stance in logical detail on this so I'm not going to retype what I already have.
-
it's not about how people play/land/whatever, it's about trying to get extra free points for yourself for doing nothing extra. it cheapens the score horeders.
semp
LOL, you need to adjust your tin foil hat if you think that is what it is about.
-
In the long run ... who gives a crap how you land? ... why would they need to give a crap how you land?
In the interest of making a boring thread more lively, let me say, it is I, slapshot, who will beach a nice one for the landing. After all, if a nice landing is not worthy of, how you say, "giving the crap", then when am I to give it at all? Such an occasion is worth a royal expulsion and I am proud to fill the bowl to the brim. Perhaps I'll take a nice photo to share with my friends of Aces High. Here is what I made after this hairy landing, friends. Enjoy its heaping majesty and know that this means I care.
Kidding aside, it's just a style thing. I don't find it satisfying to land gear up a unless they're shot away. Crazy thing is, I have more trouble bouncing the 190 with it's wide track than landing the narrow 109. It's just practice, I think, and the higher landing speed of the FW.
I'm supporting Grizz on this. Let's incentivize good form, but only a little and where/when we can do so objectively.
-
I would probably land using gear if points were awarded for using them..... :noid
-
+1 for the OP and/or Grizz's version. For me, there is merit in landing the aircraft undamaged and wheels down. I simply like to land an aircraft as it's intended to be landed, gear down (including the skid on the Me163). I even like to rearm and re-sortie. Hell, I'll fly a L/H pattern sometimes too... I use my flaps as they "historically" were used on landing...and for some aircraft, taking off. Call me a purist...it's all related. I use the RPM to lower my fuel consumption so that I have more time on station (and when I've not enough fuel to get home at full power). Sure I'll belly land like so many others have said, when they're about to be vulched or if their gear is shot up. For my efforts and landing, I'd like the additional bonus (however small) that a "normal" aircraft landing would give. I wouldn't be disappointed if my plane absorbed damage during combat and I had forfeited that small bonus either...it's a win-win for me, I got my cartoon pilot home alive. I also think that if you land your otherwise undamaged aircraft, wheels down with a pilot wound, you should get that additional point percentage as well. Technically (as far as gameplay is concerned) it's a damaged plane but it's tough sometimes to land an otherwise undamaged aircraft with a pilot wound.
It's not about being penalized for not landing with your gear down but if you choose to look at it that way, that's your perogative (sp). The arguement about getting something for nothing is about POV as well, you either agree with it or you don't, there is no relavent arguement.
-
+1 for the OP and/or Grizz's version. For me, there is merit in landing the aircraft undamaged and wheels down. I simply like to land an aircraft as it's intended to be landed, gear down (including the skid on the Me163). I even like to rearm and re-sortie. Hell, I'll fly a L/H pattern sometimes too... I use my flaps as they "historically" were used on landing...and for some aircraft, taking off. Call me a purist...it's all related. I use the RPM to lower my fuel consumption so that I have more time on station (and when I've not enough fuel to get home at full power). Sure I'll belly land like so many others have said, when they're about to be vulched or if their gear is shot up. For my efforts and landing, I'd like the additional bonus (however small) that a "normal" aircraft landing would give. I wouldn't be disappointed if my plane absorbed damage during combat and I had forfeited that small bonus either...it's a win-win for me, I got my cartoon pilot home alive. I also think that if you land your otherwise undamaged aircraft, wheels down with a pilot wound, you should get that additional point percentage as well. Technically (as far as gameplay is concerned) it's a damaged plane but it's tough sometimes to land an otherwise undamaged aircraft with a pilot wound.
It's not about being penalized for not landing with your gear down but if you choose to look at it that way, that's your perogative (sp). The arguement about getting something for nothing is about POV as well, you either agree with it or you don't, there is no relavent arguement.
:ahand :aok
-
The solution is pretty simple.
Since most every single belly landing during the war occurred at or near stall speeds, then any plane bellying in a certain percentage over stall speed blows up.
It's much too fast as it is.
-
The solution is pretty simple.
Since most every single belly landing during the war occurred at or near stall speeds, then any plane bellying in a certain percentage over stall speed blows up.
It's much too fast as it is.
I assume you have some data to back that up, yes? ;)
-
Yeah....everybody who ditched did at the highest possible speed.
-
Yeah....everybody who ditched did at the highest possible speed.
According to who?
-
I believe that was sarcasm
-
We have landing gear on the planes ? :bhead
-
I may have missed it, but why do you land gear up?
HiTech
I wish we could hear more input from HiTech. I can't tell if that's HiTech appalled at people abusing the current system or if he feels nobody does this.
-
HiTech is waiting for the moment to light someone up. He's good at that. :uhoh
It does lead to great laughs though. :devil
:salute
-
When do we start really dying?
The beauty of it, is that you can provide as much cartoon realism or as little as you want in your imagination, cause nothing in this game is real other then the people sitting at their computers pretending.
If you need a perk or point motivation to look for that kind of motivation, I'd suggest you lack imagination.
Nobody needs a point or perk motivation for anything here and the only ones who lack imagination are the ones who dont, as DS pointed out, take the "ART AND SCIENCE" of of ww2 aviation seriously in AH just because it's a game and they are too lazy to do anything that takes more discipline than an xbox game.
-
This may come as a shock to some, but Aces High actually is a game. What's been suggested isn't any more "real" than the alternative. Did real World War II pilots receive perks when they landed with wheels down? Were they punished for returning home with perfectly legitimate plane damage?
This may come as a shock to some, but hitech actually knows that this is a game. And yet he still penalizes people by refusing to grant credit for kills unless a landing is made on the tarmac.
Spin it as a way to promote more realistic behavior, but this proposal attempts to do so within the confines of the game in a completely gamey and arbitrary way.
Good point :aok
Couldnt leave this out--> Did real ww2 pilots lose credit for a kill if they ditched their aircraft ANYWHERE? Including behind enemy lines? Where they punished for coming home with perfectly legitimate plane damage?
-
no its not even close to a "flight simulator" just because there are planes and they are modeled realistically and we fly them....its a COMBAT simulator..using WW2 tools.
period.... we are not reliving ww2......it is a GAME.....a game to simulate COMBAT that happened during WW2.
I don't understand why that is so difficult for people to grasp :headscratch:
You should take that dictionary of yours and get a refund, someones playing jokes with your definitions.
-
You should take that dictionary of yours and get a refund, someones playing jokes with your definitions.
really......explain to my ignorant self how AH is a "flight simulator" it's far from a simulator, it don't model engine damage due to overheating, it don't model all the intricacies of engine control.
just because YOU like to think of it as a "flight simulator" don't make it so....go play target ware....and then come back and explain to me the differences.....
AH is a COMBAT GAME using WW2 tools simple as that. :rolleyes:
-
I have to double post for this one.
It cheapens the efforts of everybody else in the game. That alone is a massive detriment. It further de-values the "value" of landing safely in the first place. It brings the game down 1 step closer to arcade XBOX levels.
So you say someone else taking the added time and effort (more effort than your "successful" sortie as a matter of fact) to wait for fuel and work his way back to base "cheapens" your timid yet successful flight.
And you punish player A with a perfectly legitimate reason for running out of fuel because player B...MIGHT try to game the game. (as if someone would consider waiting an extra 20 minutes for a fuel drop, a cheat) :rolleyes: OMFG that's brilliant.
but in this thread
What you suggest penalizes player A for player B's actions. Might as well roll a dice on landing and randomly remove points for no reason.
You cannot police thought patterns Grizz.
It's ok to cheapen the efforts of everyone else by landing wheels up in a perfectly good plane while others go to the effort to land properly.
:ahand
-
really......explain to my ignorant self how AH is a "flight simulator" it's far from a simulator, it don't model engine damage due to overheating, it don't model all the intricacies of engine control.
just because YOU like to think of it as a "flight simulator" don't make it so....go play target ware....and then come back and explain to me the differences.....
AH is a COMBAT GAME using WW2 tools simple as that. :rolleyes:
Just as you had trouble understanding the definition of "war" especially when the word was combined as "war game" when referring to AH, you also have trouble with the definition of the word simulation.
No simulation in the world models every possible intricacy, so who gave you the authority to determine where the line is drawn at what should be modeled in a simulation?
Go ahead, show me the definition of "flight simulator" that says modeling engine damage do to overheat is exclusive to any "real" flight simulator.
And I hate to repeat myself but if your delusion is correct, "I bet the Air Force is :bhead over that revelation."
-
Just as you had trouble understanding the definition of "war" especially when the word was combined as "war game" when referring to AH, you also have trouble with the definition of the word simulation.
No simulation in the world models every possible intricacy, so who gave you the authority to determine where the line is drawn at what should be modeled in a simulation?
Go ahead, show me the definition of "flight simulator" that says modeling engine damage do to overheat is exclusive to any "real" flight simulator.
And I hate to repeat myself but if your delusion is correct, "I bet the Air Force is :bhead over that revelation."
thats only one aspect of the modelling that AH does not do.. :rolleyes:..besides the owner himself you know the guy who made this GAME describes it as a game and not a simulator...and NOT a WW2 game, but a GAME using Ww2 tools.
for someone who is so smart your pretty ignorant.
-
thats only one aspect of the modelling that AH does not do.. :rolleyes:..besides the owner himself you know the guy who made this GAME describes it as a game and not a simulator...and NOT a WW2 game, but a GAME using Ww2 tools.
for someone who is so smart your pretty ignorant.
And yet the AH homepage still says "...a war rages..."
-
And yet the AH homepage still says "...a war rages..."
a "war" to promote ......wait for it........
COMBAT
-
It occurred to me that while on most occasions my landings are in small pieces, when I do return semi intact I tend to put the gear down. Yet I know that if I up at a close to, or capped base, race into the fight, get shot to pieces but somehow still stay in the air, I'll belly land it every time just to not let some guy vulching the base get a vulch kill. I like to imagine that I'm running screaming from the plane looking for a bomb crater to dive in under those circumstances.
Seems like a reasonable reason to not put the gear down. Maybe I should get points for not getting vulched and surviving? :)
-
Maybe I should get points for not getting vulched and surviving? :)
You dew. It's called 1.25x landing bonus. Part of that bonus should be reflective of the scrap metal you bring back to base though. There shouldn't be as much bonus if you bring back a wingless upside down P38. ;)
-
I don't think this guy was worried about points. Saw this picture years ago. Only this week learned the name of the pilot. Always amazed me to think he walked away.
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/landing-1.jpg)
-
I don't think this guy was worried about points. Saw this picture years ago. Only this week learned the name of the pilot. Always amazed me to think he walked away.
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/landing-1.jpg)
Well if we only had one life in the game then I'd say yes surviving is the only bonus needed, but.... :)
-
I'm pretty sure he was unhappy with everything else but the fact that he survived.
-
I'm pretty sure he was unhappy with everything else but the fact that he survived.
:lol
And I assume he crash landed in US Occupied territory otherwise he'd have another reason to be very unhappy.
-
He really does look unhappy in that picture but I'll bet he looked a lot happier that evening having a drink with his buddies.
-
Never seen that pic before. Once the shock wears off, I'd expect him to be in a pretty good mood.
Corky- That is not an example of proper landing procedure, just FYI.
Wiley.
-
a "war" to promote ......wait for it........
COMBAT
What took you so long? All I wanted to hear is you agree it is a war. (simulated of course, right buuuuuuuuuuddy?)
And of course it promotes combat, all the best wars do.
In the future, please don't use big words. I have to go look them up.
-
Wait, I'm confused... why would someone ditch on the runway if their undercarriage is undamaged? Does it look cool or something?
-
Wait, I'm confused... why would someone ditch on the runway if their undercarriage is undamaged? Does it look cool or something?
It's been explained already. You are late to the party!
-
No, I just was too lazy to read the whole freaking thread.
-
No, I just was too lazy to read the whole freaking thread.
In the dark remain then you shall.
-
What took you so long? All I wanted to hear is you agree it is a war. (simulated of course, right buuuuuuuuuuddy?)
And of course it promotes combat, all the best wars do.
In the future, please don't use big words. I have to go look them up.
:rofl :rofl
you made me :rofl
"dont use big words....."
:rofl
that was good :aok
-
Never seen that pic before. Once the shock wears off...
And he cleans the brown lumps out of his flight suit...
-
Wait, I'm confused... why would someone ditch on the runway if their undercarriage is undamaged? Does it look cool or something?
Not sure why they won't land but they sure complain about flight model accuracy.
-
I remember seeing a wish for this a little while ago, regarding sparks flying as his metal grinds against the runway because he has taken damage to his landing gear.
My vote is yes. For that, anyways.
As to the OP of this thread, I vote absolutely.
-
Not only should we add a small fraction to the perk multiplier for wheels down, we should make those perks exchangeable for a universal firepower variant. We could borrow it from Doom and call it the BFG-9000. That, and I'd like a special "zero grav" power up that I can buy when I'm in midflight with some kind of keystroke or cockpit pick. It'd be good to have a whole series of these kind of power-ups, like, for example, "invisible ac, shoot around corners, designatable missile, smokescreen cloud, etc."
What?
haaaw, haaaw...
-
Another non-lander speaks?
-
Nah. I land -and, as I said earlier, am in favor of making it a perkable offense. I just think we should reward good form, to the extent we can do so objectively. The question of wheels up or down is one such objective metric.
Occasionally, during FSO, the squaddies and I have actually done rollouts from the hangar, taxiing all the way to the take-off like ducks in a row. It makes things so much more fun and colorful, imj. Those who play it like Doom will never know...
-
I agree.
I should probably do some testing to find out the time differences between wheels down and wheels up landings.
Does anybody know the maximum speed you can land gear up on the runway and survive?
-
I agree.
I should probably do some testing to find out the time differences between wheels down and wheels up landings.
Does anybody know the maximum speed you can land gear up on the runway and survive?
Not sure. I remember back in AW3 it was very difficult to land without a gear, especially in the P38. You had to touch down just at the right angle at a very slow speed, otherwise it was instant death. Now, I don't think it should be that drastic in Aces High but there should either be one of the following things done or a combination:
1) Require a slower speed and reduced angle of decent to properly land without gear
2) Reduce points as reflection of accrued damage to landed aircraft in the landed bonus multiplier.
Oh and another huge reason why it makes more sense to land without a gear if there is no demerit: You don't have to worry about rolling off the end of the runway! Or the carrier for that matter, or being slingshot off the end of the carrier. Why use a tail hook on a carrier plane and risk death when you can just belly flop it right on the deck and be stopped in one second?
Again, in the current game, it makes the most sense to land without a landing gear, which imo, is not in the spirit of reproducing the art of WW2 aviation.
-
Let the records show that I do not think you should get a ditch for landing no wheels. I simply think a small portion of the landed perk multiplier (what is it now 1.25?) should be a function of damage inflicted to your aircraft.
I too would have some sympathy with this view.... the counter arguement will be that such stuff promotes timid flying with a reluctance to enter combat unless the odds are securely stacked in the average AH pilits favour with a subsequent degradation in game play.
However even given the above counter arguement I think that landing an undamaged ac should incurr some sort of bonus.............
-
Does anybody know the maximum speed you can land gear up on the runway and survive?
No exact information, but I've found it's around 170mph.
-
The whole "landed successfully" needs revamping when you land on the wheels and end flight in the center of the field with one wheel slightly off the concrete and you are credited a ditch....yet someone lands gear up and get's credited a landing.
A ditch on the runway is still a ditch and a landing within the airfield with your plane undamaged is a landing.
-
No exact information, but I've found it's around 170mph.
i have landed as high as 200 but made the tail scrape the runway first to slow me down but that was unusual as it will kill you most of the time. around 170 is more like it as long as your nose is up and tail touches ground first. in ponyd you from the time it touches runway to the time you are back in a brand new plane it takes about 5 seconds.
semp
-
I like to do wheel landings if I can, because they look purdy
-
In the old days you could land wheels up at any speed. HTC changed it to 150 mph at one point and I believe thats where it still is set.
ANY landing fully ON the concrete is a successful landing. One wheel off and its a ditch.
Personally I've always played the game as a cartoon pilot flying in a war (and I use that term VERY loosely). So to that end, I try to land with my wheels down on the runway. I try to fight my way into the battle area, accomplish my mission, and return fighting my way out. All that fighting with my limited skill doesn't leave open too many chances at landing, but I do ty to do them right when I get the chance.
To me, when you land a plane, its with wheels down. In the case of the game I'd be happy to see those that land ON the concrete with wheels up get a ditch only because they didn't do it right, instead of giving a bonus to those that do it right. If you land short of the runway because you ran out of fuel, you get a ditch. The mistake you made was not saving enough fuel to land. The same should go with wheels up landing.
-
i have landed as high as 200 but made the tail scrape the runway first to slow me down but that was unusual as it will kill you most of the time. around 170 is more like it as long as your nose is up and tail touches ground first. in ponyd you from the time it touches runway to the time you are back in a brand new plane it takes about 5 seconds.
semp
Gear snaps at 200, doesn't it?
-
LOL.....I just did my second gear up landing in aces high....ever.
I had a couple of kills and tried to barnstorm both fighter hangers on the same pass and hit the prop. so I lowered the gear and it snapped off right away.
After landing someone mentioned this thread on country channel.
-
Gear snaps at 200, doesn't it?
Snaps at 375+ for the F4U :D
-
Snaps at 400+ for the F4U :D
fixed.
-
I really do not like the idea of getting a ditch for a wheels up landing, what if my gear gets shot off? I agree with everyone that it is "gaming" the game, but I do not see how this will improve gameplay in any way.
-
Well, if your gear is damaged, and you land on the runway, call it successful. If it is intact, and you land wheels up, call it a ditch.
Fixed.
-
That was the original intent to a degree.
Same idea, but even wheels up with no damage was still a landing but in the original plan if you landed wheels down you got a minor bonus in perkies.
-
Well, if your gear is damaged, and you land on the runway, call it successful. If it is intact, and you land wheels up, call it a ditch.
Fixed.
Not really fixed, how does this really even affect gameplay? Gears up or down doesnt make it easier/harder to land
-
Not really fixed, how does this really even affect gameplay? Gears up or down doesnt make it easier/harder to land
That's not what I'm saying. What I'm trying to say is that if you can land with all wheels touching the ground, and you do, it should be called a "Successful landing."
Or, if you have your gear damaged, and you manage to land on the runway, it ought to count as a successful runway, because you have amazing skill. But maybe put a damage limit % on your plane or something.
On the other hand, if they are intact, and you "ditch" Wheels up, it should be called a "ditch."
Any clearer?
-
If you ditch on the runway, it's still a ditch.
-
Gear snaps at 200, doesn't it?
what gear? you dont need it to land.
semp
-
Land on the runway with gear up or shot away: "You have crash-landed successfully"
Land on the runway with gear down: "You have landed successfully"
Best