Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Pand on December 27, 2011, 01:22:28 PM
-
Would like to see a rearm pad for aircraft at a vehicle base.
- Fuel and Ammo bunkers on field have no impact on vehicles, so maybe they could store aircraft fuel/ammo/ord and give people a reason to pork them.
Please discuss.
-
Would like to see a rearm pad for aircraft at a vehicle base.
- Fuel and Ammo bunkers on field have no impact on vehicles, so maybe they could store aircraft fuel/ammo/ord and give people a reason to pork them.
Please discuss.
so we would obviously need to add a runway while we're at it. maybe some hangars too?
-
No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, and NO! :bhead
-
Well the Ord does affect PT boats (torps) and M4(75) (Rockets) to name a few.
shdo
-
Well the Ord does affect PT boats (torps) and M4(75) (Rockets) to name a few.
shdo
Didn't know that shdo, thanks!
-
nope just a pad will do.
-
not a bad idea
-
Bad idea in my book.
-
Ground bases don't usually have a stock of bombs or aviation gas on hand as bombs are too heavy to throw by hand.
wrongway
-
Bad idea in my book.
And here's some reasons why... ;)
Vehicles would "sit" on the rearm pad essentially meaning only a 1shot kill would ever destroy them.
It would encourage more bombing of GV's
It certainly wouldn't make sense from a "realism" standpoint, theres no airstrip!
-
Ground bases don't usually have a stock of bombs or aviation gas on hand as bombs are too heavy to throw by hand.
wrongway
Chuck Norris would disagree :D
-
Ord bunkers at a vbase effect the M4 Calliope, the SdKfz 251, and PT boats. No ord bunkers = no rockets or torps.
This is EXACTLY where HTC could code things a bit further and stair step the ord bunker effects.
-
The problem with ORDs is that the supposedly hardened concrete bunkers can be strafed down by a c202.
-
Would like to see a rearm pad for aircraft at a vehicle base.
- Fuel and Ammo bunkers on field have no impact on vehicles, so maybe they could store aircraft fuel/ammo/ord and give people a reason to pork them.
Please discuss.
+1
-
With the addition of the new air craft to the v bases a rearm pad seams logical to me. +1
-
Absolutely not. Vehicle bases are not airfields and they would not stock supplies for aircraft.
-
so we would obviously need to add a runway while we're at it. maybe some hangars too?
Aircraft take off from GV style bases in the AvA all the time.
Maybe use the Vbases as more of an emergency landing station. A/C cant take off, but if we're low on fuel or something, we can do a quick land to refuel and be on our way.
-
No to the wish.
A pad for a vehicle, maybe, but never for an a/c. "How would you prevent the a/c from using the pad?"; Simple, put a building over it that's only big enough for gv's to go through or clump some trees around it.
-
For the love of all things Holy... I sincerely hope that HTC wont even consider putting re-arm pads on v-bases for aircraft or gv's. There are so many reasons not to do it that it should be so obvious as to why.
Do you really think the USAAF would have put aircraft fuel and ordnance any other place than a legit airfield? Seriously?
Some ideas go way too far on the gamey side of things, this is one of them.
-
+1 We are about to get a small spotter aircraft that will be posted to the V bases, and a tank can re-arm on the pads at a air base, so why not have a re-arm pad at the V bases also. It can be used by the tanks to re arm when defending instead of relying on V supplies, and we don't need a runway or hanger, it would be there for the tanks use, and for emergency use by aircraft. After all, when we get the Storch posted to the V bases, they will need a place to land and refuel and rearm too. I always thought that we needed a rearm pad at V bases and ports for this reason. So, I say... +1
-
+1 We are about to get a small spotter aircraft that will be posted to the V bases, and a tank can re-arm on the pads at a air base, so why not have a re-arm pad at the V bases also. It can be used by the tanks to re arm when defending instead of relying on V supplies, and we don't need a runway or hanger, it would be there for the tanks use, and for emergency use by aircraft. After all, when we get the Storch posted to the V bases, they will need a place to land and refuel and rearm too. I always thought that we needed a rearm pad at V bases and ports for this reason. So, I say... +1
Re-arm the Storch??? You really think it is going to need to be re-armed or refueled??? Keep in mind it has 25 smoke grenades, 2 gv supplies boxes, and %25 fuel gives it 20 mins in the air. It has no offensive capability, only a single 8mm MG for rear/dorsal defense, and that is for wishful thinking mostly.
No, no, no, no, no, no, and NO.
-
Why would a vehicle base stock high octane aviation fuel, ammo and ordnance?
I bet the Storch didn't need high octane aviation fuel.
-
Why would a vehicle base stock high octane aviation fuel, ammo and ordnance?
I bet the Storch didn't need high octane aviation fuel.
Why can a vehicle get it's turret or engine repaired instantaneously with a box of supplies? To make it fun!
-
Vehicles would "sit" on the rearm pad essentially meaning only a 1shot kill would ever destroy them.
Vehicle supplies, dropped by other players, do fix damage; rearm pads do not fix damage for planes or GVs.
(Not that I think the OPs idea is good; vehicle bases aren't going to stock aircraft supplies.)
-
Why can a vehicle get it's turret or engine repaired instantaneously with a box of supplies? To make it fun!
Actually I suspect that has more to do with the travel time for GVs to get into combat on offensive operations than anything else.
-
Besides the fact that you don't think GV bases had ac rearm capability fuel amo etc. Why are you guys against it besides that? Its kind of challenging to land at a gv base. If your worried about people bombing rearming and bombing gvs again then make it a fuel only rearm pad :cool:
-
Besides the fact that you don't think GV bases had ac rearm capability fuel amo etc. Why are you guys against it besides that? Its kind of challenging to land at a gv base. If your worried about people bombing rearming and bombing gvs again then make it a fuel only rearm pad :cool:
I'd be ok with fuel and guns, not necessarily ordinance.
-
How about a rearm pad on the CV at ports?
It would take considerable skill to use it and the difficulty would ensure it wouldn't be abused in ways that would affect gameplay in a negative fashion.
-
How about a rearm pad on the CV at ports?
It would take considerable skill to use it and the difficulty would ensure it wouldn't be abused in ways that would affect gameplay in a negative fashion.
They would definitely have the ordinance available at the port.
-
plus one for this idea :aok
-
cause i am tired of being able to land at gv bases but nothing else, (this is when i am in a plane of course) :lol
-
slam me if you want...there should not be a rearm pad on v-bases.........
-
cause i am tired of being able to land at gv bases but nothing else, (this is when i am in a plane of course) :lol
If I had my way, we'd not be able to land aircraft at V-bases and get "credit" for it, it'd be a ditch always. just sayin'
-
I understand the argument for rearm on v-bases for aircraft, there are fuel dumps and ord bunkers right, fuel and guns sounds like a reasonable idea.
-
How about a rearm pad on the CV at ports?
It would take considerable skill to use it and the difficulty would ensure it wouldn't be abused in ways that would affect gameplay in a negative fashion.
Try landing on that carrier sometime and see what happens.
-
Try landing on that carrier sometime and see what happens.
Duh.......the purpose of placing it on the CV is to limit a possible negative affect of an airplane spawn at the ports by limiting the planeset to aircraft that can land and take back off.
This way you don't have C-hogs streaming off the deck any time the base starts flashing.
-
Duh.......the purpose of placing it on the CV is to limit a possible negative affect of an airplane spawn at the ports by limiting the planeset to aircraft that can land and take back off.
This way you don't have C-hogs streaming off the deck any time the base starts flashing.
I have rearmed and re-upped on a CV in all types of German a/c, none of which could ever spawn from the CV...
-
I have rearmed and re-upped on a CV in all types of German a/c, none of which could ever spawn from the CV...
No try landing on the carrier that's docked at the port. It has no arresting wires.
-
I don't agree that vbases should have re-arm pads for aircraft based on the argument that they will soon be able to launch the Storch. I'm guessing the Storch had a fuel burn rate somewhere in the ball park of 9 gal/hour, with a capacity of 30-40 gal useable? (I'm basing that guess off light aircraft that I am familiar with). There is a huge difference between refueling and equipping a high performance aircraft that would hold hundreds of gallons of high octane Avgas, and a low performance utility plane like the storch.
-
No, aircraft should not be able to rearm/refuel at vbases. They also should not be able to land successfully at vbases.
-
No, aircraft should not be able to rearm/refuel at vbases. They also should not be able to land successfully at vbases.
I disagree with the landing part.
-
I disagree with the landing part.
Do you think a P47 would have landed at a vehicle depot in WWII if there was an airbase 25 miles away, even if it had plenty of fuel, even if there was no emergency? No, it didnt. Aircraft did not land at a ground unit base of operations unless there were provisions already there UNLESS there was a dire emergency (sever injury, busted up plane, etc). Even then, it was an act of God to get that aircraft back in the air if it made it down safely. The Storch is/was the only aircraft in AH's lineup that truly followed the infantry wherever they went on the ground, it didnt really need a prepped runway. If the Storch was not flown in, the wings were folded and it was hauled in via truck.
-
Do you think a P47 would have landed at a vehicle depot in WWII if there was an airbase 25 miles away, even if it had plenty of fuel, even if there was no emergency? No, it didnt. Aircraft did not land at a ground unit base of operations unless there were provisions already there UNLESS there was a dire emergency (sever injury, busted up plane, etc). Even then, it was an act of God to get that aircraft back in the air if it made it down safely. The Storch is/was the only aircraft in AH's lineup that truly followed the infantry wherever they went on the ground, it didnt really need a prepped runway. If the Storch was not flown in, the wings were folded and it was hauled in via truck.
Planes have always been easier to replace than pilots. If you land on friendly concrete at a friendly base, it makes sense to me that you would consider that a landing.
-
No try landing on the carrier that's docked at the port. It has no arresting wires.
So... with regard to my post that you quoted and responded to
I have rearmed and re-upped on a CV in all types of German a/c, none of which could ever spawn from the CV...
Please refresh my memory of which plane in the German stable would be affected by the presence or absence of these arresting wires?
-
Planes have always been easier to replace than pilots. If you land on friendly concrete at a friendly base, it makes sense to me that you would consider that a landing.
Hence my stance that sure, you can land at a v-base... but not earn the points for doing so. You'd get a ditch under my proposal.
-
So... with regard to my post that you quoted and responded to
Please refresh my memory of which plane in the German stable would be affected by the presence or absence of these arresting wires?
And a total lack of forward motion on the boat. I've tried landing Navy planes on it with the hook out, the plane lands on the deck but doesn't really slow down.
-
German planes do not have a hook.
-
German planes do not have a hook.
Stop arguing and try it. You will crash. I'm talking about the parked carriers at the ports, not the moving carriers that you land on successfully and take off from again after rearming.
-
-1
Its a Vehicle Base.... NOT a small airfield..
-
Stop arguing and try it. You will crash. I'm talking about the parked carriers at the ports, not the moving carriers that you land on successfully and take off from again after rearming.
Incentive to add proper landings and ground handling to one's skillset.
I covered the stationary CV rearm/spawn in this thread.
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,326181.0.html