Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: USAF2010 on January 08, 2012, 07:44:01 PM
-
Today, unfortunately I was flying a 262, took severe amounts of fire and lost both my engines, pilot wound, fuel, etc. The aircraft was still controllable, just dead stick and bouts of passing in and out. I was able to make a friendly field, and land, but I blacked out upon touchdown and ended up stopping in the grass next to the runway..... 109 perks lost for returning the plane to the field.
My wish is to make so that severely damaged aircraft will not get a ditch so long as they land within the airfield perimeter.
Fire away gents, I know the topic of ditching on the field has come up many times before <S> :salute
-
That was a close one, but the line has to be drawn somewhere.
-
I to believe there should be just a little bit of leeway when it comes to landing on "concrete" as a lot of player make it back to the field limping with planes missing half a wing or passing out every 2-4 seconds. Now, I can see if your plane ends up in the middle of the field between runways getting a ditch, but I cant even count how many times I have returned from a helluva fight blacking out, touched down on concrete, blacked out, and rolled off to where 3/4 of my fuselage is onm the grass and my tail is over the concrete and I get a ditch. Maybe a 10 ft (obviously to the dimensions of whatever HTC uses to judge distance) buffer on each side of the runway could be initiated because you still did land "safely" and to get a ditch in that situation is just hard to swallow for anybody.
-
maybe belly land next time
-
I to believe there should be just a little bit of leeway when it comes to landing on "concrete" as a lot of player make it back to the field limping with planes missing half a wing or passing out every 2-4 seconds. Now, I can see if your plane ends up in the middle of the field between runways getting a ditch, but I cant even count how many times I have returned from a helluva fight blacking out, touched down on concrete, blacked out, and rolled off to where 3/4 of my fuselage is onm the grass and my tail is over the concrete and I get a ditch. Maybe a 10 ft (obviously to the dimensions of whatever HTC uses to judge distance) buffer on each side of the runway could be initiated because you still did land "safely" and to get a ditch in that situation is just hard to swallow for anybody.
He did make a decision to the actual distance, it's the edge of the runway. Today you ask him to move it out 10 feet, tomorrow the next guys that slides a 262 off the edge of the runway and gets a ditch will ask for another 5 feet.
You got a ditch, practice. Next time fly better and you'll get the little reward of a "landed safely" message. Good Luck!
-
:noid :noid :noid Im Naked! :old: :noid :noid
-
He did make a decision to the actual distance, it's the edge of the runway. Today you ask him to move it out 10 feet, tomorrow the next guys that slides a 262 off the edge of the runway and gets a ditch will ask for another 5 feet.
You got a ditch, practice. Next time fly better and you'll get the little reward of a "landed safely" message. Good Luck!
Easy killer.
I've practiced quite a bit and I'm not trying to turn this into a crazy deboggle here. All I'm saying is add a consideration for seriously damaged aircraft... not talking about your typical landing here.
-
He did make a decision to the actual distance, it's the edge of the runway. Today you ask him to move it out 10 feet, tomorrow the next guys that slides a 262 off the edge of the runway and gets a ditch will ask for another 5 feet.
You got a ditch, practice. Next time fly better and you'll get the little reward of a "landed safely" message. Good Luck!
Poppy-cock. He got the airplane back on the field -- it should be counted as a landing. Anything inside the perimeter of the field should count if you survive the landing.
If we're going to be that strict then get some sticky grass so guys can't takeoff out of the hangar across the grass, or not maintain directional control on takeoff and go willy-nilly across the field until yanking it into the air. Guys routinely land gear up and get credit for a landing.
-
All I'm saying is add a consideration for seriously damaged aircraft... not talking about your typical landing here.
Both sides of this issue are equally valid. As noted, an arbitrary line has to be drawn and that has been done. You don't have to LIKE it, but it's reasonable, rational, and deserving of respect. There -IS- already consideration given to seriously damaged aircraft ... keep it on the runway and it doesn't matter HOW BADLY DAMAGED it is, you get full points (and retain your perkies).
There are always going to be cases of "missed it by THAT much" ... If you think the present system is inadequate, I'd suggest adding a RTB reward, that would apply to EVERY case in which the PILOT makes it back into the base perimeter, be it in a plane, a chute, or walking. Having a trained pilot live to fight another day has value.
:)
-
Both sides of this issue are equally valid. As noted, an arbitrary line has to be drawn and that has been done. You don't have to LIKE it, but it's reasonable, rational, and deserving of respect. There -IS- already consideration given to seriously damaged aircraft ... keep it on the runway and it doesn't matter HOW BADLY DAMAGED it is, you get full points (and retain your perkies).
There are always going to be cases of "missed it by THAT much" ... If you think the present system is inadequate, I'd suggest adding a RTB reward, that would apply to EVERY case in which the PILOT makes it back into the base perimeter, be it in a plane, a chute, or walking. Having a trained pilot live to fight another day has value.
:)
YES.
-
If you walk away from it, it is a landing. Unless you hit a tree or something stupid like that. :devil
-
Both sides of this issue are equally valid. As noted, an arbitrary line has to be drawn and that has been done. You don't have to LIKE it, but it's reasonable, rational, and deserving of respect. There -IS- already consideration given to seriously damaged aircraft ... keep it on the runway and it doesn't matter HOW BADLY DAMAGED it is, you get full points (and retain your perkies).
There are always going to be cases of "missed it by THAT much" ... If you think the present system is inadequate, I'd suggest adding a RTB reward, that would apply to EVERY case in which the PILOT makes it back into the base perimeter, be it in a plane, a chute, or walking. Having a trained pilot live to fight another day has value.
:)
I like this one :aok
----------------------------------------------------
OR they could add lines to the line they've allready drawn.. Say, 5 lines starting from the concrete and 5ft apart out over the grass?
Like:
-0: You have landed successfully :rock (100% reward) :banana:
-1: You landed, not too successfully but still.. :eek: (80% reward)
-2: You made it, barely! :huh (60% reward)
-3: You have ditched your prop in the dirt, but your tail is fine :ahand :aok (40% reward)
-4: You could do better! :furious (20% reward)
-5: You have SO DITCHED!! Back to the trainer!!! :bhead (Locked to Training Arena for 2 days) :noid
-
EVERY case in which the PILOT makes it back into the base perimeter, be it in a plane, a chute, or walking. Having a trained pilot live to fight another day has value.
:)
Right now you can walk from a "You have been captured" to a "You have bailed successfully".
:aok
wrongway
-
Right now you can walk from a "You have been captured" to a "You have bailed successfully". wrongway
Ahhhh ! The GREAT Escape, starring wrongway as Steve McQueen !!!
:cool:
-
Since so many fields in WW2 were grass, I wished long time ago that
on field area- successful landing. But nooooooo. Not happening I guess
:cheers: Oz
-
Simple thought....in real life if you have a dual flame-out and are wounded yet manage to get the airplane back to the field intact you will be awarded a DFC even if you roll off the paved portion.
-
I don't think having one wheel off the runway should award you the same ditch that someone who bombed HQ and water ditched his bombers rather than return home.
There needs to be some incentive to return home and there is none currently.
-
There needs to be some incentive to return home and there is none currently.
There is, but you need to demonstrate a modicum of skill and land on the runway to qualify for it. Sometimes due to damage inflicted by the enemy this doesn't happen, but whether the enemy blows your wing off then and there or it is damage that takes its toll later, that is just the way it goes.
-
There is, but you need to demonstrate a modicum of skill and land on the runway to qualify for it. Sometimes due to damage inflicted by the enemy this doesn't happen, but whether the enemy blows your wing off then and there or it is damage that takes its toll later, that is just the way it goes.
The added points are ridiculously negligible.
I bombed 1 VH, 1 BH, and shot down 1 enemy fighter in a B-17. I then pushed the nose over, hit 400 mph, the wings came off, bailed, and got a "Host: You have bailed Successfully."
Last sortie: 4.5
I did the same thing, but landed the bird (all 3 of them) and got a "Host: You have landed Successfully."
Last sortie: 5.12
EVEN THOUGH both drones came back. I was only leaking fuel, too. I also think maybe a small bonus for landing 3 drones, too.
-
The added points are ridiculously negligible.
I bombed 1 VH, 1 BH, and shot down 1 enemy fighter in a B-17. I then pushed the nose over, hit 400 mph, the wings came off, bailed, and got a "Host: You have bailed Successfully."
Last sortie: 4.5
I did the same thing, but landed the bird (all 3 of them) and got a "Host: You have landed Successfully."
Last sortie: 5.12
EVEN THOUGH both drones came back. I was only leaking fuel, too. I also think maybe a small bonus for landing 3 drones, too.
A 25% bonus is negligible? Ok, if you say so.
-
It's closer to 16/18%...
-
I bombed 1 VH, 1 BH, and shot down 1 enemy fighter in a B-17. I then pushed the nose over, hit 400 mph, the wings came off, bailed, and got a "Host: You have bailed Successfully." Last sortie: 4.5
I did the same thing, but landed the bird (all 3 of them) and got a "Host: You have landed Successfully." Last sortie: 5.12
I think a Successfull Bail is supposed to be 50% ??? Does that apply to Perks too? AND, I think? you have to keep in mind that Perks are computed with an ENY adjustment ... so they will VARY depending on the odds ...
I've gotten 6.0 perks before for de-acking 4 guns and RTB in a 38 (MWA).
:huh
-
It's closer to 16/18%...
It is exactly 25%. You get 100% of the perks you earned if you fail to "land successfully". If you land successfully you get 125% of the perks you earned.
-
It is exactly 25%. You get 100% of the perks you earned if you fail to "land successfully". If you land successfully you get 125% of the perks you earned.
...I didn't know that. Thanks :)
-
All in All...I think it is stupid that you have to be on the pavement at your own base to land your kills successfully. If I crash land or just land anywhere inside the base perimeter, I think we should get a 'successful landing'. I do believe that during WW2, or any war for that matter, that if you were shot up and flew back to friendly lines and made it back to your home base, it was a successful flight. I know alot will b*tch about this, but, i just hate the fact that if i have one wheel off the pavement on my landing, or slid off runway on crash landing, i lose out on perks and performance rating. IMHO
-
what perimeter?
edit:
any plane that cant taxi back to its hangar needs to be recovered. getting a succesful landing on the runway in AH is a concession that saves you the bother/time of taxiing. last night I lost a gear in a jet and had to slide it in. got a landed message and didnt lose 250ish perks, despite my airframe being written off. we already have it easy I reckon.
-
Today, unfortunately I was flying a 262, took severe amounts of fire and lost both my engines, pilot wound, fuel, etc. The aircraft was still controllable, just dead stick and bouts of passing in and out. I was able to make a friendly field, and land, but I blacked out upon touchdown and ended up stopping in the grass next to the runway..... 109 perks lost for returning the plane to the field.
My wish is to make so that severely damaged aircraft will not get a ditch so long as they land within the airfield perimeter.
Fire away gents, I know the topic of ditching on the field has come up many times before <S> :salute
You were lucky you got a ditch. The 262 requires a long concrete runway. You landed in the grass and survived.
-
Hmm, a lot of very good points made here, so perhaps this leading to another wish....
How about a tug/recovery vehicle that can be spawned on the field to help moved damaged aircraft back to the pavement? Nothing worth gaining points from, but will make you a very welcomed wingman, especially in the case where I had a dead 262 (gear still intact though) only 15-20 ft max from the pavement.
This could even be a simple fix by allowing the Jeep to be able to push a/c, but only if the a/c hits an "accept tug" or w/e type pop-up message.
-
Both sides of this issue are equally valid. As noted, an arbitrary line has to be drawn and that has been done. You don't have to LIKE it, but it's reasonable, rational, and deserving of respect. There -IS- already consideration given to seriously damaged aircraft ... keep it on the runway and it doesn't matter HOW BADLY DAMAGED it is, you get full points (and retain your perkies).
There are always going to be cases of "missed it by THAT much" ... If you think the present system is inadequate, I'd suggest adding a RTB reward, that would apply to EVERY case in which the PILOT makes it back into the base perimeter, be it in a plane, a chute, or walking. Having a trained pilot live to fight another day has value.
:)
That would be a great compromiise to a buffer...and I dont know who crapped in your cheerios Fugitive, but easy man...I think a little buffer would be fine for all parties involved because as I said in my post, if 3/4 of your plane are off and the tailwheel and tail are on technically u landed it on concrete rtight? If a guy lands it and his AC is sitting completely off the runway then he wasnt tha close and therefore its a ditch
-
Many planes in WWII, when faced with landing damaged, chose to land on the grass alongside the runways.
-
Many planes in WWII, when faced with landing damaged, chose to land on the grass alongside the runways.
Since the only score involved was their only life and they didn't care about perk points or their name in lights, they were more than happy to crash land in such a manner.
i just hate the fact that if i have one wheel off the pavement on my landing, or slid off runway on crash landing, i lose out on perks and performance rating. IMHO
I don't think having one wheel off the runway should award you the same ditch that someone who bombed HQ and water ditched his bombers rather than return home.
This was a "successful landing":
(http://img70.imageshack.us/img70/8393/closeenough.jpg)
So much for the "one wheel off the pavement/airplane barely off" = ditch theory.
Maybe the other wing is back on the pavement somewhere.....
wrongway
-
only thing wrong i see with that pic is the shadow that landing gear makes :rofl :rofl.
semp
-
Many planes in WWII, when faced with landing damaged, chose to land on the grass alongside the runways.
If they did they were making a mistake unless they just wanted to keep the runway clear, don't land wheels up on grass your more likely to dig in stop short and die.
When I first started this game I would land and then pull off the runway, could not understand why I kept getting the You have Ditched message.
I know its a game and has to have compromises but I think it would be nice if: when you landed with your gear intact that would count as landing, when you break it off its a ditch, if you land it in your territory its better then landing in their territory, if you land at your field its best. I'm sure somebody out there knows but I'm pretty sure most wwII AC could operate from grass. I was under the impression (from movies I'll admit) that during the BOB spits and hurricanes operated from grass fields. I don't know if it holds true for warbirds but little taildraggers like grass better then concrete which irritates and makes them want to ground loop.
I also wish that when I lowered my landing gear to surrender they wouldn't just shoot me down. Inhumane sonsabishes.
-
don't land wheels up on grass your more likely to dig in stop short and die.
True. Ditching on the grass thing was more of a fire prevention concept (no sparks) when there was fuel in the tanks or leaking due to enemy action.
When I first started this game I would land and then pull off the runway, could not understand why I kept getting the You have Ditched message.
Me too! Concrete was to taxi on ...
I'm pretty sure most wwII AC could operate from grass. I was under the impression (from movies I'll admit) that during the BOB spits and hurricanes operated from grass fields.
Spits and Hurris Did... they sometimes had to dodge the local sheep. ME 109s did too, in france, after it fell. BUT - those were the light weights, heavier figters and bombers needed BETTER runways than the soggy english pastures. The Sea-Bees developed some fascinating techniques for putting down hard surface runways in a hurry, landing to one side or the other on those Strips was a good way to become well aquainted with the jungle.
;)
-
How about, if you land within in the confines of the base, it changes from a "you have ditched" to a "you made it home" no other perk modifiers just the message. Give ppl some congratulations for landing a plane that should not, by any rights, be flying. I know for me when I land a deadstick or half a plane its demoralizing to see the "ditched" for just rolling/sliding off the runway a few feet. At least with this with this you get a...
"your landing sucked, but at least you made it back alive :aok"
and we would still keep "you have landed successfully" for the pavement
-
its demoralizing to see the "ditched" for just rolling/sliding off the runway a few feet. At least with this with this you get a... "your landing sucked, but at least you made it back alive :aok"
Maybe we could have a random selection ... like "thanks sport, maybe we can salvage the spark plugs." or "WOW, that looks almost like an airplane!"
or
Maybe HT could put up KEEP OFF THE GRASS signs at the end of all the runways ?
:D
-
maybe belly land next time
that is true actually, you could just belly land and not have to worry about rolling of the runwya once you black out
-
Getting a "ditch" for going off the concrete is simply a game play choice. The main arena is set up for a game, it's not set up to simulate WW2.
-
That was a close one, but the line has to be drawn somewhere.
Perhaps the line should be "wheels down, on the wheels, and within the air field perimeter." Especially since you get landing credit for a plane just being on the runway, even if it is what amounts to a "write off". A plane, on its wheels, within the base perimeter, is probably every bit as close as, if not closer than, to being something other than a "write off", a plane in multiple pieces, sitting on the concrete runway.
-
I'm devoted now ---- we need a tug
-
There are always going to be cases of "missed it by THAT much" ... If you think the present system is inadequate, I'd suggest adding a RTB reward, that would apply to EVERY case in which the PILOT makes it back into the base perimeter, be it in a plane, a chute, or walking. Having a trained pilot live to fight another day has value.
:)
The only problem I see with this is whats to stop people from just flying base to base or fly in a few circles then land?
I think it would be abused to perk farm. Even though the reward may be small people will do it.
-
The only problem I see with this is whats to stop people from just flying base to base or fly in a few circles then land? I think it would be abused to perk farm. Even though the reward may be small people will do it.
I didn't think about that ... you're probably right.
:salute
-
you already get a perk reward for landing successfully.
semp
-
you already get a perk reward for landing successfully.
? I thought that -REWARD - was given as a % of the PERKS EARNED on the mission? - you don't get points for a successful RTB unless you earned some for accomplishing something ... Right? This eliminates the flaw in my idea, but doesn't necessarily compensate the guy who went out and got shot to pieces without earning perks, for his successfull RTB.
:salute
-
Anyone else catchin' my idea here? Tug = no other type of added incentive to what we already have, no need to change current landing areas, just a small vehicle capable of moving damaged a/c. Just a good wingman concept :rock
-
rtb with no kills or damage done and your reward is no kill against you (and no loss of perks for a perk plane.)
having said that the scoring system does favour ditching in range of your base rather than landing properly if you got nothing on that sortie, which doesnt seem right.
-
I wouldnt say no to a tug.
-
Anyone else catchin' my idea here? Tug = no other type of added incentive to what we already have, no need to change current landing areas, just a small vehicle capable of moving damaged a/c. Just a good wingman concept
It's not an unreasonable idea ... but given the priorities of many people posting here, I suspect it's perceived as trivial ? Personally, I think a RTB ditch is just a better luck next time thing ... If you can't afford to LOOSE the perk points? DON'T put them at risk.
:salute
-
All in All...I think it is stupid that you have to be on the pavement at your own base to land your kills successfully. If I crash land or just land anywhere inside the base perimeter, I think we should get a 'successful landing'. I do believe that during WW2, or any war for that matter, that if you were shot up and flew back to friendly lines and made it back to your home base, it was a successful flight. I know alot will b*tch about this, but, i just hate the fact that if i have one wheel off the pavement on my landing, or slid off runway on crash landing, i lose out on perks and performance rating. IMHO
Landing on the runway with a damaged plane isn't very hard to do.
ack-ack
-
Only read the first few posts so apologies if this has been stated. There has to be a line drawn. If you massage that line and adjust it, someone else will come along asking for that massage to extend just a little bit more. That could go on and on and on.
My opinion, keep the line where it is.
-
Landing on the runway with a damaged plane isn't very hard to do.
I agree, have done so many times. But to manage to get all the way back, land on the runway then slide off the side or something and not get landing credit is silly. You have demonstrated the skill needed, real life you would be good to go, here in game you are penalized. Silly to make the game stricter than real life.
-
Since the only score involved was their only life and they didn't care about perk points or their name in lights, they were more than happy to crash land in such a manner.
This was a "successful landing":
(http://img70.imageshack.us/img70/8393/closeenough.jpg)
So much for the "one wheel off the pavement/airplane barely off" = ditch theory.
Maybe the other wing is back on the pavement somewhere.....
wrongway
If your gear had been down, you could have been 5 feet closer to the runway and gotten a ditch.
A gear up plane can be further "off" the runway than one with gear down.
-
I agree, have done so many times. But to manage to get all the way back, land on the runway then slide off the side or something and not get landing credit is silly. You have demonstrated the skill needed, real life you would be good to go, here in game you are penalized. Silly to make the game stricter than real life.
going by a raft of WWII movies, you'd get a bollocking from your squadron leader and be picking up the night's bar tab for a sloppy landing :D
-
If you spend perks, that's what you're doing. SPENDING them. Just imagine they are a 1-time payment and are GONE as soona s you leave the hangar. GONE, no more, never to be seen again. IF you happen to land safely that just means you get a refund and can try again.
Otherwise you can't keep the mindset that you still have those perks, or that you are owed any kind of refund.
I've made more damaged landings than you or I or Lusche can even count. I've missed the runway, I've died on touchdown, I've blacked out and veered off after a perfect landing, etc. The challenge is: Land it ON the runway. That's the MA game mechanic.
Now if you all want to propose some sort of "entire airfield" rule then I'd be all for it ASSUMING it's only used in historic setups such as FSOs, scenarios, and so forth. As far as MA flight goes, you NEED a little challenge. As stated, you ask for 10 feet now, 10 feet tomorrow, 20 feet the next, soon you never lose perks for anything and you gain points just for sitting in the tower.
The runway/cement limit is a good one for now.
-
I'm cool with that Krusty, I'm just proposing the tug idea now, just for those cases of "ah crap all that work for nothin" situation
-
I agree, have done so many times. But to manage to get all the way back, land on the runway then slide off the side or something and not get landing credit is silly. You have demonstrated the skill needed, real life you would be good to go, here in game you are penalized. Silly to make the game stricter than real life.
Staying on the runway is a better demonstration of skill. You don't want to see that rewarded?
-
The "tug" is just a rewording of the same complaint.
Look, AH cuts some corners as compared to real life... When you land it doesn't show all the things that happened in real life. A swarm of people come out, clean the plane, reload, refuel it, etc, wheel it back to the hangar for repairs, etc.
But that sortie is OVER. You didn't make it to the end of the runway. End of story. You're out of bounds. Sortie over, scores computed, no matter what you suggest, what deus ex machina you invent to get you BACK to that runway, you've failed the "challenge" and should not be rewarded for skirting the rules.
The rule: End sortie on the cement, or get less points. Simple logic: Can you make it to the cement? If yes, tower. If no, keep trying. Give up? Tower off the runway.
Don't complicate it with tow tugs, jeeps with gas cans, instant repair crews, or anything like that. That's just getting around the issue of: You didn't end sortie on the cement. That's the end of the argument right there.
-
Well I'm still saying I think we should get a tug. I'm not asking for all those other things you listed. Valid points, but I believe what I'm asking for is pretty simple, and hell obviously if the plane is too wrecked, it probably wont be moving much.
Change isn't always a bad thing you know :old:
-
Change isn't always a bad thing you know :old:
A change isn't always needed either.
ack-ack
-
going by a raft of WWII movies, you'd get a bollocking from your squadron leader and be picking up the night's bar tab for a sloppy landing :D
Once had to deal with a complete hydraulic failure (occured on the ground post landing) in the B-24. I was happy just to get the airplane stopped...wasn't particular about where it stopped.
-
As far as MA flight goes, you NEED a little challenge.
Okay fine. Let's apply the challenge to takeoff as well. If you veer off the runway into the soft mud alongside you damage gear/remove gear/nose over. Tit for Tat. Goose and Gander.
-
I glided my 109K4 over a sector yesterday and landed on a runway after I got a radiator hit. I like that rewarding feeling of making it back in (mostly) one piece.
-
having said that the scoring system does favour ditching in range of your base rather than landing properly if you got nothing on that sortie, which doesn't seem right.
I presume? you mean they are scored the same, (0) so why waste the time landing? I'm thinking? that a BAIL or DITCH -is- recorded by the stats and ? would ultimately affect your RATING ? in a small way? Not at all SURE about that ? but it would be a SMALL difference.
I think I know WHY HT penalises anyone landing in the grass ... Pretty sure I have that figured out ... It's to PROTECT THE SQUIRRLS !
:D
-
No and we have all seen the answer many times before yet keep forgetting that success would mean nothing without the potential for failure.
-
I presume? you mean they are scored the same, (0) so why waste the time landing? I'm thinking? that a BAIL or DITCH -is- recorded by the stats and ? would ultimately affect your RATING ? in a small way? Not at all SURE about that ? but it would be a SMALL difference.
exactly. landed/ditched are treated the same for K/D, the only difference is damage points and perks modifier, so if you got no kills/damage its the same effect. landing properly rather than quickly ditching harms your K/T.*
(*fixed)
-
exactly. landed/ditched are treated the same for K/D, the only difference is damage points and perks modifier, so if you got no kills/damage its the same effect. landing properly rather than quickly ditching harms your K/T and D/T.
D/T ? :headscratch:
-
hmmmm dont know where that came from. must remember not to post until I've had coffee, I'm not good in the morning :uhoh
-
D/T ? :headscratch:
It would be harmful to your droptanks, clearly... :rolleyes:
:noid
-
I glided my 109K4 over a sector yesterday and landed on a runway after I got a radiator hit. I like that rewarding feeling of making it back in (mostly) one piece.
Thought you had a Cessna :headscratch:
-
Thought you had a Cessna :headscratch:
I have a 109 that I dont talk about much :D
Remember folks, as soon as you lose your engine make your props coarse. Less drag that way.
-
One thing is sure.... it's fair because all have to do it. Everyone knows it.
-
I always felt that anywhere inside the field box should count as a landing myself. . .
-
I always felt that anywhere inside the field box should count as a landing myself. . .
i think ppls point is there has to be a cut off point.. inside the square of the field, what next.. "gv distance".. "inside radar ring", "anywhere on the map", etc... you know someone would whine the first time he "barely rolled outside of the field boundary!" and got a ditch!
-
i think ppls point is there has to be a cut off point.. inside the square of the field, what next.. "gv distance".. "inside radar ring", "anywhere on the map", etc... you know someone would whine the first time he "barely rolled outside of the field boundary!" and got a ditch!
In the field though does seem quite reasonable.... I'm sure many wouldn't mind, at the same time does take that "challenge" away.... such a tough topic.... it's like walking into an auditorium and saying "ABORTION----GO!"
-
In the field though does seem quite reasonable.... I'm sure many wouldn't mind, at the same time does take that "challenge" away.... such a tough topic.... it's like walking into an auditorium and saying "ABORTION----GO!"
Today, unfortunately I was flying a 262, took severe amounts of fire and lost both my engines, pilot wound, fuel, etc. The aircraft was still controllable, just dead stick and bouts of passing in and out. I was able to make a friendly field, and land, but I blacked out upon touchdown and ended up stopping in the grass next five feet off the field..... 109 perks lost for returning the plane to the field.
My wish is to make so that severely damaged aircraft will not get a ditch so long as they land within the airfield perimeter.
Fire away gents, I know the topic of ditching on the field has come up many times before <S> :salute
wrongway
-
If it is not on a road, it is in a ditch (or somewhere else that is NOT on a road)
I thought it was pretty simple. :headscratch:
-
One thing is sure.... it's fair because all have to do it. Everyone knows it.
It rewards the people who can't be bothered to land gear down by allowing them to successfully land a plane that is actually further off the runway than a plane with gear down.
-
This was credited as a ditch.
Gear down with one wheel on grass 50 feet from the hanger.
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7144/6684978417_9c06a3eede_b.jpg)
This was credited as a landing.
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7014/6684978425_66854516fe_b.jpg)
The plane in the first picture will simply be loaded and fly again only minutes later regardless of the fact that it was credited as if you had ditched 200 miles from friendly territory.
The plane in the second picture will likely never fly again and it is rewarded by the game.
The arena population adjusts and flies even less realistic when some simple changes would net more realism and stop rewarding lazy pilots who can't be bothered to even lower gear to land.
-
I don't understand this, how does landing gear up affect another player in anyway? Maybe if you're vulching and he towers out too fast with gears up, as opposed to gear down.
What is next? Since you shot someone down he needs to cancel his account and never log on to emulate his death in the skies of Aces High? It is a game, nothing more than a simple diversion from the doldrums of daily life.
-
The game rewards people for not flying within what is known as reality yet the same morons who can't bothered to ever land with realism complain endlessly about flight, gunnery, and damage modeling realism of the planes.
-
I landed and got full perks and you didn't!
(http://www.fiddlersgreen.net/aircraft/North-American-P51-Collection/IMAGES/North-American-P51-Mustang-Crash.jpg)
I wanted to post more pictures, but I didn't want to use any that involved injuries or death. All I'm trying to say to you, Icepac, is what you said to Karnak in another thread.
You are trying to get people to conform to your perception of what fun is.
-
Completely different context.
Do you promote continued divergence from realism and the exploiting of non-realistic parts of the program to game the game........or would you like HTC to do something to promote realistic flying?
-
Completely different context.
No, you're guilty of the same thing you accused Karnak of.
If I wanted realism, I'd wake up at 4am and possibly force down some powdered eggs and bitter coffee. Follow that with a mission briefing with a queasy stomach feeling when the target is revealed, followed by hours of boredom and a few minutes of sheer terror. Realism isn't going to exist in the MA, it just isn't the place for it. Changing the game settings to even attempt to do so is akin to the legendary task of Sisyphus.
What you are talking about sounds more like a scenario event, and belongs there. On the days of an event, I'll purposefully drink lousy coffee (which isn't easy with a Keurig machine) and have an egg before the frame starts. If I have free time, I'll even put my Glenn Miller records on the player while I wait. However, I wouldn't expect anyone else to do this before a frame, and even I wouldn't do it for a routine MA experience.
-
ice you're making things into more of an imbalance than they are.
Your first pic? You ditched because your center was over the grass. The second? You were clearly on the cement, even if your gear was down you'd have had all 3 wheels on the cement.
Long story short, if you are THAT concerned about it, land on the frickin' cement. If you're not concerned about it at all, why chime in? It doesn't affect you.
-
Anyone looking at the pictures can clearly see that you're closer to the runway with your gear up. :neener:
-
ice you're making things into more of an imbalance than they are.
Your first pic? You ditched because your center was over the grass. The second? You were clearly on the cement, even if your gear was down you'd have had all 3 wheels on the cement.
Long story short, if you are THAT concerned about it, land on the frickin' cement. If you're not concerned about it at all, why chime in? It doesn't affect you.
You are incorrect Krusty.
The left main gear is off runway on both planes.
So the guy who made it all the way back to his field, landed wheels down, taxi'd to the hanger, and exited plane with one wheel off the concrete only 50 feet from his hanger gets credited with the same ditch someone who ditched in enemy territory.
-
Long story short, if you are THAT concerned about it, land on the frickin' cement.
that pretty much covers it :aok
-
You are incorrect Krusty. So the guy who made it all the way back to his field, landed wheels down, taxi'd to the hanger, and exited plane with one wheel off the concrete only 50 feet from his hanger gets credited with the same ditch someone who ditched in enemy territory.
Well ... I guess technically the DITCH is the same ... But if he made it back, he was NOT captured in ENEMY TERRITORY and did NOT forfeit the extra 10% or 20% (?) points a Capture Costs ... not to mention it didn't go into his stats either.
:)
I was discussing this topic with another player last night and arrived at an interesting observation. What we have now is one negative experience piled on top of another one ... 1st the disappointment of being Damaged, PWed, or just making a mess of landing, then the added indignity of being TOLD about your failure and losing some of your points / perks. As has been suggested ONE of these factors can be easily changed to END the mission with a neutral or positive experience rather than a negative. CHANGE THE MESSAGE from "YOU HAVE DITCHED" to something upbeat, congratulate the pilot for his RTB. EVEN if the landing was screwy, walking away from it makes it a GOOD ONE, so tell him so. Psychologically, the LAST (most recent) experience will define the players attitude from that point on and this should ease the sting and let the player move on in a BETTER frame of mind.
:angel:
-
Today, unfortunately I was flying a 262, took severe amounts of fire and lost both my engines, pilot wound, fuel, etc. The aircraft was still controllable, just dead stick and bouts of passing in and out. I was able to make a friendly field, and land, but I blacked out upon touchdown and ended up stopping in the grass next five feet off the field..... 109 perks lost for returning the plane to the field.
Just to clarify: I was only a few feet off the runway in the middle of the field.
But in any case I understand what you're saying wrongway, but like the others of said, theres gotta be the a line, so now its just a matter of where? I believe that the inside would be acceptable, balancing game and realism to a nice median.
-
It sucks, but the line must be and has been drawn somewhere. In the case of landings the line is drawn on concrete. If you're in a PT the line is drawn at crashing into a surface ship and ending sortie immediately. If you're in a ground vehicle the line is drawn with glitches.
-
yea i've had that exact same scenario happen to me before. it sucks. first time i ever flew a Me 262, i was pissed
-
Concrete saved this person yesterday. In any real life scenario they would have certainly been killed to death by me, but because they were on concrete they were safe.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOqS2MfDbjw&feature=youtu.be
-
What I don't like about it is, the more relaxed the landing requirements are, the lazier people get. It's not really a major thing, but it doesn't look right to have people just bellylanding to get down.
Maybe a possibility would be to have some kind of point value assigned to the stuff that's missing from your vehicle, and based on that have either tighter or more relaxed requirements for landing.
So for example, say it was a system something like this:
Ailerons 4 points each.
Engine 8 points, or 4 points each for dual engines, 2 each for quad engines.
Rudder 4 points.
Elevator/hstab 6 points per side.
PW 6 points.
Gear 6 points.
If you've got less than 6 points of damage, gear down and on concrete would be required for a safe landing. 6 to 12 points, anywhere on concrete gear up or down is fine. If you've got accumulated damage over 12, anywhere within the perimeter is fine.
This is just a barely formed, off the top of my head thought, but I think it'd be a better compromise than what they have.
The line they've drawn isn't too terrible, although the babying it home and losing it because you're a foot off the runway does hurt.
Wiley.
-
planes are a lot easier to replace than pilots (al-Qaeda excluded).
-
What I don't like about it is, the more relaxed the landing requirements are, the lazier people get. It's not really a major thing, but it doesn't look right to have people just bellylanding to get down.
Wiley, you can't police the lame brains. There are a lot of guys that land gear up on the runway as it is. I'm not worried about policing someone that is a gamer -- I just don't want undue punishment when I've put out the effort to return the flying junk pile to the field.
-
True enough. I could live quite happily with 'within the perimeter'. I was just thinking of a reasonable set of rules that doesn't give a guy full style points for smashing an undamaged plane into the tarmac.
Wiley.
-
That was a close one, but the line has to be drawn somewhere.
Yes............but not in the proper place.
-
-1... this would severely impact vulching. :bolt:
On the other hand, I can see a loss of perks being dolled out based on damage to the plane. Your 262 didn't make it back to base in 100% working order... I'm sorry, blue book on it is only 87 perks. I'll give you 80 on the trade-in, and throw in AC & a Moon roof at no cost on your next one. Do we have a deal?
-
True enough. I could live quite happily with 'within the perimeter'. I was just thinking of a reasonable set of rules that doesn't give a guy full style points for smashing an undamaged plane into the tarmac.
Wiley.
Within the perimeter exists, its the concrete. You can see the concrete, making a landing or ditch...well "concrete to the viewer" :)
If you add what would essentially be an invisible perimeter, Imagine the complaints from people who "think" or have decided that their plane should have counted as a land, and not a ditch.
-
What if we modeled that german half motorcycle half track contraption for towing planes back? Sorta like jeeping supplies out to a gv.
-
-1... this would severely impact vulching. :bolt:
On the other hand, I can see a loss of perks being dolled out based on damage to the plane. Your 262 didn't make it back to base in 100% working order... I'm sorry, blue book on it is only 87 perks. I'll give you 80 on the trade-in, and throw in AC & a Moon roof at no cost on your next one. Do we have a deal?
0% of the guys who belly in make it back to base in 100% working order.
-
Within the perimeter exists, its the concrete. You can see the concrete, making a landing or ditch...well "concrete to the viewer" :)
If you add what would essentially be an invisible perimeter, Imagine the complaints from people who "think" or have decided that their plane should have counted as a land, and not a ditch.
I mean inside the taxiways. Anywhere inside the taxiways that bound the airfield. Outside of that, no joy. It's equally definable.
Wiley.
-
I mean inside the taxiways. Anywhere inside the taxiways that bound the airfield. Outside of that, no joy. It's equally definable.
Wiley.
Exactly, plus if you consider how many of these aircraft took off from, or were capable of at least, from grass fields, inside the taxiways works.
-
0% of the guys who belly in make it back to base in 100% working order.
what exactly is the big deal about landing wheels up with your aircraft that it bothers you so much? I hardly land wheels down as it is faster for me to land and take off again specially over a capped field.
and for the record, you guys have a 0% chance of ah implementing this wish. as it is really a non-issue.
semp
-
Eh, it may not be of major necessity, but still doesn't hurt to get it out there. :P
I mean, c'mon, look how many other things in the past that have been wished for that have no relevance to the game period.
This at least is an everyday occurrence with in AH.
-
what exactly is the big deal about landing wheels up with your aircraft that it bothers you so much? I hardly land wheels down as it is faster for me to land and take off again specially over a capped field.
and for the record, you guys have a 0% chance of ah implementing this wish. as it is really a non-issue.
semp
If you can't fly with realism, you have no leg to stand arguing realism in the game.
This includes flight, gunnery, and damage modeling.
-
what exactly is the big deal about landing wheels up with your aircraft that it bothers you so much? I hardly land wheels down as it is faster for me to land and take off again specially over a capped field.
The difference 'tween a gamer and a simmer IMO. I like the challenge of flying as I would in real life to the extent possible within a desktop computer sim. Landing gear up is pretty gamey, not to my liking.
-
If you can't fly with realism, you have no leg to stand arguing realism in the game.
you seem to forget this is just a game. not realism. or do you think all pilots learn to fly a real airplane with 10 minutes worth of instruction
This includes flight, gunnery, and damage modeling.
what exactly does landing have to do with flight gunnery or damage modeling?
you may want to think you are flying with realism, but you are just bs'ing yourself. this is only a game :salute
semp
-
I'm with USAF - TUG! :aok
-
you may want to think you are flying with realism, but you are just bs'ing yourself. this is only a game :salute
No it's not ONLY a GAME ... It's a SIMULATION. WHY do you think HT -ONLY ALLOWS- real skins on these planes? Why do you think details are modeled down to bomb release latchs?
Not every one is you ... and what THEY want is just as important as what you want ... SIMULATION = realistic ... not REAL. People who enjoy simulations (simmers is a good handle) want IMMERSION ... not reality ... They want it to be believable ... leave 2012 for a bit and return to 1942-3-4-or 5 ... The GAME provides a structure and SIMULATES a conflict that is CLOSE ENOUGH to the real thing to let us fool ourselves for a little bit. Many Simmers aren't REALLY interested in the competitive aspects beyond the IMMERSION in the ENVIRONMENT that they enable. Now MAYBE that IS BSING ... and MAYBE some people enjoy a bit of that ... OK?
This GAME -IS- a simulation ... I don't think that's an arguable point. If YOU enjoy the competition and want to play it YOUR way ... GREAT! NO PROBLEM ... But don't expect HT to degrade the SIM experience to facilitate your point of view ... HT has worked very hard to achieve the level of immersion that is possible in this game.
:cool:
-
you may want to think you are flying with realism, but you are just bs'ing yourself. this is only a game :salute
semp
You can't be bothered to fly with the realism but you demand realism from your "game"?
-
You can't be bothered to fly with the realism but you demand realism from your "game"?
Let's keep in mind that this tread wasn't about Realism vs Gamey ... It was about someone NOT wanting to loose their perk points when they failed to make a Successfull Landing. In SOME airforces under SOME circumstances that might have gotten you shot (comrade). In some airforces, under some circumstances it might have gotten you a medal (if your name rhymed with Boreing). There isn't anyway I can envision that HT can model that.
You can argue all day about where the line is drawn ... there is no solution that is going to make everybody happy ... HT has DRAWN THAT LINE ... I think everybody needs to BE REALISTIC (!) and RESPECT that ... ? Don't you?
:salute
-
You can't be bothered to fly with the realism but you demand realism from your "game"?
The two aren't mutually exclusive. For example, I'm not a fan of modeling engine management. Sorry, I just don't find it fun. I am, however, a huge fan of a more detailed damage model and would love to see things like turbulence, updrafts, and crosswinds added, as I feel that adds a lot of fun to the game.
Guys landing wheels up on a perfectly fine plane doesn't bother me when I see it in game if it's done on the concrete, but for some reason the thought of it being the same if they just aim in the general direction of the airfield and skid it in anywhere bugs me a bit. *shrug*
As to the boundaries they've chosen for good landing vs bad landing, I'm fine with the status quo. It's fairly reasonable, everybody knows where it is. I have my preference for where I'd ideally like it to be, but it sure isn't a gamebreaker for me.
Wiley.
-
Can we draw the imaginary line on the perimeter of the base?
chipr
-
TUG DAMN IT! >.<
It's a fix for all of it.
You roll off, ask for a tug. I say it should only be an option if you land wheels down and all of your engines are out.
-
I also wish that when I lowered my landing gear to surrender they wouldn't just shoot me down. Inhumane sonsabishes.
Some planes can turn better when the gear is down. I understand where you are coming from, what gets me is when gears are down and your landing that they try to make another run at you. But heck, its war.
chipr
-
Getting a "ditch" for going off the concrete is simply a game play choice. The main arena is set up for a game, it's not set up to simulate WW2.
I got this game all wrong, then.
-
This was credited as a ditch.
Gear down with one wheel on grass 50 feet from the hanger.
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7144/6684978417_9c06a3eede_b.jpg)
This was credited as a landing.
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7014/6684978425_66854516fe_b.jpg)
The plane in the first picture will simply be loaded and fly again only minutes later regardless of the fact that it was credited as if you had ditched 200 miles from friendly territory.
The plane in the second picture will likely never fly again and it is rewarded by the game.
The arena population adjusts and flies even less realistic when some simple changes would net more realism and stop rewarding lazy pilots who can't be bothered to even lower gear to land.
Ouch, my eyes are straining. is that a 262?
-
you may want to think you are flying with realism, but you are just bs'ing yourself. this is only a game :salute
semp
So what you are saying is that the plane acm's are not accurate, neither is the weight, drag, dimensions, etc. is all exaggerated? And the skins in the game are all made up from imagination and movie films? Then I guess theres no difference between .50 cals and the 20 mm cannons then either. Come on, Semp
Chipr
-
Some planes can turn better when the gear is down.
:headscratch:
-
:headscratch:
The F4U
-
sure about that?
-
The F4U
That will slow it down faster so it is easier to cut inside your opponent's turn, but it definitely doesn't make the F4U's sustained turns better.
-
Well, you can drop the gear at 300mph. :lol
-
So what you are saying is that the plane acm's are not accurate, neither is the weight, drag, dimensions, etc. is all exaggerated? And the skins in the game are all made up from imagination and movie films? Then I guess theres no difference between .50 cals and the 20 mm cannons then either. Come on, Semp
Chipr
No, what I'm saying is that thinking that landing wheels down makes the game more realistic you are bsing yourself.
Semp
-
For those of you who haven't figure it out yet, its a simulator used to make a game.
Hitech
-
For those of you who haven't figure it out yet, its a simulator used to make a game.
Hitech
:headscratch:
Are you running for Congress or something?
-
For those of you who haven't figure it out yet, its a simulator used to make a game.
Hitech
:aok
:headscratch:
Are you running for Congress or something?
:lol
-
No, what I'm saying is that thinking that landing wheels down makes the game more realistic you are bsing yourself.
semp, you've lost your mind!
Let me change your quote slightly.
No, what I'm saying is that thinking that landing makes the game more realistic you are bsing yourself.
You still agree ?
-
semp, you've lost your mind!
Let me change your quote slightly.
You still agree ?
actually you can also say that by moving the thottle to full and the airplane moves down the runway if you think that is realistic you are bsing yourself. it's a game that simulates flying and fighting. it's not reality. it simulates it but will never be almost or close to it. fun as hell to play but nowhere close to reality. my quote was meant to make you think of what the game is.
In other words it's like having a real life gf and an inflatable one. the inflatable one is mean to simulate a real girlfriend, lots of fun, but will never be a real girlfriend. :salute.
semp
-
Seems to me that the title of the thread was misleading to begin with.
It meant to say. "I'm really ticked off I didn't get my perk points!"
This of course being the realistic response of a WW2 fighter pilot :aok
-
actually you can also say that by moving the thottle to full and the airplane moves down the runway if you think that is realistic you are bsing yourself. it's a game that simulates flying and fighting. it's not reality. it simulates it but will never be almost or close to it. fun as hell to play but nowhere close to reality. my quote was meant to make you think of what the game is.
In other words it's like having a real life gf and an inflatable one. the inflatable one is mean to simulate a real girlfriend, lots of fun, but will never be a real girlfriend. :salute.
semp
I'll take that metaphor to this level: we're all using inflatable girlfriends in this game. you want yours to have no "openings" because it's all fake anyway. :neener: :D
-
I'll take that metaphor to this level: we're all using inflatable girlfriends in this game. you want yours to have no "openings" because it's all fake anyway. :neener: :D
nope what I am saying is it doesnt matter if you do the landing on the belly button or on your hand as what really is important is the fun you had the 30 seconds prior. remember the fun part is not where you finish but how you got there in this fake fake reality that only exists in your head. if you really have more questions perhaps you should look up some visual aids and realize that it's all in your head and it doesnt make it any more real if you land in your hand (wheels up) or on the floor with your wheels pointing down.
semp
-
idk....I suck in a fighter, so if I upped a 262, blew some people up, lost both engines and had a PW, only to roll off and be 1 foot away from the concrete...blowing all my perkies....yeaaahhh... I'd be done with fighters and just stick to bombing...even worse...I'd probably just turn into a bomb**** in lancs. Might as well right?
-
nope what I am saying is it doesnt matter if you do the landing on the belly button or on your hand as what really is important is the fun you had the 30 seconds prior. remember the fun part is not where you finish but how you got there in this fake fake reality that only exists in your head. if you really have more questions perhaps you should look up some visual aids and realize that it's all in your head and it doesnt make it any more real if you land in your hand (wheels up) or on the floor with your wheels pointing down.
semp
Then you would be ok if HTC decided to make all fighter flight models diverge from thier known real life performance?
You want to diverge from reality in your flight yet you demand reality from the flight modeling?
-
No, what I'm saying is that thinking that landing wheels down makes the game more realistic you are bsing yourself.
Semp
I still don't believe that statement to be true. Wheels down does make it more realistic. Some games start you off in mid-flight, I hope this game doesnt come to that.
chipr
-
actually you can also say that by moving the thottle to full and the airplane moves down the runway if you think that is realistic you are bsing yourself. it's a game that simulates flying and fighting. it's not reality. it simulates it but will never be almost or close to it. fun as hell to play but nowhere close to reality. my quote was meant to make you think of what the game is.
In other words it's like having a real life gf and an inflatable one. the inflatable one is mean to simulate a real girlfriend, lots of fun, but will never be a real girlfriend. :salute.
semp
Take the red pill next time!
-
Then you would be ok if HTC decided to make all fighter flight models diverge from thier known real life performance?
You want to diverge from reality in your flight yet you demand reality from the flight modeling?
you dont really understand. landing gears up or down doesnt make the game any more or less realistic. in other words I am making fun of the fact that you believe the game to be realistic when it's based on the illusion that we fly in ww2 aircraft.
once I made a statement here on the wish list that no airplane in ah has any metal in it. It turned into a 2 page discussion with lots of quotes and references to sources about how much metal was used in all the different airplanes in ww2, blah, blah, blah. but the true fact is no airplane is ah has metal or any other substance as a matter of fact.
Now if you understood my statement that no airplane is ah as metal in it. then you would also agree that landing gear up or down doesnt make it any more realistic. It's just the illusion that you are flying in a certain way that makes you think you are flying realistically. :salute
semp
-
I'm thinking that would really depend on ones view of reality wouldn't it?
Some people, for better or worst, really insert themselves into the "supposed" reality of the game and for them it is important whether of not wheels are used for landings. While points are unimportant to me I do like to RTB, and unless I have damage I will land on my wheels, after all that is why they are there.
I would think that if the game designer and team went through the trouble of adding wheels and the drop/raise animations to the game that they should be used. I'd also agree that if that option is NOT used there should be a penalty for it much like if you can keep the whole rig on the runway when landing.
-
you dont really understand. landing gears up or down doesnt make the game any more or less realistic. in other words I am making fun of the fact that you believe the game to be realistic when it's based on the illusion that we fly in ww2 aircraft.
once I made a statement here on the wish list that no airplane in ah has any metal in it. It turned into a 2 page discussion with lots of quotes and references to sources about how much metal was used in all the different airplanes in ww2, blah, blah, blah. but the true fact is no airplane is ah has metal or any other substance as a matter of fact.
Now if you understood my statement that no airplane is ah as metal in it. then you would also agree that landing gear up or down doesnt make it any more realistic. It's just the illusion that you are flying in a certain way that makes you think you are flying realistically. :salute
semp
LOL.......you would scream bloody murder if the planes performed in a clearly non-realistic fashion.
-
LOL.......you would scream bloody murder if the planes performed in a clearly non-realistic fashion.
but I am not saying that. all I am saying is landing wheels up or down is no more or less realistic.
I'm thinking that would really depend on ones view of reality wouldn't it?
Some people, for better or worst, really insert themselves into the "supposed" reality of the game and for them it is important whether of not wheels are used for landings. While points are unimportant to me I do like to RTB, and unless I have damage I will land on my wheels, after all that is why they are there.
I would think that if the game designer and team went through the trouble of adding wheels and the drop/raise animations to the game that they should be used. I'd also agree that if that option is NOT used there should be a penalty for it much like if you can keep the whole rig on the runway when landing.
there's lot of features that arent used in the game. full tank of gas, external fuel tanks, bombs, rockets, rearm pad, gunners, heck even the mission creator (or whatever is called) is hardly used. developers went thru lots of trouble to code those but not everybody uses them all the time. perhaps there should be a penalty for not upping with full tanks as in ww2 all airplanes did that at the very least and on longe range missions they also carried external fuel tanks. why should landing gears up or down be any different than all the other things we dont use that are available.
semp
-
Solution? Allow the jeep to tow planes. Miss the runway? Call a buddy.
-
:huh Did you just say rockets and a fuel tank of fuel aren't used a lot?
Have you EVER done anything than furball? If you have, you'd know that if you want to do something other than make your aircraft do pretty spins and twirls, you use ALL of the things you listed. What in the hell are you smoking????
And you must be a rook....Bishops run missions all the time. We don't "horde" we just prefer to work in a giant group (with some exceptions). I don't join missions if it's fighters only with no goon or M3.
Also; How in the hell did this get on gear up or down? Do you all have ADD?
Look - It IS realistic to land gear DOWN if your gear aren't blown off. Want to know why? Find me 10 accounts of pilots from WWII who landed gear UP when they had functioning gear and they were OK (No pilot wound).
It's realistic to land gear up and down, but gear up is realistic only if your gear is blown off or not functioning. Everyone is right, but it's situational.
From the words of my gunny: "For the love of all that is holy", someone with an IQ higher than 12 take charge of this conversation and get over the e-peen swingin' contest on who is right and wrong.
This is a thread about ENGINE OUT LANDINGS not GEAR UP OR DOWN landings. Go make a separate thread and bicker about how you all are absolutely wrong because you automatically assume your idea is the best thing since oxygen.
FMGDL - I thought this "new generation" was a bunch of clueless numbskulls. smh.
-------------
On topic: TUG TUG TUG TUG JEEP TUG
-------------
Edit for reiteration: Semp, just because YOU don't use it frequently does NOT mean it's not used a lot as a whole. Example: 91st and DHBG - We fly primarily heavy bombers. We use ALL of our guns (waist included). Our escorts use DT, Rockets and Bombs (depending on target size and location). Oh oh...and 100% fuel.
People who run CV missions use rockets and bombs. In most cases 100% fuel isn't needed, so it isn't used, but we use all the other things. Oh and those of us who know how to land GEAR DOWN get to use this thing called a um....re-arm pad! O_O hlyfknsht. Ever tried landing on a CV? Lot's of fun.
I'm sorry, sometimes STUPID comments mixed with an arrogant nature just rub me the wrong way, unfortunately I think all I'm doing is feeding a basement dwelling troll. There is no way someone could be that ignorant about a game they play so much.
-
Solution? Allow the jeep to tow planes. Miss the runway? Call a buddy.
:aok
-
and still be awarded a ditch :aok
-
:huh Did you just say rockets and a fuel tank of fuel aren't used a lot? <--as a percentage of all flights in ah they are rare indeed.
Have you EVER done anything than furball? If you have, you'd know that if you want to do something other than make your aircraft do pretty spins and twirls, you use ALL of the things you listed. What in the hell are you smoking????
And you must be a rook....Bishops run missions all the time. We don't "horde" we just prefer to work in a giant group (with some exceptions). I don't join missions if it's fighters only with no goon or M3. seriously bishops are the only country in the game that doesnt horde? so those 30 airplanes that we had at v64 when defenders where only a handfull wasnt a horde? no wonder you think this game is realistic you living an illusion.
Also; How in the hell did this get on gear up or down? Do you all have ADD? <--did you bother to read the thread? I was only replying to somebody saying 0 points for landing with gear up.
Look - It IS realistic to land gear DOWN if your gear aren't blown off. Want to know why? Find me 10 accounts of pilots from WWII who landed gear UP when they had functioning gear and they were OK (No pilot wound). we arent talking about ww2, we are talking about a game. find 10 peope in ww2 who dove in to save a buddy and 2 minutes later were up in a brand new spanking plane ready to save another.
It's realistic to land gear up and down, but gear up is realistic only if your gear is blown off or not functioning. Everyone is right, but it's situational.
From the words of my gunny: "For the love of all that is holy", someone with an IQ higher than 12 take charge of this conversation and get over the e-peen swingin' contest on who is right and wrong. my gunny always told me "dont follow those who think they are better than others.
This is a thread about ENGINE OUT LANDINGS not GEAR UP OR DOWN landings. Go make a separate thread and bicker about how you all are absolutely wrong because you automatically assume your idea is the best thing since oxygen.
FMGDL - I thought this "new generation" was a bunch of clueless numbskulls. smh. <--this makes you look like an arrogant snob who forgets it's only a game.
-------------
On topic: TUG TUG TUG TUG JEEP TUG
-------------
Edit for reiteration: Semp, just because YOU don't use it frequently does NOT mean it's not used a lot as a whole. Example: 91st and DHBG - We fly primarily heavy bombers. We use ALL of our guns (waist included). Our escorts use DT, Rockets and Bombs (depending on target size and location). Oh oh...and 100% fuel.
do you up with 100% fuel every time? in ww2 it was very rare for a plane to up with less than 100%. and the escort fighters did not escort the bombers all the way in and out, they took turns with other squadrons. so I am assuming that you demand your escorts leave and a new escort fighter group accompany you every 15 or 20 minutes. after all that is realistic.
People who run CV missions use rockets and bombs. In most cases 100% fuel isn't needed, so it isn't used, but we use all the other things. Oh and those of us who know how to land GEAR DOWN get to use this thing called a um....re-arm pad! O_O hlyfknsht. Ever tried landing on a CV? Lot's of fun.
so you dont use 100% fuel and yet in ww2, planes upped with 100% fuel. not very "realistic" indeed.. and by the way I dont end all my flights wheels up.
I'm sorry, sometimes STUPID comments mixed with an arrogant nature just rub me the wrong way, unfortunately I think all I'm doing is feeding a basement dwelling troll. There is no way someone could be that ignorant about a game they play so much.
[/color] only arrogant people like you think they are better than others and resort to name calling.
semp
-
Lol you proved that you're a troll who is demanding everything be his way.
You will no longer receive a reply from me after this post.
You just bring play devil's advocate, only instead of helping either side - you attack both. So sad.
Tsk tsk tsk.
-
Right, so my question here is, does anybody here really disagree with the option of a tug?
Maybe not call it a successful landing, but if it is a ditch, don't take everything away from the perked a/c, at least again if the power source is gone or other critical components that allow it to are damaged, etc.
IMHO, i want to get this topic back on track to where it was, not personal opinion vendetta's about realistic or not. Just to quickly throw in, its a simulation like hitech said, so the ability to fly realistically is there, but so is the option to do whatever you prefer....
...something about free will and freedom to do what you want with your $14.95 a month perhaps? :old:
-INCOMING
-
I'm thinking that would really depend on ones view of reality wouldn't it?
That's it in a nutshell ... unfortunately, some people's REALITY does not extend beyond their own physical perception ... For them the rest of us are just figments of whatever THEY imagine US to be ... The concept that anyone might have a DIFFERENT PERCEPTION or that it could possibly be anything other than BS ... is almost unthinkable ... another brick ...
I would think that if the game designer and team went through the trouble of adding wheels and the drop/raise animations to the game that they should be used. I'd also agree that if that option is NOT used there should be a penalty for it much like if you can keep the whole rig on the runway when landing.
Well said!
;)
-
but I am not saying that. all I am saying is landing wheels up or down is no more or less realistic.
there's lot of features that arent used in the game. full tank of gas, external fuel tanks, bombs, rockets, rearm pad, gunners, heck even the mission creator (or whatever is called) is hardly used. developers went thru lots of trouble to code those but not everybody uses them all the time. perhaps there should be a penalty for not upping with full tanks as in ww2 all airplanes did that at the very least and on longe range missions they also carried external fuel tanks. why should landing gears up or down be any different than all the other things we dont use that are available.
semp
I'd love to see everything used, and used correctly. I think the game would once again promote SKILL over hordes of dweebs we have now.
-
but I am not saying that. all I am saying is landing wheels up or down is no more or less realistic.
there's lot of features that arent used in the game. full tank of gas, external fuel tanks, bombs, rockets, rearm pad, gunners, heck even the mission creator (or whatever is called) is hardly used. developers went thru lots of trouble to code those but not everybody uses them all the time. perhaps there should be a penalty for not upping with full tanks as in ww2 all airplanes did that at the very least and on longe range missions they also carried external fuel tanks. why should landing gears up or down be any different than all the other things we dont use that are available.
semp
I wouldn't mind having either the portions of gas changed around a bit-- take half or 100-- and for fuel tanks to be a little easier to hit.