Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: bustr on January 30, 2012, 08:29:20 PM
-
Allow the Storch to land and pickup a dead engined landed/ditched pilot or parachuted pilot. Then the Storch pilot if he lands successfuly at a base gets a landing message:
HOST: fudknuker in a Storch Fi156 Rescued buddybumper successfuly.
It will only cost the rescued pilot a littel time and who knows what he might shoot on the way back to base.
-
Lots of coding for no useful purpose.
I vote no.
-
Why would the downed player wait for a slow, likely to be shot down, Fi156 rather than just hitting .ef, grabbing another plane and getting back in the game? The downed player will not get a "Landed successfully" message as he did not land his plane successfully. In addition, if rewards were added to actually make it worth a downed player's time to wait for rescue, it would be bad for the game as every player that is sitting on a hill waiting to be rescued is not participating in the massively-multiplayer aspect of the game and each player in a Storch is only semi-participating.
I am sorry, but this is just a bad idea for the MA. It might have very limited use in scenarios.
-
maybe if the pilot gets his name in highlights if he had more then 2 kills?
Lots of coding for no useful purpose.
I vote no.
does it matter? you arent the one doing it
-
Why would the downed player wait for a slow, likely to be shot down, Fi156 rather than just hitting .ef, grabbing another plane and getting back in the game? The downed player will not get a "Landed successfully" message as he did not land his plane successfully. In addition, if rewards were added to actually make it worth a downed player's time to wait for rescue, it would be bad for the game as every player that is sitting on a hill waiting to be rescued is not participating in the massively-multiplayer aspect of the game and each player in a Storch is only semi-participating.
I am sorry, but this is just a bad idea for the MA. It might have very limited use in scenarios.
Then Sir KnowItAll,
With your logic Hitech should simply pull the Storch as a usless POS and get on with asking you for what you think should be on his HoneyDo list each day. I'm just trying to give it something to do worth while other than be gun fodder for any popgun in the game.
Since the game is still based on free association it would be up to the two players involved to participate. Meaning it's something they agree with each other to do and no skin off your postierior. Or have you been hired recently to be the game nanny? Do we check in with you now to preflight our diapers and make sure they are on clean and tight? I got a truck load of Depends for you to inspect and fluff in that case......extra fluffy. Do you wash windows to?
-
The Storch has an excellent role already.
-
The Storch has an excellent role already.
Spawning when all the hangers down, bailing immediately and taking out troops with his .45?
-
Then Sir KnowItAll,
With your logic Hitech should simply pull the Storch as a usless POS and get on with asking you for what you think should be on his HoneyDo list each day. I'm just trying to give it something to do worth while other than be gun fodder for any popgun in the game.
Since the game is still based on free association it would be up to the two players involved to participate. Meaning it's something they agree with each other to do and no skin off your postierior. Or have you been hired recently to be the game nanny? Do we check in with you now to preflight our diapers and make sure they are on clean and tight? I got a truck load of Depends for you to inspect and fluff in that case......extra fluffy. Do you wash windows to?
:D
-
Spawning when all the hangers down, bailing immediately and taking out troops with his .45?
The .50 on an m3 is ineffective against a chute? Something doesnt seem right here :headscratch:
-
Not when you're not looking for them. Chute Icons can only bee seen while flying at certain angles. And their icon range is a lot shorter than anything else in the game.
-
The game has lots of interesting 'scenarios' already. If it's not too difficult to add the 'rescue downed pilot' option (and maybe he can keep half of his won perks) then that would be a nice little addition. Furthermore, in scenarios when you're only allowed a limited number of lives wouldn't a rescue be helpful?
With another little tweak maybe you could land, drop off a pilot who would act like a scout of FOO particularly in a GV battle. In any case I think its nice idea.
-
Nice idea +1
-
When I used to play BF1942 (totally different style of game) I perfected the art of picking up downed pilots in the water (For those who never played, usualy you died if you were in the water to long)
I'd grab an SBD or other similar 2-seater and as I flew directly over the other player they'd press the enter vehicle button, then I'd fly back and they could jump out and parcute back to base. Obvious merits of this were each death counted against the score so there was some incentive for me to do this. No personal glory, other than saving a teammate and the over all team score.
Would I do this if it was implemented in this game, certainly, I'm a terrible dog fighter (the transition from Arcade Jet Fighter games was not kind to me, what no 1:1 thrust ratio?)
So any litle side thing I can do I enjoy. (i.e. AA-plunking with a B-25H, Torpedo runs with a TBM, marking targets with a storch) I realize in the over all scheme of things most of that doesn't contribute to the game that much, but it's fun for me. :aok
-
I've made my opinion of this particular wish known multiple times before, but I figure I can throw a +1 on this thread too.
-
The .50 on an m3 is ineffective against a chute? Something doesnt seem right here :headscratch:
cant always have m3 50 cal spawn to said port or vbase :headscratch:
-
Could someone please explain to me what the actual desired gameplay with these ideas is? Do you want to be able to have a buddy tailgun from your storch? That's already available. Is it some kind of backhanded way to go about improving your score in some way? Why is sitting in a field such a desirable gameplay element?
You could have this gameplay in the game right now. Bail. Wait for your buddy to come along in his Storch. .ef. Attach to his plane. Gun for him all the way back to base.
If you don't do this now, why would it improve the game if you got your name in lights for it?
Wiley.
-
I think the desire (and this is just my opinion) is to add another element/option of what went on in the era. or maybe thier relative flew SAR and they want to relive/honor that.
Of course there would have to be some incentive to the downed pilot, maybe making downing in enemy territory versus freindly territory worth different amounts, or maybe if you got shot down in a perked plane, you wouldn't lose all your points.
for 99% of players they'll just tower and go back to flying, for the 1% (Occupy Aces High?lol) that would like to enjoy doing mundane tasks such as picking up downed flyers I'm sure they'd love it.
Or for that matter, perhaps we should have a WASP option, where you can't just spawn an airplane where ever you want, but someone else has to fly it half way across the map to your airbase. ;)
As much as I'd like to see little side things like that developed, I don't think its the most cost effective use of development time/effort (even though I'd love doing it!) :)
-
Spawning when all the hangers down, bailing immediately and taking out troops with his .45?
No Im referring to marking vehicles which is what its intended for. It can also deliver supplies at twice the speed of an M3. Flying at just 100 mph it can remain below tree level and there its nearly impossible to see (except its specular mapping makes it stick out a lot).
The Storch doesnt have much range and pilot retrieval wouldnt really be a useful role.
-
Only reason folks want it is because the guy downed wants to save his score, his points, and his name in lights.
You put up the argument "What if it was done that way but the rescued guy's sortie ended just like if he .EF'ed then and there? A ditch/capture/etc?
They go strangely silent after that point, most times.
Or they come up with another roundabout way to save their scores after they (yet again) fail to make it back to base.
-
Then Sir KnowItAll,
With your logic Hitech should simply pull the Storch as a usless POS and get on with asking you for what you think should be on his HoneyDo list each day. I'm just trying to give it something to do worth while other than be gun fodder for any popgun in the game.
Since the game is still based on free association it would be up to the two players involved to participate. Meaning it's something they agree with each other to do and no skin off your postierior. Or have you been hired recently to be the game nanny? Do we check in with you now to preflight our diapers and make sure they are on clean and tight? I got a truck load of Depends for you to inspect and fluff in that case......extra fluffy. Do you wash windows to?
Sorry to pop your bubble, sweetheart, but the objections I raised were not false. You are demanding something that would be bad for the game. The existing role of the Fi156 has nothing to do with what you are asking and telling you the blunt truth about the idea does not mean the Storch should be removed.
Pilot rescue is a horrible idea for the reasons I listed in my post. If you don't like that, tough, sometimes reality doesn't do what we want.
-
does it matter? you arent the one doing it
No but the people who will could be coading something more contributive to the the game :)
-
I disagree with Karnak and Krusty. I view this wish as being similar to running gv supplies in a jeep, sometimes it's nice to take a break and do something a little different in game.
I personally don't care about score and I would like to be able to pick up downed pilots from time to time. And there are many others like me that don't care about score either, so to claim that the ONLY reason for this wish is to protect their score (or name in lights) is false.
-
I disagree with Karnak and Krusty. I view this wish as being similar to running gv supplies in a jeep, sometimes it's nice to take a break and do something a little different in game.
I personally don't care about score and I would like to be able to pick up downed pilots from time to time. And there are many others like me that don't care about score either, so to claim that the ONLY reason for this wish is to protect their score (or name in lights) is false.
I reiterate, get shot down. Bail. Wait in a field for your buddy. When he gets there, .ef and .join your buddy. Gun for him all the way home.
What's the difference, other than score and name in lights?
Wiley.
-
Wiley, while I understand what you are saying with your posts. There is no need to repeat it in a thread about adding a pilot rescue feature to AH. Now if the thread was about how to simulate pilot rescue with the tools we have available currently in game, then I wouldn't have any problem with the reiteration of your first post. We get it, you don't like the idea; but you don't get anywhere just expressing the same statement repeatedly. Do you have any other reasons or arguments against the inclusion of pilot rescue that might add to the debate?
-
I disagree with Karnak and Krusty. I view this wish as being similar to running gv supplies in a jeep, sometimes it's nice to take a break and do something a little different in game.
I personally don't care about score and I would like to be able to pick up downed pilots from time to time. And there are many others like me that don't care about score either, so to claim that the ONLY reason for this wish is to protect their score (or name in lights) is false.
That isn't quite the same thing. Running supplies in a jeep has an effect on the game. If there were no cost to it being added and no benefit to the player using it I wouldn't have any problem with it being in the game, it would just be something for people to do when they wanted. However, it has a cost in the time to program it and any benefit added to encourage its use would be detrimental to the game as the game requires players to fight against and the more the better. Players sitting on a hillside waiting for rescue are taken out of that pool of participating players.
I also don't think it is reasonable to recover the perk cost of your B-29 if you don't land it successfully.
-
Wiley, while I understand what you are saying with your posts. There is no need to repeat it in a thread about adding a pilot rescue feature to AH. Now if the thread was about how to simulate pilot rescue with the tools we have available currently in game, then I wouldn't have any problem with the reiteration of your first post. We get it, you don't like the idea; but you don't get anywhere just expressing the same statement repeatedly. Do you have any other reasons or arguments against the inclusion of pilot rescue that might add to the debate?
Baumer's point was:
And there are many others like me that don't care about score either, so to claim that the ONLY reason for this wish is to protect their score (or name in lights) is false.
I am pointing out that as far as I can see, it is not false, and asking what other addition it brings to the table? It is not there to add to gameplay, it is there to give people a way to ensure nothing bad happens to their numbers as long as they have enough patience, except it's couched in a warm fuzzy 'It would add something to the game' message.
Karnak's last post hits it square on the head. People waiting for rescue are people not fighting. Recovering perks as long as you have enough time on your hands smacks of the kind of gameplay most other MMOs are built on. It is a step in the wrong direction.
Wiley.
-
I reiterate, get shot down. Bail. Wait in a field for your buddy. When he gets there, .ef and .join your buddy. Gun for him all the way home.
What's the difference, other than score and name in lights?
Wiley.
'2 weeks' of 'coading' stolen from *my* pet project (the Spanish Civil War - we still need at least 4 more planes modeled - the Spanish terrain may be a community project).
(edit - I mean .... if the request was modeled - not your version of accomplishing the same basic thing). :salute
-
Thanks for elaborating Wiley. I have no problem with somebody remaking their point as long as they throw in some more details and don't just basically retype their previous post. Heck, as Karnak knows from the last pilot rescue topic; I might even end up and agree with you if you make a compelling enough argument.
I'll rip up my forum police badge now. (I accidentally colored outside the lines on it anyway :D)
-
You are demanding something that would be bad for the game.
Disclaimer: I could NOT care less about the storch or its abilities.
This is a "WISH" forum, NOT a "demand" forum, people post "wishes". Why is it people get their panties in a bunch when someone makes a wish they disagree with?? Some of you guys act like your making up Hitechs mind for him........... :headscratch:
NOT
-
Thanks for elaborating Wiley. I have no problem with somebody remaking their point as long as they throw in some more details and don't just basically retype their previous post. Heck, as Karnak knows from the last pilot rescue topic; I might even end up and agree with you if you make a compelling enough argument.
I'll rip up my forum police badge now. (I accidentally colored outside the lines on it anyway :D)
No blood, no foul. :) You've got a point, I should've made it clearer what I was responding to.
I just don't want this game to get watered down in certain ways. I've played a lot of MMOs, and one of the things that this game is relatively free of is beggars standing around asking for free stuff, or for people to do something for them so they don't have to do it for themselves. I abhor changes that will result in things like multitudes of people on channel 'I just crashed my 262/had 3 kills/whatever, somebody needs to take me home in a storch so my numbers aren't affected.'
Not good gameplay.
This is a "WISH" forum, NOT a "demand" forum, people post "wishes". Why is it people get their panties in a bunch when someone makes a wish they disagree with?? Some of you guys act like your making up Hitechs mind for him........... :headscratch:
Nah. Hitech makes up his own mind. Just pointing out why bad ideas are bad ideas, so perhaps if people see why they are bad ideas, they might consider their suggestions a bit more carefully, and refine their ideas before they come to the board with them.
Wiley.
-
If I can get 100 perks per 1 rescued pilot, +1. :D
-
Nah. Hitech makes up his own mind. Just pointing out why bad ideas are bad ideas, so perhaps if people see why they are bad ideas, they might consider their suggestions a bit more carefully, and refine their ideas before they come to the board with them.
Wiley.
Exactly.
-
That isn't quite the same thing. Running supplies in a jeep has an effect on the game. If there were no cost to it being added and no benefit to the player using it I wouldn't have any problem with it being in the game, it would just be something for people to do when they wanted. However, it has a cost in the time to program it and any benefit added to encourage its use would be detrimental to the game as the game requires players to fight against and the more the better. Players sitting on a hillside waiting for rescue are taken out of that pool of participating players.
I also don't think it is reasonable to recover the perk cost of your B-29 if you don't land it successfully.
Karnak I purposely didn't state anything about the recovered pilots points or perks, you are applying your opinion and bias to what I said. Also, I agree with you that if this were to take SIGNIFICANT development I would be against it. However, I doubt it would take much time for HTC to develop this from the existing .join command.
I see only two parameters that would need to be checked prior to the .join command executing,
1.) Distance between the two players
2.) Speed of the player in the Storch
-
Karnak I purposely didn't state anything about the recovered pilots points or perks, you are applying your opinion and bias to what I said. Also, I agree with you that if this were to take SIGNIFICANT development I would be against it. However, I doubt it would take much time for HTC to develop this from the existing .join command.
I see only two parameters that would need to be checked prior to the .join command executing,
1.) Distance between the two players
2.) Speed of the player in the Storch
If it were that easy to add and had no "Save your perks/score" feature, then sure, no harm no foul. I do think that people would whine pretty fast that they waited for 30 minutes to be rescued only for it to not do anything for their perks/score though.
-
If it were that easy to add and had no "Save your perks/score" feature, then sure, no harm no foul. I do think that people would whine pretty fast that they waited for 30 minutes to be rescued only for it to not do anything for their perks/score though.
The way pilot rescue would affect a players score is why I am against it's inclusion in the MA but for it's inclusion in FSO and scenarios; where individual score means little-to-nothing and overall team score is the key factor. However, I can't justify the time it might take to develop and code this feature, to only see use outside of the MAs. Quite the "rock and a hard place" problem for me.
-
This is a "WISH" forum, NOT a "demand" forum, people post "wishes". Why is it people get their panties in a bunch when someone makes a wish they disagree with?? Some of you guys act like your making up Hitechs mind for him........... :headscratch:
Consider it a primary vote with a lot of public input and interrogation of the suspect request.
-
If I can get 100 perks per 1 rescued pilot, +1. :D
:D +1
-
LIke This?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Na2RtXlFGsA
-
LIke This?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Na2RtXlFGsA
Hey co-pilot why dont you do your job?! :mad:
:rofl
-
I kinda like the idea.
maybe make the rescue score like a ditch.instead of a "you have been captured"
perhaps the pilots could split the perks if any applied? dont yell at me I do not understand the points system I just fly here :)
-
I kinda like the idea.
maybe make the rescue score like a ditch.instead of a "you have been captured"
perhaps the pilots could split the perks if any applied? dont yell at me I do not understand the points system I just fly here :)
To the best of my knowledge, there is no difference in score between killed, captured, bailed and ditched.
-
To the best of my knowledge, there is no difference in score between killed, captured, bailed and ditched.
for perks, no difference, for actual score, yes.
-
"IT DOESNT ADD ANYTHING TO GAMEPLAY" .........Oh brother :rolleyes:
How smart do you have to be before you have the mental capacity to understand that not everyones idea of "game" and "fun" are the same? There are several other sims out there that model LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNG boring flights, in boring aircraft, that are as successful or more so than AH. So your gameplay arguments are a complete fail.
As for the score whoring, what do you care if someone makes a few more points by getting picked up? Does it bother you when others get their name in lights? Do you feel jealousy? Do you think that you have a chance of catching up to the top players in the game if you prevent them from getting any more points or getting their name in lights?
I got news for you, you arent getting any closer to that number one spot than you are right now because your adolescent "I want to make the rules" attitudes show that you don't have the maturity to grasp basic common sense concepts. Perhaps the top players in the game were just as adolescent as you before they got to the top and mellowed out, so I will wish you all the best of luck in the hope of someday seeing fewer twits on the forums.
As for the coding, Im guessing an hour worth of work, tops. Lets see...how easy would it be to code this? HMM we already have a join command. Perhaps a little like this (if/command .join johndoe and johndoe is in xxxxxspecificvehiclexxxxx within xxxxfeetxxxx distance then player is attached to xxxxspecificvehiclexxxx)
you'll have to excuse my lack of coding etiquette, my genius is limited by my lack of interest in the subject. :D
-
"IT DOESNT ADD ANYTHING TO GAMEPLAY" .........Oh brother :rolleyes:
I'm sorry. I wasn't quite clear. It would add something to gameplay:
Guy: I'm bailed! Somebody come and pick me up so I don't lose my score!
Guy2: I'm in the middle of sector 4,4! I have 3 kills! Somebody come pick me up!
Guy3: PICKUP PLZ
Guy: ************************BAILED NEED PICKUP
Guy4: ne1 need pickup
Guy5: cmon guys somebody come get me ive been here for an hour
ad nauseum.
It takes people out of the fight to do menial tasks. I couldn't care less about score. I want opponents and people to wing with in the game, not bailed pilots waiting for pickup.
Simplicity of coding is irrelevant when it's not a good idea.
Wiley.
-
I like the idea because it is nice change to the game, and a chance to do something completely different. I think it might be fun to risk your score (if you in fact care about it) to brave the enemy fire to rescue a fellow countryman. Although he suffered some boo boos, BirdDog from Bat21 would be proud of this idea :D
I say, +1 :aok
-
Only reason folks want it is because the guy downed wants to save his score, his points, and his name in lights.
exactly, which is not what should happen anyway.
the only thing a rescued pilot would get of of it would be to turn his Captured into a Bailed. big deal.
-
+1
It would be funny.
It will give to this game a particular option.
It would be also educative for young players.
Somebody argued that who is requesting to be rescued have to wait too much, but
I will wait if i have the kills points as rescued pilot.
I don't think that this option requires so much coding.
C'mon HTC let's do it.
:salute
-
The Storch doesnt have much range and pilot retrieval wouldnt really be a useful role.
I beg your pardon sir, if someone is willing to take the time to go out and rescue someone, it's a very worthwhile role. Buster is right on...
Only the reward should be the Storch driver gets ALL the perks...the pilot was down and has already lost them. However, being rescued allows him his name in lights and he keeps the kills he had and his k/d ratio is affected positively.
I fly out to grab anyone that called out on country for help...after I rtb'd or died. Since I mostly die, it won't take me long.
+1
-
I beg your pardon sir, if someone is willing to take the time to go out and rescue someone, it's a very worthwhile role. Buster is right on...
Only the reward should be the Storch driver gets ALL the perks...the pilot was down and has already lost them. However, being rescued allows him his name in lights and he keeps the kills he had and his k/d ratio is affected positively.
I fly out to grab anyone that called out on country for help...after I rtb'd or died. Since I mostly die, it won't take me long.
+1
THIS
+1
-
However, being rescued allows him his name in lights and he keeps the kills he had and his k/d ratio is affected positively.
why? first he lost his own aircraft and then he risked the life of the storch driver to rescue him. why on earth should he be rewarded the same as if he Landed Successfully? makes no sense. :headscratch:
-
The rescued pilot shouldn't receive anything other than what he would get in a normal safe bail. Anything else is BS.
-
exactly :aok
-
why? first he lost his own aircraft and then he risked the life of the storch driver to rescue him. why on earth should he be rewarded the same as if he Landed Successfully? makes no sense. :headscratch:
Because he got back to base. Downed fighter pilots don't lose their kills in R L if they live, why should we if we get CSAR'd. You guys are worrying too much about the score part...Boyington didn't lose all of his kills because he spent 2 years in a Japanese POW camp.
-
exactly, which is not what should happen anyway.
the only thing a rescued pilot would get of of it would be to turn his Captured into a Bailed. big deal.
Ridiculous answer....this is the answer of the score worrier. How many German pilots were shot down repeatedly? They lose their kill credits? No. Quit worrying about how it affects your score
-
you dont lose any kill credits in AH either when you land/ditch/bail/captured/killed. so a rescued pilot towering as Bailed would not lose any kill credits, just like RL.
-
you dont lose any kill credits in AH either when you land/ditch/bail/captured/killed. so a rescued pilot towering as Bailed would not lose any kill credits, just like RL.
My understanding, and it may be wrong, is that bail/ditch/capture affects K/D ratio negatively. If that is true, then a rescued pilot should get to keep his kills as landed, not as bailed/ditch/captured because, for one reason, he is sacrificing his kills per hour to wait on the rescue.
However, if I was told incorrectly, another argument would have to be made.
-
thats right, it effects K/D because it effects D. In AH, D doesnt mean death, it means not Landed or not Ditched. Its not about the pilot, its about the plane. If you land it, great you get full perks and name in lights. If you ditch it behind friendly lines, the aircraft is counted as recoverable, but you didnt complete your mission by landing it, so no name in lights and less perks. bail from the plane, get killed or ditch it behind enemy lines and the aircraft is lost, so that counts as a D against you.
-
If you lose the plane, you lose the perk bonus, perks it cost if any and you get a "death" tallied against you. All that "death" is in AH is a loss. It only means you lost a fight, which you did. You get to keep all your kills, even if you die at exactly the same moment as your target. I once did an HO with an Me262 and the system recorded our deaths in the same moment and awarded each of us a kill on the other. When looking at my stats for that tour you will see one kill of an Me262 by Karnak in a Mosquito VI. That I died in the doing matters not at all to me getting to keep my kill.
(Obviously I'd have preferred to live, but hey, it was an Me262 and it had to die)
-
My understanding, and it may be wrong, is that bail/ditch/capture affects K/D ratio negatively. If that is true, then a rescued pilot should get to keep his kills as landed, not as bailed/ditch/captured because, for one reason, he is sacrificing his kills per hour to wait on the rescue.
However, if I was told incorrectly, another argument would have to be made.
He shouldn't get to land kills if he first had to bail, in order for his mommy to come pick him up. :rolleyes:
-
He shouldn't get to land kills if he first had to bail, in order for his mommy to come pick him up. :rolleyes:
I bet if you were carrying 8 when you got gang-banged you'd love your mommy to come pick you up. If you say no, you're a liar. :rofl
-
I bet if you were carrying 8 when you got gang-banged you'd love your mommy to come pick you up. If you say no, you're a liar. :rofl
No. No to your hypothetical "carrying 8" scenario and no to lying about it. I don't get off on having my name in lights.
Which is what this is all about: "Look at me everybody, I landed killz!" Not if you got shot down, you didn't.
-
In an effort to push this topic along to a different part of the dead horse than the current part -
I have a question for caldera, Karnak, and RTHolmes (and anybody else that agrees with their view). I understand you view on a pilot rescue feature being used in the MA's; what I am curious about is how you would feel about a pilot rescue feature for FSOs and scenarios use, with the stipulation that development and inclusion of a pilot rescue feature in FSO/scenarios wouldn't take away from development of other features/planes to be added? Keep in mind I am just asking to satisfy curiosity and am in no way trying to be rude or sarcastic.
-
I think it would be useless in FSOs or scenarios. It does nothing other than make busy work while people wait. Even if it is done at the end of the frame it still requires people to wait to be picked up rather than calling it a day and simply declaring that people who get a "bailed" were recovered and people who get a "captured" were captured. I highly doubt that a significant number of flyers were pulled out of enemy territory by aircraft rescuing them. Further, using the Storch as the referenced plane, it breaks down on bombers as rescuing the pilot of the B-17, Lancaster, G4M or Ju88 would hardly result in the manning of another such bomber.
-
No. No to your hypothetical "carrying 8" scenario and no to lying about it. I don't get off on having my name in lights.
Which is what this is all about: "Look at me everybody, I landed killz!" Not if you got shot down, you didn't.
Sure, lol
-
Ridiculous answer....this is the answer of the score worrier. How many German pilots were shot down repeatedly? They lose their kill credits? No. Quit worrying about how it affects your score
They weren't credited for a successful landing either.
ack-ack
-
In an effort to push this topic along to a different part of the dead horse than the current part -
I have a question for caldera, Karnak, and RTHolmes (and anybody else that agrees with their view). I understand you view on a pilot rescue feature being used in the MA's; what I am curious about is how you would feel about a pilot rescue feature for FSOs and scenarios use, with the stipulation that development and inclusion of a pilot rescue feature in FSO/scenarios wouldn't take away from development of other features/planes to be added? Keep in mind I am just asking to satisfy curiosity and am in no way trying to be rude or sarcastic.
I can't see them being useful in FSOs, Scenarios.. Maybe. Still I would score any rescued pilot as a safe bail nothing more. Nor would his name appear in lights unless the message went something like.
SYSTEM: Pilot Name safely landed his Storch after rescuing Pilot Name who got his butt shot down by Pilot Name.
-
I think it would be useless in FSOs or scenarios. It does nothing other than make busy work while people wait.
exactly. we did a special event a few yrs ago, I think a BoB.. where if you got shot down.. you could bail, and wait for a goon to "rescue" you.. enemy could not shoot chutes or goons.. we walked around on the deck waiting for goons.. you'd have to report that you wanted to be picked up, and a CM would have to go and view us getting "picked up" by the goon, and then we could re-up... all it ended up was half our side walking around waiting for someone to park a goon near us..
-
Then Sir KnowItAll,
With your logic Hitech should simply pull the Storch as a usless POS and get on with asking you for what you think should be on his HoneyDo list each day. I'm just trying to give it something to do worth while other than be gun fodder for any popgun in the game.
Since the game is still based on free association it would be up to the two players involved to participate. Meaning it's something they agree with each other to do and no skin off your postierior. Or have you been hired recently to be the game nanny? Do we check in with you now to preflight our diapers and make sure they are on clean and tight? I got a truck load of Depends for you to inspect and fluff in that case......extra fluffy. Do you wash windows to?
Oh my!
No need to read any further, got my fix! :rofl :rofl :rofl
JUGgler
-
thanks for the answers Karnak, shifty and kvuo75. I did not know they already tried pilot rescue in FSO.
-
It just occurred to me. The one valid argument that any of you Jealous Jennys have, has a simple solution.
It COULD be a problem if too many people decide to ask for a pick up. And it makes perfect sense to assume this although I dont think that it would be as popular of an option as some of you girls think.
Simple fix: NO COMMUNICATION FROM DOWNED PILOTS!
Whiners are so clueless.
Oops. Sorry. Back to my point. A pilot downed behind enemy lines had little to no access to comms, so it's fair enough to say that neither should you. The only way to get a pick up should be if you report that your going down before the bail or ditch. And if you cant stop crying about this compromise, then they could even go so far as to make a pick-up a squad only function where only a member can pick-up another member.
And the only way to find said pilot is if someone covers him from the sky until the storch arrives or the storch pilot gets very lucky.
A simple fix and an even better adventure than the original idea.
-
I still dont think it would be used, who wants to wait 15mins+ to turn a captured into a bailed?
-
I like that I could get 2 kills shooting down a storch carrying a downed pilot.
I don't like the fact that one of my squaddies coming to save me would have to land anywhere near me. Have you seen how we in the 80th land? I'd probably use my 45 to just put myself in the tower.
I just thought of something...... if killshooter is on and I use my 45 as stated above..... does the game crash?
-
:lol
-
The problem is with them getting a "landed kills" message when they were shot down. So player X gets two kills and lands is the same as player Y getting two kills and then shot down? Just because player Y has squaddies or lackeys that want to preserve his score or get him his precious "kills landed" text bar glory?
It can't be counted as "kills landed" because he came back in a different plane than he left in. If the Storch pilot were to get:"player Z rescued two pilots in a Storch", that would make sense. The rescued pilot didn't do anything, so why should he get anything?
-
It just occurred to me. The one valid argument that any of you Jealous Jennys have, has a simple solution.
It COULD be a problem if too many people decide to ask for a pick up. And it makes perfect sense to assume this although I dont think that it would be as popular of an option as some of you girls think.
Simple fix: NO COMMUNICATION FROM DOWNED PILOTS!
Whiners are so clueless.
Oops. Sorry. Back to my point. A pilot downed behind enemy lines had little to no access to comms, so it's fair enough to say that neither should you. The only way to get a pick up should be if you report that your going down before the bail or ditch. And if you cant stop crying about this compromise, then they could even go so far as to make a pick-up a squad only function where only a member can pick-up another member.
And the only way to find said pilot is if someone covers him from the sky until the storch arrives or the storch pilot gets very lucky.
A simple fix and an even better adventure than the original idea.
Ever hear of Teamspeak, Ventrilo, Skype or phones?
Yeah, all the "no communication" bit would do is block random people.
Think a bit before posting, "whiner".
-
Ever hear of Teamspeak, Ventrilo, Skype or phones?
Yeah, all the "no communication" bit would do is block random people.
Think a bit before posting, "whiner".
Whos the whiner? Im not the one crying because someone else might land "2 kills" or 20. Im merely pointing out solutions to your petty whines. If you get angry because someone else succeeds in any way, you have an ego problem. I could care less if they use ventriloquist, skypeople, or teamspokesmen.
It is as important to me as when gv'ers instantly repair 10 times before finally killing the guy who shot them 10 times or when someones only tactic in the game is to go head-on guns blazing in every encounter because they know that this is just a game and they dont really die if things dont go their way. It may be lame and an annoyance, but the ways that others game the game does not consume my days.
The problem is with them getting a "landed kills" message when they were shot down. So player X gets two kills and lands is the same as player Y getting two kills and then shot down? Just because player Y has squaddies or lackeys that want to preserve his score or get him his precious "kills landed" text bar glory?
It can't be counted as "kills landed" because he came back in a different plane than he left in. If the Storch pilot were to get:"player Z rescued two pilots in a Storch", that would make sense. The rescued pilot didn't do anything, so why should he get anything?
No. No to your hypothetical "carrying 8" scenario and no to lying about it. I don't get off on having my name in lights.
Which is what this is all about: "Look at me everybody, I landed killz!" Not if you got shot down, you didn't.
So is it fair to say that you dont clap when someone else lands kills?
They weren't credited for a successful landing either.
ack-ack
Erich Hartmann went down 11 times, lets just say they didnt hold it against him.
-
whiner,
Those who are objecting to the state of the game as it is now and ignoring the obvious problems being pointed out about their idiotic wish are the whiners. That should be obvious. The people who are pointing out these obvious problems in a foolhardy and apparently hopeless attempt to enlighten said whiners have nothing to whine about as they are already aware of why things are better the way they are now.
Erich Hartmann went down 11 times, lets just say they didnt hold it against him.
You're in luck. It doesn't get held against you in AH either. You can just grab another airplane.
-
Think a bit before posting, "whiner".
Wow...what a "dick" response. Don't be a "dick". Wasn't Karnak the pretend know-it-all of Johnny Carson? Perfect
-
Wow...what a "dick" response. Don't be a "dick". Wasn't Karnak the pretend know-it-all of Johnny Carson? Perfect
Read the thread. I was not the one tossing insults, but whiner there decided that he had to interject them into the thread. I am merely granting whiner's wish.
-
So is it fair to say that you dont clap when someone else lands kills?
Quite fair. Rarely do I send out a "WTG". What that fact has to do with the discussion is beyond me. Still waiting for an explanation of how getting shot down will be equated with landing kills.
-
Read the thread. I was not the one tossing insults, but whiner there decided that he had to interject them into the thread. I am merely granting whiner's wish.
I'm certain that calling him a whiner 50 times per post isn't dickish and it's helping you make your point..ya think?
-
I'm certain that calling him a whiner 50 times per post isn't dickish and it's helping you make your point..ya think?
He is beyond getting my point, so me being testy with him in reply to his choice to start insulting people who dared to disagree with him doesn't affect the chance of him understanding our arguments.
-
Quite fair. Rarely do I send out a "WTG". What that fact has to do with the discussion is beyond me.
It's called sarcasm. It is relevant because of how utterly consumed you are with other people landing kills, or not landing kills by your preference.
Still waiting for an explanation of how getting shot down will be equated with landing kills.
I am going to make an assumption here because your question makes no sense. Getting shot down does not "equate" to landing kills. Although they are both aspects of our discussion, they are not the same thing. Getting shot down is getting shot down, not much room for interpretation there.
Landing kills is a strictly game function and definition because in WW2, pilots didnt "land kills." They achieved victories (which DOES "equate" to kills.) And they didnt have to "land" to be credited with a kill. They could ditch, bail, crash, and/or die and their kills were still credited to them.
The only thing I am trying to equate here is pilot rescue to a fun activity, that hopefully doesnt hurt your feelings
Read the thread. I was not the one tossing insults, but whiner there decided that he had to interject them into the thread. I am merely granting whiner's wish.
When you actually understand the meaning of the word whiner, perhaps we can continue this discussion.
He is beyond getting my point, so me being testy with him in reply to his choice to start insulting people who dared to disagree with him doesn't affect the chance of him understanding our arguments.
I completely get your point. You feel insignificant when other people land kills and you want to prevent it from happening at the expense of others having fun.
-
I completely get your point. You feel insignificant when other people land kills and you want to prevent it from happening at the expense of others having fun.
Nope. Not that at all.
-
It's called sarcasm. It is relevant because of how utterly consumed you are with other people landing kills, or not landing kills by your preference.
I am going to make an assumption here because your question makes no sense. Getting shot down does not "equate" to landing kills. Although they are both aspects of our discussion, they are not the same thing. Getting shot down is getting shot down, not much room for interpretation there.
Landing kills is a strictly game function and definition because in WW2, pilots didnt "land kills." They achieved victories (which DOES "equate" to kills.) And they didnt have to "land" to be credited with a kill. They could ditch, bail, crash, and/or die and their kills were still credited to them.
The only thing I am trying to equate here is pilot rescue to a fun activity, that hopefully doesnt hurt your feelings
When you actually understand the meaning of the word whiner, perhaps we can continue this discussion.
I completely get your point. You feel insignificant when other people land kills and you want to prevent it from happening at the expense of others having fun.
Wow. You're right, I haven't slept in weeks over this. So anyone that disagrees with your ideas and makes a case against them is both consumed and hurt? I'm done here. The phrase "like talking to a brick wall" has your name written all over it.
-
If you get angry because someone else succeeds in any way, you have an ego problem.
Explain how getting shot down is succeeding.
-
Explain how getting shot down is succeeding.
If I took 5 of them with me? success
If they hung out at 12K and waited til 4 guys bled me out and then came down and killed me? success
If I gave someone a good fight that they enjoyed? Success
If I flew out in a Storch and picked MUZIK up so he could land his kills and I got to keep his perks? Success (That would be a win/win in motivational parlance)
As a future MOD, you should know better than anyone...its a game and FUN = success
What I dont understand is the folks here that TELL people what is a waste of time. As much as they would hate to admit it here or to themselves, no one gets to tell someone else what is or is not a waste of their time or the games time. See, that is a value judgement and although some might not value a rescue, others would. That's akin to telling someone how they should "feel". No one gets to tell people how they feel or what would be a waste of time to them because its all in the value judgement. Folks that do that kind of thing are typically the corner A personalities that feel important only when they are controlling others.
Take the idea and talk about what YOU would or wouldnt do...not what you know as fact others would do because quite frankly, no one knows what someone else would do. Its kind of embarrassing watching someone speak for the community as a whole...because that person has NO IDEA what someone else finds fun. Please don't say they do...
-
Yes, taking five with you is a success, but not as much as taking five out and returning to your base. You are asking to turn it into the same thing at the expense of the game.
To a degree the answer to this is already in the game in the form of perk bomber drones. If you take a formation of B-29s you will pay about 300 perk points, 100 per plane, and if you lose two of them while getting the "successful landing" message in the third, you still don't get to get the perk points back for the two that you lost, you only get about 100 perk points back.
-
If I took 5 of them with me? success
If they hung out at 12K and waited til 4 guys bled me out and then came down and killed me? success
If I gave someone a good fight that they enjoyed? Success
If I flew out in a Storch and picked MUZIK up so he could land his kills and I got to keep his perks? Success (That would be a win/win in motivational parlance)
As a future MOD, you should know better than anyone...its a game and FUN = success
What I don't understand is the folks here that TELL people what is a waste of time. As much as they would hate to admit it here or to themselves, no one gets to tell someone else what is or is not a waste of their time or the games time. See, that is a value judgement and although some might not value a rescue, others would. That's akin to telling someone how they should "feel". No one gets to tell people how they feel or what would be a waste of time to them because its all in the value judgement. Folks that do that kind of thing are typically the corner A personalities that feel important only when they are controlling others.
Take the idea and talk about what YOU would or wouldn't do...not what you know as fact others would do because quite frankly, no one knows what someone else would do. Its kind of embarrassing watching someone speak for the community as a whole...because that person has NO IDEA what someone else finds fun. Please don't say they do...
That's quite a soapbox you jumped on for a question that wasn't even directed at you. You don't need to lecture me on presuming I know what is and isn't fun for people, I've made no claims in that regard in this thread. Here's something for you to consider. Why should a guy that gets shot down and rescued get his name in lights when a guy that got the same number of kills and nurses his aircraft back to a friendly base ditching in the airbase perimeter because battle damage prevented him from making it to the runway not get his name in lights? Why should the guy that defends his base from a horde getting 5 kills and forced to bail over his base not get his name in lights yet a guy rescued does? What makes getting rescued more valuable and worthy of getting your name in lights when the same is not done for the other two instances I've listed above?
-
If I flew out in a Storch and picked WHINER up so he could land his kills and I got to keep his perks? Success (That would be a win/win in motivational parlance)
Depends on your point of view and what you mean by "keep his perks."
For you it is a win, particularly if he managed to get back towards the base and you aren't flying your Fi156 into contested air space you are getting basically free perks. For him, he gets his name in lights and gets to keep his score despite being shot down and all he has to do is wait for fifteen to thirty minutes on a hillside. For the rest of the guys in the arena it is a loss, you've both been effectively removed from participating in the game for those fifteen to thirty minutes.
As to the keeping the perks bit, it is one thing if you mean the perks he earned on the sortie, though I do see ways to game that. Much worse and much easier to game would be getting the perks he had paid for a perk plane. That would be frequently gamed as a perk point transfer method, bail out of an Me262 near some field in the back and then your buddy, at no risk, comes and picks you up, presto, you gave him about 200 perk points.
-
Yes, taking five with you is a success, but not as much as taking five out and returning to your base. You are asking to turn it into the same thing at the expense of the SCORE.
To a degree the answer to this is already in the game in the form of perk bomber drones. If you take a formation of B-29s you will pay about 300 perk points, 100 per plane, and if you lose two of them while getting the "successful landing" message in the third, you still don't get to get the perk points back for the two that you lost, you only get about 100 perk points back.
FIXED
Thanks for making my point. You are telling me what my definition of success is...and I already answered that. Please don't...saying its more or less of a success doesnt ease the control any. If enough people want to do it or get rescued and have fun doing it, it has a place in the game and that's simple logic.
-
That's quite a soapbox you jumped on for a question that wasn't even directed at you. You don't need to lecture me on presuming I know what is and isn't fun for people, I've made no claims in that regard in this thread. THAT'S BECAUSE YOUR POST SMACKED OF RHETORICAL SARCASM. THE ACK-ACK "stick you comment in for effect" routine
Here's something for you to consider. Why should a guy that gets shot down and rescued get his name in lights when a guy that got the same number of kills and nurses his aircraft back to a friendly base ditching in the airbase perimeter because battle damage prevented him from making it to the runway not get his name in lights? BECAUSE HE DIDN'T GET RESCUED. THIS IDEA FIXES THAT. HE CAN WAIT AND GET RESCUED IF HE WISHES.
Why should the guy that defends his base from a horde getting 5 kills and forced to bail over his base not get his name in lights yet a guy rescued does? IF WE ARE TALKING IMMERSION HERE, I WOULD THINK ITS OBVIOUSLY A RISK ISSUE. BAILING OVER YOUR BASE IS ABOUT AS RISKLESS AS FLYING IN THE TA. WHY WOULD YOU USE THIS AS AN EXAMPLE? THE PILOT IS TAKING NO RISK IN HIS BASE-BAIL
What makes getting rescued more valuable and worthy of getting your name in lights when the same is not done for the other two instances I've listed above? BECAUSE TWO PEOPLE ARE RISKING THEMSELVES
FIXED
-
FIXED
Thanks for making my point. You are telling me what my definition of success is...and I already answered that. Please don't...saying its more or less of a success doesnt ease the control any. If enough people want to do it or get rescued and have fun doing it, it has a place in the game and that's simple logic.
No, it isn't. It is extremely faulty logic. People think they want many things that they do not really want because they do not think of the consequences of those things. In all the game forums I have frequented this has always been the case, requests for new features or for changes are almost never accompanied by any attempt at thinking through the effect that the request would have on the game, good and bad. The thinking is usually limited to "I think I would have fun using 'really powerful thing x' against the other players without even the most basic thought of 'really powerful thing x' being used against the wisher. In this case it isn't a wish for a really powerful thing, but the thinking is still limited to "I think this would be cool and fun!" without thinking of either the effect on the game nor of how practical the wish is.
Whiner, for example, got very testy with me after I merely pointed out the gaping hole in his reasoning about blocking communication from bailed players as a solution to people arranging pickups. He didn't even try to vet his solution before posting it.
-
FIXED
:lol
You really should try and fix your own statements. Like the two below.
THE PILOT IS TAKING NO RISK IN HIS BASE-BAIL
BECAUSE TWO PEOPLE ARE RISKING THEMSELVES
Actually only one person would be risking himself and that would be the storch pilot. I'm all for his name being in lights. The guy shot down is no more at risk than the guy that bailed over his own base. He's already lost his aircraft just like the guy that bailed over his own base or the guy that ditched short of the runway. You just don't seem to be capable of picking up on that. Wanting your name in lights for being rescued is about the same as wrecking a company vehicle having a co-worker pick you up and return you to the office so you can walk in and demand a raise.
-
No, it isn't. It is extremely faulty logic. People think they want many things that they do not really want because they do not think of the consequences of those things. In all the game forums I have frequented this has always been the case, requests for new features or for changes are almost never accompanied by any attempt at thinking through the effect that the request would have on the game, good and bad. The thinking is usually limited to "I think I would have fun using 'really powerful thing x' against the other players without even the most basic thought of 'really powerful thing x' being used against the wisher. In this case it isn't a wish for a really powerful thing, but the thinking is still limited to "I think this would be cool and fun!" without thinking of either the effect on the game nor of how practical the wish is.
Whiner, for example, got very testy with me after I merely pointed out the gaping hole in his reasoning about blocking communication from bailed players as a solution to people arranging pickups. He didn't even try to vet his solution before posting it.
Please don't be vague. You are actually beginning to make an argument against the rescue that has merit and that's a start.
What are the consequences you speak of....be specific. You have said there are consequences, but you havent really listed anything other than what your opinion of fair "scoring" might be. What are they? Lets just get this nailed down right now.
-
:lol
You really should try and fix your own statements. Like the two below.
THE PILOT IS TAKING NO RISK IN HIS BASE-BAIL
BECAUSE TWO PEOPLE ARE RISKING THEMSELVES
Actually only one person would be risking himself and that would be the storch pilot. I'm all for his name being in lights. The guy shot down is no more at risk than the guy that bailed over his own base. He's already lost his aircraft just like the guy that bailed over his own base or the guy that ditched short of the runway. You just don't seem to be capable of picking up on that. Wanting your name in lights for being rescued is about the same as wrecking a company vehicle having a co-worker pick you up and return you to the office so you can walk in and demand a raise.
wow...let me spell it out for you.
Storch is risking himself..yes
Downed pilot could have gotten a BAIL...his risk is he now gets a DEATH if the rescue bird gets shot down. You are equating LOST AIRPLANE to death as I'm reading it. Baby steps...
The REWARD is name in lights for the rescued pilot and PERKS of the kills the rescued pilot earned go to the Storch driver. It really isn't that hard.
What you both are trying to do is keep the penalties of being shot down or ditching on someone which I FEEL is a petty little gamer attitude as opposed to another possible immersion feature.
Whether or not its a COADING waste is not up to either of you...there are a lot of features in the game that aren't used very often. How long do you think Storch's marking GV's is going to last? I've been shot down with tank main guns about everytime Ive upped one. How long has the WWI arena been a useful, busy arena? Is that a waste of time and COADING...not to the people who did the work nor to the few who use the feature. It isn't up to you...and nothing either of you have typed has been impactful enough to me to make me think the feature would be used any more or less than designing an entire ARENA (WWI)!
We can do this all day...the truth is none of us are privy to anything other than our opinions...if it were to get implemented, DON'T USE IT...It won't bother any of us one little bit. I will take a screen shot of your whines on 200 when someone gets rescued and you're upset because of something so petty as "he got his name in LIGHTS" for being rescued. Stop already with the "it will ruin the integrity of the game" routine.
-
I have been very specific. This is, again, the position I have stated from the beginning.
It takes players out of the game by having them sit on a hillside for 15-30 or more minutes waiting to be picked up. While they sit on the hillside they are not participating in the game, which is the fighting, base taking and strat hitting. It also takes the pilot of the Fi156 mostly out of the game as the Fi156 is, in this context, is not much of a combatant.
This would be fine if there were no reward that encouraged it or made it worth the time other than for the fun factor as it would be rarely utilized. The moment a reward is added that is large enough to make it worth while to rescue and/or be rescued it would have an impact on the number of players actually participating in the game.
All score, perk and name in lights considerations pale compared to that negative impact on the game.
-
the system currently rewards pilots who can RTB with their aircraft and land it on concrete at a friendly base with their name in lights.
what a couple of people here are proposing is that the reward system be changed so that a pilot who RTBs even without his aircraft is also rewarded with his name in lights.
the logical consequence of that suggested change is that all sorties end with name in lights, because the AH pilot always RTBs to a friendly base whether he ditches, bails, is captured or dies. whatever the result of a sortie, you always end up in the tower of a friendly base.
apparently I am also an adolescent/twit/Jealous Jenny/girl/whiner/clueless/crying/petty little gamer because I dont think the wish is a good idea :lol
-
What you both are trying to do is keep the penalties of being shot down or ditching on someone which I FEEL is a petty little gamer attitude as opposed to another possible immersion feature.
What you're trying to do is get your name in lights for landing kills after losing your plane and becoming a passenger in a plane somebody else lands.. Then you say I'm the one with the petty gamer attitude? :lol Why do you keep blowing your coading rants in my direction? The only thing I've commented on is the rescued pilot getting his name in lights none of the other mucus in your rant.
-
Explain how getting shot down is succeeding.
You have a hard time with comprehension dont ya. Who said getting shot down was succeeding? Getting back to base is the actual success IF if you must define one.
Anyhow, why do you assume that someone who flys back to base has worked any harder than someone who had to wait 15 minutes (or more) for a rescue? It's obviously more tedious and boring to get rescued. For some of us, killing is the easy part :devil Im guessing it's somewhat of a challenge for those of you who dont want to see others get their name in lights for this.
And the bottom line here is that everyone in favor of this idea is in favor of it, because of the ADVENTURE of it. Not the score. The score is merely a way to increase the gamble of doing this. It's a way of adding a danger of loss to the situation.
That is the purest description of an idea that a bunch of jealous, obsessive children have turned into a "I dont want him to get his name in lights" whine.
-
whiner,
I don't care at all about name in lights or score or perks.
My problem with it is that it is either a waste of coding time or it is bad for the game. It is a waste of coding time if there is no reward because it will almost never be used. It is bad for the game if there is a reward large enough to significantly encourage its use because it takes players out of the actual game by rewarding them for doing nothing but sitting on a hillside.
Not that I expect that concept to get through your thick skull as you are too locked into some juvenile jealousy fantasy you are projecting on us.
-
That is the purest description of an idea that a bunch of jealous, obsessive children have turned into a "I dont want him to get his name in lights" whine.
It seems you have a hard time with answering a simple question without throwing insults. If you want the adventure of the rescue and any immersion that goes with it that's a good thing for all involved in the rescue. Its not that I don't want him to get his name in lights. Its is a question of is the action worthy of getting his names in lights anymore than the situations I've posted above about a pilot who has bailed or a pilot forced to ditch short of the runway? In my opinion its not but thats my opinion nothing more. You've given your opinion Changeup has given his, so does that mean you two are obsessive whiners as well? Or is insulting people who have a different opinion from you the only way you two can attempt to get your points across?
-
And the bottom line here is that everyone in favor of this idea is in favor of it, because of the ADVENTURE of it. Not the score. The score is merely a way to increase the gamble of doing this. It's a way of adding a danger of loss to the situation.
You can have gameplay identical to this idea right now, today, the very next sortie you fly. Get shot down, have a buddy launch his storch and fly to you and land beside you. Attach to his plane. Fly back to base.
If you aren't doing this right now, you don't want it because it is fun, you want it because you want to preserve your numbers and score. QED.
Wiley.
-
You can have gameplay identical to this idea right now, today, the very next sortie you fly. Get shot down, have a buddy launch his storch and fly to you and land beside you. Attach to his plane. Fly back to base.
If you aren't doing this right now, you don't want it because it is fun, you want it because you want to preserve your numbers and score. QED.
Wiley.
Except there is no penalty for failure to get back to base with your picked up pilot, hence, no risk and to me, no fun
-
Except there is no penalty for failure to get back to base with your picked up pilot, hence, no risk and to me, no fun
Sure there is, you get a "death" in the Fi156.
-
Hmm... So, when I up a C.202, F4F-3/4, P-40C and fly over the friendly Capital till I need to rtb due to fuel for NO OTHER REASON than to just fly around, ONLINE over the Capital, I'm robbing everyone of something? That makes no sense. Then again, why should I care? I felt like doing the above and I had fun doing it. So I am to guess that if a friend and I decided to up from the 163 base in Trinity, and fly around till we ran low on fuel doing formation flying or just simply screwing around, we would have robbed everyone of something?
My point is, if someone wants to fly the rescue mission and someone wants to wait to be rescued, LET THEM DO IT. Last I recall, it's THEIR $15.
In the end, if it is added, I'll fly a rescue mission every now-and-again. I would like to see it implemented, but if not, oh well. As for the score bit, who-...oh wait. Some people do care. Nevermind. :noid (and no, that is NOT directed at anyone here, just a general statement)
-
I have been very specific. This is, again, the position I have stated from the beginning.
It takes players out of the game by having them sit on a hillside for 15-30 or more minutes waiting to be picked up. While they sit on the hillside they are not participating in the game, which is the fighting, base taking and strat hitting. It also takes the pilot of the Fi156 mostly out of the game as the Fi156 is, in this context, is not much of a combatant.
This would be fine if there were no reward that encouraged it or made it worth the time other than for the fun factor as it would be rarely utilized. The moment a reward is added that is large enough to make it worth while to rescue and/or be rescued it would have an impact on the number of players actually participating in the game.
All score, perk and name in lights considerations pale compared to that negative impact on the game.
As I said, you're making value judgments on where people decide to spend their time and your exaggerating the rescue's probable usage in game. Ridiculous
-
the system currently rewards pilots who can RTB with their aircraft and land it on concrete at a friendly base with their name in lights.
what a couple of people here are proposing is that the reward system be changed so that a pilot who RTBs even without his aircraft is also rewarded with his name in lights.
the logical consequence of that suggested change is that all sorties end with name in lights, because the AH pilot always RTBs to a friendly base whether he ditches, bails, is captured or dies. whatever the result of a sortie, you always end up in the tower of a friendly base.
apparently I am also an adolescent/twit/Jealous Jenny/girl/whiner/clueless/crying/petty little gamer because I dont think the wish is a good idea :lol
Really? Then explain how this is different than deliveries supplies to a FUBAR GV. He, by all rights is dead and cannot get back to base OR is out of ammo and cannot defend himself...if he gets resupplied, he gets to land his kills AND the supply guy gets perks for the supps that were used saving him. How is rescuing a pilot down any different?
Karnak and shifty,
How is it different? Why wouldnt this be considered taking someone out of the game?
-
GV supplies:
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-k7RYJbWgXbk/TWTwx2zagII/AAAAAAAAAKE/gBZNm_1L3p8/s1600/Red%2BHerring.gif)
-
And the bottom line here is that everyone in favor of this idea is in favor of it, because of the ADVENTURE of it. Not the score. The score is merely a way to increase the gamble of doing this. It's a way of adding a danger of loss to the situation.
so if its just for immersion, not for score, then presumably you wouldnt have a problem with the rescued pilot's sortie being treated as a Bailed?
edit: cool, I'm now a Jealous/Obsessive Child too :D
-
Hmm... So, when I up a C.202, F4F-3/4, P-40C and fly over the friendly Capital till I need to rtb due to fuel for NO OTHER REASON than to just fly around, ONLINE over the Capital, I'm robbing everyone of something? That makes no sense. Then again, why should I care? I felt like doing the above and I had fun doing it. So I am to guess that if a friend and I decided to up from the 163 base in Trinity, and fly around till we ran low on fuel doing formation flying or just simply screwing around, we would have robbed everyone of something?
My point is, if someone wants to fly the rescue mission and someone wants to wait to be rescued, LET THEM DO IT. Last I recall, it's THEIR $15.
In the end, if it is added, I'll fly a rescue mission every now-and-again. I would like to see it implemented, but if not, oh well. As for the score bit, who-...oh wait. Some people do care. Nevermind. :noid (and no, that is NOT directed at anyone here, just a general statement)
You can fly your early fighter around an unoccupied area until it runs out of fuel, sure. It is your $15/mo. The difference here is that there is nothing encouraging significant numbers of people to do so and no changes to the game are required for you to be able to do so. If you were making a wish thread to be rewarded for that behavior I'd post against it too.
As I said, you're making value judgments on where people decide to spend their time and your exaggerating the rescue's probable usage in game. Ridiculous
I am yes, and while I am not part of HTC I am well aware that game designers have to make those judgments for a game to function. Games designed by democracy are rarely any good.
As to the probable usage, without a reward it is very low. I stated as much in the post of mine that you quoted. I have no problem with that version of the request due to its low usage. My problem with it is that people want, or will want, a reward to justify the time investment and if there is a reward to make the time investment worth it, suddenly the low usage is far from certain.
re: GV supplies:
Supplies to a slow tank delivered by a fast GV or by an aircraft get that slow tank back into the fight faster than the tank ending the sortie and starting a new one in which he has to slowly drive back to the fight. It helps sustain the GV fight.
-
re: GV supplies:
Supplies to a slow tank delivered by a fast GV or by an aircraft get that slow tank back into the fight faster than the tank ending the sortie and starting a new one in which he has to slowly drive back to the fight. It helps sustain the GV fight.
Are you kidding me? There are hundreds of spawns into bases that 10 mins or more of drive time to get to them and same or more for the GV to drive back to land his kills. You're reaching now...and I guess you don't vote on the a/c development? Based on your feelings, that is a poor decisions by the owners...lol. I bet you voted in every case, lol. You're funny.
-
GV supplies:
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-k7RYJbWgXbk/TWTwx2zagII/AAAAAAAAAKE/gBZNm_1L3p8/s1600/Red%2BHerring.gif)
Nice post...those folks unable to reason an argument claim red herrings...it's weak because you have no other argument. Put a fork I this one...he's out of mental capacity.
-
so if its just for immersion, not for score, then presumably you wouldnt have a problem with the rescued pilot's sortie being treated as a Bailed?
edit: cool, I'm now a Jealous/Obsessive Child too :D
Possibly...If resupped GVs are....maybe a new point situation could be developed....RESCUED
-
...those folks unable to reason an argument use red herrings...it's weak because you have no other argument.
fixed :aok
-
fixed :aok
Lmao!! You sir, are right. I stand corrected
-
Are you kidding me? There are hundreds of spawns into bases that 10 mins or more of drive time to get to them and same or more for the GV to drive back to land his kills. You're reaching now...and I guess you don't vote on the a/c development? Based on your feelings, that is a poor decisions by the owners...lol. I bet you voted in every case, lol. You're funny.
Whenever I have used an actual tank the drive times have been well more than ten minutes. There are also the added problems that perk tanks have of retreating and "landing successfully" as compared to a Tempest, which can pretty much just decide to go home.
As to the plane polls 1) developer sponsored polls are a separate category obviously. 2) Which unit gets added is not at all on the level of gameplay changes when it comes to affecting the way the game plays. What real change does the Beaufighter make to the gameplay of non-Beaufighter fans?
-
Whenever I have used an actual tank the drive times have been well more than ten minutes. There are also the added problems that perk tanks have of retreating and "landing successfully" as compared to a Tempest, which can pretty much just decide to go home.
As to the plane polls 1) developer sponsored polls are a separate category obviously. 2) Which unit gets added is not at all on the level of gameplay changes when it comes to affecting the way the game plays. What real change does the Beaufighter make to the gameplay of non-Beaufighter fans?
The difference is that the owners are more wise than you. They allow some developer/user interaction because good ideas on planes and gameplay are good for the continued development of the game.
I, for one, am glad they allow some voting. It keeps the players in touch with the developers and it keeps the game from getting stale.
I'm glad you don't own the place...I fear it would be terribly stale if you did.
You better give HITech a call and tell him to remove the Wishlist Forum....cuz that's all this is. Somehow, you've turned it into a jailbreak of democracy, lol
-
Wiser than I am? Well, they certainly know their product better than I do, but.....the position I have been stating about popularity not being a good method for a developer to make changes to their game is a position that HiTech has explicitly stated in this forum. I have also seen the developers at Blizzard explicitly state the same.
So, I guess in this case HiTech, the guys at Blizzard and myself share the same opinion.
Obviously, as I said, any developer will know their product better than any player will. It is entirely possible that what I see as bad things for the game, HiTech would see as a good thing for the game, so maybe you will get your perk transfer, name in lights, pilot rescue feature, but if you do it will not be because it was a popular idea, it will be because HiTech and Pyro thought it was a good idea.
-
Y'all are so amusing....kinda like kids on a playground, tryin to impress one another with your vast knowledge,or beat em down with your replies.
-
Wiser than I am? Well, they certainly know their product better than I do, but.....the position I have been stating about popularity not being a good method for a developer to make changes to their game is a position that HiTech has explicitly stated in this forum. I have also seen the developers at Blizzard explicitly state the same.
So, I guess in this case HiTech, the guys at Blizzard and myself share the same opinion.
Obviously, as I said, any developer will know their product better than any player will. It is entirely possible that what I see as bad things for the game, HiTech would see as a good thing for the game, so maybe you will get your perk transfer, name in lights, pilot rescue feature, but if you do it will not be because it was a popular idea, it will be because HiTech and Pyro thought it was a good idea.
Actually the position you've been stating is that the idea would be a waste of the players time and a waste of the developers time. Development via popular conceptualization has had very little to do with the entire thread thus far, but you used it well for your fallback position in the discussion.
-
Actually the position you've been stating is that the idea would be a waste of the players time and a waste of the developers time. Development via popular conceptualization has had very little to do with the entire thread thus far, but you used it well for your fallback position in the discussion.
What fallback position? My take from the start has been that it is bad for the game as I stated. I stand by that position as there has not been any effective refutation of it. You introduced the faulty idea that anything the players want to do should be available as it is their $15/mo. I simply added that to my list of things to respond to.
-
If rescues were never conducted in WW2 by puddel jumper observation craft then I ask Hitech to close this thread for being histroicly off base.
Otherwise, I don't see it poking out anyones eyeballs whenever messages scroll through the games text buffer. I'll understand though if Karnak is using direct lazer imaging technology and he's begining to get retna burn in these days and doesen't want to go to his grave seeing the following in his periferal for the rest of his life:
HOST: changeup saved bustr in a Storch of Army of Muppets
-
If rescues were never conducted in WW2 by puddel jumper observation craft then I ask Hitech to close this thread for being histroicly off base.
Otherwise, I don't see it poking out anyones eyeballs whenever messages scroll through the games text buffer. I'll understand though if Karnak is using direct lazer imaging technology and he's begining to get retna burn in these days and doesen't want to go to his grave seeing the following in his periferal for the rest of his life:
HOST: changeup saved bustr in a Storch of Army of Muppets
And Changeup WOULD save Bustr in a Storch of Army of Muppets
-
What fallback position? My take from the start has been that it is bad for the game as I stated. I stand by that position as there has not been any effective refutation of it. You introduced the faulty idea that anything the players want to do should be available as it is their $15/mo. I simply added that to my list of things to respond to.
Wrong. I added the following:
1. Success (as defined by the user, not the community) = Fun
2. BBS flametards and gamers don't get to judge the time value of other players;
3. That HiTech and his staff have used a form of democracy in the past to let the community help decide which equipment will be modeled next for the game;
4. That a game-appropriate model can be developed for this concept that rewards the pilot rescuing and being rescued;
5. That the Storch/downed pilot rescue is no different than the GV/Supply delivery rescue of a GV that is injured beyond repair or out of ammo (both are guaranteed death in most cases) from a time-away-from-the-fight perspective and a "rescue" perspective;
6. This is an idea and all ideas are worthy of being vetted out to a game-appropriate conclusion (to which you have posted nothing of any value towards a decision in the negative, with the exception of properly crediting the pilots involved...and possibly the over-your-own-field-bail out.)
I have NEVER mentioned the following:
1. Its my 15 bucks
2. Gimme what I want because I think its a good idea (BTW, had you come up with a decent reason rescues WERE a bad idea, I would have no compunction whatsoever capitulating)
3. Hitech and his staff should grant all wishes (that is just stupid for you to say I said or, that I intimated that)
You say it would be bad for the game but you cannot come up with any reasons that do not already exist in the game as evidenced from your posts; therefore, yes, inclusion by popularity was a horrible fallback position.
Friends?
Changeup
-
I explained why rescues that were encouraged by rewards that made it worth the time to do the rescue would be bad for the game. You disagree because you think players should be able to do what they want with the game as it is their$15/mo and, correctly, that it isn't my place to tell people how to play. It is, however, HTC's place to tell players how to play, at least to a degree.
Also, consider the kind of game play you are advocating. One of the participants gets to sit on a hillside for 15-30 or more minutes doing nothing. That doesn't strike me as something that should be encouraged.
-
I explained why rescues that were encouraged by rewards that made it worth the time to do the rescue would be bad for the game. You disagree because you think players should be able to do what they want with the game as it is their$15/mo and, correctly, that it isn't my place to tell people how to play. It is, however, HTC's place to tell players how to play, at least to a degree.
Also, consider the kind of game play you are advocating. One of the participants gets to sit on a hillside for 15-30 or more minutes doing nothing. That doesn't strike me as something that should be encouraged.
I am encouraging it could be a fun addition to the game. Whatever time it takes is up to the rescuer and the rescuee. In other words, if HiTech were to include the rescue into the game, the "gameplay" Im advocating is up to the players and they don't have to do it...just like the WWI arena or GVing (camping for 30 minutes for absolutely NOTHING...they aren't even being rescued! They are sitting there waiting for some poor unsuspecting noob to pop in so they can whammo them from a distance that doesn't even put them at risk).
BTW, running supps out to a busted up GV and dying 7 times to get it there aint much fun either but its in the game.
-
Since the beginning of World War II, "Storch" was accompanied by German troops are literally everywhere, wherever they go.
The loss of these aircraft were isolated, they said that their front-line life of up to 10 times longer than Bf.109. And this despite the fact that the special rescue units were ordered to take out Wustennotstaffeln officially dead and wounded in battle, as well as the crews of downed aircraft, wherever they are. For example, in North Africa, Fi-156 C-5 is often flew into the roadless desert to rescue German pilots. Since the late 1941 began a special ambulance version released Fi-156 D-1, which has most of the starboard side held the door hatch for quick loading / unloading of the stretcher.
Wüstennotstaffel 1
Formed 8.41 in Benghazi. Main duties was rescue of downed pilots in the African desert.
In 6.43 redesignated Verbindungsstaffel 400.
Known bases:
Gazala, 12.41
Martuba, 4.42 - 5.42
Derna, 11.41
Tmimi, 12.41
Qutaifiya, 6.42 - 11.42
Castell Benito, 1.43
Medenine, 2.43
Wüstennotstaffel 1
Knight’s Cross
Kroseberg, Heinz 19.06.1942 Hauptmann d.R. Staffelkapitän 1./Wüstennotstaffel
German Cross in Gold
Siegmund, Manfred, 17.06.1942, Oberleutnant, Flugzeugführer im Sonderbildkommando Afrika
----------------------------------------------
The Storch was used for a very wide range of functions, amongst them artillery spotting, reconnaissance, staff liaison, as an air ambulance, to rescue downed airmen from behind enemy lines (especially valuable in North Africa, where it was operated by two rescue squadrons or Wüstennotstaffeln, and in Russia), as a cable laying aircraft, and on a number of special missions.
-
whiner,
I don't care at all about name in lights or score or perks.
My problem with it is that it is either a waste of coding time or it is bad for the game. It is a waste of coding time if there is no reward because it will almost never be used. It is bad for the game if there is a reward large enough to significantly encourage its use because it takes players out of the actual game by rewarding them for doing nothing but sitting on a hillside.
Not that I expect that concept to get through your thick skull as you are too locked into some juvenile jealousy fantasy you are projecting on us.
idiot,
With the exception of the coding, (which you dont have the aptitude to understand in the first place) your whole argument revolves around removing the reward for being rescued. You wont stop coming back to the same argument. It hurts your feelings that someone else lands kills PERIOD. There is no doubt about it. The more you run your mouth, the more you prove it.
As changeup stated and you have no intelligent response to, no more players would be removed from the game than GV'rs who wait for supplies to repair their dead tanks. It is the same concept and tankers still get to land kills.
And again, it's none of your diddlying business what anyone else does with their 15 bucks.
It seems you have a hard time with answering a simple question without throwing insults. If you want the adventure of the rescue and any immersion that goes with it that's a good thing for all involved in the rescue. Its not that I don't want him to get his name in lights. Its is a question of is the action worthy of getting his names in lights anymore than the situations I've posted above about a pilot who has bailed or a pilot forced to ditch short of the runway? In my opinion its not but thats my opinion nothing more. You've given your opinion Changeup has given his, so does that mean you two are obsessive whiners as well? Or is insulting people who have a different opinion from you the only way you two can attempt to get your points across?
I have no problem having civil discussions with intelligent, reasonable people. If you dont like an idea all you have to do is type -1. If you really must prove that an idea is a bad one, it can be done politely by simply asking something like "what if this idea promotes lots of calls on 200 for rescue and removes so many players from the game that it becomes a detriment to gameplay?"
But that is not how these guys operate. They come in and bash ideas. Rudely. And their arguments are idiotic besides. I came in here guns drawn because I have seen enough of their posts to know who they are and the retardation they promote. My insults are calculated and intentional. Theirs may not be intentional (I dont believe that for a second) or even obvious to others, but I see their bbs bullying as an insult to other players and the game, if not against the rules of the BBS.
The fact is that with enough constructive criticism this idea can be developed and implemented with enough checks and balances to mitigate any negatives that may come with it EXACTLY the way Htc has designed every other aspect of this game.
Some people come to these boards to offer ideas on what those checks and balances might be. Retards come here and say it cant be done (as if they were smart enough to know,) it takes development time away from MY insignificant wishes, it takes players away from MY idea of fun
NO ONE has ever said that any ideas posted on these forums would ever get implemented and these clowns come in here throwing tantrums as if they're on a mission to halt production. BRILLIANT.
-
As changeup stated and you have no intelligent response to, no more players would be removed from the game than GV'rs who wait for supplies to repair their dead tanks. It is the same concept and tankers still get to land kills.
Except it's not. The return trip unless it's a couple miles from the base will eat up way more time to get them back to the fight, whereas the repaired GV is immediately back in the fight. Not the same thing at all.
Wiley.
-
Except it's not. The return trip unless it's a couple miles from the base will eat up way more time to get them back to the fight, whereas the repaired GV is immediately back in the fight. Not the same thing at all.
Wiley.
It is the same...the GVer had to wait 10 mins to get the supps in the first place, unless he was resupped by a Storch which is faster than the M3. You are talking about time HOME, I'm talking about time TO. What difference does it make whether its on the front end or the back end?
And, if players are doing what they want to do, how are they "removed" from the fight? Sometimes the game is fighting, sometimes its getting sups out, sometimes its rearming, sometimes its me getting a beer, etc.
Furthermore, if you really think about this scenario, no one is going to ask for a rescue half a sector away from a base....because not very many people would go get them. But to go down halfway inside the dar ring or closer?...yup....I'd go get you Wiley! You probably wouldn't wait though because getting back in the fight is more important to you. That's the value judgement...
-
It is the same...the GVer had to wait 10 mins to get the supps in the first place, unless he was resupped by a Storch which is faster than the M3. You are talking about time HOME, I'm talking about time TO. What difference does it make whether its on the front end or the back end?
Plenty. GV sits 10 minutes. Storch drops supplies. GV is now combat effective.
Pilot gets shot down. Has a buddy immediately waiting to get to him. Storch ups. Flies 10 minutes (and that's a really short flight) and lands. Picks guy up. Flies back 10 minutes. Rescued pilot now ups again and flies back to fight.
20 minutes to get rescued, still has to fly back to the fight.
Wiley.
-
With the exception of the coding, (which you dont have the aptitude to understand in the first place) your whole argument revolves around removing the reward for being rescued. You wont stop coming back to the same argument. It hurts your feelings that someone else lands kills PERIOD. There is no doubt about it. The more you run your mouth, the more you prove it.
You write pretty good English for not being able to read.
Seeing as you are literally incapable of reading, I am done with this.
-
Except it's not. The return trip unless it's a couple miles from the base will eat up way more time to get them back to the fight, whereas the repaired GV is immediately back in the fight. Not the same thing at all.
Wiley.
You shouldnt use arguments with holes in them. They leak. Your "unless" is just more of the same BS you all have been using this whole argument. You keep making assumptions that arent based on what we already know to be facts. Sometimes GVrs may only wait a couple minutes for supps. Others with more kills might sit there for 20 minutes. Ive seen it plenty of times and so have you.
Downed pilots are not going to be any different. The fact is, people are impatient, lazy, and generally only concerned with their own self gratification. So downed pilots will get bored and tower out (especially if they have no comms) and the general population is going to typically ignore requests for rescue (we already know a few of you who will.) And the law of averages say that there will be plenty more of you in the arena, so whatever frustration you claim is going to result if this idea is implemented will mitigate the mass rescue missions you THINK will occur.
Ive also seen campers sit on a spot for an hour to avoid getting killed. They might get a few kills that hour, but they are hardly active. With proper tweaking any idea can be implemented and used successfully, along with with another dozen examples of what players MIGHT be doing when they are not participating in combat, your "out of the fight" arguments get blown out of the water.
You write pretty good English for not being able to read.
Seeing as you are literally incapable of reading, I am done with this.
If you write a letter to someone you believe is incapable of reading, your intellect has failed you again. But your true frustration lies with my ability to see through your BS.
-
Plenty. GV sits 10 minutes. Storch drops supplies. GV is now combat effective.
Pilot gets shot down. Has a buddy immediately waiting to get to him. Storch ups. Flies 10 minutes (and that's a really short flight) and lands. Picks guy up. Flies back 10 minutes. Rescued pilot now ups again and flies back to fight.
20 minutes to get rescued, still has to fly back to the fight.
Wiley.
Now, add in the fact that your rescued GVer has to drive up to 15 mins back to base to land his "rescued" kills or just to save his k/d ratio and you are less time back in the battle getting rescued. We are talking total time...if he would have just died, he could have already respawned. Hes not getting resupped to die bro. Nice try though :salute
-
Hey!! Welcome to the "I know more than you forums"
I don't engage in conflicts that do not matter...
-
Now, add in the fact that your rescued GVer has to drive up to 15 mins back to base to land his "rescued" kills or just to save his k/d ratio and you are less time back in the battle getting rescued. We are talking total time...if he would have just died, he could have already respawned. Hes not getting resupped to die bro. Nice try though :salute
It doesn't work that way if you can get separation from the enemy. GVs don't have to be on concrete to "land successfully", just a certain distance from any enemy.
Also, most often the "rescued" GVer doesn't head back to base, but rather back into the fight from the point of his rescue.
-
Hey!! Welcome to the "I know more than you forums"
I don't engage in conflicts that do not matter...
And yet, you are still here trolling and babbling "look at me" in the middle of a conflict that doesnt matter.
Barely a hundred posts and you already have joined the ranks of the dumbest these forums have to offer.
-
It doesn't work that way if you can get separation from the enemy. GVs don't have to be on concrete to "land successfully", just a certain distance from any enemy.
Also, most often the "rescued" GVer doesn't head back to base, but rather back into the fight from the point of his rescue.
Ive GV'd plenty of times over the years and separation is relative bud...sometimes separation takes longer than driving back to the base depending on the map. No dice. I will give all of you this: If the GV's get the armor cleared from the battlefield, your land is golden...no driving necessary. I have seen that happen one time in a full-tilt battle and spawn campers at small, local battles (if you wanna call 5 guys camping 30 noobs a battle) don't need rescuing from supps because they never get shot...they win the battlefield from attrition. Even noobs get tired of getting killed repeatedly! lol
-
Hey!! Welcome to the "I know more than you forums"
I don't engage in conflicts that do not matter...
Then you should have just moved along instead of adding to the:
Welcome to the "My sarcasm is as useless as I am" postings....everyone needs a goal I suppose.
-
It just occurred to me. The one valid argument that any of you Jealous Jennys have, has a simple solution.
It COULD be a problem if too many people decide to ask for a pick up. And it makes perfect sense to assume this although I dont think that it would be as popular of an option as some of you girls think.
Simple fix: NO COMMUNICATION FROM DOWNED PILOTS!
Whiners are so clueless.
Oops. Sorry. Back to my point. A pilot downed behind enemy lines had little to no access to comms, so it's fair enough to say that neither should you. The only way to get a pick up should be if you report that your going down before the bail or ditch. And if you cant stop crying about this compromise, then they could even go so far as to make a pick-up a squad only function where only a member can pick-up another member.
And the only way to find said pilot is if someone covers him from the sky until the storch arrives or the storch pilot gets very lucky.
A simple fix and an even better adventure than the original idea.
Logic has eluded you my friend. Of course EVERYONE is going to want to be rescued.
This game is filled with score tards and I am going to have to assume you are one as well since you are campaigning so fiercely for this wish. Pilots need to end their sortie and get back up in the air so there is more action for everyone. Besides yourself, who really wants to fly around avoiding combat and only shootin down storches on rescue missions?
-
Now, add in the fact that your rescued GVer has to drive up to 15 mins back to base to land his "rescued" kills or just to save his k/d ratio and you are less time back in the battle getting rescued. We are talking total time...if he would have just died, he could have already respawned. Hes not getting resupped to die bro. Nice try though :salute
Now who's ascribing motivations to other people? Plenty of people use supplies in plenty of ways, it's not always the guy flipped over calling for supplies. More often than not, it's guys dropping a bunch of supplies in an area to support a fight. There's more than one reason to have vehicles capable of dropping supplies. The only reason to have a guy waiting in a field for a pickup is to kill time and save score.
The only thing it adds to a fight is a bunch more chute vulching and a slow defenseless target.
Wiley.
-
Now who's ascribing motivations to other people? Plenty of people use supplies in plenty of ways, it's not always the guy flipped over calling for supplies. More often than not, it's guys dropping a bunch of supplies in an area to support a fight. There's more than one reason to have vehicles capable of dropping supplies. The only reason to have a guy waiting in a field for a pickup is to kill time and save score.
The only thing it adds to a fight is a bunch more chute vulching and a slow defenseless target.
Wiley.
I ascribe nothing...those are the GV resup facts and, btw, that suppo runner is out of the fight. Most of the time, there are 8 suppo runners because they need the perks associated with the suppo rescue.
Chute vulching and shooting at slow defenseless targets is a risk some people want to take...this idea should make the scoretards very happy. This is a win/win all the way around actually.
-
Logic has eluded you my friend. Of course EVERYONE is going to want to be rescued.
This game is filled with score tards and I am going to have to assume you are one as well since you are campaigning so fiercely for this wish. Pilots need to end their sortie and get back up in the air so there is more action for everyone. Besides yourself, who really wants to fly around avoiding combat and only shootin down storches on rescue missions?
No bakery guy....I have no desire to be rescued...you are making another ridiculous assumption. Zero contribution from this one
-
For all of you "get the guy back in the battle" defenders...
Maybe, if the altfairy, scoretard, basevulch, smashrunner, no-fight-in-um, yellow backs get the idea that MAYBE they would be rescued, they might actually come down and square dance with those of us who are going blind by squinting trying to see the outline of their planes at 31K feet AGL. Where you might lose a guy or two getting rescued, you win 50 of these tards who will come down from their NASA sight-seeing mission to fight. If they had enough time on their hands to get to 30K, they certainly don't mind waiting on ride back to base.
-
For all of you "get the guy back in the battle" defenders...
Maybe, if the altfairy, scoretard, basevulch, smashrunner, no-fight-in-um, yellow backs get the idea that MAYBE they would be rescued, they might actually come down and square dance with those of us who are going blind by squinting trying to see the outline of their planes at 31K feet AGL. Where you might lose a guy or two getting rescued, you win 50 of these tards who will come down from their NASA sight-seeing mission to fight. If they had enough time on their hands to get to 30K, they certainly don't mind waiting on ride back to base.
Holy crap, it's going to fix ALL THAT?! They should implement this tomorrow! :rofl
People don't need more motivation to avoid fighting, which is all this idea would provide.
Wiley.
-
Logic has eluded you my friend. Of course EVERYONE is going to want to be rescued.
This game is filled with score tards and I am going to have to assume you are one as well since you are campaigning so fiercely for this wish. Pilots need to end their sortie and get back up in the air so there is more action for everyone. Besides yourself, who really wants to fly around avoiding combat and only shootin down storches on rescue missions?
Negative. Logic has eluded you my young BBS stooge. Perhaps in a few hundred more posts you might acquire true enlightenment.
First off, the scoring system works against using this wish as a means of having a higher score. That is because one of the criteria for having a high score is kills per hour
If you look at the top ranked pilots in the game, just from memory, they have averages of around 15 kills per hour. Any time score potatos decide to work on score, they look specifically for high target areas where they can take off, get lots of kills, and land in the shortest period of time. That process is mandatory if you are going to make it to the top of the score board. If you sit around waiting for rescues, it kills any chance you have of achieving a high score just as much as spraying and praying kills your hit percentage and also lowers your overall score. Wrong on count 1.
Of course EVERYONE is going to want to be rescued.
Secondly, we have a vehicle supply system that repairs tanks and GVs instantly and you dont see EVERYONE sitting around waiting for supps every time they get crippled. Wrong on count 2.
Pilots need to end their sortie and get back up in the air so there is more action for everyone.
Then Htc needs to get rid of the vehicle supplies so that GVrs stop wasting so much time. If they lose a turret, or an engine, it most likely wouldnt be a simple field repair so they are out of the fight. Wrong on count 3.
Besides yourself, who really wants to fly around avoiding combat and only shootin down storches on rescue missions?
You apparently dont know me at all, but keep trying.
-
Why would someone stick around and fight it out in the deck when u can easily get head shot killed or wounded too low to bail? All this would do is cause dweebs to fly to the nearest barn, bail out then hide. No combat. And Muzik more people in the game care about surviving moreso than score. This is just a bad bad idea.
And you are right I don't know you Muzik, but can only make inferences as to your operandis by your absurd stance.
-
Ive GV'd plenty of times over the years and separation is relative
I dont GV that much, but how do you even know for sure that there are no enemy GVs around? Isnt the typical strategy to drive so far from the combat area that there is little chance that an enemy GV is around or find a pad to end sortie on?
-
Why would someone stick around and fight it out in the deck when u can easily get head shot killed or wounded too low to bail? All this would do is cause dweebs to fly to the nearest barn, bail out then hide. No combat. And Muzik more people in the game care about surviving moreso than score. This is just a bad bad idea.
And you are right I don't know you Muzik, but can only make inferences as to your operandis by your absurd stance.
So you found out you are wrong and you change your argument. Thats a surprising turn of events.
It is funny how incoherent people become when they try to hold on to a losing argument. Your question makes no sense and seems to completely leave the subject of the OP.
Let me see if I can decipher your question. "Why would someone stick around and fight it out [on] the deck when u can easily get [edit for clarity] killed[?] or wounded too low to bail? You're asking me why would anyone fight when they know they can just avoid combat all-together?
OMG really? The obvious answer is that none of us play this game to avoid combat. But everyone has their preferred way of doing things. Some people look for the safest means of accomplishing their goals. Others are impetuous and dive head first into every situation no matter what the odds. People rarely change that drastically and you are suggesting that everyone is going to all of a sudden change their behavior because of one minor change in the game.
And Muzik more people in the game care about surviving moreso than score.
In other words, no one wants to die. Wow, brilliant observation you made there.
So let me clarify your stances. First you said it was the score potatos who would abuse the rescue. When you were proved wrong, you changed it to the entire population of the game. So are you going to bail to avoid combat? Are any of the other stooges here going to bail to avoid combat? I suppose that all of the adults that have an hour or so a day or week to play this game would rather spend it sitting on the ground waiting for rescue.
NO ONE IS GOING TO CHANGE THEIR PERSONALITY for a rescue!
And Muffin, more people in the game care about engaging in combat than waiting for a rescue. Go ahead, tell me I'm wrong. Please.
-
Holy crap, it's going to fix ALL THAT?! They should implement this tomorrow! :rofl
People don't need more motivation to avoid fighting, which is all this idea would provide.
Wiley.
What part didn't you read? I will say there are tons of guys who avoid an engagement where they either lose their clear, initial advantage or if they miss their first two HO passes, they move on to the next unsuspecting two-weeker. I've flown with you and against you and you are neither that I can recall. You're argument assumes that you know what motivates people so before we can proceed, please explain how you know what motivates people. If you cannot, please move on.
Do us a favor, don't use the usual fight-avoidance suspects. They have been around for years and aren't going to change anything no matter what changes in the game...you know who they are so I will stipulate that some will not fight if you will stipulate that they are simply the same old characters not worthy of mention in your explanation of how you know what motivates players in this game. Furthermore, these same characters would NEVER lower themselves to rescue anyone so they are the outliers and shouldn't be used in what will shortly be your "I-see-these-alttards-doing-this-already-and-we-don't-need-to-give-them-another-excuse-not-to-fight argument."
-
So you found out you are wrong and you change your argument. Thats a surprising turn of events.
So let me clarify your stances. First you said it was the score potatos who would abuse the rescue. When you were proved wrong, you changed it to the entire population of the game. So are you going to bail to avoid combat? Are any of the other stooges here going to bail to avoid combat? I suppose that all of the adults that have an hour or so a day or week to play this game would rather spend it sitting on the ground waiting for rescue.
NO ONE IS GOING TO CHANGE THEIR PERSONALITY for a rescue!
And Muffin, more people in the game care about engaging in combat than waiting for a rescue. Go ahead, tell me I'm wrong. Please.
I never changed my stance, i was supplementing to it to try to get logic through to your yoyo brain. You are wrong. Just stop, thanks.
-
What part didn't you read? I will say there are tons of guys who avoid an engagement where they either lose their clear, initial advantage or if they miss their first two HO passes, they move on to the next unsuspecting two-weeker. I've flown with you and against you and you are neither that I can recall. You're argument assumes that you know what motivates people so before we can proceed, please explain how you know what motivates people. If you cannot, please move on.
Ok. I can't define what motivates everybody. Neither can you, yet you claim to know this idea will motivate all those people above to fight. How does that work?
What we can do is see behavior. What you described above is the norm, not the exception or the 'usual suspects'. What does that mean?
Wiley.
-
I never changed my stance, i was supplementing to it to try to get logic through to your yoyo brain. You are wrong. Just stop, thanks.
No Muffin, I wont stop. Tell me how I am wrong. You did change your stance. And now I am giving you the opportunity to show me your logic. Where is it?
Tell me how the score weenies are going to increase their score by ruining their kills per hour stats.
Tell me why a whole population of people are going to suddenly change their addictive behaviors because of one minor game change.
As I recall, many of the ideas that came before this one were cried about just as you are doing about this one. "if we get that tank, thats the only tank you will ever see," "if we get that plane, the sky will be full of dweebs," "blah blah blah."
Ninnys apparently never stop making predictions or start using their heads.
Ok. I can't define what motivates everybody. Neither can you, yet you claim to know this idea will motivate all those people above to fight. How does that work?
What we can do is see behavior. What you described above is the norm, not the exception or the 'usual suspects'. What does that mean?
Wiley.
You cant define what motivates anyone and you obviously cant even "see behavior!' There is a running example of how many people have an interest in sitting and waiting for rescue (supplies) and you are too blind to see it or that it doesnt ruin the game. There is still combat because thats what everyone is here for. You can whine all you want about how others dont fight the way you want them to, but that will never change.
Every argument that you and your cronies have laid out has been unquestionably beat down. Do you have another that actually makes sense?
-
I happen to like this idea. It would be cool to have a "so and so rescued so and so, and kills are still broadcast.
-
No Muffin, I wont stop. Tell me how I am wrong. You did change your stance. And now I am giving you the opportunity to show me your logic. Where is it?
Tell me how the score weenies are going to increase their score by ruining their kills per hour stats.
Tell me why a whole population of people are going to suddenly change their addictive behaviors because of one minor game change.
As I recall, many of the ideas that came before this one were cried about just as you are doing about this one. "if we get that tank, thats the only tank you will ever see," "if we get that plane, the sky will be full of dweebs," "blah blah blah."
Ninnys apparently never stop making predictions or start using their heads.
You cant define what motivates anyone and you obviously cant even "see behavior!' There is a running example of how many people have an interest in sitting and waiting for rescue (supplies) and you are too blind to see it or that it doesnt ruin the game. There is still combat because thats what everyone is here for. You can whine all you want about how others dont fight the way you want them to, but that will never change.
Every argument that you and your cronies have laid out has been unquestionably beat down. Do you have another that actually makes sense?
Now you are just putting words in my mouth. Your hyperboles prove how ridiculous your counter argument has become.
In any case, this wish will never be granted because hitech does not like you and he will keep it out of the game just to spite you. :lol
-
Ok. I can't define what motivates everybody. Neither can you, yet you claim to know this idea will motivate all those people above to fight. How does that work?
What we can do is see behavior. What you described above is the norm, not the exception or the 'usual suspects'. What does that mean?
Wiley.
I never claimed to know what motivates people, you did. My stance is this: if there are things that could be coaded into the game that I believe can enhance someone's fun, then I will present or support the idea. Knowing "I, therefore you" is the absolute worst tactic to use when presenting an argument or trying to manage a situation, I waited to see if others liked it and they did so I supported it.
There are current, like situations in-game now that are not disputed. The only argument against is it will put people out of the fight and that is just speculation as is the position that it won't take people out of the fight. Since the game currently models a form of rescue, there is no precedent to support the argument against. It's that simple.
-
I never claimed to know what motivates people, you did. My stance is this:
Maybe, if the altfairy, scoretard, basevulch, smashrunner, no-fight-in-um, yellow backs get the idea that MAYBE they would be rescued, they might actually come down and square dance with those of us who are going blind by squinting trying to see the outline of their planes at 31K feet AGL. Where you might lose a guy or two getting rescued, you win 50 of these tards who will come down from their NASA sight-seeing mission to fight. If they had enough time on their hands to get to 30K, they certainly don't mind waiting on ride back to base.
Sounds like you think it'd motivate them to use it.
if there are things that could be coaded into the game that I believe can enhance someone's fun, then I will present or support the idea. Knowing "I, therefore you" is the absolute worst tactic to use when presenting an argument or trying to manage a situation, I waited to see if others liked it and they did so I supported it.
There are current, like situations in-game now that are not disputed. The only argument against is it will put people out of the fight and that is just speculation as is the position that it won't take people out of the fight. Since the game currently models a form of rescue, there is no precedent to support the argument against. It's that simple.
A succinct summary. I still think it's a silly thing to ask for out of all possible things to ask for, but hey, whatever floats your boat.
Wiley.
-
In any case, this wish will never be granted because hitech does not like you and he will keep it out of the game just to spite you. :lol
LOL that's the first thing you've said that's correct.
edit: which begs to question who you really are Mr 11 posts. LOL
-
I think the people who say they do not care about score...whine more about score than those who "care" about score do. :lol
-
I think the people who say they do not care about score...whine more about score than those who "care" about score do. :lol
A fine contribution to this thread about Storch rescues.... :noid
-
Kind of along the same lines, but I think it would be cool if you could refuel a ditched friendly. Land next to friendly out in wilderness, and when you get within 5 yards, a box pops up to refuel. Would definitely add to the fun factor and adventure factor as mentioned previously.
-
I'm certain that calling him a whiner 50 times per post isn't dickish and it's helping you make your point..ya think?
I think he just mispelled Winner. :P
Hey if a downed pilot gets picked up he has to split his kills with the storch pilot. Using this method will also see to it that better pilots were returned sooner than others. :neener:
-
A fine contribution to this thread about Storch rescues.... :noid
I think it fit right in. the only negative anybody has said has to do with the concern about peoples scores or some variation of a score potato thing. It is viewed as one of two thing
a) something that will make the score guys even worse on 200
b) something that will take precious resources away from winning the war to go pick up a score potato
sum it up?
all fairly rediculous....
-
I think it fit right in. the only negative anybody has said has to do with the concern about peoples scores or some variation of a score potato thing. It is viewed as one of two thing
a) something that will make the score guys even worse on 200
b) something that will take precious resources away from winning the war to go pick up a score potato
sum it up?
all fairly rediculous....
cc...read it wrong earlier
-
And here I just wanted to give Storch pilots something that might be a littel more worth dieing over with recognition for the effort if against all odds they pulled it off. And a rousing great personal adventure between two like minded freinds.
Like all those 10,000 foot cliff and mountain side M3 and jeep races down the slopes never happend over the years when squads got bored with the hoards. Those races during the Ohhh so IMPORTANT prime time fighting were taking place in spite of the need for able bodies in the fray.
Players get bored with the rinse and repeat dog eat dog never ending jerk arse pompasity of this game. Look how many fighter pilot hot sticks are taking out Storches in the face of sure death just to dork around a GV fight and fly a fun puddel jumping ride to taunt the GV's.
Changup and Grizz. If it was coded into the game that picking up a downed flyer with a Storch and sucessfuly returning him to base gave you a HOST:(Attaboy) as a result. Would you guys do it just to get the ch:200 whines from the dog eat doggers while showing everyone your flying skills to evade them? I think alot of players looking for some bordom releif would do it also.
-
And here I just wanted to give Storch pilots something that might be a littel more worth dieing over with recognition for the effort if against all odds they pulled it off. And a rousing great personal adventure between two like minded freinds.
Like all those 10,000 foot cliff and mountain side M3 and jeep races down the slopes never happend over the years when squads got bored with the hoards. Those races during the Ohhh so IMPORTANT prime time fighting were taking place in spite of the need for able bodies in the fray.
Players get bored with the rinse and repeat dog eat dog never ending jerk arse pompasity of this game. Look how many fighter pilot hot sticks are taking out Storches in the face of sure death just to dork around a GV fight and fly a fun puddel jumping ride to taunt the GV's.
Changup and Grizz. If it was coded into the game that picking up a downed flyer with a Storch and sucessfuly returning him to base gave you a HOST:(Attaboy) as a result. Would you guys do it just to get the ch:200 whines from the dog eat doggers while showing everyone your flying skills to evade them? I think alot of players looking for some bordom releif would do it also.
I already said I would do it regardless...just to watch Assi auger all over himself trying to get the kill, name in lights or not. Everyone has something in the game that gets their blood pumping...for most its an awesome 1 v 1 in the middle of the chaos that is normally present in the MA, but flyin out to make an attempted pickup of someone in the middle of hoard repelling action or just a giant furball, IN ALL THE WAY.
Truth be told, I'm not sure I would even notice a Storch flying around at treetop...the sky is way too busy when it gets like that. Make no mistake, the Storch is probably gonna die but the hilarity and fun that ensues before it goes will be riotus.
-
We need a "Leroy Jenkins" race with only Storches, could be hilarious!!
-
We need a "Leroy Jenkins" race with only Storches, could be hilarious!!
+1