Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: alpini13 on April 15, 2013, 09:40:37 AM
-
WTG hitech on the wind. this starts at 10k and goes up......How about rain and bad weather below 10k at tank town on maps with that feature. a little weather wont really affect the gv play,but might thwart the massive bombing of gv's at that point. the rest of the map would still be clear and normal,just the tank town gv area would be affected.
-
Hmm qouldntherw possibly be lightning? If so I'd be just go to tt for a photo shoot of awesome kills :D
-
Why do people that take out GVs insist they should be immune from air attack?
ack-ack
-
:headscratch:
-
If you lift it or roll it in the main arenas, it is a target.
-
I agree. If you up in a tank you're a target. Safe from nothing. It is about as gamey as it gets though having a Lancaster carpet bomb a couple of tanks with 14/1000 lb bombs
-
Why do people that take out GVs insist they should be immune from air attack?
ack-ack
I would be cool with some form of that IF it were also nearly impossible for the main gun of a tank to hit a maneuvering aircraft. Just like in RL.
-
Before you spawn a GV, help 'em take down ords at nearest air field. bomb****s are busy resupplying or awhile. :D
-
WTG hitech on the wind. this starts at 10k and goes up......How about rain and bad weather below 10k at tank town on maps with that feature. a little weather wont really affect the gv play,but might thwart the massive bombing of gv's at that point. the rest of the map would still be clear and normal,just the tank town gv area would be affected.
So what about guys like myself who like to go on bombing runs? Not against GV's but against targets in general. I don't care if that is the HQ or a Bomber Hanger. If I bomb above 10K I have wind that, at this moment, makes hitting the target extremely challenging. Now you are asking to make it almost impossible for me to bomb UNDER 10K as well? Whats the point in me bombing? I am as entitled as you are to have fun in my own way. I pay the same ammount. So why try to limit what I can do? I understand you mentioned only in the TT area, however as far as I am aware the arena settings do not allow for specific areas of weather. It is all or nothing and with that said, I vote loudly for nothing. I'm sure I am not going to be the only Buff Pilot feeling this way about your wish.
-
(http://media.moddb.com/images/members/1/301/300594/Hangar.png)
^
|
what about these dweebs?
-
The problem isnt that, its that all fields seem to field formations of lancs and other heavy bombers.
This may be an error with the map design ideaologies currently circling around the game or a lack of controlling inplements but the true culprit lies in the inherently flawed spawn camping system that exists.
Most gv battles are wack-a-mole minigames which, while sustain the current demands of the community make it a laughing stock of gameplay to those otherwise not fimiliar with the emotional demands that drive it.
-
well it's one thing to carpet bomb the spawn with 17's or lancs. It's another to carry limited ord to go seek and out GV's.
If you lift it or roll it in the main arenas, it is a target.
I agree with you 100 %
-
Macleod01......you have the right to bomb and help capture fields.....have fun doing it. He is referring to the areas of the map that are dedicated to GV fights. There are guys that bomb GV's and that is all they do. That is why I suggested taking down ords at the near air fields. It has no effect on capturing the map.
-
The classic solution is for fighters to shoot the bombers down.
-
How bout you give me a A-10 help me help you
BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRMMMMMMMMPPPP PPPPPPRTTTT
-
Indeed FLS, that is the standard procedure, but most of us just tend to enjoy the basic fighter sorties and not the more grueling dedicated roles such as fighter cap for gv or strat defense.
I have found the 410 with the 2 13mm and 6 20mms (close enough nates) most effective in this manner, due to the sheer number of bullets in the air and persueing pings scaring the hell out of any victims and reducing return runs, but staying low enough to cover the gvs in a timely manner certainly turns a magnet into an electro-magnet and requires a toughened state of mind (one that may not be condusive to total enjoyment).
-
I've found that the bombing issues have largely been alleviated by the new icon ranges.
The only real way to bomb them effectively is to carpet bomb, or come within range of invisible AA fire.
Not many people appear to be using smoke as a way of making targets for aircraft.
-
A quick refresher on GV's
A GV firing even a pintle gun at an enemy aircraft, the enemy can see your tracer round, effectively giving away your position.
A GV parked shows half the icon range as a GV moving. So it would be prudent to stop moving if enemy aircraft are nearby.
A GV parked under trees can mask (to a degree) its icon from enemies. So it would be prudent to take cover if enemy aircraft are nearby.
-
As of right now, I love when bomb laden fighters show up over tank town. I usually cruise in a clean fighter just to shoot them down. The guys on the ground seem pretty happy that I'm knocking bomb tards out of the sky that would normally be hitting them. The only issue I have is with the bomber pilot that comes in at 25k. I'm not high enough/ have enough E to catch him before he drops. The clouds seem to do a good job at capping that issue even if it does wreck my frame rate.
On the other hand, adding a little dynamic to the game is a concept that interests me. Maybe have patches of rain instead of raining everywhere. Have a day that is overcast (once the frame rate issue with clouds is fixed). And even though it is not a popular topic, maybe night time or at least an accelerated night time (one that only lasts about 20 to 30 minutes). I don't know what everyone complains about. I've set it to night time in a custom arena and offline and had no trouble hitting targets, that is when they weren't busy punishing the back side of my plane.
-
remember one thing about this weather wish over tank town........it would not stop bombing.....just reduce bombing...if anything ...it would add a new challenge to the bombing pilots.........maybe a challenge isnt good in the game...i see we already got rid of wind because people cried.....we got rid of trinity map....be cause it was too hard....and people cried....we un-perked the ta-152,etc
-
As of right now, I love when bomb laden fighters show up over tank town. I usually cruise in a clean fighter just to shoot them down. The guys on the ground seem pretty happy that I'm knocking bomb tards out of the sky that would normally be hitting them. The only issue I have is with the bomber pilot that comes in at 25k.
a bomb**** at tank town at 25k deserves every kill he can get :aok
-
remember one thing about this weather wish over tank town........it would not stop bombing.....just reduce bombing...if anything ...it would add a new challenge to the bombing pilots.........maybe a challenge isnt good in the game...i see we already got rid of wind because people cried.....we got rid of trinity map....be cause it was too hard....and people cried....we un-perked the ta-152,etc
Don't try and mask your request as a "challenge" to the bomber pilots, be honest in what you're wishing for, which is to make you immune to being bombed while you're in a GV.
ack-ack
-
a bomb**** at tank town at 25k deserves every kill he can get :aok
Sadly, I have to agree with this. If he took the time to climb up there, I'll let him have his fun.
-
Don't try and mask your request as a "challenge" to the bomber pilots, be honest in what you're wishing for, which is to make you immune to being bombed while you're in a GV.
ack-ack
While youre right somewhere, please note that he was talking about the tank town first. It was pretty annoying when some individuals spent a hour in a lancaster only to be able to bomb defenseless targets. Also, its not much fun to fly a fighter for like 25 mins only to see that lancaster bailing when you get into icon range.
I would say, yes, the Tank Town btarding is lame, but anywhere else, deal with it.
-
dont believe i ever bombed tank town over my years of playing, i may have tried ground attack a few times,but i dont recall getting kills. that said leave it as is, i say if you are all so concerned about it, ask for a separate "gv only arena" but dont ask for immunity in a game. unless i start getting immunity for my bombers over 30k or so "because thats basically bomber territory" theres no reason yu should have your own little slice of god mode. that said, why dont you get people to provide air cover? i see no end to the whining of fighter guys on here about how this is a "fighter sim" and we shouldnt have gv or bombers at all. if they want to shoot down planes, then go where the planes like to accumulate. im sure this will be oh so popular of an opinion but the way i see it, nothing is special for anyone and the second that changes this game goes on the downward spiral to unplayable
-
Why do people that take out GVs insist they should be immune from air attack?
ack-ack
QFT
The one that kills me is the map with the 7500 foot tank fields, surrounded by mountains (about the most isolated spot to gv fight) is typically empty. GVrs go where there is good spawn camping. Those... just happen to be near bases that are easier to take. I would love to see a large scale GV fight, uninterrupted by air to ground guys... still have not seen one last more than 10-15 minutes before some guy shows up in an airplane.
It is just the nature of the beast.
-
I would be cool with some form of that IF it were also nearly impossible for the main gun of a tank to hit a maneuvering aircraft. Just like in RL.
You are correct about not being able to hit a plane with the main gun of any tank. I had a 19D20 MOS and anyone who ever looked into the sights of a tank would know why. It would be like being put in the trunk of a car with a small hole to put a rifle scope out of than being driven around while trying to locate aim fire at and hit a flying bird. Never mind never even being able to hear a plane over the engine nose. Even if the TC saw the apposing aircraft he would still have to tell the gunner and the gunner would have to locate traverse the gun onto the moving plane and fire. By that time the pilot and plane would be three counties away. The only way a tank ever shot down an aircraft was by accident and the crew never knew it or never reported it. I do not count claims made by the Red Army in WWII if there are any.
-
I don't think it's a desire for immunity so much as odds of survival that approach something close to 50:50.
I mean frankly, if you die to a non-flak vehicle, you were flying poorly, and deserved to take a 75mm to the cockpit. There is no reason you should expect NOT to be hit when flying down a tank's barrel.
Gv's on the other hand can't avoid an aircraft's field of fire in any way other than just not upping.
-
Lancasters kill a tiny fraction of GVs, but the whines make it sound like an epidemic.
Right now the balance of power is way, way, way too far in the GV's favor. I say this as somebody who doesn't usually attack GVs. The icon change has made Wirbelwinds into mobile, invisible and extremely deadly safespots for ack runners.
GVs need no additional protection from hostile aircraft. What is needed is for friendly icons on GVs to follow the same rules as hostile icons. 600 yards if not moving and 1200 yards if moving.
-
The balance of power is probably fine. IRL, any plane flying straight at an AA gun would be shot down. Same in game...
More wirbs, more aircraft, and dumber pilots. Of course more of you will be shot down. But that's some of your fault, not entirely the game's.
I agree on the friendly icon thing to a certain extent. Maybe 1.25 x the view range of enemies, just to represent radio contact.
-
. . . fly a fighter for like 25 mins only to see that lancaster bailing when you get into icon range.
More like ten minutes in Luftwaffe iron. Watching them bail is still better than watching them bomb while you are in the tower, because its just too high to climb.
-
The balance of power is probably fine. IRL, any plane flying straight at an AA gun would be shot down. Same in game...
Too bad I can't see them to not fly at them and Bob can see them from 6000 yards out to run straight to them.
If I let all runners go I would get far fewer kills. In addition, given the thing I fly, letting them go is often tantamount to offering my six to a more agile aircraft, not a great thing for my long term survival.
More wirbs, more aircraft, and dumber pilots. Of course more of you will be shot down. But that's some of your fault, not entirely the game's.
No idea what you mean here.
I agree on the friendly icon thing to a certain extent. Maybe 1.25 x the view range of enemies, just to represent radio contact.
Radios were quite limited. I highly doubt that your random Bf109 pilot could talk to your random AA gun or that your random P-51 pilot could talk to a the M4 Sherman below him. Icons should be just as limited for friendly aircraft as they are for enemy aircraft. Icons for friendly GVs should remain as they are currently.
-
IRL, any plane flying straight at an AA gun would be shot down. Same in game...
Really? Somebody better tell those American and Japanese divebomber pilots who sunk warships with all their masseed AA guns firing at them and flew home to tell
about it that they really got shot down. While you're at let the Luftwaffe pilots that survived attacking mass bomber formations and the Stuka pilots
on the Eastern front. Those idiots told us for years that they survived. :headscratch:
-
. . .Radios were quite limited. . .
I'll say! The F4U1 had a nasty habit of electrical disturbances above 30,000 feet, which led to radio static that made any communication impossible. This was also true for the P47Bs and Cs, because it was an issue with the ignition system arcing at high altitudes.
-
Too bad I can't see them to not fly at them and Bob can see them from 6000 yards out to run straight to them.
If I let all runners go I would get far fewer kills. In addition, given the thing I fly, letting them go is often tantamount to offering my six to a more agile aircraft, not a great thing for my long term survival.
I'm not saying the runner issue is fine. But in terms of aircraft out hunting GVs vs GVs ability to shoot them down, it's fine.
No idea what you mean here.
I mean there's no reason anyone should expect to survive what amounts to a suicide charge. Everyone should suck it up and accept the fact that they will have to think from now on.
Radios were quite limited. I highly doubt that your random Bf109 pilot could talk to your random AA gun or that your random P-51 pilot could talk to a the M4 Sherman below him. Icons should be just as limited for friendly aircraft as they are for enemy aircraft. Icons for friendly GVs should remain as they are currently.
Like I said, just make it slightly longer. Just because they're on the same side, they'll have a better idea of what's in the neighborhood.
Or we could make storchs increase the icon range for friendly forces.
-
Really? Somebody better tell those American and Japanese divebomber pilots who sunk warships with all their masseed AA guns firing at them and flew home to tell
about it that they really got shot down. While you're at let the Luftwaffe pilots that survived attacking mass bomber formations and the Stuka pilots
on the Eastern front. Those idiots told us for years that they survived. :headscratch:
Oh yes, and swarms of dive bombers trying to overwhelm defenses at 10k+ is completely the same as your stupid arse flying straight at a Wirbelwind at 1000 ft.... :rolleyes:
Also, difference between attacking a bomber stream with a fighter doing 450mph+, coming in at an off angle, while the bomber is also moving.
Don't twist things. It doesn't strengthen your case.
-
Oh yes, and swarms of dive bombers trying to overwhelm defenses at 10k+ is completely the same as your stupid arse flying straight at a Wirbelwind at 1000 ft.... :rolleyes:
Also, difference between attacking a bomber stream with a fighter doing 450mph+, coming in at an off angle, while the bomber is also moving.
Don't twist things. It doesn't strengthen your case.
You're the one trying to make a case not me. Referring to somebody as a stupid arse means you don't have the ability to debate a subject intelligently. You're a child who has to resort to insults. Who said swarms of dive bombers? Oh yeah that was you not me. You might do a little research every now and then before just making foolish statements. Then take a peek in the mirror if you're looking for somebody to refer to as a stupid arse. :lol
-
You might do a little research every now and then before just making foolish statements.
I doubt that habit is one he is likely to change ;)
also GVs are for ladies :bolt:
-
More like ten minutes in Luftwaffe iron. Watching them bail is still better than watching them bomb while you are in the tower, because its just too high to climb.
Leave me alone with your mindless lamentation. Thanks.
Or... i would resub only to duel with you and post the film here. Is it a fair deal?
(what a punk, geez)
-
You're the one trying to make a case not me. Referring to somebody as a stupid arse means you don't have the ability to debate a subject intelligently. You're a child who has to resort to insults. Who said swarms of dive bombers? Oh yeah that was you not me. You might do a little research every now and then before just making foolish statements. Then take a peek in the mirror if you're looking for somebody to refer to as a stupid arse. :lol
Valid point, you're not making a case, per se. Luckily what I said also applies to making a point, a statement of fact, and many other situations.
Or it could mean flying straight at a Wirbelwind is inarguably stupid, and those expecting to survive such an act are inarguably less intelligent. If you've done such a thing, then you sir are less intelligent, and therefore the term "stupid" would apply to you.
And yes, even 10 dive bombers would count as a 'swarm' when compared to the single P-51 flying at the wirb. But of course you wouldn't take things in the intended manner. Oh no, that would be much too simple and logical. Much better to intentionally misunderstand for the sake of an argument.
-
Leave me alone with your mindless lamentation. Thanks.
Or... i would resub only to duel with you and post the film here. Is it a fair deal?
(what a punk, geez)
@Hitech- perma-ban this one (Debrody). PLEASE!
-
Valid point, you're not making a case, per se. Luckily what I said also applies to making a point, a statement of fact, and many other situations.
Or it could mean flying straight at a Wirbelwind is inarguably stupid, and those expecting to survive such an act are inarguably less intelligent. If you've done such a thing, then you sir are less intelligent, and therefore the term "stupid" would apply to you.
And yes, even 10 dive bombers would count as a 'swarm' when compared to the single P-51 flying at the wirb. But of course you wouldn't take things in the intended manner. Oh no, that would be much too simple and logical. Much better to intentionally misunderstand for the sake of an argument.
You keep thinking I'm trying to prove a point because I have some dog in the hunt with your bombing GVs argument. I don't. So approaching me with a chip on your shoulder is your first mistake. I only go after GVs when they are firing in an airbase I'm using. Attack aircraft did not always attack in swarms, and attacking an AA by flying straight at it did not always mean the plane was shot down. There are volumes and volumes of instances where attacking aircraft were not shot down. Yes flying into the teeth of an AA gun is not wise, but it is never been always fatal. My post was simply trying to point out to you that IRL as you used the term there are a lot of guys that got away with exactly what you said they couldn't IRL. Careful making a concrete IRL statement when making a point unless you're sure what happened IRL or actually lived the experience IRL. I happen to agree with you that Tank Town should be left to tanks. However you guys that roll up on airbases and start shooting the place up have no room to whine. Never take a tank to an airstrike. ;)
-
You keep thinking I'm trying to prove a point because I have some dog in the hunt with your bombing GVs argument. I don't. So approaching me with a chip on your shoulder is your first mistake. I only go after GVs when they are firing in an airbase I'm using. Attack aircraft did not always attack in swarms, and attacking an AA by flying straight at it did not always mean the plane was shot down. There are volumes and volumes of instances where attacking aircraft were not shot down. Yes flying into the teeth of an AA gun is not wise, but it is never been always fatal. My post was simply trying to point out to you that IRL as you used the term there are a lot of guys that got away with exactly what you said they couldn't IRL. Careful making a concrete IRL statement when making a point unless you're sure what happened IRL or actually lived the experience IRL. I happen to agree with you that Tank Town should be left to tanks. However you guys that roll up on airbases and start shooting the place up have no room to whine. Never take a tank to an airstrike. ;)
It seems to me you came out of the gate with a chip on your shoulder. Can't accept the point of the post (which was valid) and simply correct me, or say it wasn't always fatal IRL. Instead the sarcasm comes out.
I think we both didn't handle things in the best possible way. Agree to drop it?
But let me rephrase;
If you expect to survive a stupid move, you deserve to die, because it is in fact a stupid move. Flying at an AA gun is that type of mistake, and their lethality is largely supported by historical events.
Point being don't while like a brat about cause and effect.
-
@Hitech- perma-ban this one (Debrody). PLEASE!
Why?