Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Letalis on July 12, 2013, 10:08:11 PM
-
As of Tour 161 what has 4x20mm cannons, ranked 4th in overall kills while having a kill/death ratio better than the P-51D, better than the Spit16, better than the La7, better than the N1K, better than the M18? Do you want to fly it? Sorry folks, I speak of the wirblewind. Now if would, go here: http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/newscores/planes.php?sortby=3&selectTour=LWTour161&action=1
Of the types that have a better k/d, how many are non-perk vehicles? Looks like the answer is zero. How many types that are perked had an inferior K/D? At least two (M18, LVT4) just off the top of my head.
The wirb unbalances the game. "Heresy!!" goes the cry, "the game is fine as it is!" Well, I say that simply because you are acclimated to the status quo does not mean it is unbalanced by objective measures. The wirb should carry a modest perk value for the following reasons:
1. The Wirb is possibly the easiest point and click system in the game. The only other real contender here is the 5 inch gun because of the fact you will never get credit for a death in it. I submit that both the 5 inch and 88 are less mobile in terms of both player choice and absolute mobility while also generally being harder to score kills with.
2. Can you overheat the barrels of the Wirb in game? The ability to fire a couple thousand rounds non-stop is something even a ZSU-23 would be jealous of...
3. How prevalent was the IL-2 during WWII? Very. In AH, flying this tank killer is one of the most fun flight profiles possible. Emphasis on possible. The IL-2, despite some 30,000+ examples built, is a relatively rare sight in AH. 1200 kills compared to the Wirb's 13,000...
4. How prevalent was the Wirb? According to every source I've found, the number is unlikely to have been above 150 units. A small perk would increase the use of more common anti-aircraft types like the M16 and balance gameplay.
And while we're at it, how many documented aircraft kills were logged by tank cannons during the entire duration of the largest war ever in mankind's history? Please disable the ability of tank cannons to destroy flying aircraft. I have a positive K/D in the Sherman partially for this reason, but that doesn't make it right...
In defense of the GV players, the prevalence of the 1000 pound bomb is CAS missions enables very easy kills. While I have not yet found specific metrics on the prevalence of 500 pound weapons vice 1000-pounders, it is clear that the 500 pound class was much more common. I am not in favor of weapons being perked, paying instead for the versatility of the weapon platform. Limiting fighter/attack aircraft access to 1000+ pound weapons to large airfields and carriers would go a fair way toward both historical accuracy and evening the air-ground balance of power.
Last and least, it would be an interesting addition to the game if napalm, incendiary and cluster munitions were added. Admittedly, there are relatively few uses for such weapons compared to RL, but there are some aircraft and some uses.
Examples:
Napalm: Useful against light vehicles, convoys guns and town structures, dealing damage over time. Precise hits can slowly deal damage to AAA positions and shore batteries with a small chance of internal explosion due to "cookoff," an effect also possible when hitting trains.
Incendiary: Lights fires to building which spread and deal damage relatively slowly over time. Potentially greater net damaged partially offset by time.
Cluster: Useful against light vehicles, convoys, personnel, AAA.
(http://www.303rdbg.com/bombs.html)
Inclusion of a wider variety of weapons would necessitate a change to the hangar ord selection GUI, but hey, it's a wishlist:)
-
Historically in many occasions I would assume that there were dozens if not hundreds of weapons ranging from small arms to dedicated anti-aircraft weapons that would await a low flying aircraft attacking an enemy position.
We dont have that
We do have a wirble in AH though. I believe that exists simply to balance gameplay, like a giant sign that says "attacking ground targets is extremely dangerous around here"
The wirble can is reasonably easy to identify from the air from outside its range
GV spawn points are clearly shown
A huge streak of tracer fire might be a warning sign...
I think it is fine for gameplay purposes.
Yours truly,
MK84 (who lost a 262 strafing one about two hours ago) :uhoh
-
I don't use the warble, and don't have the stats, but I'd almost bet the K/d for it went way up when the gv icon range was reduced.
-
@Kvuo: I don't really have much issue with the gv icon range, a little short indeed, but perhaps a compromise can be made. GVs could be very difficult to spot when stationary and camo'd, likewise they were much easier to spot on the move. It would be harder to coad, but what about this:
For single seat aircraft: stationary GVs have a generic icon at just 400 with ID provided at 200 without exception. If the vehicle is moving, generic icon occurs for airborne aircraft at the vehicle speed multiplied by 300 all divided by the aircraft's speed in miles per minutes groundspeed. Example: An M18 tank is moving at 25mph, detection/icon range for a single seat aircraft traveling at 300 ground (5 miles/min) would be: (25*300)/5=1500M. The detection range with a vehicle speed of 50 in he same scenario would generate a 3.0 general icon range while a GV speed of 5 would yield icon at just 300M. GV type icon on movers for single seat aircraft occurs at 600M or 1/2 of dynamic icon range, whichever is less.
For multi-place aircraft: The same formulas apply with a 30% range bonus to reflect at least one more set of dedicated eyes. A Fi156 moving at 60kts ground will detect an M18 moving at 25mph at a range of 7.5, the max icon range for aircraft. (Roughly 4 miles) Remember how the GV moving at 5mph yielded a icon range of 300 with the fast-moving single-seater? The Fi156 moving at 1/5th the speed will gain generic icon at 1500M! GV icon type on movers for multi-place aircraft occurs at 600M or 1/2 of dynamic range, whichever is greater.
Adding dynamic icon range to the mix would add an element of strategy for both air and ground parties.
@MK84: "Well, I say that simply because you are acclimated to the status quo does not mean it is unbalanced by objective measures."
I'm sorry about your 262. I also get where you're coming from to a degree, but don't you think that the 30k+ IL-2 ("as essential to the Red Army as air and bread") is relegated to virtual non-factor status by a platform that consisted of less than 150 units? Does that seem right? :headscratch:
-
Well I contend the Wirbel is nowhere near deadly enough.
We don't have the correct gun sights that's right sights it had two one for ground & one for air targets & the one we have now was not on the Wirbel. We don't have the ability to traverse the gun in its full range of motion in the vertical from what I have read.
While we are at it & since the need to perk it is in the air again. Lets give it the AP rounds the Wirbel carried as well.
Just so we can punch some holes in tanks & really rack up it's kill to death rate. :aok
After that perk the hell out of it. :headscratch:
Anyways I prefer the Ostwind.
:rock
-
So because the aircraft doesn't have his life at stake, and so flies in a manner so much stupider and vulnerable than in real life.... we should perk the Wirbelwind....
What the hell have you been drinking? If the Wirbelwind has a high KTD, then it is entirely the fault of the aircraft that got shot down. It is the same as if everyone felt the compulsion to HO every 110 they saw; the 110 would have an astronomical KTD, and could never need a perking.
Also, il-2s were shot down in droves, IIRC. And pilots were forced to fly them under threat of beatings, imprisonment, or even death. They weren't prevalent because everyone loved them.
Don't get me wrong, I'd like to see relevant automatic weapons need to be reloaded. IIRC, the Wirbelwind could only have 84 rounds loaded at any one time
-
-You can't assume people (not aircraft) all fly like idiots because you want to set up a straw man argument, that's not very polite... (I don't drink BTW)
There were thousands of IL-2s lost, sure, just like there were over 3000 Jugs lost in combat, but you can be sure these "droves" weren't lost to Wirblewinds.
-Why pilots flew the IL-2 is irrelevant to this discussion.
-The IL-2 killed tanks in droves IIRC, but you don't see that in AH. I've spent quite a bit of time playing this game and it is not uncommon for me to go the better part of the week without seeing an IL-2 land kills. IL-2 pilots must just be "much stupider" than normal people...
-This discussion has much more to do with the fact that a vehicle model with maybe 100-ish examples makes up two thirds of the AAA GV kills, and is #4 overall in kills.
-I am for more realism - bring on the AP rounds, the sights and the short clip but let's not overdo the Wirb's prevalence...
-
There are only three anti-air GVs. One of them has to take top billing. The M-16 is a great idea, but it can be killed with .50 calibers. The Ostie is less favored because it takes a lot of time in the gun to hit anything with it. That leaves the Wirb. One reason it kills so many aircraft is because so many noobs, and even non-noobs get really stupid when it comes time to kill the ack on a field (or vulch). It's hard to see the GVs because of reduced icon range. Then there is also the fact that the majority of low-level missions are against vehicle fields where a Wirb can either shoot or drive to a target quickly. Anyone experienced with the vehicle can shred low level bombers rather easily, despite the Wirb having already been neutered below its real-world performance capabilities. And lastly, the Tiger II is not the only vehicle that can tower when it is sitting on concrete, which helps to lower kills against any vehicle.
Wish denied. This is a whine thread.
-
I don't use the warble, and don't have the stats, but I'd almost bet the K/d for it went way up when the gv icon range was reduced.
I wouldn't...
Wirbelwind overall K/D by year
(http://i1145.photobucket.com/albums/o507/Snaildude/wwKD_zpsef30eda4.jpg)
-
1. The Wirb is possibly the easiest point and click system in the game. The only other real contender here is the 5 inch gun because of the fact you will never get credit for a death in it. I submit that both the 5 inch and 88 are less mobile in terms of both player choice and absolute mobility while also generally being harder to score kills with.
5in is the best anti air imho because of the usable range. Wirble seems to be the only real defence gv-s have against air threat in this game. Without it gv-s would be easy to pick. Statistics does not always show the whole picture. For example if Wirbles get a lot of kills by shooting at very low flying formations of buffs, that does not mean it unbalances the game.
2. Can you overheat the barrels of the Wirb in game? The ability to fire a couple thousand rounds non-stop is something even a ZSU-23 would be jealous of...
Can you overheat the engines, guns etc of an aircraft in game?
3. How prevalent was the IL-2 during WWII? Very. In AH, flying this tank killer is one of the most fun flight profiles possible. Emphasis on possible. The IL-2, despite some 30,000+ examples built, is a relatively rare sight in AH. 1200 kills compared to the Wirb's 13,000...
I understand that flying the IL-2 is fun for you, but for many the first choice is low level carpet bombing or a jabo. My personal favourite is the B25H. Trying to sneak close to a wirble or any other gv and getting it with the 75mm is a blast. Often does not work, but when I succeed it is like :banana: I bet most Wirble kills are aircraft that are low, slow or heading straight towards it. If people do not use the IL-2 then of course it gets few kills.
4. How prevalent was the Wirb? According to every source I've found, the number is unlikely to have been above 150 units. A small perk would increase the use of more common anti-aircraft types like the M16 and balance gameplay.
M16 with it`s .50s is an easy target for air. If the Wirble really unbalances the game and it should be perked, there should be a new anti air ground weapon introduced in my opinion. Something tougher than an M-16 and at least comparable to the firepower that fighters/attack planes have.
And while we're at it, how many documented aircraft kills were logged by tank cannons during the entire duration of the largest war ever in mankind's history? Please disable the ability of tank cannons to destroy flying aircraft. I have a positive K/D in the Sherman partially for this reason, but that doesn't make it right...
How many tank crews had a chance in practicing shooting air targets with their main gun? One of the reasons why weapons are accurate in this game is the practice people get when shooting targets moving at various speeds and angles. I imagine that lifespan was short in real war and you could not get the experience players get from the game by learning from their mistakes. "How to" information is also available from the internet.
As I have stated in other threads player vs player fight is very important aspect in online games for me. If a single tank spawns to deack the town near an airfield and it can`t shoot aircraft with the main gun, it would be a sitting duck for air threat. When a tank is using the main gun to shoot air targets in the game you are already preventing it from shooting ground targets. It`s position is also revealed to friendly gv-s. Maybe something should be done, but gvs would be too vulnerable at present with less Wibles to protect them.
-
5in is the best anti air imho because of the usable range. Wirble seems to be the only real defence gv-s have against air threat in this game. Without it gv-s would be easy to pick. Statistics does not always show the whole picture. For example if Wirbles get a lot of kills by shooting at very low flying formations of buffs, that does not mean it unbalances the game.
Can you overheat the engines, guns etc of an aircraft in game?
I understand that flying the IL-2 is fun for you, but for many the first choice is low level carpet bombing or a jabo. My personal favourite is the B25H. Trying to sneak close to a wirble or any other gv and getting it with the 75mm is a blast. Often does not work, but when I succeed it is like :banana: I bet most Wirble kills are aircraft that are low, slow or heading straight towards it. If people do not use the IL-2 then of course it gets few kills.
M16 with it`s .50s is an easy target for air. If the Wirble really unbalances the game and it should be perked, there should be a new anti air ground weapon introduced in my opinion. Something tougher than an M-16 and at least comparable to the firepower that fighters/attack planes have.
How many tank crews had a chance in practicing shooting air targets with their main gun? One of the reasons why weapons are accurate in this game is the practice people get when shooting targets moving at various speeds and angles. I imagine that lifespan was short in real war and you could not get the experience players get from the game by learning from their mistakes. "How to" information is also available from the internet.
As I have stated in other threads player vs player fight is very important aspect in online games for me. If a single tank spawns to deack the town near an airfield and it can`t shoot aircraft with the main gun, it would be a sitting duck for air threat. When a tank is using the main gun to shoot air targets in the game you are already preventing it from shooting ground targets. It`s position is also revealed to friendly gv-s. Maybe something should be done, but gvs would be too vulnerable at present with less Wibles to protect them.
All of this. Plus, the .50 cals from the m16 are quite weak, imho. I think I still have the video of a low n slow 262 that was attacking bish gvs, and ENY was too high for a wirble, I upped an m16 and got enough hits on him to knock out both of his engines, but he was able to coast back to base and land successfully....
At certain angles you can actually see ground vehicles from 2-3k away, they look like shiny specs on black carpet.
If HTC updated the wirbles with all their counterparts realistic attributes from AP rounds to gunsights and whatnot then sure. Give it 1-2 perkies, once I get my portable 88MM towable via jeep or m3. :D
Then I'm sure we will be hearing after that is released on how over-powered it is :rolleyes:
Until then the wirble doesn't deserve to be perked until it is updated.
Tinkles
:salute
-
The WirbelGawd will not respond to this thread out of respect for Letalis.
-
I think the balance on this is issue is just fine as it is. If your in a plane flying low over a hot spawn and suddenly you here whack ping bang and see death lazers all around you, your cursing expostulations are perfectly balanced by the poor bastard in a panther watching the f6 that just missed him reupping mere seconds after his first drop with two more shiny orbs of death. And that's not even mentioning the close air support lancasters.
-
I think the balance on this is issue is just fine as it is. If your in a plane flying low over a hot spawn and suddenly you here whack ping bang and see death lazers all around you, your cursing expostulations are perfectly balanced by the poor bastard in a panther watching the f6 that just missed him reupping mere seconds after his first drop with two more shiny orbs of death. And that's not even mentioning the close air support lancasters.
Not out to "get" the GVers. I did mention adjusting icon range and ord. If the Wirb were produced in large numbers I'd have no problem. My problem is that this RL rarity has pretty much eliminated a staple Ruskie aircraft. The withering fire brought about by high sortie rates, large bombs, buff formations and pilot proficiency do call for an evening of the odds, just make the answer something that affected the war. The formation buff issue could be partially fixed by 1. increasing calibration time or disabling it completely below 5k. 2. Fixing the specular winking you get at 3k when looking at GVs (they should be matte).
I do not have a decent answer for Lancstukas but mobile AAA with longer range and more hitting power will only help.
Maybe what we need are some of these:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ea/QF_40mm_Mk1_CFB_Borden_1.jpg/666px-QF_40mm_Mk1_CFB_Borden_1.jpg)
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7b/12.8_cm_Flakzwilling_40_1.jpg/800px-12.8_cm_Flakzwilling_40_1.jpg)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bofors_40_mm_gun
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QF_3.7_inch_AA_gun
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QF_3_inch_20_cwt
http://www.militaryfactory.com/armor/detail.asp?armor_id=488
http://olive-drab.com/idphoto/id_photos_37mm_aaa.php
Towed by a jeep or truck, these would be mobile, hard to spot and deadly. Some wouldn't even require a setup time.
Granted they would be easier to kill, but also higher ENY and offer greater range than the wirb. Aircraft over the front would be well within envelope range at the 5-8k alt that enables easy plinking.
Or what about the Crusader?
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3a/IWM-B-7738-Crusader-AA-19440719.jpg/598px-IWM-B-7738-Crusader-AA-19440719.jpg)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusader_tank
A Wirb with a perk cost of 1 or 2 at 10ENY would pay for itself with one or two kills. The pertinent points have all been made, I shall now discontinue this line of reasoning out of respect for the Wirblegawd.
-
Letalis, don't be obtuse. Regardless of if it's the plane or the pilot being dumb (and I guaran-damn-tee you knew what I meant), the fact remains that the Wirbelwind in no way responsible for the high KTD, the planes/pilots are.
And it is no more unbalancing than the dozens of other things that are all screwed up either. Spits fighting spits, 109s fighting 190s, and the number of wirbs produced relative to their usage bothers you?
Also, reasons for why il-2s were common in WW2 is entirely relevant, when you were talking about how uncommon it is in the game (the reason being that it is terrible in game, and far less survivable than many other attack platforms.)
Your problems are either contrived or based on your emotional perception of what's going on. I think we're done here.
-
Reduce GV icon ranges for friendly aircraft to the same as they are for enemy aircraft. Schmitt in his Wirbelwind was not talking to Hans in his Fw190D-9 and telling him to drag that P-51D over so the Wirbel could shoot it. Hans would have essentially no idea where Schmitt was. In AH let Schmitt use Vox to tell Hans where to go, not a magic 6000 yard marker that always tells Hans where Schmitt is when Frank can't see it until 600 yards.
Per the Wirbel at 1-2 perks.
Add a quad 20mm halftrack or truck.
The game has tilted too far in favor of the GVs, to the point where GVs are actively interfering in strictly air-to-air fights like they complained of aircraft interfering in strictly gv-to-gv fights.
-
The game has tilted too far in favor of the GVs, to the point where GVs are actively interfering in strictly air-to-air fights like they complained of aircraft interfering in strictly gv-to-gv fights.
That is the main issue, combined with the ridiculous accuracy and modeling of AA guns - no recoil, no reload pauses. It is really amusing to see in such threads in which players defend the possibility of hitting a plane with a tank main gun.
GVs are different than planes. A spawning plane is helpless for about a minute till it takes off and picks up a bit of speed. Wirbs just spawn, roll 10 feet out of the VH and pose a significant threat to areal activity. Now lets say that the planes get smart, one draws the wirb's attention while the other strafes it. Even if the latter did some significant damage (usually not), the wirb will just exit (no kill to the plane), respawn and be firing from the same location in 10 seconds.
Base defense is only the lesser half of the issue. The wirbs can also remote spawn near an enemy base and threat plane taking off and landing in just a couple of minutes - no radar, no dar bar, no icons will well within threat range. This is completely different from a plane approaching an enemy base. In many spawn points, the wirb will be back quicker then a plane can do so after getting shot down. Spawn points need to be moved back, but that is another issue related to maps design.
By the way, planes interfering with strictly GV fights I bet are 90% of the cases being flown by players who are mainly GVers. I can tell by how easy they are to shoot down when I am CAPing V bases or fly over tank town. When GVs attack an airfield, they should expect to be bombed into submission - they are interfering with the air war.
-
Almost all of my non-Il-2/A-20G/Fi156 deaths to GVs happened when I was engaged in an air-to-air fight and I ended up in range, planned or unplanned by my opponent, of a Wirbelwind.
That said, I don't have a real problem with the main gun kills by tanks. It is relatively easy to avoid and I don't see any way to stop it short of making tank rounds pass through aircraft without hurting them, a severe violation of consistency.
-
Looks like there are some loose ends to tie up on the personal front. Let's remember that I did not start the thread to insult Mr. Tank Ace, but this was in his first response:
So because the aircraft doesn't have his life at stake, and so flies in a manner so much stupider and vulnerable than in real life.... we should perk the Wirbelwind....
as well as this:
What the hell have you been drinking?
Pretty standard fare for forums, but, good sir, shouldn't it take at least 3-4 exchanges before you identify yourself as a member of the genus Equus africanus asinus??
If I wrinkled some precious contrived emotional perception of yours, I do apologize!
Letalis, don't be obtuse. Regardless of if it's the plane or the pilot being dumb (and I guaran-damn-tee you knew what I meant), the fact remains that the Wirbelwind in no way responsible for the high KTD, the planes/pilots are.
Hmm. By this reasoning the M3 should have a K/D on par with the Wirb because the Wirb is "in no way responsible for the high KTD, the planes/pilots are." If the premiere AAA GV can't impact K/D vs. aircraft, what GV can?
I understood your point and rejected it; don't be obtuse ;)
And it is no more unbalancing than the dozens of other things that are all screwed up either. Spits fighting spits, 109s fighting 190s, and the number of wirbs produced relative to their usage bothers you?
N/A. This is a false dilemma fallacy/straw man. I never said those aspects didn't bug me. Unlike the Wirb issue however, I understand the reasoning.
Also, reasons for why il-2s were common in WW2 is entirely relevant, when you were talking about how uncommon it is in the game (the reason being that it is terrible in game, and far less survivable than many other attack platforms.)
False dilemma/straw man again (could fall under any number of fallacies actually). I already dismissed this. You'd made a spurious comment that Russian pilots were forced to fly the IL-2 and that should have something to do with the IL-2's established historical prevalence and demonstrated effectiveness -that's what we call a red herring, and it does not bolster your position.
Your problems are either contrived or based on your emotional perception of what's going on. I think we're done here.
Wrong again. Let's make this easier for you. Pick either "contrived" or "emotional" and prove it. A judgment can be an attack, but the attack is only as valid as the judgment - so far I'm not impressed. While you're at it, reference this page and come back when you're ready. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies)
-
:rofl perk the wirbel... :rofl :rofl
make it the same as the t-34/85 or panther...problem (whines) solved.
-
-This discussion has much more to do with the fact that a vehicle model with maybe 100-ish examples makes up two thirds of the AAA GV kills, and is #4 overall in kills.
Quite ridiculous ...
Yes If this was the case in the real war we would off been out of planes.... or Hittler wouldn't of needed any... :lol
-
The game has tilted too far in favor of the GVs, to the point where GVs are actively interfering in strictly air-to-air fights like they complained of aircraft interfering in strictly gv-to-gv fights.
Not trying to pick on anyone just,,,,
My two cents
GV's fight near or on base, near or at a spawn or in towns,,, that's it! They occupy maybe one eighth of the land mass of AH and none of the sky above 2k or so,yet you say they are interfering with the " strictly air to air fights"?
A GV can't fly, it can't swim ( small exceptions )and 7/8ths of the map are GV free yet that's not enough?
Have your air to air battles over 2 k up or away from GV spawns,, if your in a fight and the guy drags you off to a sitting wirble,,, he wasn't in a "strictly air to air fight"!
GV's need all the help they can get from wirble's, as well as freindly planes to be a part of the game at all,, don't believe me,, set up a map with only GV's on one side and only aircraft on the other and see who wins
You can bomb the hangers down long before the GV's can kill off the ords and or hangers, IMHO!
-
Air battles frequently form over GVs due to the presence of the GV hunting aircraft drawing in fighters to prey on them and then fighters to fight those fighters.
While GVs only occupy a small portion of the map, as you say, it is usually the portions were the fighting is more intense.
-
I completely agree with Letalis...the part where he said this won't be popular with some. :D
-
That is the main issue, combined with the ridiculous accuracy and modeling of AA guns - no recoil, no reload pauses. It is really amusing to see in such threads in which players defend the possibility of hitting a plane with a tank main gun.
I can`t comment on the recoil accuracy, but it seems to be modeled in the game because the gunsight trembles when gun fires. If Wirble is really that dangerous then maybe it should be perked, but I would like some new anti air weapons introduced as presented before. Isn`t the ground cannon ballistics better than aircraft because of the longer barrel and more stable platform? I see no reason why anti air cannons shouldn`t have a reload time. The crews could reload their guns when desired in reality.
GVs are different than planes. A spawning plane is helpless for about a minute till it takes off and picks up a bit of speed. Wirbs just spawn, roll 10 feet out of the VH and pose a significant threat to areal activity. Now lets say that the planes get smart, one draws the wirb's attention while the other strafes it. Even if the latter did some significant damage (usually not), the wirb will just exit (no kill to the plane), respawn and be firing from the same location in 10 seconds.
Destroying the vehicle hangar prevents gvs from respawning. If a base is being attacked for capture then the vh is usually one of the top targets. This part seems like a complaint that the Wirbles interfere with vulching enemy aircraft while they are trying to take off. Wirbs 10ft near the vh do not interfere with air combat otherwise, do they? Aircraft over the field already have speed, altitude, ords and they are ready for combat.
Base defense is only the lesser half of the issue. The wirbs can also remote spawn near an enemy base and threat plane taking off and landing in just a couple of minutes - no radar, no dar bar, no icons will well within threat range. This is completely different from a plane approaching an enemy base. In many spawn points, the wirb will be back quicker then a plane can do so after getting shot down. Spawn points need to be moved back, but that is another issue related to maps design.
Planes can take off in different directions. The town usually starts blinking when a gv is in close proximity, but out of the base blinking range. I have been blown up more by tanks on the field when I am still on the runway than Wirbs after take off. Flak weapons are easy targets for gvs so they usually tend to stay away from tanks and large caliber cannons.
By the way, planes interfering with strictly GV fights I bet are 90% of the cases being flown by players who are mainly GVers. I can tell by how easy they are to shoot down when I am CAPing V bases or fly over tank town. When GVs attack an airfield, they should expect to be bombed into submission - they are interfering with the air war.
So do you think the Wirbs should be perked so that it would be even easier to shoot down attack planes? If a fighter pilots wants to stop attack planes getting to a V base you can always intercept them before they get to the vehicle battle area. When gvs attack an airfield then this could just be a base take similar to V base take with aircraft. Air, land and sea battle seems to be combined in AH2 without any preference to one.
-
I can`t comment on the recoil accuracy, but it seems to be modeled in the game because the gunsight trembles when gun fires.
<snip>
This part seems like a complaint that the Wirbles interfere with vulching enemy aircraft while they are trying to take off. Wirbs 10ft near the vh do not interfere with air combat otherwise, do they? Aircraft over the field already have speed, altitude, ords and they are ready for combat.
There is no recoil, just a visual effect of the screen shaking. The aiming point does not move.
There is also no reload of what was quite a short clip. There is no vibration when driving allnsurfaces are perfectly smooth which allows fiire on the move which is completely impractial in real life unless we are talking drive by shooting. The ground is generally perfectly flat even off road which means gv's can go anywhere at top speed and when stopped, the are never at an awekward angle.
The fact is that GVs are modeled no where near the realism level achieved in the flight modeling. The standard has been set qhen GVs where a side show in this game. It is no longer so.
Wirbs on an airfield are much more than vulch defence. Planes in trouble drag the enemy near the field to be shot by wirbs. The remote spawn points are much too close to enemy bases and wirbs spring into action too soon after spawning. For example, yesterday a wirb spawned near a rook base and was shooting at planes after takeoff. Occasionally, someone would kill it, but it simply respawn and keep shooting. Even worse, I strafed and killed it while it was shooting at another friendly plane - before I could do a 360 and get out of there it respawed and hit my oil and radiator. Now that is ridiculous.
-
I wouldn't...
Wirbelwind overall K/D by year
(http://i1145.photobucket.com/albums/o507/Snaildude/wwKD_zpsef30eda4.jpg)
How would that relate to player population?
-
Wirbs on an airfield are much more than vulch defence. Planes in trouble drag the enemy near the field to be shot by wirbs. The remote spawn points are much too close to enemy bases and wirbs spring into action too soon after spawning. For example, yesterday a wirb spawned near a rook base and was shooting at planes after takeoff. Occasionally, someone would kill it, but it simply respawn and keep shooting. Even worse, I strafed and killed it while it was shooting at another friendly plane - before I could do a 360 and get out of there it respawed and hit my oil and radiator. Now that is ridiculous.
why not just request that gv's have a delayed respawn timer? a 30 second delay in re-spawn time would make a difference in the way things play out. maybe make the respawn delay a progressive timer that goes from 30 to 90 seconds based on the number of times a player has chosen to use any gv in the hangar.
if the truth be told, this "wish" is nothing more than a whine, probably brought on by the op getting dragged over a wirbel in a perk plane.
-
Considering the AA platforms we currently have, I say the late war ENY values are about right.
M16 = 35
Ostwind = 25
Wirblewind = 10
-
why not just request that gv's have a delayed respawn timer? a 30 second delay in re-spawn time would make a difference in the way things play out.
That is not bad.
-
That is not bad.
Because camps would be impossible to break otherwise? Because attackers also have a highly simplified and easy method for "taking" a position?
IDK about the rest of you, but after some paratroopers land, I'm going try to keep fighting, regardless of if they went down into our bunkers. I mean right now it goes about like this:
"Aw hell, they're in the map room. Time to pull back 12 miles!"
"But Sarge, we can fight just as effectively from right here, as we ca....."
"Shut your mouth Private, I said we're pulling back 12 miles, and I expect you to follow orders!"
Granted I recognize the need, but smart attackers already have a big advantage, in that they can shut down any and all forms of reinforcement from the immediate area by bombing a few structures. No need to make the horde's day any easier.
-
Because camps would be impossible to break otherwise?
no it wouldn't, especially if the gv'ers were "smart" about it...besides, nothing is stopping someone from dropping bombs on the campers, and with a 30 second delay to respawn they would have a more difficult time keeping their spawn camp.
-
Hmm. By this reasoning the M3 should have a K/D on par with the Wirb because the Wirb is "in no way responsible for the high KTD, the planes/pilots are." If the premiere AAA GV can't impact K/D vs. aircraft, what GV can?
Salient point. Lets rephrase; It is 75% the aircraft, 25% the GV, in that the GV just has to take the easy shot provided by the low, non-maneuvering aircraft as it flies strait it, providing what could be considered "the" ideal shot.
My point is that until the cartoon pilots stop flying like morons (and a great many do), we shouldn't blame our cartoon drivers for taking a shot.
I understood your point and rejected it; don't be obtuse ;)
Both perhaps? And I think rather more than rejecting it, it was that you didn't like the incontinent flaws in your argument I raised.
N/A. This is a false dilemma fallacy/straw man. I never said those aspects didn't bug me. Unlike the Wirb issue however, I understand the reasoning.
Calm yourself, you were just making a relatively large issue about the realism of it, but not a peep from you about anything else. Just wondering. And if you feel the problem is arbitrarily created, asking for it to be fixed would be more logical.
[/quote]False dilemma/straw man again (could fall under any number of fallacies actually). I already dismissed this. You'd made a spurious comment that Russian pilots were forced to fly the IL-2 and that should have something to do with the IL-2's established historical prevalence and demonstrated effectiveness -that's what we call a red herring, and it does not bolster your position.[/quote]
False conclusion; your OP mentioned the prevalence of IL-2's, and the scarcity of Wirblwinds in WWII, and how their positions are switched in AH. The wirblewind part does actually lend something to your argument, even if its only a little, considering that more Tigers are lost each month than were produced in the entirety of the war, and the same likely goes for most every other aircraft or vehicle in AH.
But the Il-2 really seems to be more of a whine, and you almost seem to imply that the Wirbs are driving the Il-2's away, as though their own lack of capability weren't enough to do that. The fact is that its simply not an effective platform, considering its bombs are small, its rockets near useless, and its guns are hampered by the fact that it must remain in range of retaliation to use them. Combine this with the A-20, the 190F-8, or even the Ju-87G with its more powerful guns, and the myriad of other fighter-bombers, and its obvious that the Il-2's days of popularity are over.
Wrong again. Let's make this easier for you. Pick either "contrived" or "emotional" and prove it. A judgment can be an attack, but the attack is only as valid as the judgment - so far I'm not impressed. While you're at it, reference this page and come back when you're ready. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies)
The wirblewind has been steadily dropping in KTD for quite a while, despite what should have been a big advantage in the form of reduced icon range two years ago. From everything I've seen, the deaths are the result of stupid flying, loitering within range for extended periods, or repeated passes over a base. I'm certain almost all anecdotal evidence from any given GV'er will back me up on this.
You yourself have double the number of kills OF wirblewinds as you have been killed BY wirblewinds, all of them being in aircraft, and it is half way through this tour; not due to a lack of opportunity.
Clearly your post isn't sparked by any first-hand experience of the wirblewind's effectivnes in usual situations. If I had to guess, bad luck prompted a trip to the stats, and then on to this thread.
And thinking on it, its no surprise the wirblwind has so many kills. Aircraft are going to be be numerous relative to GV's, and it won't really interact with GV's all that much. Its also the main AA weapon used by players.
It would be literally as though we had only 3 aircraft that could carry decent sized bombs, and then acting all amazed and pissed off when one of those emerges with the majority of vehicle kills.
-
I can say for myself, the reduced icon range stopped me from taking up the IL2 anymore, and that used to be one of my favorite things to do in the game, kill tanks with it's guns. but only discovering it's a wirble only after it started shooting at you sucked. so bad for me, good for the gv'ers, I guess. :cry
-
The aircraft doesn't settle down, and the sight picture doesn't resolve to a firing solution until the aircraft has flown a steady path for the same amount of time the code for the tanks main gun allows a one shot skeet shot visa the player commander. Tank busting in ww2 visa gun or rockets was inside of 800 yards, 300-400 in most cases from a straight sighting run. In AH tank main gun skeet shooting range is 800 and closer. Wonder why tank main gun skeet shooting of typhoons and IL2 was not the norm but, a rare exception during WW2?
Is anything different in our "game"?
In ww2 attackers did not have to perform ACM with tanks to shoot them. In AH we do. I remember a time this was not the norm but, about as rare as ww2 in our game. Being a computer program, someone had to make a choice to introduce this ability for the tank player even if WW2 tank commanders didn't have it. I can understand for game play reasons the non historic proliferation of wirbels to protect tankers. I have trouble understanding how a single tank can shoot down all the planes attacking it with a 100% hit rate one single shot after another. Or I did until recently.
In our game the ability to move between commander barrel direction slaved mode and gunsight mode is near instantaneous. Tank commanders with their heads outside of the turret are in "God Mode" and can fire from there with experience to their IP. While the tank player knows the attacker to have a high chance of success, must fly a straight path inside of 800. It's a gimmie to the tank player because his gun is slaved to the commander mode. Attackers have to fly a straight path to concentrate 37mm, BK3.7 or insure rockets will not fly off into left field. The more ingenious tank player parks his tank nose up on a berm to achieve a higher angle of fire against attackers trying to attack above the main gun's max elevation. Then the player forwards and reverses up and down that small berm while tracking the attacker in commander main gun slaved mode. Welcome to Mech War AH Light.
The change to gamey "Mech War" skeet shooting mode for tanks came with the change to commander mode with the main gun slaved to the commander's head. It didn't take long for gamers to turn this into skeet shooting mode.
I suspect in ww2 there never was the instantaneous and perfect digital union of commander to gunner and barrel direction against high speed flying objects as has been given to tank players in our game "A la Mech War". Tanks have never been one shot skeet shooting wonders against fast moving aircraft. That's what osties, wirbels, and top turret machineguns are for. Aircraft didn't have to fly ACM against tanks to shoot them like we do in "AH Mech War Light".
-
no it wouldn't, especially if the gv'ers were "smart" about it...besides, nothing is stopping someone from dropping bombs on the campers, and with a 30 second delay to respawn they would have a more difficult time keeping their spawn camp.
Fine, let's do the same to a/c. Then when subscriptions fall sub-100 we can call on you for another 'fix.'
-
Fine, let's do the same to a/c. Then when subscriptions fall sub-100 we can call on you for another 'fix.'
did i step on your little winky? sure, let's do it for all aircraft and vehicles across the board...would not make one bit of difference once the whine fest ended. if a player rage quits for a 30 second respawn delay, he's here for the wrong dam reasons anyway. maybe you should rage quit now...
-
Honestly, you guys are all over thinking the problem, and coming up with solutions that are, frankly, just a tad stupid.
Perk it!! Add a respawn delay!!!
One of the issues is the continuous fire. So just add a reload time. It can only have 84 rounds loaded into the guns at anyone time, at absolute most (20rds per magazine x 4 magazines + 1 in each chamber), but you can extend the length of fire by using only one bank of guns, while the other is reloaded. Unsure of the reload times, but its possible that you could achieve constant fire with only 2x 20mm's, as there are two dedicated loaders.
In any case, this would really help fix the problem (if there even is one to begin with, aside from one of exploits and gaming the game), and add some nice realism.
-
did i step on your little winky? sure, let's do it for all aircraft and vehicles across the board...would not make one bit of difference once the whine fest ended. if a player rage quits for a 30 second respawn delay, he's here for the wrong dam reasons anyway. maybe you should rage quit now...
No gyrene. It's my way at laughing at you for being so transparent. No one wants to pay money for 'time-outs.' I think everyone sees that except you, maybe.
-
No gyrene. It's my way at laughing at you for being so transparent. No one wants to pay money for 'time-outs.' I think everyone sees that except you, maybe.
transparent is a preference over ignorance, perhaps you should consider it. since you're so well informed about what no one will pay for, the developers of some other subscription mmo's seem to have missed the memo.
-
One of the issues is the continuous fire. So just add a reload time. It can only have 84 rounds loaded into the guns at anyone time, at absolute most (20rds per magazine x 4 magazines + 1 in each chamber), but you can extend the length of fire by using only one bank of guns, while the other is reloaded. Unsure of the reload times, but its possible that you could achieve constant fire with only 2x 20mm's, as there are two dedicated loaders.
Turning the GV part of AH more into a sim and less world of tanks will be a big step forward. However, this still does not solve the problem of wirbs being killed and instantly respawn to shoot down thier attacker before the latter even finished making one full turn.
-
Turning the GV part of AH more into a sim and less world of tanks will be a big step forward. However, this still does not solve the problem of wirbs being killed and instantly respawn to shoot down thier attacker before the latter even finished making one full turn.
you do know that the controls we have now for gv's have been around for 30 years before world of tanks. and the reason for having the views we have now have been explained many times already.
semp
-
Turning the GV part of AH more into a sim and less world of tanks will be a big step forward. However, this still does not solve the problem of wirbs being killed and instantly respawn to shoot down thier attacker before the latter even finished making one full turn.
Because is necessary for good game play. The speed of GV combat is greater than that of aerial combat. I'd you were to apply a respawn delay of roughly equivalent length to aircraft, that would be around 3 minutes.
Camps would become impossible to break (and broken camps lead to THE best GV fights in the game). Defending a base would be one HELL of a lot harder. Such an idea frankly scares me a bit; it literally might break the GV aspect of the game. I mean this in the most sincere way possible, and I hope the implications aren't lost on you.
-
"historic this" "historic that" "keep it accurate"
Is keeping historic everything doing anything for the growth of this game? LET IT GO PEOPLE AND JUST PLAY!!!
And bring me a Meteor and a Do-229 while you are at it.
Those who do not learn from past history will declare Chapter 11 one day.
-
"historic this" "historic that" "keep it accurate"
Is keeping historic everything doing anything for the growth of this game? LET IT GO PEOPLE AND JUST PLAY!!!
And bring me a Meteor and a Do-229 while you are at it.
more so than the arcade mentality that makes people ignore history and forces developers to do the same...
Those who do not learn from past history will declare Chapter 11 one day.
there are several small game developers that didn't get that memo...and they are still going strong.
-
So you're new here?
I know that is not true. Me? I've been around quite a long time, this is my 3rd BBS name. When I first started playing, so were eight thousand other people in a tour. Today, 8k worth of players are playing FB arcade games, in one second of time, and not logging into AH.
more so than the arcade mentality that makes people ignore history and forces developers to do the same...
there are several small game developers that didn't get that memo...and they are still going strong.
So now we are here spending our energy on the perk value of the Whirble instead of wishing for more aircraft and more diverse forms gameplay.... NONE OF WHICH, btw, would change the flight models already in place ( the thing that make this game not gamey or arcade-ish ) We already have the science down, maybe the time for magic is upon us (pardon the pun... I don't want to see lightning strikes or fireball enabled Ponies)
OFF TOPIC (sort of) If they added a few non real life things, and opened up and all out, no real rule arena, perhaps then 10,000 jerkaff arcade gamers will come pay them 15 bucks and play in that dumb arena while we can hang out in Late War and fly real world situations.
Think about that!
-
So you're new here?
I know that is not true. Me? I've been around quite a long time, this is my 3rd BBS name. When I first started playing, so were eight thousand other people in a tour.
8k people in a tour? That's new to me... at around which time was that? :)