Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: SirNuke on August 18, 2013, 05:38:51 AM
-
Anyone remembers that german vehicule's name with 20mms on a lightly armored chassis?
-
Some of the discussion is here:
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,351112.0.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,351112.0.html)
I would like to see more anti aircraft stuff myself especially something with a longer reach, maybe:
Cannone da 90/53: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannone_da_90/53 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannone_da_90/53)
Or vehicle mounted Bofors 40mm gun.
-
Anyone remembers that german vehicule's name with 20mms on a lightly armored chassis?
http://www.scribd.com/doc/70231833/050-Flakpanzer-38-t
http://www.scribd.com/doc/97292317/051-Waffen-Arsenal-Flak-Auf-Dem-Gefechtsfeld
http://www.scribd.com/doc/113790510/1982-Gepard-The-History-of-German-Anti-Aircraft-Tanks
-
Wirbies should be given away by shooting, showing icon until they move away
-
Wirbies should be given away by shooting, showing icon until they move away
I made another wish for that, I feel too that the balance gv/planes is off. GVs have it easy nowadays.
-
yep got shot up by a wirbie I could not see before I was already shot up yesterday, been chasing a rabbit 51 low.
That could be realistic, but IRL he would have paid the price giving away his position, either he has to move or get pounded.
In here he can wait for next low guy coming in unaware.
Also to have a own field perimeter warning system showing what arc within 45 degree where enemies are at.
This effectively stop parked wirbies at your field end when you take off, you have no chance seeing him before its too late since you only know field is flashing.
-
yep got shot up by a wirbie I could not see before I was already shot up yesterday, been chasing a rabbit 51 low.
That could be realistic,
The unrealistic thing was for the P-51 driver to know exactly where to run to when you were on his tail. There is no reason that friendly GVs should be visible at long range. People say "They could communicate on radio." which isn't true due to the limited channels, but more importantly we can also communicate using vox so let the Wirbie try to talk the P-51 over.
-
... IRL he would have paid the price giving away his position, either he has to move or get pounded.
His position was given away. The stream of tracers rising from his position gives it away exactly as it would in real life. Knowing where on the ground friendly FPs are is the thing that needs to be fixed. FPs were built to protect other GVs from air attack; not protect planes from other planes.
Regards,
Hammer
-
The unrealistic thing was for the P-51 driver to know exactly where to run to when you were on his tail. There is no reason that friendly GVs should be visible at long range. People say "They could communicate on radio." which isn't true due to the limited channels, but more importantly we can also communicate using vox so let the Wirbie try to talk the P-51 over.
FO's were present all over the ETO front, at least for the allies. The Germans used them as well but to a lesser degree. Also, when pilots upped they had been briefed as to what units were where, maybe not to a specific location but the pilots knew that X town was occupied by Y unit. Allied pilots were not completely blind.
I could go either way on the allied gv icon, on one hand I like the fog of war but on the other hand so many people do not have the basics of communication down (bearings, O'Clock positions, what is and is not important info to relay, etc).
-
"His position was given away. The stream of tracers rising from his position gives it away exactly as it would in real life. Knowing where on the ground friendly FPs are is the thing that needs to be fixed. FPs were built to protect other GVs from air attack; not protect planes from other planes"
Above statement is only true if spotting plane is close range from the shooting wirby, and in open ground.
It's darn hard to find them concealed in woods,and it should be hard to find them, likewise it should be very hard for Wirby to find out if a plane is friendly or enemy at 3k-6k range,here is is presented with data from a ranging computer, even telling what plane it is.
-
"His position was given away. The stream of tracers rising from his position gives it away exactly as it would in real life. Knowing where on the ground friendly FPs are is the thing that needs to be fixed. FPs were built to protect other GVs from air attack; not protect planes from other planes"
Above statement is only true if spotting plane is close range from the shooting wirby, and in open ground.
As it was in real life. If you see tracers coming from a clump of trees, you know there is something in the clump of trees, not a pinpoint location.
It's darn hard to find them concealed in woods,and it should be hard to find them...
This seems counter to your original argument, but I agree!
... likewise it should be very hard for Wirby to find out if a plane is friendly or enemy at 3k-6k range...
Agreed. There were lots of instances to pilots going down to friendly ground fire. I'm not sure, though, there would be a way to model that in the MA environment without making all AA guns useless.
Regards,
Hammer
-
FO's were present all over the ETO front, at least for the allies. The Germans used them as well but to a lesser degree. Also, when pilots upped they had been briefed as to what units were where, maybe not to a specific location but the pilots knew that X town was occupied by Y unit. Allied pilots were not completely blind.
I could go either way on the allied gv icon, on one hand I like the fog of war but on the other hand so many people do not have the basics of communication down (bearings, O'Clock positions, what is and is not important info to relay, etc).
It is absurd to think that provided anything like the pinpoint situational awareness of where the AA units were that we have here. Even today we don't have that level of information for our pilots, hence dropping bombs on Canadian special forces and shooting down Blackhawk helicopters. I know that P-47s and Typhoons involved in ground support had their radios tuned to communicate with ground forces. I am much more skeptical that a random P-51 or Spitfire that was tasked with air-to-air would have that option though. Even so, we have radio communication with our ground forces in AH and if they want to coordinate using it, fine. I just don't think a P-51 should be able to come out of a swirling dogfight and know the exact position a friendly AA vehicle is at 5500 yards away in non-descript terrain while the guy he just lost the swirling dogfight to won't know until he gets a face full of 20mm rounds.
You can say "Just don't chase runners" but that makes the runner aircraft even more favored. I don't want to feel like I have to fly La-7s just to ensure P-51Ds and Fw190D-9s don't have a get out of jail free card.
-
+1 for more FLAK platforms.. Like something in between the M16 and Flaks..
Like maybe a "SturmFlak", or something with a Single or Twin 20mm on a 1/2track chassis??
+1 for a Mobile Bofors Vehicle..
I believe the Brits had a Single Bofors on the Crusader Chassis.. (nice to have the Crusader in game too)
And the USA had a Tracked Twin Bofors mount too, cant remember which chassis tho. (Pre M42 Duster)
But if ya wanna perk the Wirb/Osti, then a Bofors equipped vehicle would need God Perks..
As far Dragging a Pursuer over a fellow countryman in Wirby??? LOL, It's ALWAYS been that way..
Lost track of how many times I was A20, bingo ord, damaged with one engine smokin etc...
Playing bait for my buddies in Flakpanzers.. Works too!
COME GET IT SUCKERS! :rofl
-
As far Dragging a Pursuer over a fellow countryman in Wirby??? LOL, It's ALWAYS been that way.
Sure, but it used to be that you knew it was happening and could make an informed choice to risk it or break off the pursuit, but with the change to enemy GV icons that is no longer true.
-
Sure, but it used to be that you knew it was happening and could make an informed choice to risk it or break off the pursuit, but with the change to enemy GV icons that is no longer true.
I agreed with the GV Icon range change.. Well, in real life you'd have to make the call too.. Chase him into an enemy infested area where (in reality) you would just assume, that everything that could shoot would be blasting at you from every angle.. Or don't!
It was hazardous bizz gettin down near the trees over known Flak areas.. But this is a game, so the risk of not gettin back to drinks at the O club, and your warm bed, are somewhat less.. Makes people bolder than they normally would be..
-
Perk the wirble. Or add the manual reload time of that they had. Or both.
-
Twin Bofors against Lankstukas, OH YEAH, I'm likin that idea! :aok
-
I agreed with the GV Icon range change.. Well, in real life you'd have to make the call too.. Chase him into an enemy infested area where (in reality) you would just assume, that everything that could shoot would be blasting at you from every angle.. Or don't!
It was hazardous bizz gettin down near the trees over known Flak areas.. But this is a game, so the risk of not gettin back to drinks at the O club, and your warm bed, are somewhat less.. Makes people bolder than they normally would be..
I have no problem with the enemy icon change, hence I am not asking for it to be reverted. I just want friendly icons to be changed to match so that this "run to a Wirbie that my opponent can't see" crap stops.
-
I have no problem with the enemy icon change, hence I am not asking for it to be reverted. I just want friendly icons to be changed to match so that this "run to a Wirbie that my opponent can't see" crap stops.
Oh OK, I gotcha now, same range for you and He.. Sure, absolutely, human eyes are the same for both sides.. No reason for friendlies icon to be visible to you at longer ranges than it is to him.. :aok
-
I don't see this as a big enough problem to warrant any changes. It's not an epidemic proble
People run to base ack happens much more.
-
I don't see this as a big enough problem to warrant any changes. It's not an epidemic proble
People run to base ack happens much more.
I don't play much. I have died by chasing runners who ran to Wirbies multiple times since the GV icon change.
Base ack is 1) at a known location, a base or town, so it is not unexpected and 2) far, far less lethal.
-
+1 for more aa chassis,s
Would also like to see a slight perk cost for the osti and wirb, as they were quite rare in the real war and common as pig toejam here.
-
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/19/Bundesarchiv_Bild_101I-665-6823-11%2C_Russland%2C_Flak_auf_Halbkettenfahrzeug_im_Erdeinsatz.jpg)
-
(http://www.scaleplasticandrail.com/kaboom/images/stories/rbmodel/oerlikon/05-Allafa.jpg)
(http://www66.tok2.com/home2/tankguy/saumur01/crusader3aa/crusader3aa-01.jpg)
Little faster then wirble, little harder to kill (not so easy to smoke it), but 1/2 the firepower.
-
I think the whole thread is about worse AAA than the wirb and ost, not "faster and harder to kill"
-
I think the whole thread is about worse AAA than the wirb and ost, not "faster and harder to kill"
We have that, its called the M16.
What I really want, is something of a mid-step so that the wirble could have a slight perk added. 2 x 20mms is still going to make a Vulcher balk, without the easy kill of the M16.
-
I made another wish for that, I feel too that the balance gv/planes is off. GVs have it easy nowadays.
This is a ridiculous comment. I tell you what; how about you engage in a duel. Your opponent takes a P51 with 2 1000 pounders (costs no perk points) and you take a Tiger II (costs 100 perk points). Let's see who wins...
MH
-
Perk the wirble. Or add the manual reload time of that they had. Or both.
Or neither. MH
-
This is a ridiculous comment. I tell you what; how about you engage in a duel. Your opponent takes a P51 with 2 1000 pounders (costs no perk points) and you take a Tiger II (costs 100 perk points). Let's see who wins...
MH
That isn't a very accurate representation of the MA combat environment.
-
That isn't a very accurate representation of the MA combat environment.
Disagree :)
-
of course the plane with ord and that took the time to climb will win against a gv, if it can spot it. (but the t34 flaks makes you wonder at times :noid:)
but did the gv do to get there? just click the spawn button.
but if a flak is close it will kill the plane in total impunity, without even being spotted.
The time spent and the risks took is not in the plane's favor, thats why the bish horde via gvs anytime they can, and nothing can't them with the current balance.
-
(but the t34 flaks makes you wonder at times :noid:)
About time we got this in the game. :aok
(http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/af142/barneybolac/vehicles/653-Schwjager-03_zpsec3b0f36.jpg) (http://s1002.photobucket.com/user/barneybolac/media/vehicles/653-Schwjager-03_zpsec3b0f36.jpg.html)
(http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/af142/barneybolac/vehicles/t-34r-flak-2_zpsf460da1b.jpg) (http://s1002.photobucket.com/user/barneybolac/media/vehicles/t-34r-flak-2_zpsf460da1b.jpg.html)
(http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/af142/barneybolac/vehicles/flak-3_zpse8aa8342.jpg) (http://s1002.photobucket.com/user/barneybolac/media/vehicles/flak-3_zpse8aa8342.jpg.html)
:devil
-
Please no, they aim well enough with a 76mm gun
-
Please no, they aim well enough with a 76mm gun
True. :aok
Always has bothered me that the same tanker can't hit you with a Wirbel or Osti.
Main gun on a tank though :mad:
-
Half the aircraft view range, simply because a friendly aircraft has a better idea where AA is than the enemy plane.
Alter nothing in terms of aircraft's difficulties in detecting them. Flacks are actually mildly effective against enemies who aren't being morons, ever since the change.
I'd even go so far as to say engine on/off should have no effect on icon range. Movement, firing or not, and proximity to cover only.
Not firing, under cover, and stationary should not generate an icon at any distance at speeds greater than, say 150mph. 200m range maximum.
Firing main gun should increase view range by 200m only (you have only a fraction of a second in which anything other than a general bearing is revealed), and only for a few seconds.
Automatic weapons fire increases view range by 500m for 10 seconds, regardless of other factors.
-
Ostwinds and Wirblewinds were uncommon beasts in WW2 compared to towed flak s. (never left Germany IIRC)
We already have the 37mm ggun modelled and it could be made to be towed behind either an M3 or a Sd.Kfz 251 to represent the various 37mm AAguns in use by Germany, Russia and the US.
A short delay for deployment and there is a soft gun beside the carrier vehicle.
The Sk.Kfz 251/ 21 with triple 20mm could also be added.
I would then prefer that AA guns be looked at separately re their perk values...... Both the panzer mounted variants getting perked once the more common variants above were available.
As stated elsewhere i would prefer to make icon range the same for freindly as it is now for enemy. The only thing I would have different would be to make it inversely proportional to aircraft speed..... Such that the slower you fly the easier it is to find gv's. Then if you can fly as slow as a Storch you see as well as a Storch.
-
Half the aircraft view range, simply because a friendly aircraft has a better idea where AA is than the enemy plane.
I disagree. More than enough carrots have been handed tot he GVers. They complained about aircraft interfering in GV fights and changes were made, but now that we have a new balance and the shoe is on the other foot the GVers are now arguing to maintain their ability to interfere with aircraft fights and get relatively free kills.
Same view distance for friendly and enemy GVs following the same rules as we currently have for enemy GVs.
Look at the positives GVers, bombing tanks would be more dangerous as you'd need to make sure it was an enemy GV or risk killshooting yourself. Being more dangerous, it would likely become rarer.
-
As someone who is rather fond of killing gv's, in my opinion wirblwinds are highly effective making light work of most planes. In the hurri2d i have to fly within the effective guns range to visually identify it and routinely take hits doing so. The only thing i think which isn't in their favour is f3 mode in bombers which makes it easier to bomb gv's, i think may be the reasons the a20 is used so frequently to kill gv's.
-
As a side note you can't killshoot yourself by bombing friendly gvs
-
As a side note you can't killshoot yourself by bombing friendly gvs
Then my wish would be that this is enabled...... And visa versa.
-
The WirbelGawd enjoys this thread. :aok
-
As someone who is rather fond of killing gv's, in my opinion wirblwinds are highly effective making light work of most planes. In the hurri2d i have to fly within the effective guns range to visually identify it and routinely take hits doing so. The only thing i think which isn't in their favour is f3 mode in bombers which makes it easier to bomb gv's, i think may be the reasons the a20 is used so frequently to kill gv's.
And, you know... The 225mph speed advantage you have. And the fact that you can maneuver freely in 3 dimensions. And that you can grab ordnance to guarantee they die.
Yeah, if you take the derp planes, you will be killed a few times. Expect it, because that's as it should be. But those GV's have numerous aircraft after them, and often times die when you don't see them die. It's not at all like they're invincible.
Besides that, what exactly do you propose be done? Change the view range back heavily in favor of the aircraft, so you can slaughter tanks more easily? I'm still going to plug you with my ostwind if you're dumb enough to fly a straight line within 3.5k of me.
Karnak, aircraft still interfere with GV fights, even if it's not quite so bad now. Having things go the other way a little bit is not a bad thing, since aircraft hold all the cards, if the player makes even the slightest effort to use them. The GVers shouldn't be punished for the ineptitude and laziness of some of the would be bomb tards.
-
Seems like a lot of you have a birdseye perspective about this issue but not a groundhogs.
The odds are great of you being killed by another gv when you spawn into a town where the distance between eny/friendly spawn is anything worth mentioning. Conversely, a fair amount of time when I do this, I'm not even 1/3 the way to the town yet and there will be an A20 or a N1K up getting ready to bomb. Other days when they're feeling a little more risky they'll do it in p38s, stukas or IL2s. Thus we have Wirblewinds, and thank HT for that very much.
Go spawn into the nearest enemy town where there isn't a gv fight already established, let me know how it goes...
-
This is a ridiculous comment. I tell you what; how about you engage in a duel. Your opponent takes a P51 with 2 1000 pounders (costs no perk points) and you take a Tiger II (costs 100 perk points). Let's see who wins...
MH
That isn't a very accurate representation of the MA combat environment.
I am responding his claim that the "balance" between GVs and AC favors GVs, which is clearly not the case. I assume his post is motivated by his perception that it is harder to kill GVs when there are Wirbles around, which is true. However, he is not looking at things from the GV perspective. The "duel" proposal is an attempt to get him to see how one-sided the AC/GV interaction actually is. Not only does the Tiger II player die every time, but loses massive perks in addition. Imagine how you would feel if you had UFOs blasting your 262 from low earth orbit, with nothing you could do about it. Same thing.
MH
-
And, you know... The 225mph speed advantage you have. And the fact that you can maneuver freely in 3 dimensions. And that you can grab ordnance to guarantee they die.
Yeah, if you take the derp planes, you will be killed a few times. Expect it, because that's as it should be. But those GV's have numerous aircraft after them, and often times die when you don't see them die. It's not at all like they're invincible.
Besides that, what exactly do you propose be done? Change the view range back heavily in favor of the aircraft, so you can slaughter tanks more easily? I'm still going to plug you with my ostwind if you're dumb enough to fly a straight line within 3.5k of me.
Karnak, aircraft still interfere with GV fights, even if it's not quite so bad now. Having things go the other way a little bit is not a bad thing, since aircraft hold all the cards, if the player makes even the slightest effort to use them. The GVers shouldn't be punished for the ineptitude and laziness of some of the would be bomb tards.
Can you not read? I have posted my suggestion over and over and over and it never involves reverting the icons. I simple want the friendly GV icons to follow the same rules as the enemy GV icons so that Mr. Coward in his P-51D doesn't know from 6000 yards out where he needs to run to have a Wirbie clear his six and knowing that his enemy will never see the Wirbie until he is eating a face full of 20mm rounds.
And yes, having it go the other way is bad. Unless you want to force air-to-air inclined players to go on cockroach squashing sprees out of frustration of having Wirbies repeatedly insert themselves into an air-to-air contest you ought to support this as well.
I also object to your continued insinuation that this only affects "bomb****s" who are attacking the GVs.
I am responding his claim that the "balance" between GVs and AC favors GVs, which is clearly not the case. I assume his post is motivated by his perception that it is harder to kill GVs when there are Wirbles around, which is true. However, he is not looking at things from the GV perspective. The "duel" proposal is an attempt to get him to see how one-sided the AC/GV interaction actually is. Not only does the Tiger II player die every time, but loses massive perks in addition.
MH
As I said, it is not an accurate description of MA combat. Of course in a duel the P-51 would be favored, but the MA is not a duel and it is highly unlikely that it would be a single P-51D vs a single Tiger II.
-
Can you not read? I have posted my suggestion over and over and over and it never involves reverting the icons. I simple want the friendly GV icons to follow the same rules as the enemy GV icons so that Mr. Coward in his P-51D doesn't know from 6000 yards out where he needs to run to have a Wirbie clear his six and knowing that his enemy will never see the Wirbie until he is eating a face full of 20mm rounds.
And yes, having it go the other way is bad. Unless you want to force air-to-air inclined players to go on cockroach squashing sprees out of frustration of having Wirbies repeatedly insert themselves into an air-to-air contest you ought to support this as well.
I also object to your continued insinuation that this only affects "bomb****s" who are attacking the GVs.
As I said, it is not an accurate description of MA combat. Of course in a duel the P-51 would be favored, but the MA is not a duel and it is highly unlikely that it would be a single P-51D vs a single Tiger II.
Perhaps Karnak is limiting his request to equalizing the detection range **for AC only** between enemy and friendly GVs. If so, I would support his request. Perhaps he is not one of those guys who wants GVers to spend their $15./month acting as targets for ground attack aircraft. Is that more or less correct, Karnak?
MH
-
aircraft still interfere with GV fights, even if it's not quite so bad now
This perspective..... Seems to think that there is this sort of gv world apart from the rest of the cartoon battle..... I hear all the time .... reference to bomb**** s etcetera etcetera.
GV's are a part of AH not some separate little world isolated from it everything may enjoy combat with everything else.
-
Perhaps if Karnak is limiting his request to equalizing the detection range **for AC only** between enemy and friendly GVs.
MH
Granted... Although
I think it could apply to all if the icon range was unversally made inversely proportionate to vehicle speed as it is would beto ac speed. If you stop your gv you have max icon range to friendlies. Even at 30mph you would have twice the icon range of a Storch.
I don't see it bringing any benefit however. It would be just a slightly more elegant piece of code across all gv icons still keeping enemy gv to gv icons invisible.
-
This perspective..... Seems to think that there is this sort of gv world apart from the rest of the cartoon battle..... I hear all the time .... reference to bomb**** s etcetera etcetera.
GV's are a part of AH not some separate little world isolated from it everything may enjoy combat with everything else.
The game has evolved, Tilt. Many people now spend a lot of time and effort on GV "furballing", which takes time to develop, and GVs are no longer just a base-capture human-wave target. If the game doesn't allow for GV-on-GV play, reasonably free of constant AC interference, then some players will log off and may eventually leave. That wouldn't be good for any of us.
MH
-
Perhaps Karnak is limiting his request to equalizing the detection range **for AC only** between enemy and friendly GVs. If so, I would support his request. Perhaps he is not one of those guys who wants GVers to spend their $15./month acting as targets for ground attack aircraft. Is that more or less correct, Karnak?
MH
That is precisely correct.
Tanks obviously need to have friendly icons at longer ranges or it would be broken by killshooter.
-
I disagree. More than enough carrots have been handed to the GVers. They complained about aircraft interfering in GV fights and changes were made, but now that we have a new balance and the shoe is on the other foot the GVers are now arguing to maintain their ability to interfere with aircraft fights and get relatively free kills.
I agree with this 100%
Remember, any GV'er at anytime can simply take up a fighter and hunt down the aircraft that has "ruined his day". This however will require that you "learn to fly".
I know, I know, I'm not a Gv'er. I have always thought of it this way: You graduate from Officer Training school in WW2, you are then given the choice (just like the choice here), do you want to command a GV or an aircraft and I wonder how many would really really choose the GV. I understand they were not really given this choice in WW2 you went where you were ordered to go, but here it is your choice.
-
Zoney, you know I fly aircraft, and am a decent pilot. Yet I GV a lot as well. I and people like me are the hole in your thinking. Nobody on the ground needs to learn to fly; in fact quite the opposite is true. Most gv bombing seems to be brought about by a tank driver being killed and getting pissed.
Basically if you bomb GV's, you need to learn how to tank, or your VH is down.
@ Karnak, I think cutting icon range for friendly GV's in half is pretty damn generous, since your wish would completely kill teamwork between the two groups. But hey, if you want to further the "f**k you, other players" attitude that has been popping up in the MA, on your head be out.
And if you want to furball over a GV spawn, you're gonna have a bad time. Deal with it, it's part of the game, and won't change significantly if you change friendly icons. But if you're twisting things, and are still talking about the runner problem, suck it up, it happens less than bombing.
Come to that, I don't think I've ever had a runner drag me to a Wirbelwind.
-
I have had it happen multiple times and I rarely play anymore. When it does happen it makes me stop playing.
If they want to coordinate, fine, but they should have to work at coordinating, it shouldn't be given to them for free. GVs and fighters did not have that level of coordination and here it is abused by cowards dragging an opponent to a Wirbie he literally cannot see before it opens up on him. Saying "Just break off" is not acceptable as it makes the runner aircraft even more potent when all they have to do is run to cause the enemy to give up, no Wirbie needed. Saying "Don't fight over GV spawns." is just as useful as telling GVers to not fight near air fields. We all go where the fight is.
-
+1 for increasing gv tag distance during and after firing.
-
And, you know... The 225mph speed advantage you have. And the fact that you can maneuver freely in 3 dimensions. And that you can grab ordnance to guarantee they die.
Yeah, if you take the derp planes, you will be killed a few times. Expect it, because that's as it should be. But those GV's have numerous aircraft after them, and often times die when you don't see them die. It's not at all like they're invincible.
Besides that, what exactly do you propose be done? Change the view range back heavily in favor of the aircraft, so you can slaughter tanks more easily? I'm still going to plug you with my ostwind if you're dumb enough to fly a straight line within 3.5k of me.
Karnak, aircraft still interfere with GV fights, even if it's not quite so bad now. Having things go the other way a little bit is not a bad thing, since aircraft hold all the cards, if the player makes even the slightest effort to use them. The GVers shouldn't be punished for the ineptitude and laziness of some of the would be bomb tards.
I don't propose anything, i am refuting your point that flaks are mildly effective, they are anything but. The wirblewind had a k/d of 1.4 last tour including its numerous deaths to tanks, and had a positive k/d against all a/c with exception of 3 (the a20 was not one of them which IMO is the best anti-gv platform in the game). The best thing to do in the presence of the wirblewind, which is by far the most common flak, is to stay well clear. Dive bombing isn't all that easy and most people struggle to do it with any degree of accuracy. I don't know where you're getting this idea that people who bomb gv's do it because they are inept and lazy. I can just as easily say people gv because they are inept pilots and too lazy to learn, and i'm sure there are people who hold this belief.
-
The game has evolved, Tilt. Many people now spend a lot of time and effort on GV "furballing", which takes time to develop, and GVs are no longer just a base-capture human-wave target. If the game doesn't allow for GV-on-GV play, reasonably free of constant AC interference, then some players will log off and may eventually leave. That wouldn't be good for any of us.
MH
If ac have access over a "GV furball" then the game has evolved to permit those GV's to be attacked by those ac and for those GV's to defend them selves appropriately.
If folk cannot play in this environment then.............
-
Tank-ace. I know you are more than just a GV'er. Please don't take my reply personally. I have 200 tuned, and that along with the country channel shows many a complaint about aircraft ruining a GV fight. I am curious when folks post these complaints and will look their score up just to see, and find many of them do not fly, fly very little, or many times onlly GV and fly bombers. I don't dismiss them as being the less for it, i feel bad for them because this is such a wonderful game to fly fighters. I love flying fighters here and simply want more folks to join in the fighter fun. Also please don't send me any more pictures of you drunk and naked.
-
Come to that, I don't think I've ever had a runner drag me to a Wirbelwind.
All the time.... And indeed very often whilst running for dear life with the usual daisy chain behind me I will be hailed on range channel by a wirblewind or Ostwind driver to drag them over to him. I often do so as well. But it is not fair that I see my AA saviour some 3000 yards before my chasers do.
-
All the time.... And indeed very often whilst running for dear life with the usual daisy chain behind me I will be hailed on range channel by a wirblewind or Ostwind driver to drag them over to him. I often do so as well. But it is not fair that I see my AA saviour some 5400 yards before my chasers do.
Fixed.
-
I have had it happen multiple times and I rarely play anymore. When it does happen it makes me stop playing.
If they want to coordinate, fine, but they should have to work at coordinating, it shouldn't be given to them for free. GVs and fighters did not have that level of coordination and here it is abused by cowards dragging an opponent to a Wirbie he literally cannot see before it opens up on him. Saying "Just break off" is not acceptable as it makes the runner aircraft even more potent when all they have to do is run to cause the enemy to give up, no Wirbie needed. Saying "Don't fight over GV spawns." is just as useful as telling GVers to not fight near air fields. We all go where the fight is.
I don't stop playing when I get bombed. I grab an Osti and blow their wing off.
And I accept being bombed when I up at an airfield. It's when we get bombed at our gv bases, or at what started exclusively as a gv fight that I complain. If we start shooting you down on a regular basis, without you being dragged to us, then you can complain as well. And you lot always told us to bring air support. Now I'm saying you can ask nicely and I might up a tank to protect you from the flackers. Irksome to not be untouchable anymore, I know.
And zoney, you can't contain the nekked!!!!
-
If ac have access over a "GV furball" then the game has evolved to permit those GV's to be attacked by those ac and for those GV's to defend them selves appropriately.
If folk cannot play in this environment then.............
I assume the "...." means you would rather have GVers leave the game? Nice.
MH
-
I don't stop playing when I get bombed. I grab an Osti and blow their wing off.
And I accept being bombed when I up at an airfield. It's when we get bombed at our gv bases, or at what started exclusively as a gv fight that I complain. If we start shooting you down on a regular basis, without you being dragged to us, then you can complain as well. And you lot always told us to bring air support. Now I'm saying you can ask nicely and I might up a tank to protect you from the flackers. Irksome to not be untouchable anymore, I know.
And zoney, you can't contain the nekked!!!!
So, you complained about being interfered with and it was changed, but now that it is the GVs interfering in air-to-air fights you say it is just dandy? Hypocrisy much?
I am not asking to make tanks any more visible or vulnerable to enemy aircraft. I am not asking for enemy aircraft icons or friendly aircraft icons to be changed to make it hard for GVers to see them. All I am asking is to make it harder for cowards to run to mommy and you can't handle the idea that you might be out some gimme kills?
Aircraft were never untouchable, contrary to the hyperbolic claims you make. I have lost aircraft to vehicles as long as there have been vehicles in this game. Nor, contrary to your claims, is a bomb carrying aircraft utter inevitable doom to a Tiger II. I well recall bombing an unsupported Tiger I to death in the AvA using the Mossie VI. He shot down about 5 Mossies before he finally died. On one strike, dropping both 500lbers from my bomb bay, I landed one right next to him so close that the tank was sitting in the crater and the other actually produced a hit sprite on the tank itself, the only effect of which was for the tanker to exclaim how loud it had been.
-
I assume the "...." means you would rather have GVers leave the game? Nice.
MH
You assume incorrectly
-
<deleted; it's like talking to a wall>
MH
-
That was my post wasn't it, about the "duel"? I did specify 1000 pdrs, btw. Also, your anecdote about a Tiger I shooting down 5 Mosquitos is not convincing; are you implying that this outcome is typical or common? That's like claiming that because you once shot down a 262 with a P51 that they must therefore be equal.
MH
Perhaps. Yes, you referenced 1000lbers, but also Tiger IIs. Reducing it to 500lbers and Tiger Is is still valid and the idea that any tank, even a Challenger II, would survive a direct hit by a 500lb bomb seems to me to be absurd.
He shot me down because I was using my guns to try to track him after dropping my four 500lbers. He did so with the commander's MG, not the main gun.
FWIW, I would love to see changes made so that Tiger IIs and the like would actually get used instead of just sitting on concrete. My current idea is to reduce the perk cost of GVs to 1/10th of what it is currently, but make it non-refundable. Based on current K/D ratios that would actually make perk tanks cheaper than they are now.
-
GV's are a part of AH not some separate little world isolated from it everything may enjoy combat with everything else.
Unfortunately that is not true on most maps especially the newest map where they have a GV sanctuary. Gv's have the capability not to join in with the planes.
Also they have been given a special status with the recent icon change.
-
Unfortunately that is not true on most maps especially the newest map where they have a GV sanctuary. Gv's have the capability not to join in with the planes.
Also they have been given a special status with the recent icon change.
Sanctuary? SANCTUary?? You talking about SANCTUARY??? My best Jim Mora...
You have been there have you? For whatever reason they are there still, Greebo should have made the mtns 20k, maybe ppl who get the hint then.
-
So, you complained about being interfered with and it was changed, but now that it is the GVs interfering in air-to-air fights you say it is just dandy? Hypocrisy much?
Not even in the slightest. If I shoot you down in the middle of a turn fight, by all means whine. That's the equivalent of unprovoked bombing.
But if someone is running, and I land some 37mm's in your cocpit, you can't complain; you knew the risk, and what the runner might be doing.
I am not asking to make tanks any more visible or vulnerable to enemy aircraft. I am not asking for enemy aircraft icons or friendly aircraft icons to be changed to make it hard for GVers to see them. All I am asking is to make it harder for cowards to run to mommy and you can't handle the idea that you might be out some gimme kills?
I don't up flacks unless under direct air attack; if you knew me well enough to make a guess as to my motives, you would know that.
Bottom line, teamwork should be encouraged, and game play concessions will be made. Get used to being less well informed than your enemy. I don't think it should be s's extreme as it is now, but the green guys should have a better idea where I am than you should.
Aircraft were never untouchable, contrary to the hyperbolic claims you make. I have lost aircraft to vehicles as long as there have been vehicles in this game. Nor, contrary to your claims, is a bomb carrying aircraft utter inevitable doom to a Tiger II. I well recall bombing an unsupported Tiger I to death in the AvA using the Mossie VI. He shot down about 5 Mossies before he finally died. On one strike, dropping both 500lbers from my bomb bay, I landed one right next to him so close that the tank was sitting in the crater and the other actually produced a hit sprite on the tank itself, the only effect of which was for the tanker to exclaim how loud it had been.
Fine let me rephrase. Aircraft were shot down, no GV deaths were prevented. And don't accuse me of being unfair, and then cherry pick your anecdotes. "one time, I got incautious and a flacker shot me down :cry". "one time, I attacked the toughest tank in the game, and lost 5 planes due to my own incompetence :bhead".
I mean do you truly here the crap spewing from your mouth? If you get incautious, it's your fault. IF A TANK HITS YOU WITH ITS MAIN GUN, IT'S YOUR FAULT. Karnak, I've truly never experienced this flack issue, and I fight in the weeds. I've been shot at, but never shot down. The instant I see tracers, I break hard. Now if your reflexes are slow, that's not a problem with the game. If your mossie doesn't break as well as my K4, accept it as a weakness of the plane.
-
Then my wish would be that this is enabled...... And visa versa.
ok but be carefull next time you bomb a base from orbit ;)
-
I disagree. More than enough carrots have been handed tot he GVers. They complained about aircraft interfering in GV fights and changes were made, but now that we have a new balance and the shoe is on the other foot the GVers are now arguing to maintain their ability to interfere with aircraft fights and get relatively free kills.
Same view distance for friendly and enemy GVs following the same rules as we currently have for enemy GVs.
Look at the positives GVers, bombing tanks would be more dangerous as you'd need to make sure it was an enemy GV or risk killshooting yourself. Being more dangerous, it would likely become rarer.
I concur with you assessment and support your idea that GV icon range would be the same for both enemy and friendly.
-
yes please minimize GV icons for both sides.
I have died 9 times this month in a F8, 5 from fighter/bomber gunfire, one by collision getting greedy, and 3 from Wirb/Ostwinds.
One of these I was Wirbied leaving own runway, One was a good gunner at a enemy field, And one used the Run-to-wirbie tactic.
I think some kind of field awareness system should be implemented, when GV's are within field perimeter they would be known to be there, more exact than a blinking field within radar that extends out almost a sector.
Now they can sit in your own hangar when Ack is down,and nobody knows about it until you get shot up :headscratch:
BTW if that is ok, they should be able to shoot you when you select ordnance too, since you are in same hangar as them :bhead.
-
Not even in the slightest. If I shoot you down in the middle of a turn fight, by all means whine. That's the equivalent of unprovoked bombing.
I've seen that happen....
But if someone is running, and I land some 37mm's in your cocpit, you can't complain; you knew the risk, and what the runner might be doing.
I don't up flacks unless under direct air attack; if you knew me well enough to make a guess as to my motives, you would know that.
If he can see the Wirbie 6000 yards away then so should I. Period. To do otherwise, to follow your "Don't chase the runner" suggestion, makes having top end speed even more powerful than simply being able to reset a fight or escape, it turns it into an outright weapon at times.
Bottom line, teamwork should be encouraged, and game play concessions will be made. Get used to being less well informed than your enemy. I don't think it should be s's extreme as it is now, but the green guys should have a better idea where I am than you should.
They can use vox to communicate. They can set up predetermined locations ahead of time.
Fine let me rephrase. Aircraft were shot down, no GV deaths were prevented. And don't accuse me of being unfair, and then cherry pick your anecdotes. "one time, I got incautious and a flacker shot me down :cry". "one time, I attacked the toughest tank in the game, and lost 5 planes due to my own incompetence :bhead".
I mean do you truly here the crap spewing from your mouth? If you get incautious, it's your fault. IF A TANK HITS YOU WITH ITS MAIN GUN, IT'S YOUR FAULT. Karnak, I've truly never experienced this flack issue, and I fight in the weeds. I've been shot at, but never shot down. The instant I see tracers, I break hard. Now if your reflexes are slow, that's not a problem with the game. If your mossie doesn't break as well as my K4, accept it as a weakness of the plane.
Wherein did I say I got shot down by a main gun? To the best of my knowledge I have never been shot down by a tank's main gun.
-
" IF A TANK HITS YOU WITH ITS MAIN GUN, IT'S YOUR FAULT"
I've been hit by a main gun at 3km range flying away from the tank. note: this was before new icon system was introduced.
I was PM'ed from the GV driver who considered himself " a bit lucky".
-
<snip>
I think some kind of field awareness system should be implemented, when GV's are within field perimeter they would be known to be there, more exact than a blinking field within radar that extends out almost a sector.
<snip>
We already have this; it's called the Storch, which is available at all airfields.
MH
-
Maybe a red dot to indicate an enemy gv instead of the full icon, but at a greater range ,,,
also a shorter friendly icon range wouldn't seem to bad of an idea to me IMHO
Now if your in a fighter V fighter: fight and you get dragged to a wirble,, that's an SA problem and a perfectly acceptable defensive tactic ,,, the thing your not realizing is that your the only one who believes your in a 1v1
Maybe we need a red line on the map to show you that you are in enemy territory ?
That red line would extend out to the end of all spawns of enemy bases on the front lines!
-
besides the Icon problem, does anyone have any other vehicles they would want to see in game so the wirble could be perked? such as truck or half track mounted AA
-
besides the Icon problem, does anyone have any other vehicles they would want to see in game so the wirble could be perked? such as truck or half track mounted AA
Before any perks need to be added to our current flack panzers if at all. They need to add a few things first to make them as deadly as they were in real life. For example AP rounds for one would like to be able to punch holes in tanks as well as aircraft. :aok
-
does anyone have any other vehicles they would want to see in game so the wirble could be perked?
Not me, as I don't want to see the wirbel perked at all.
But some earlier AA vehicles would still make sense...
-
Yeah, I can't say I am keen to see any AA vehicle perked. The more units in the game the merrier though.
-
Not me, as I don't want to see the wirbel perked at all.
But some earlier AA vehicles would still make sense...
+1
-
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_kIWY2DV0KnE/SXu8o-kZeMI/AAAAAAAACNU/4jGxXj0nypI/s400/Early+anti-aircraft+gun+2.jpg)
-
Really the best way to solve the alleged problem with both flack panzer's is fit them with the correct historical gun sights. There is no magnification for shooting at aircraft. Now the ground sight though I am not sure about yet as to what level of magnification it has.
The last 3 pictures are the ground sight for the Wirbel & Osti.
Ostwind sight.
(http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/af142/barneybolac/Ostwind%20Wirbelwind/37mmsight_zpsa3354f65.jpg) (http://s1002.photobucket.com/user/barneybolac/media/Ostwind%20Wirbelwind/37mmsight_zpsa3354f65.jpg.html)
Wirbelwind sight.
(http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/af142/barneybolac/Ostwind%20Wirbelwind/aa-sight-30-38_zps12e7682b.jpg) (http://s1002.photobucket.com/user/barneybolac/media/Ostwind%20Wirbelwind/aa-sight-30-38_zps12e7682b.jpg.html)
(http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/af142/barneybolac/Ostwind%20Wirbelwind/22wl2_zpsa01f9ad0.jpg) (http://s1002.photobucket.com/user/barneybolac/media/Ostwind%20Wirbelwind/22wl2_zpsa01f9ad0.jpg.html)
(http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/af142/barneybolac/Ostwind%20Wirbelwind/obr6_zps85d5a06b.jpg) (http://s1002.photobucket.com/user/barneybolac/media/Ostwind%20Wirbelwind/obr6_zps85d5a06b.jpg.html)
(http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/af142/barneybolac/Ostwind%20Wirbelwind/obr7b_zpsebfe14b3.jpg) (http://s1002.photobucket.com/user/barneybolac/media/Ostwind%20Wirbelwind/obr7b_zpsebfe14b3.jpg.html)
(http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/af142/barneybolac/Ostwind%20Wirbelwind/obr5b_zpsc213de8c.jpg) (http://s1002.photobucket.com/user/barneybolac/media/Ostwind%20Wirbelwind/obr5b_zpsc213de8c.jpg.html)
-
I've seen that happen....
If he can see the Wirbie 6000 yards away then so should I. Period. To do otherwise, to follow your "Don't chase the runner" suggestion, makes having top end speed even more powerful than simply being able to reset a fight or escape, it turns it into an outright weapon at times.
I never said I like the 6K view range.
They can use vox to communicate. They can set up predetermined locations ahead of time.
Hmm... Point taken. Just to make things fair in all areas, we should also limit the information available from friendly air icons. You couldn't know who was flying the P-51 in a furball, you only knew it was a P-51. And as you say, there is vox.
herein did I say I got shot down by a main gun? To the best of my knowledge I have never been shot down by a tank's main gun.
The Tiger II killed 5 Mossies, no? Were they 5 other pilots, or did he use the pintle gun? And in any case, if you lost 5 Mossies to any tank, you obviously were doing something wrong. And if 5 pilots died to a tank, they obviously weren't very good pilots.
-
It didn't take long for armor to defeat most 20 and 37mm AP rounds. This doesn't even take into
effect the notion that a light flak unit would be bughouse crazy to take on a tank voluntarily. You
have a puny gun and toilet paper for armor.
I admit having no reload delays and 1000+ rounds of ammo makes things a little easier in AH,
but it's going to be a desperation play at best.
-
The Tiger II killed 5 Mossies, no? Were they 5 other pilots, or did he use the pintle gun? And in any case, if you lost 5 Mossies to any tank, you obviously were doing something wrong. And if 5 pilots died to a tank, they obviously weren't very good pilots.
Tiger I. Yes, pintle gun. I was straffing him with my guns after having dropped my four 500lb bombs to no effect. He took out four or five of my Mossie's, pilot kills as the Mossie was very vulnerable to pilot wounds back then, before I got him, and I think I got him through cumulative damage from the bombs as direct hits didn't seem to have any effect.
You can argue that he still died in the end, but what else was I supposed to do? Let him walk over our base? It was in the AvA and the Allies had the Panzer IV H against the German's Panzer IV H and Tiger I so I would have been significantly outclassed if I'd tried to take tanks against him. I wasn't interfering in a GV fight as it was only he and I in the arena.
-
derp
This is a sad day in AH history, the word derp has been used to describe an aircraft.
-
It didn't take long for armor to defeat most 20 and 37mm AP rounds. This doesn't even take into
effect the notion that a light flak unit would be bughouse crazy to take on a tank voluntarily. You
have a puny gun and toilet paper for armor.
I admit having no reload delays and 1000+ rounds of ammo makes things a little easier in AH,
but it's going to be a desperation play at best.
Number of tanks in game now that can be killed with HE rounds from either flack panzer.
-
Which just goes to show how weak the damage model for GVs is. Mobility kills maybe, but not pop
goes the weasel.
-
Tiger I. Yes, pintle gun. I was straffing him with my guns after having dropped my four 500lb bombs to no effect. He took out four or five of my Mossie's, pilot kills as the Mossie was very vulnerable to pilot wounds back then, before I got him, and I think I got him through cumulative damage from the bombs as direct hits didn't seem to have any effect.
You can argue that he still died in the end, but what else was I supposed to do? Let him walk over our base? It was in the AvA and the Allies had the Panzer IV H against the German's Panzer IV H and Tiger I so I would have been significantly outclassed if I'd tried to take tanks against him. I wasn't interfering in a GV fight as it was only he and I in the arena.
How long ago was this? My perk tanks are certainly nowhere near that resistant to bombs. And if he killed FOUR of your planes with the pintle gun, he still deserved the kills, since you obviously weren't coming in at a high enough angle.
And lastly, though I don't disagree with your use of the Mossie, a Panzer IV would be fully capable of killing a Tiger I. Unless it were way back in the day, when single Tiger was fully capable of fighting off numerous tanks simultaneously. But if that's the case, then it's entirely irrelevant to the current situation.
-
It was in AH1, so about ten years ago.
-
It was in AH1, so about ten years ago.
Yeah, so it has virtually no relevance to the current situation.
I agree with you; I think friendly ground icon range should be reduced. I'm just not as draconian about it as you are. But even if I were to want it extended, why cherry pick your anecdotes when its not necessary to do so?
-
I don't recall any changes to tank durability in the intervening years, so as far as I am concerned it is still 100% valid. Heavy tanks are very hard to kill with 500lbers. 1000lbers probably make it much easier, but I don't have much experience with them so I can't say.
Panzer IV Hs have always been very much easier to kill with bombs.
I don't understand your position really. Either it should stay as is or it should match enemy GV icon ranges when seen from aircraft. I don't see an argument for it to be reduced, but not all the way to where enemy icons are.
-
I confirm that the Tiger I's used to be much harder to bomb a 500lb before. A 1K was mandatory except if your drop was right on the tank.
Strafing it with a 20mm's is useless and will put you in harms way for nothing, as demonstrated above :D
-
I don't recall any changes to tank durability in the intervening years, so as far as I am concerned it is still 100% valid. Heavy tanks are very hard to kill with 500lbers. 1000lbers probably make it much easier, but I don't have much experience with them so I can't say.
Panzer IV Hs have always been very much easier to kill with bombs.
I don't understand your position really. Either it should stay as is or it should match enemy GV icon ranges when seen from aircraft. I don't see an argument for it to be reduced, but not all the way to where enemy icons are.
Karnak, I don't know about you, but I've been on both sides recently. Tiger I's are not excessively hard to kill with bombs, fact. If you use 500lbers or smaller, yes it will require either a direct or near direct hit to kill, but that's because of the limitations of our current damage model; no spalling, no blast turning the crew into jelly, etc.
And the argument for the merely reduced icon range is simple; briefings were usually better than field Intel for telling you where something was. Because we don't have intel, this will have to do. Second, to keep encouraging cooperation. Use of any strafer aircraft will die almost entirely with this, simply because that flacker might not be friendly, even if you see it 6000m out (not impossible).
I've never been shot down while chasing things; clearly there is more going on than the icon range.
-
Maybe a chart might help make some of this clearer. Lusche don't know if you've got anything of the like, and of course it would be variable depending on where/angle the ord is dropped from.
But maybe we could start here:
I often, as most should, try to cover the backside of my tank (if at all possible) by positioning the rear of the vehicle against a berm, bldg or any other object I can find. Because of this I often find planes flying in at me and dropping bombs from 45deg>. So lets say is there a chart/spreadsheet that might give us a general idea of the amount of ord necessary to kill each tank and its' variable frontal armour say within 100ft?
I say 100ft because not many drop directly on you (although some are very good at it,) but most, even mediocre at it can get with 100' or so. I'd imagine the 1000lb'ers are still effective at that distance, but are the 500's, 250's?
Maybe this isn't possible to do , but we should be able to come up with a basis/approximation for what amount of lbs need to be put within a certain radius to cause great to catastrophic damage...
-
I remember when the Tigers were virtually bomb proof..
One day they were like eggshells, and the next day impervious.. :rolleyes:
I wasn't the only one who noticed either..
I remember doing a test, buddy rolls a tiger and waits for me..
I fly over in my A20, make a perfect DB pass, drop all 8 500lbers..
Buddy tells me, MULTIPLE DIRECT HITS, but he was still there..
One tight little crater, with a tiger sitting in the middle of it..
That lasted for little while, but it evened out eventually..
That was very strange tho, :joystick: