Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Zerstorer on June 04, 2014, 08:47:19 AM
-
So consider the following two scenarios:
1. Sitting off a base on a 3-5K perch in a P47, P51 or Dora waiting on uppers to take off and killing them as they do so, low on E and unable to fight back. As more planes take off the attacker zoom climbs back to his perch to maintain separation and E superiority over the enemy (call this 'cherry picking').
2. Setting off a base on a 3-5K perch in a 109K or Ki84 watching as uppers lift off and attempt to climb to engage. The attacker kills each in turn as they close, starved of E and helpless. As more planes take off the attacker uses the superior climbing characteristics of his/her plane to maintain separation and E superiority over the enemy (call this 'roping').
Based off these two scenarios, please answer the following questions:
1.) Which is the more effective killing technique? Please explain your reasoning.
2.) Which technique is more fair to the base defenders i. e. Given both attackers start with an advantage, which technique provides the defenders a better chance of neutralizing the advantage.
3.) Which technique provides the attacker the best opportunity to extend and escape as the attackers advantages dwindle (assume the attacker would want to do so).
4.) Which technique requires greater skill of the attacker to maintain his/her advantage? Please explain your reasoning.
5.) Which technique is more 'honorable' to employ and why?
6.) Similar to question 2, but putting yourself in the shoes of the base defenders, which technique will be perceived by the defender as being more fair?
Thanks... I look forward to everyone's answers!
(my thanks to Dolby for pointing out scenario #1 is better described as "cherry picking" rather than vulching as originally noted :old:)
-
Fair? No such thing.
Whatever is most effective for killing/ defending is the best.
-
I'd like to phone a friend :old:
-
I'd like to phone a friend :old:
Sorry Lusche I dont have an answer for you! If in doubt just say 42!
:salute
-
My answer is 42! :old:
-
My answer is 42! :old:
While this is the answer to Life, the Universe and Everything.... I don't beleive it applicable in this case. :D
Besides, we would have to build a bigger computer to understand the question!
-
The answer is MATH!
M=13
A=1
T=20
H=8
13+1+20+8=42
-
The answer is MATH!
M=13
A=1
T=20
H=8
13+1+20+8=42
:lol
-
While this is the answer to Life, the Universe and Everything....
As you stated,42 is the answer to everything! If you want conformation just ask the nearest dolphin!
:salute
-
Well people are going to jump into this thread and tell you there is no honor in the MA. That, however, is not true for everyone. Neither of the tactics you've described is unfair or dishonorable.
What you describe as a "cherry pick" doesn't fit my definition. A cherry pick, in my opinion, is when you pick an already engaged aircraft who is essentially defenseless against your attack. If its just you and the other guy, then it can never be a pick because he knows or should know you're there. Especially in the example you give where the enemy is essentially lifting off the base to attack the agressor. The only dishonorable move (again in my opinion) in the first example would be to kill the guy while he's still on the runway and essentially defenseless. Once he's up and cleared the base boundaries, he's fair game.
There's only one person responsible for ever being roped and that's the guy who blew all his speed trying to zoom up to the enemy. Following the enemy up like that is, at best, a calculated risk. You're betting you can get to him before he can turn the tables on you and vaporize you before you can recover. Best practice in the example given is to let him be the agressor until you can work down his E to a point where the tables are a little more even.
Most of the time, when I'm the Jug in the scenerio you describe, the first plane to lift off and defend the feild is either an LA-7, or a Spit16. Either of these planes, flown by a sligtly below average stick, has the ability to equalize E with me within 60 seconds of my first pass. So, as a Jug pilot, I know they better be dead within that first minute or the Calvary is going to start launching off that base in droves before I can recover my energy. While the Jug is a pretty fast plane, it doesn't have the get away ability of the 51, 109k, or 190d because of its lack of acceleration and/or sustained climb rate. If they aren't dead in that first minute, I can sustain the fight to longer duration but I will have depleted and E advanage I may have had and now have to consider exit strategies as the enemy is likely launching off the base like a bunch of fire ants who just had their hive kicked over. Also the enemy has the advanage of unlimited lives. No matter how many I kill there's infinite numbers of aircraft which can lift. I will generally stay in this fight until one of three things happens. 1. fuel/ammo depleted 2. Damage sustained to my aircraft impedes my ability to fight. 3. So many ants come out of the hive that I need to fall back to a position where I can fight them off.
Anymore, what really happens when I approach a quiet base looking for a fight, no one on the other team sees my lone con as much of a threat and doesn't bother to launch an airplane. Usually I orbit the base waiting for the ants while some guy spends 10 minutes shooting at me in an 88.
-
Well people are going to jump into this thread and tell you there is no honor in the MA. That, however, is not true for everyone. Neither of the tactics you've described is unfair or dishonorable.
What you describe as a "cherry pick" doesn't fit my definition. A cherry pick, in my opinion, is when you pick an already engaged aircraft who is essentially defenseless against your attack. If its just you and the other guy, then it can never be a pick because he knows or should know you're there. Especially in the example you give where the enemy is essentially lifting off the base to attack the agressor. The only dishonorable move (again in my opinion) in the first example would be to kill the guy while he's still on the runway and essentially defenseless. Once he's up and cleared the base boundaries, he's fair game.
There's only one person responsible for ever being roped and that's the guy who blew all his speed trying to zoom up to the enemy. Following the enemy up like that is, at best, a calculated risk. You're betting you can get to him before he can turn the tables on you and vaporize you before you can recover. Best practice in the example given is to let him be the agressor until you can work down his E to a point where the tables are a little more even.
Most of the time, when I'm the Jug in the scenerio you describe, the first plane to lift off and defend the feild is either an LA-7, or a Spit16. Either of these planes, flown by a sligtly below average stick, has the ability to equalize E with me within 60 seconds of my first pass. So, as a Jug pilot, I know they better be dead within that first minute or the Calvary is going to start launching off that base in droves before I can recover my energy. While the Jug is a pretty fast plane, it doesn't have the get away ability of the 51, 109k, or 190d because of its lack of acceleration and/or sustained climb rate. If they aren't dead in that first minute, I can sustain the fight to longer duration but I will have depleted and E advanage I may have had and now have to consider exit strategies as the enemy is likely launching off the base like a bunch of fire ants who just had their hive kicked over. Also the enemy has the advanage of unlimited lives. No matter how many I kill there's infinite numbers of aircraft which can lift. I will generally stay in this fight until one of three things happens. 1. fuel/ammo depleted 2. Damage sustained to my aircraft impedes my ability to fight. 3. So many ants come out of the hive that I need to fall back to a position where I can fight them off.
Anymore, what really happens when I approach a quiet base looking for a fight, no one on the other team sees my lone con as much of a threat and doesn't bother to launch an airplane. Usually I orbit the base waiting for the ants while some guy spends 10 minutes shooting at me in an 88.
Thanks man! :aok
-
That's a long quiz for someone who doesn't give a damn. :old:
-
That's a long quiz for someone who doesn't give a damn. :old:
I dont give a damn if it's long! :old: :lol
-
This first scenario I'd call a Vulch more than anything. If your coming in on a player that hasn't enough speed or room to maneuver then it's a vulch. Sitting on a perch killing dingbats to stupid to get some all and speed before engaging isn't a rope, it's killing dingbats.
In neither case would I call them fights. They would just lame ways to rack up easy kills. Kinda like spawn camping. Yes everyone does it, but it still isn't a fight.
-
Some people like to play with a tight fist on their advantages and value a kill streak and landing some people don't particularly care and enjoy engagement and risk more. Then there is everything in between and outside. Since there are no rules on how you play there is no such thing as objective fairness, it's entirely subjective without strong consensus.
LilMak's description is an excellent one of the challenges and play from his point of view, these are objective challenges and require an objective level of skill to pull off. After all what is he supposed to do? Fly to an enemy base and hover off the field at 100 feet and half throttle?
On the other hand, aside from the frustration that comes from being killed repeatedly, it can seem to someone taking off at the enemy base that the bnzr is engaged in some selfish little project akin to stealing candy from a baby and is therefore at a minimum cold and perhaps more extravagantly, a tad antisocial. Objectively speaking the enemy needs you to play else it is tumbleweed time so what is he doing inflicting his brand of dullsville misery on you as if you weren't 50 percent of a living gameplay phenomena.
I don't know if you have ever had the misfortune to play softball in a game between an "office drinking lets have fun coed" team and a "we will DOMINATE, fraternity " team but its kinda like that.
I am always disappointed, for instance, when somebody sprays at me from the front because I am thinking "don't they know me, I can barely get an AFK kill, don't they want to turn and mix it up and let me have some fun?" This of course is ridiculous on my part but I believe we are talking about emotions here and not logic. After all has anybody ever felt better about getting dumped by their girlfriend because somebody told them "look...objectively your better off without her."
-
if there's an ene plane trying to cap the airfield at 3 to 5k he's more than likely gonna get shot down by auto or manned ack--unless the field is already deacked...and it sounds like your trying to learn the best way to vulch..be ready to get pm'ed by the vulchie--with not so kind words, or phrases...alot of people vulch but cry when they get vulched..so don't get mad when it happens to you..if i get vulched more than 3 times while trying to takeoff i go elsewhere.
-
Robert Shaw in his seminal book "Fighter Combat" defines the two most important advantages a fighter may have over the opposition: A lower wing-loading (leading to better turn performance and the ability to fly slower) and a more engine power in relation to weight (leading to a higher ROC, better acceleration, and more vertical maneuvering potential generally)
Note that top speed alone is not mentioned here, and with good reason. A top speed advantage is useful in many ways, but once engaged maneuvering begins, it's usefulness is very limited compared to superiority in turning or power.
The most common dissimilar air combat scenario is one fighter possessing lower wing-loading while the other possesses higher thrust-weight. The classic angles/energy fighter matchup.
Another possibility is for equivalence in one of these areas and difference in the other. The fighter on the bad end of the stick finds itself in the situation of being what the book defines as single inferior and generally must be the more skillful pilot to win. An even worse situation is when a fighter finds itself in what the book calls double-inferior condition, that is, inferior to the opposition in both turn and power/weight. Shaw, who I think we can all agree possesses some insight into the subject, makes it clear that the double-inferior fighter is at enormous disadvantage and must have either advantage, surprise, or superior pilot skill to win. The double-inferior fighter cannot expect to win an engagement from an even break against a comparable pilot in a double-superior fighter. And even if the double-inferior fighter possesses a top speed advantage, it may not be able to use this advantage to run away if it commits too deeply to an engagement with a fighter that has superior acceleration.
So getting back to the original posters question, the P-51, P-47, and Dora are all, as defined by Shaw, double-inferior to either the 109K4 or the Ki-84. All other things being equal, the Kurt and Hayabusa will have an *easier*, not harder, time maintaining an E-advantage over lower bandits due to superior power/weight ration and will also have an easier time gaining angles on these bandits in engagements due to lighter wing-loading.
-
Thanks for the replies.... Very interesting responses thus far!
-
I always hate to hear on the Vox, "Let's de-ack the field." If it is part of a base capture scheme it is acceptable but most often I hear it in the context of racking up kills. Just not copacetic.
-
Both are seal clubbing and who hasn't enjoyed a good seal clubbing at least once.
-
Both are seal clubbing and who hasn't enjoyed a good seal clubbing at least once.
I agree completely with your assessment and sentiments. :aok
-
1) Either works well enough.
2) Whether it is fair is not important to me.
3) A Faster plane always has the best opportunity to disnegage and pull back to a safer position.
4) If you have someone who knows their plane well, then either scenario is dangerous for cons climbing up to those on the perch.
5) Honor has no relevance to either situation.
6) Neither will be perceived as more fair.
-
I always hate to hear on the Vox, "Let's de-ack the field." If it is part of a base capture scheme it is acceptable but most often I hear it in the context of racking up kills. Just not copacetic.
But you find it acceptable to jump in on a 109 already engaged by 5 of your countrymen.....interesting :P
In regards to the OP ive done both, had both done to me but i see it as SA starts the minute you decide to up from that field theres nothing to stop you looking out of the tower before you up. If you make the decision to up when there are cons vulching or rope yourself to a lurking con you are as much to blame as the person doing it.
I think Waystins post sums it up well.
EatG
-
1) Either works well enough.
2) Whether it is fair is not important to me.
3) A Faster plane always has the best opportunity to disnegage and pull back to a safer position.
4) If you have someone who knows their plane well, then either scenario is dangerous for cons climbing up to those on the perch.
5) Honor has no relevance to either situation.
6) Neither will be perceived as more fair.
Give the man a cigar.
I disagree only slightly with #3...I think both techniques offer plenty of disengagement opportunities, especially if one is using the planes in question, IMO.
-
I play in the MA with a personal code of honor. As a general rule I want a good fight. I want myself and my enemies to have a good time. My code slides based on factors outside of my control. The biggest of those factors is the number of red guys within close proximity of my aircraft. One thing you'll never see me do is kill an aircraft with its wheels on concrete.
-
I play in the MA with a personal code of honor.
Actually you play with a personal code of taste. Hitech has made no rule against things like vulching (and much resistance was raised when I suggested there be such rules :devil). Also, AFAIK no one has ever signed a "No vulching" agreement or taken such an oath, and inasmuch as this is a flippin' video game where no one really kills and no one really dies, vulching and what have you have no relation whatsoever to honor. You refusal to vulch because you find vulches unsatisfying is ethically identical to someone who vulches because it tickles them to do so, merely a matter of taste.
The various attempts on this board to claim elevated personal character because of the way one fake-kills in a video game or because of a lack of fear of fake-dying in a video game are a phenomenon I find odd in the extreme. It makes me think that maybe some people need to take a step back from this and connect with the real world a little bit more.
-
I play in the MA with a personal code of honor. As a general rule I want a good fight. I want myself and my enemies to have a good time. My code slides based on factors outside of my control. The biggest of those factors is the number of red guys within close proximity of my aircraft. One thing you'll never see me do is kill an aircraft with its wheels on concrete.
You should be more pragmatic. The true measure of an Aces High pilot is not how he gets his kills, but only that he kills.
-
You should be more pragmatic. The true measure of an Aces High pilot is not how he gets his kills, but only that he kills.
And how he dances too! :old:
-
And how he dances too! :old:
We don't give a damn about dancing.
-
You should be more pragmatic. The true measure of an Aces High pilot is not how he gets his kills, but only that he kills.
I gotta respectfully disagree with this. Kills are great, and they come. However, I personally think the yardstick is how well I fly supporting my squadmates first and team mates second.
-
I gotta respectfully disagree with this. Kills are great, and they come. However, I personally think the yardstick is how well I fly supporting my squadmates first and team mates second.
But... they told me numbers don't lie. Did they lie about numbers not lying? :headscratch:
I'm so confused.
-
But... they told me numbers don't lie. Did they lie about numbers not lying? :headscratch:
I'm so confused.
Naa, we (all of us) have our on metric and our's (you and I) differ. It's all good.
-
I gotta respectfully disagree with this. Kills are great, and they come. However, I personally think the yardstick is how well I fly supporting my squadmates first and team mates second.
Bravo and an excellent response.
Might want to be careful with the whole "supporting squadmates" stuff....you wouldnt want to get called out as a buncha picktards who help each other out if one is in trouble.
-
But you find it acceptable to jump in on a 109 already engaged by 5 of your countrymen.....interesting :P
Yes if they become a threat.
-
Naa, we (all of us) have our on metric and our's (you and I) differ. It's all good.
No. I used to feel just like you but I was skillfully convinced otherwise by certain wise (?) members here.
I shall reevaluate my stance.
:salute
-
I gotta respectfully disagree with this. Kills are great, and they come. However, I personally think the yardstick is how well I fly supporting my squadmates first and team mates second.
You can hardly support your squadmates without applying section tactics, which leads to free fighters shooting vulnerable enemy engaged fighters, which is picking, the doing of which makes anyone the sort of bad person who beats their kids and rapes their dog. :devil
(Just to avoid misunderstandings...)
(http://img0.joyreactor.cc/pics/comment/%D0%95%D0%B2%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%B4%D0%B0%D0%BD-%D0%9C%D0%B8%D1%80%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B9-%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%81%D1%82-%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%B1%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BA%D0%B0-%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B5%D0%B2-910436.jpeg)
-
I had a new method. Take 50% fuel in a G14 and land near the enemy base and use F5 to watch then runway, then take off when someone ups :banana:
Got quite a few kills doing this a few tours ago
-
if you watch the old black and white war footage--you will see fighters bombing and strafing airfields--and if you watch theseries DOGFIGHTS you will see the same thing..vulching is a part of war....and so is picking.
-
I had a new method. Take 50% fuel in a G14 and land near the enemy base and use F5 to watch then runway, then take off when someone ups :banana:
Got quite a few kills doing this a few tours ago
I will have to add that one to the scenario list!
-
I have been on the receiving end of both scenarios and since this is a game you attempt to up and tho they have the advantage once you are co alt with most of these chaps they are dispatched quite readily. Harder when numbers are unbalanced but still can be quite fun as long as you aren't worried about score. :rolleyes:
Was the OP on the receiving end of these tactics and thought they are unfair and there should be some compassion for the enemy that wants to up and kill you? :neener:
-
Ok i'll play
The first is the best for the attacker...they have no intention of ever engaging and will bolt if they get even a sniff that they have lost advantage of 3-5K. Ultimately their intention was pad score or incite disdain
The second scenario.... dumb bellybutton defender for flying straight at the con and following to be roped..The K4 has the option to leave ...the Ki will eventually have to fight to the death. unless their actual intention was to fly like scenario one.
As a defender they both suck and both are soft play...if it is during a base take I personally understand...If it is just to get a few kills I feel sorry for them and their misunderstanding but you can choose to up or not..... Both styles can be manipulated to force/cause a mistake....If the cons intention is to fight...if not they will just leave when things get a little too equal for comfort... most times I find if there are a couple of guys doing it together you (as a defender) actually get an opportunity to at least kill one....the second is a bonus sometimes...but usually the take off.
Ultimately (In my mind) this is a set of questions to incite a situation whilst veining concern... much like scenario one
-
I will have to add that one to the scenario list!
this is a totally different situation....things are waaaaaaaaaayyyyy more even
-
if you watch the old black and white war footage--you will see fighters bombing and strafing airfields--and if you watch theseries DOGFIGHTS you will see the same thing..vulching is a part of war....and so is picking.
yup and we all die just like in the war too! :rolleyes:
-
Ran into a twit the other evening that only attacked landing aircraft. He tried to catch them at gear out. He was in a 51 so every time I pulled the gear in and tried to pull on him he just went up and away. I would try to land and he would do it again. Never got me but the twit got two or three before he made a big mistake.
-
Ran into a twit the other evening that only attacked landing aircraft. He tried to catch them at gear out. He was in a 51 so every time I pulled the gear in and tried to pull on him he just went up and away. I would try to land and he would do it again. Never got me but the twit got two or three before he made a big mistake.
once again...as someone else asked...
what is so different then you attacking a guy who is already engaged with multi cons?
here you call out someone for trying to vulch you landing...what did you say..." Never got me but the twit..."
so I take it you dont like his behavior...it was "uncool"
but you have NO problem engaging a guy who is already fighting however many cons....
you have ran away as soon as I had position and came back and tried to pick me fighting 3 and more cons....matter of fact I would say every kill you have ever gotten (on me at least).... was a pick.
who is the bigger "twit"
as far as the OP goes....... :cry :cry :cry :cry
cry me a river
how about you go to a base..let the con get ALT....engage them and when they are in losing position they immediately head to ACK or friends...and only turn and "engage" when the guy is surrounded by red.
or how about fighting 3-4-5 guys NOT hoing but ALL they can do is go for the HO shot... after it takes 5 minutes to kill you.... actually thinking they are good.
pfft
you and you ilk are all the same....
no honor...no heart.....
I say instead of blood your veins are filled with koolaid.
-
no honor...no heart.....
I say instead of blood your veins are filled with koolaid.
People who really think this video game relates in any way to honor or heart need to step away and experience their real lives for a bit.
-
Yes if they become a threat.
Ill just leave this here http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,362970.0.html if ya watch the video you may recognize the 47 who cant shoot looked like i was a massive threat.
Vulching and picking are exactly the same to me, don't try to hold the moral high ground when your as guilty as the vulcher of unsporting play.
Ill admit i pick and i vulch and when heavily outnumbered ill take any shot i can but if i see 3 friendlies on 1 guy ill fly on by.
EatG
-
There have occasionally been situations where nearly every single friendly in my vicinity has been taken up trying to kill a very slippery single bandit, and I have taken it upon myself to execute the poor red guy. Not because I particularly wanted that kill or because I thought of the bandit as a threat, but because I knew numerous other bandits with altitude were probably coming in and that the tactical situation could turn very grim very quickly if I didn't take away their toy and free my own countrymen up to be of some assistance. That was my honest tactical assessment of the situation, and if that makes me a sinner, may cartoon-airplane god have mercy on my soul.
-
Yeah been there seen that perhaps even done it when i first started playing but now i feel if 3 guys cant kill him he deserves to live to fly home.
EatG
Edit: unless its a brewster then i'll help out :t
-
People who really think this video game relates in any way to honor or heart need to step away and experience their real lives for a bit.
mmm wife of 20 years...6 kids.....think I experience plenty in real life.... ;)
so by your thinking...it is OK NOT to have Honor.....
interesting...
if you have NO honor ingame you will have no honor in life and Vice versa....
ALL games are played with Honor....
Honor is in every aspect of my life....
it is not something that can be turned off or on at will and if you think it is....then you have NO clue what Honor is.
-
People who really think this video game relates in any way to honor or heart need to step away and experience their real lives for a bit.
To me a person can have honor, and class even while playing a video game. If they don't play with honor or class, then all they are is some pimped face kid in his mother basement hiding behind his computer. Just another interweb tough guy. :rolleyes:
-
To me a person can have honor, and class even while playing a video game. If they don't play with honor or class, then all they are is some pimped face kid in his mother basement hiding behind his computer. Just another interweb tough guy. :rolleyes:
Completely agree. I think being a good sport rather than sulking is a good characteristic to have as well. Sadly that seems in very short supply with some.
-
Ill just leave this here http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,362970.0.html if ya watch the video you may recognize the 47 who cant shoot looked like i was a massive threat.
Vulching and picking are exactly the same to me, don't try to hold the moral high ground when your as guilty as the vulcher of unsporting play.
Ill admit i pick and i vulch and when heavily outnumbered ill take any shot i can but if i see 3 friendlies on 1 guy ill fly on by.
EatG
word
-
People who really think this video game relates in any way to honor or heart need to step away and experience their real lives for a bit.
Actually a video game with a certain level of anonymity is a great litmus test for the type of person you really are. It's not how you act when there are consequences for your actions. The true test is how you act when there is no one to police yourself but you.
-
mmm wife of 20 years...6 kids.....think I experience plenty in real life.... ;)
Your personal honor relates primarily to how you care for and protect them, and meet your other obligations in life. Keeping your word etc. There is not too much much you can do in a video game to help or harm it.
If you hacked Hitech's code to cheat, I would consider that fairly low, albeit unimportant against all the atrocities that go on in the world. And you would be banned and a non-factor anyway. Same thing if you broke the rules of engagement in a special event.
The problem, dear Ink, is that you and people like you often wish to make a laundry list of game tactics that you find distasteful, things which the creator of the game has explicitly allowed in his Main Arena, and then claim that your taste defines "honor". Dishonor is whatever thing Ink does not like, dishonor is violating some set of rules that no one voted on or agreed to obey. That is fairly narcissistic.
-
All I know is that once when I picked INK already engaged I heard a crack of thunder, and my house began to shake. Needless to say, I usually avoid his airspace. :uhoh
-
To me a person can have honor, and class even while playing a video game. If they don't play with honor or class, then all they are is some pimped face kid in his mother basement hiding behind his computer. Just another interweb tough guy. :rolleyes:
Hush Fugi,nobody likes you and your reputation proceeds you...... :neener:
Ok I always thought you were an OK Joe.... I guess I'm a nobody.... :o
:salute
-
All I know is that once when I picked INK already engaged I heard a crack of thunder, and my house began to shake. Needless to say, I usually avoid his airspace. :uhoh
and that was just a warning :old:
-
To me a person can have honor, and class even while playing a video game. If they don't play with honor or class, then all they are is some pimped face kid in his mother basement hiding behind his computer. Just another interweb tough guy. :rolleyes:
The people yammering about honor, courage, guts in a video game where no one ever really dies, in relation to violations of rules that don't actually exist, these are the actual "interweb tough guys".
-
never mind
-
Never mind.
-
The people yammering about honor, courage, guts in a video game where no one ever really dies, in relation to violations of rules that don't actually exist, these are the actual "interweb tough guys".
The next time my playing partner busts me for using a foot wedge I'm gonna quote you here and hopefully he'll think you're right.
-
The next time my playing partner busts me for using a foot wedge I'm gonna quote you here and hopefully he'll think you're right.
I have no idea what this means.
-
I have no idea what this means.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Footwedge+ (http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Footwedge+)
-
Actually a video game with a certain level of anonymity is a great litmus test for the type of person you really are. It's not how you act when there are consequences for your actions. The true test is how you act when there is no one to police yourself but you.
Well said! :aok
-
I have no idea what this means.
Its a time honored tradition:imply cheating and other disreputable tactics when one runs out of options in a debate.
-
Its a time honored tradition:imply cheating and other disreputable tactics when one runs out of options in a debate.
You're on drugs.
-
You're on drugs.
Not at all.... Never have or will use drugs.
If you want to state that people who don't follow your belief system may cheat just come out and say it. Don't cloak it in golf metaphor and innuendo.
-
Not at all.... Never have or will use drugs.
If you want to state that people who don't follow your belief system may cheat just come out and say it. Don't cloak it in golf metaphor and innuendo.
I used a metaphor I thought was common and understandable. I quoted B&Zs talking about honor, etc. That was a clue as to what I meant with my ill fated metaphor.
If I act "dishonorably" in a game. What am I likely to do in real life?
-
If I act "dishonorably" in a game. What am I likely to do in real life?
Much better. That's all that was asked for. :aok
-
The people yammering about honor, courage, guts in a video game where no one ever really dies, in relation to violations of rules that don't actually exist, these are the actual "interweb tough guys".
How can you say a player who plays with class and honor is an Internet tough guy?
A player with class asks if the friendly in a 1 vs 1 needs help and abides by his answer when he is asked to stay out. A player with honor will right past a 2 or 3 on 1 with out ever thinking of joining in on the gang bang. A player with courage with dive in and fight 5 enemy cons just for the fun and challenge.
Internet tough guy? I don't think so. Some one who is fun to p lay with or against? You bet!
Which player are you? I'm thinking the one who has no class and couldn't care less whether other people are having fun or not
-
How can you say a player who plays with class and honor is an Internet tough guy?
A player with class asks if the friendly in a 1 vs 1 needs help and abides by his answer when he is asked to stay out. A player with honor will right past a 2 or 3 on 1 with out ever thinking of joining in on the gang bang. A player with courage with dive in and fight 5 enemy cons just for the fun and challenge.
Internet tough guy? I don't think so. Some one who is fun to p lay with or against? You bet!
Which player are you? I'm thinking the one who has no class and couldn't care less whether other people are having fun or not
Fugitive: I believe what BnZ is stating is that how one plays a video game does not in and of itself provide a full picture to the person's character. I do agree it does give some clues. I also feel that the way one acts on a forum is also a clue to that person's character but again, doesn't provide a full picture. Too many other variables exist that can't always be judged at first glance.
For the record: I've flown with BnZs and he does indeed do the things you mention in game quite regularly. I do as well.
-
The creator of this game has created a fairly wide-open sandbox in which for people to play with very few rules. There is nothing "unfair" you can do in this game, other than hacking Hitech's coad, because everything that a player can do to you, you are allowed to do back to him. What you are doing is taking your personal opinion of how the game should be played, which is nothing other than your own taste, and accusing others of being classless and lacking in honor if you they don't play the way that your opinion dictates they should. This is profoundly narcissistic, controlling, and childish. You don't have to like the way everyone plays (I detest toolshedding myself) but you don't impugn someone's personal honor for violating a set of rules which that person has not agreed to and which exist only in your head.
Unless you are on the internet, where anonymity, distance and a sort of denial allows people to confuse bloodless cartoon airplane combat with real combat. The latter in times past has often been a consequence of mindlessly questioning the honor of others without a leg to stand on.
A player with courage with dive in and fight 5 enemy cons just for the fun and challenge.
It requires more courage to cross a busy street than it does to dive in, fight, and die to 5, 6, or 10,000 red cartoon airplanes. Why? Because this is a damn video game for Pete's sake, where no one really dies, no one even gets a bloody nose, and nothing about it requires a lick of courage. Fight as many cartoon airplane Alamos as you like, and it won't demonstrate courage, honor, guts, or anything except that is the way you personally enjoy playing this game. Which is just fine, but taste is inarguable and no excuse for questioning the honor of others.
-
For the record: I've flown with BnZs and he does indeed do the things you mention in game quite regularly. I do as well.
I've probably done most things "fair" and "foul" that there are to do in this game, mostly depending on what I thought might amuse me at the time. None of it ever required any courage, and nothing and nobody in this game has ever inspired the slightest bit of fear. Rush hour traffic is infinitely scarier than fifty red cartoon "aces" above in Spitfire and Tempests in this video game.
-
The creator of this game has created a fairly wide-open sandbox in which for people to play with very few rules. There is nothing "unfair" you can do in this game, other than hacking Hitech's coad, because everything that a player can do to you, you are allowed to do back to him. What you are doing is taking your personal opinion of how the game should be played, which is nothing other than your own taste, and accusing others of being classless and lacking in honor if you they don't play the way that your opinion dictates they should. This is profoundly narcissistic, controlling, and childish. You don't have to like the way everyone plays (I detest toolshedding myself) but you don't impugn someone's personal honor for violating a set of rules which that person has not agreed to and which exist only in your head.
Unless you are on the internet, where anonymity, distance and a sort of denial allows people to confuse bloodless cartoon airplane combat with real combat. The latter in times past has often been a consequence of mindlessly questioning the honor of others without a leg to stand on.
It requires more courage to cross a busy street than it does to dive in, fight, and die to 5, 6, or 10,000 red cartoon airplanes. Why? Because this is a damn video game for Pete's sake, where no one really dies, no one even gets a bloody nose, and nothing about it requires a lick of courage. Fight as many cartoon airplane Alamos as you like, and it won't demonstrate courage, honor, guts, or anything except that is the way you personally enjoy playing this game. Which is just fine, but taste is inarguable and no excuse for questioning the honor of others.
I think the perspective of most saying that certain ACM is unsportsman like etc. Is because when most like to fight or compete it's on even terms, and then the one to win in the 'even' fight is the victor. While that is a good way of fighting, I disagree when it's said to be the 'best' way.
I think a true fight, or at least one to be more proud of, is winning when the odds are against you, rather than even. Where the enemy is taking the 'cheap shots' etc, and you still come out on top. While it is annoying at times, it is still a legitimate tactic/tool that can be used in combat.
Some have a 'code of honor', myself included, a way of limiting how they play and defeating the enemy in those guidelines/rules. For example: when I first started playing, I did anything necessary to kill the enemy. As I got more experienced I challenged myself, one of the 'limiters' I put on myself, was not going Head-On when there is another way to kill the enemy. I will go Head-On, but only as a last resort. That being said, many make the simple mistake of trying to project their 'way of honor' or guidelines/limits on other players.
-
This first scenario I'd call a Vulch more than anything. If your coming in on a player that hasn't enough speed or room to maneuver then it's a vulch. Sitting on a perch killing dingbats to stupid to get some all and speed before engaging isn't a rope, it's killing dingbats.
In neither case would I call them fights. They would just lame ways to rack up easy kills. Kinda like spawn camping. Yes everyone does it, but it still isn't a fight.
This
-
A certain amount of challenge/risk is needed by everyone to avoid boredom. Otherwise one could stay offline shooting the target drones and save $15 a month.
However, the are so many random variables in MA play that the odds are often completely incalculable. If you consider yourself to only be playing against the nearest thing with a red icon then it looks easy to tell whether it is a "fair" fight or not, but the MA rarely allows you the luxury of that single bandit being the only factor you have to allow for. And the Main Arena is such a wide-open sandbox that it is difficult for outsider to even say which game a given player is playing, much less whether or not they are playing it with even odds. For instance, at any given moment a player might be playing to get in one good fight and wax a tail if he can. Or his objective might be trying to get some kills and survive the myriad forms of death the MA has to offer in order to land them, or he can be trying to capture or prevent the capture of a base. If a guy desperately fighting to save a base shoots you in the face in order to get past you and strafe troops, rather than engaging in an ACM chess match, is it being unsportsmanlike or is he simply playing a different sport than the one you wanted him to play with you?
I think the perspective of most saying that certain ACM is unsportsman like etc. Is because when most like to fight or compete it's on even terms, and then the one to win in the 'even' fight is the victor. While that is a good way of fighting, I disagree when it's said to be the 'best' way.
I think a true fight, or at least one to be more proud of, is winning when the odds are against you, rather than even. Where the enemy is taking the 'cheap shots' etc, and you still come out on top. While it is annoying at times, it is still a legitimate tactic/tool that can be used in combat.
Some have a 'code of honor', myself included, a way of limiting how they play and defeating the enemy in those guidelines/rules. For example: when I first started playing, I did anything necessary to kill the enemy. As I got more experienced I challenged myself, one of the 'limiters' I put on myself, was not going Head-On when there is another way to kill the enemy. I will go Head-On, but only as a last resort. That being said, many make the simple mistake of trying to project their 'way of honor' or guidelines/limits on other players.
-
Its a time honored tradition:imply cheating and other disreputable tactics when one runs out of options in a debate.
Ah. So basically this:
(http://forward-now.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/pigeon-on-chess-board.jpg)
-
it always makes me laugh when people talk abut honor then they go and kill anybody that has less "skill" than they do. what is the honorable part of killing somebody that is weaker than you or donesnt know the game as well as you do? the more people talk about playing with honor the more hypocritical they seem to me.
I will ask players if they are engaged on a 1v1 if they need help out of courtesy for the friendly. if they say jump in the I'll jump in otherwise I'll stay out. and once in a while the friendly if beaten will ask to let the red con go as he's badly damaged and he had fun with the fight. but that has nothing to do with honor.
I play this game because it is fun and I have fun playing with friends. doing honorable things in the game doesnt include flying airplanes or shooting. it's giving words of encouragement or saluting a guy that you havent seen in months and you are glad that he's back. perhaps pay a player's monthly dues when he's short of money. or give him a family discount on the extra hardware you have laying around.
semp