Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: lunaticfringe on August 31, 2021, 09:04:44 PM
-
before you start saying your usual BS saying don't fly so low-some players main gun planes like it's part of their breathing. it's not realistic as many people have said--in WWII tanks never main-gunned planes.
HiTech, is there any thing in the game or server programming that can be done to stop tanks main-gunning planes. it's gotten to be tiresome
-
before you start saying your usual BS saying don't fly so low-some players main gun planes like it's part of their breathing. it's not realistic as many people have said--in WWII tanks never main-gunned planes.
HiTech, is there any thing in the game or server programming that can be done to stop tanks main-gunning planes. it's gotten to be tiresome
I just had an idea that might help in cases where a plane is not flying directly towards a tank's gun.
What if aircraft ranges could not be seen in their icons from tanks? That would make long distance deflection shots harder if they don't have a good range estimate, right?
-
I just had an idea that might help in cases where a plane is not flying directly towards a tank's gun.
What if aircraft ranges could not be seen in their icons from tanks? That would make long distance deflection shots harder if they don't have a good range estimate, right?
That be an interesting idea to try, but would it apply to just tanks, or all GV's? :headscratch:
-
That be an interesting idea to try, but would it apply to just tanks, or all GV's? :headscratch:
I'd say all except the Wirb, Osti, or M-16. As much as I hate them, I think they need the ranges to show.
Maybe they can be tweaked as well to make them slightly less effective? Nothing is more BS than an enemy plane running to a Wirb he can see that a pursuing fighter can't.
-
Just because something didn't happen doesn't mean it can't happen. This game simulates the flight characteristics of airplanes. The game also simulates the flight characteristics of the bullets fired by those airplanes, and the bullets fired by other guns, including the main guns of tanks. So it is entirely possible, however unlikely, for a tank to fire its main gun and hit an airplane. The game simulates the flight path of an airplane. The game simulates the flight path of the tank shell when it is fired. If the airplane and the tank shell meet, the game simulates the damage the airplane would take from such a meeting.
You are asking that the simulation be artificially changed so that it no longer accurately simulates the flight path of the two objects, in order to prevent such a meeting from taking place. This is out of bounds. Now if you have evidence that the program is not accurately simulating the flight path of the objects, then you have a legitimate complaint.
Besides, it did happen in real life:
http://defensionem.com/tank-shoots-down-a-plane/
-
Besides, it did happen in real life:
http://defensionem.com/tank-shoots-down-a-plane/
The plane was essentially diving right at the tank or one very close by. There are guys in game using the commander's view to hit planes flying across their sights, not down them. That does need to be fixed.
-
Solutions.
A. Initiate a half second lag between giving a fire command vs the actual detonation of the main gun while in F3 mode
B. Make the commander position killbale while in F3 mode. Example, if a player is unbuttoned in F3 mode while a .50, 12.7mm, 20mm, 30mm, or 37mm projectile strikes the commanders hatch the tank dies.
-
Solutions.
A. Initiate a half second lag between giving a fire command vs the actual detonation of the main gun while in F3 mode
B. Make the commander position killbale while in F3 mode. Example, if a player is unbuttoned in F3 mode while a .50, 12.7mm, 20mm, 30mm, or 37mm projectile strikes the commanders hatch the tank dies.
B is a definite no-go, but A on the other hand, that one would be much more viable. It can be considered the delay between command given by commander and the gunner's response.
-
The secret is to fight back. Posted, much to my surprise in 2008, during the SAPP glory days, my response to your concern. Surprised the heck out of the tank driver when I did what I did with my 38G :)
https://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,226462.0.html
-
if I remember correctly, when they were testing ah, hitech was in a tank and one of the other developers was in a plane, he took a shot and was surprised that he killed the airplane, they went over the data and found out it was accurate. crap happens.
me myself have fired hundreds if not thousands of of shots in a tank at planes, have gotten a couple. I have gotten killed dozens of times, found out mostly because I came in too low.
now having said that, we take chances in this game that real pilots in ww2 would not have taken, here we just up in a new plane, in ww2, they got a medal and a grave.
semp
-
before you start saying your usual BS saying don't fly so low-some players main gun planes like it's part of their breathing. it's not realistic as many people have said--in WWII tanks never main-gunned planes.
I understand your frustration Luny, but I respectfully disagree. Fighters & Storches didn’t diddle around circling GV’s at 20, 30, 40, 50ft buzzing them as they do in here. So before asking for a change in the GV’s reality, let’s adjust the flying sides reality……lol
There are guys in game using the commander's view to hit planes flying across their sights, not down them. That does need to be fixed.
Too much credit is given to the rumors of the “Commanders View”. If using the Commanders view was so advantageous, why doesn’t everybody use it? Given the opportunity to shoot at a flying target the majority of those that are successful will have been from the gun site. In other words changing anything to do with the commanders view will not address Lunatics issue.
if I remember correctly, when they were testing ah, hitech was in a tank and one of the other developers was in a plane, he took a shot and was surprised that he killed the airplane, they went over the data and found out it was accurate. crap happens.
I have gotten killed dozens of times, found out mostly because I came in too low.
now having said that, we take chances in this game that real pilots in ww2 would not have taken, here we just up in a new plane.
semp
That’s Sums it up.
Players get to fly hundreds and hundreds of times to perfect their dog fighting, GVing, and bombing skills in here. Much more so than was afforded those in WWII.
Players that strafe tanks at less than one wingspan height above the ground are going to get HE, and those that dive at an angle within the main guns trajectory are going to get shot at. Why shouldn’t they be shot at? It’s a game.
-
I can easily drop an with a HE round any Aircraft that is trying to track or Disable my T-34-85 via a HE explosive round that is shot into ground toward the oncoming aircraft. Keep in mind most aircraft that are downed by a tank are flying within mere feet of the tank in the first place....ie some crash into the ground or tank because they are not smart enough to pull up before collision. It stands logical that if you shoot an 85mm HE into the ground there will be an upward spray of shrapnel that will fan back up into the air. People have complained about this forever.
If they take this feature away then I suppose we should take away aircrafts ability to bomb**** GV's. This gets "Tiresome" and annoying to GV's.
Neither of the above will change nor do they need to.
-
I'd say all except the Wirb, Osti, or M-16. As much as I hate them, I think they need the ranges to show.
Maybe they can be tweaked as well to make them slightly less effective? Nothing is more BS than an enemy plane running to a Wirb he can see that a pursuing fighter can't.
This.
-
A whine has been recorded.
Can an 88 kill a plane or a gv?? Yes, enough said.
-
The two T-34's in AH have a turret that can aim higher than other tanks. If you come in low they will get you. Leave the T-34's alone and you won't' get main gunned. A lot of gv'ers play several hours a day and their
gunnery is excellent because they put in the time to get good. Leading an aircraft gets easier the more you do it. If you bounce an HE round off a canyon wall, a tree, the ground, and time it just right the explosion will
take down the enemy plane.
Planes did get main gunned in WW2. That is amazing because enemy planes and tanks could not see any icons. :D :D :D They used camouflage to make it more difficult to find enemy GV's such as tree branches, exploded buildings,
and nets. Tanks were expensive to make and protecting resources was very important.
If HiTech changes any of the setting or writes new code the players will simply adapt and you will still see planes main gunned by tanks.
I kill lots of storches with the M-8 every ToD and most of them came in low. The M-8 has a rapid fire turret so you can quickly adapt the lead on the incoming storch. If they do not stay up there really high.....
you might as well yet "PULL!" :banana:
You have good gunnery skills Lunatic and I have seen you main gun planes many a time over the years :salute
This is a good thread. :aok
-
I just had an idea that might help in cases where a plane is not flying directly towards a tank's gun.
What if aircraft ranges could not be seen in their icons from tanks? That would make long distance deflection shots harder if they don't have a good range estimate, right?
sounds good
-
Just because something didn't happen doesn't mean it can't happen. This game simulates the flight characteristics of airplanes. The game also simulates the flight characteristics of the bullets fired by those airplanes, and the bullets fired by other guns, including the main guns of tanks. So it is entirely possible, however unlikely, for a tank to fire its main gun and hit an airplane. The game simulates the flight path of an airplane. The game simulates the flight path of the tank shell when it is fired. If the airplane and the tank shell meet, the game simulates the damage the airplane would take from such a meeting.
You are asking that the simulation be artificially changed so that it no longer accurately simulates the flight path of the two objects, in order to prevent such a meeting from taking place. This is out of bounds. Now if you have evidence that the program is not accurately simulating the flight path of the objects, then you have a legitimate complaint.
Besides, it did happen in real life:
http://defensionem.com/tank-shoots-down-a-plane/
was probably an IL2 which is what i was flying when BT-b shot me down
-
A whine has been recorded.
Can an 88 kill a plane or a gv?? Yes, enough said.
if you can't say anything constructive don't say anything at all. was not a 88 that killed me.
-
i have main gunned a plane or 2 in the past-but i still think it's wrong and to easy to do. 1 plane i main gunned was a IL2- coming right at me no way to miss.
-
if you can't say anything constructive don't say anything at all. was not a 88 that killed me.
You missed the point, 88's kill planes and gv's, oh yeah and tanks kill planes and gv's. No difference, either way you can die. I main gun planes fairly often, if they line up in the sight, boom they're dead.
-
before you start saying your usual BS saying don't fly so low-some players main gun planes like it's part of their breathing. it's not realistic as many people have said--in WWII tanks never main-gunned planes.
HiTech, is there any thing in the game or server programming that can be done to stop tanks main-gunning planes. it's gotten to be tiresome
The people that claim planes were never shot down by a tank's main gun are doing so out of ignorance.
-
before you start saying your usual BS saying don't fly so low-some players main gun planes like it's part of their breathing. it's not realistic as many people have said--in WWII tanks never main-gunned planes.
HiTech, is there any thing in the game or server programming that can be done to stop tanks main-gunning planes. it's gotten to be tiresome
Unteroffizeier Kramer did.
Do your own research.
Coogan
-
Unteroffizeier Kramer did.
Do your own research.
Coogan
Yeah we've already addressed the rare documented time it happened for real.
You missed the point, 88's kill planes and gv's, oh yeah and tanks kill planes and gv's. No difference, either way you can die. I main gun planes fairly often, if they line up in the sight, boom they're dead.
I have not problem with a plane being gunned when it's flying right down the barrel, but deflection shots should be near impossible for even the most skilled tank gunners. It's very different shooting even if the gun is the same because of the difference in sights.
Too much credit is given to the rumors of the “Commanders View”. If using the Commanders view was so advantageous, why doesn’t everybody use it? Given the opportunity to shoot at a flying target the majority of those that are successful will have been from the gun site. In other words changing anything to do with the commanders view will not address Lunatics issue.
Ok then, that makes it simple. Eliminate all range info on aircraft from non AAA GV's.
-
IRL pilots weren't stupid enough to fly shallow approaches against armed vehicles. Or if they were they were quickly trimmed from the gene pool.
-
I was at the strats yesterday or the day before, a ki84 tracked me not because it had good aim but I had been hit pretty good by the tower ack before. anyway, he made passes at me, may 10 or more times, i hit him with the mg, I was in the rocket tank, tried to main gun him but I failed every time, except for the mg, got hits almost every time, he actually crashed into me 3 times. looks like the 3rd time finally took him about.
when you come in really low from 1.5 away and slow down, you will get an he round in the face, probably 7 or 8 times I had him in my sights with he, but I am not really that good, so I fired both he and mg rounds, only mg rounds hit him.
so if you get killed by a tank round, dont blame anybody, it's your own fault.
semp
-
Can somebody plz develope a skin(possibly bubble wrap) players can put on their aircraft so they can not be killed by tanks, trees and the ground?! The only kill that is acceptable is from another aircraft... Asking for a friend... Thank you in advance.. Your friend always....scott66
-
Can somebody plz develope a skin(possibly bubble wrap) players can put on their aircraft so they can not be killed by tanks, trees and the ground?! The only kill that is acceptable is from another aircraft... Asking for a friend... Thank you in advance.. Your friend always....scott66
Seems like you need one more to protect you from bombs, since all you do is cry about bomb****s.
-
:pray
Seems like you need one more to protect you from bombs, since all you do is cry about bomb****s.
How do you bomb a Brewster?
-
I haven't been bombed in 4 months soooooo maybe you're thinking of someone else
-
Ok then, that makes it simple. Eliminate all range info on aircraft from non AAA GV's.
Well if you think it would help, I’m all for it. It wont, but if you are going to change one reality change them all by reciprocating and remove all range from the ground to the air as well…..I guess that probably wouldn’t happen?
The range may be used for reference by some but most shots are under 1.5 and a majority are at or under 1k. It’s a point, lead and shoot situation. Nobody is taking their time adjusting the gun site for 1.65k and firing. If they are they are doing it better than most of us.
-
:ahand
I say leave it as is.
-
Just for giggles I ran Tyfoo's numbers to see how much time he has in a gv. WOW!
(https://i.postimg.cc/gk1tJvDT/tyfoo.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
Not quite DR7 numbers, but whos are!
-
Well if you think it would help, I’m all for it. It wont, but if you are going to change one reality change them all by reciprocating and remove all range from the ground to the air as well…..I guess that probably wouldn’t happen?
The range may be used for reference by some but most shots are under 1.5 and a majority are at or under 1k. It’s a point, lead and shoot situation. Nobody is taking their time adjusting the gun site for 1.65k and firing. If they are they are doing it better than most of us.
I'm not suggesting that they're actually adjusting the range in the gun sight, but having the icon displaying the range it makes it easier to figure the right amount of elevation to give gun to counter the drop.
Again, I have not issue with tanks gunning down a plane that's flying right towards it at low level. My issue are tanks gunning down planes that are not a threat to the tank or one very close by.
-
Top down approaches on tanks at all times. Nothing needs to be fixed except attack strategy. :aok
-
I'm not suggesting that they're actually adjusting the range in the gun sight, but having the icon displaying the range it makes it easier to figure the right amount of elevation to give gun to counter the drop.
Again, I have not issue with tanks gunning down a plane that's flying right towards it at low level. My issue are tanks gunning down planes that are not a threat to the tank or one very close by.
ummmm so as a gv only attack an aircraft if it's attacking you? Unless you're a wirb osti or M16?
-
ummmm so as a gv only attack an aircraft if it's attacking you? Unless you're a wirb osti or M16?
I think ethically, even the AAA GV's should leave fighters alone. But I'd hesitate to limit their ability. Main battle tanks, on the other hand, should have their ability to engage aircraft with the main gun curbed.
-
Rules of engagement don't HO and as a GV do not engage your craft unless they engage you... Hmm hey if you can convince the bad guys to stop shooting at me I'm in LOL I'm not ashamed to admit when I've had three or four guys on my six I see Tyfoo in a Gv I've asked him to clear my six I fly right over him he puts HE into the ground poof there's goes one I wait 1.5 seconds pull up into the right by then he's reloaded poof there's#2 then I fight#3 and 4 if I'm still alive
-
I'm not suggesting that they're actually adjusting the range in the gun sight, but having the icon displaying the range it makes it easier to figure the right amount of elevation to give gun to counter the drop.
Again, I have not issue with tanks gunning down a plane that's flying right towards it at low level. My issue are tanks gunning down planes that are not a threat to the tank or one very close by.
Understood. However, the range does little (IMHO does nothing) in giving anybody an advantage. The majority of kill shots are taken from under 1k - 1.5k there is little adjustment in elevation required at this range (more or less put your site at the same elevation) up to the max vertical angle of the Main Gun. The difficulty at least for me - is in finding the proper lead of the moving target.
How are GVs to distinguish between what is a threat and was is not? Yes, you can see two guys Dog fighting at low level, the next minute one is strafing you or another friend is pointing you out. The reasonable solution? If an aircraft is low enough to be shot at - they get shot at. It is just as frustrating for GVs to get bombed when they are having a tank battle w/ no intention or ability to take a base. This has been going on since the day they introduced GVs. Its a fact of AH and my vote is to leave it as is.
Top down approaches on tanks at all times. Nothing needs to be fixed except attack strategy. :aok
Agreed. This is the solution to the OPs concern.
Waystin, Atlau, NOTAR and few others know how to adjust their attack so as to stay just above the Max elevation of the Tanks gun. Without a Whirb or M16 near by the GV is in an indefensible position. I hate them. . . . .lol
-
Ya NOTAR has tagged me when he was in his osti at 3k+ and when he's in his wirb if I get within 2k of him I'm usually on fire... Some players are just real good at what they do.. One time I asked him how he tagged me from that distance and was not flying in a straight line... He answered with two words... "Practice lol" that was good enough for me
-
the easiest fix for this is not allow the commander to fired a gun.........
I looked and tried to find any instance of a ww2 tank commander in World War II having Fire Control Systems. does anyone know of one?
and I would do away with the commanders superzoom and give up him binoculars...
CAV
-
:pray How do you bomb a Brewster?
dive in with bombs when it spawns :rock
semp
-
dive in with bombs when it spawns :rock
semp
lol never been bombed in my Brewster I have been rocketed tho
-
I think ethically, even the AAA GV's should leave fighters alone. But I'd hesitate to limit their ability. Main battle tanks, on the other hand, should have their ability to engage aircraft with the main gun curbed.
Maybe it's time to give up methamphetamines?
-
Maybe it's time to give up methamphetamines?
:rofl :banana: :cheers:
This conversation is a dead point. The game will stay as is. The only solution to this problem that you could ever implement is do not present a nice profile for veteran GV players to take advantage of. End of story :bolt:
-
the easiest fix for this is not allow the commander to fired a gun.........
I looked and tried to find any instance of a ww2 tank commander in World War II having Fire Control Systems. does anyone know of one?
and I would do away with the commanders superzoom and give up him binoculars...
CAV
y'all already helped take away GV spawns AND helped introduce GV dar.... Now we are going to limit gv's even further? Nahhhhhhh HiTech don't wanna take that $$ hit and I don't blame him.
-
I seem to remember shooting a goon out of the air once with the shore battery. A well modelled physics simulation should not be limited artificially just because people don't like being shot down.
-
y'all already helped take away GV spawns AND helped introduce GV dar.... Now we are going to limit gv's even further? Nahhhhhhh HiTech don't wanna take that $$ hit and I don't blame him.
What he said!!
-
I seem to remember shooting a goon out of the air once with the shore battery. A well modelled physics simulation should not be limited artificially just because people don't like being shot down.
Concur wholeheartedly. turt
-
y'all already helped take away GV spawns AND helped introduce GV dar.... Now we are going to limit gv's even further? Nahhhhhhh HiTech don't wanna take that $$ hit and I don't blame him.
HAHAHAHAHA! That's rich!
The numbers suck now because he coddled the GVer's and armchair generals several years ago by altering the GV icon rules and side switch timers. Most of the dedicated fighter pilots left because of these changes. The MA has been trash ever since because all that's left are you entitled people.
-
HAHAHAHAHA! That's rich!
The numbers suck now because he coddled the GVer's and armchair generals several years ago by altering the GV icon rules and side switch timers. Most of the dedicated fighter pilots left because of these changes. The MA has been trash ever since because all that's left are you entitled people.
And after that happened he added all the trees and a majority of the gvers left, and here we are.
-
What wild assertions are these?
The numbers steadily decline because that is the nature of things. Without constant evolution and improvements to an activity, humans need to change things up and explore different hobbies. Not to mention the niche historical element that is generationally focused.
This game is far too good to entertain most of the toxic, hacking young gamers of today.
-
What wild assertions are these?
The numbers steadily decline because that is the nature of things. Without constant evolution and improvements to an activity, humans need to change things up and explore different hobbies. Not to mention the niche historical element that is generationally focused.
This game is far too good to entertain most of the toxic, hacking young gamers of today.
What he said +1
-
The numbers suck now because he coddled the GVer's and armchair generals several years ago by altering the GV icon rules and side switch timers.
Seems like about everybody has his own singular explanation for these low numbers of today. GV Icons, new GV controls, terrains, this or that map and so on.
But the numbers don't actually support that. There had been a long, steady decline in numbers from about late 2008/ early 2009 until about 17/18, with a significant lower loss rate in the past ~2 years. If there was a single, in-game change who made all the folks quit AH, we would see that.
-
Seems like about everybody has his own singular explanation for these low numbers of today. GV Icons, new GV controls, terrains, this or that map and so on.
But the numbers don't actually support that. There had been a long, steady decline in numbers from about late 2008/ early 2009 until about 17/18, with a significant lower loss rate in the past ~2 years. If there was a single, in-game change who made all the folks quit AH, we would see that.
Do you actually have the data available? I'd like to see it because it seemed to me the largest drops since I start playing were in 2014 when the 12 hour rule cam into being and in 2016-17 with AH3.
I don't think people now remember just how bad the reaction was to the 12 hour rule and just how many prominent community left or were forced to leave because of it. I'd be shocked of the data does not show that 2014 had a steeper drop in players than '13 or '15.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/y0sA3N4.png)
gliding 3-tour average
-
Pretty cool to see we still have 1000 active players.
-
gliding 3-tour average
Better than I thought. I was spit-balling around 800.
And it's looking fairly durable. Just gradual erosion from old age mortality. Which for this demographic will be accelerating onward.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/y0sA3N4.png)
gliding 3-tour average
Thanks.
The drop in 2013-15 is much more steady than I expected.
-
Pretty cool to see we still have 1000 active players.
For the record: It's pilots, not players. I can not track the latter, nor can I say anything about actual subscriptions. :old:
-
I seem to remember shooting a goon out of the air once with the shore battery. A well modelled physics simulation should not be limited artificially just because people don't like being shot down.
Exactly!!
-
The numbers suck now because he coddled the GVer's and armchair generals several years ago by altering the GV icon rules and side switch timers. Most of the dedicated fighter pilots left because of these changes.
I'm a dedicated fighter pilot, and I'm still here. When I play, I see lots of other regular fighter pilots.
The MA has been trash ever since because all that's left are you entitled people.
And I'm not the least bit entitled.
-
I'm a dedicated fighter pilot, and I'm still here. When I play, I see lots of other regular fighter pilots.
And I'm not the least bit entitled.
Fair enough, I should have specified it was entitled GV'ers and armchair generals I was referring to.
-
Pretty cool to see we still have 1000 active players.
Its only 17% of the hey day numbers, thats pretty bad. I know we will never hit those numbers again but Im sure that with a few changes we might be able to double what we have now.
For the GV guys get rid of the gv dar boxes, add another bar to the friendly/enemy dar bar to indicate where the GV fights are with out pinpointing the vehicles. Get rid of 50-60% of the trees/bushes. And change the hit graphics. Buy a fireball to add to the turret coming off, a smaller one for a track/engine hit, and a brighter sprit for the hit/ricochet. It will seem like a graphics update the you could advertise and bring in/back tankers.
For the flying guys, get rid of the larger maps. I know Kong and Kenie had 3 new maps submitted. Im hoping they are of the smaller closer base variety. Along with the smaller maps we have they will be enough. Redo the ENY numbers on the planes, some are way out of wack. Sure that just means a different plane will become the norm, at least it wont be so many YAKs. If it wasnt a big deal to do, add a automatic hardener to bases for the maps that get reset too fast, Make those last couple of bases harder to take. And add a block so that a team cant grab more than a couple bases in a row from one country WITH out taking one or two from the other country. It would help with the ganging of one team to the point they are knocked down to a few bases at which point most of them have logged for the night/day. It would force fights on all front so there wouldnt be hours of play where one team has nobody to fight against.
No changes means we will continue like we are, some changes may mean we get a few more players to come back, or new players to stick around.
-
the easiest fix for this is not allow the commander to fire a gun.........
Exactly what my view on this subject. Its as stupid as allowing external view in a figher.
-
Exactly what my view on this subject. Its as stupid as allowing external view in a figher.
It won't really make a difference. It's only one keystroke to change positions.
-
Sitting in gunners position is like looking at the world around you though a straw, if modelled correctly it would make quite a difference.
-
Sitting in gunners position is like looking at the world around you though a straw, if modelled correctly it would make quite a difference.
But you don't have to sit there. You could scan & aim from commander position, then jump to gunner in split-second just to pull the trigger.
-
Its so funny to me that if enough of you cry about something hard enough Hitech will change whatever it is to calm the crys.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/y0sA3N4.png)
gliding 3-tour average
What's that spike in 2017?
-
What's that spike in 2017?
Steam release.
-
Steam release.
Oh right, surprising retention once it stabilised +200ish pilots.
Still, that sharp decline 2009-10 is crazy, I think that was the period of the NOEs being made obsolete by lowered DAR alt?
-
Whilst main gunning aircraft might not be realistic it is possible. In ww2 tanks didn't have 3 lancs deck pounding them with 14k of ord. Each.
-
Still, that sharp decline 2009-10 is crazy, I think that was the period of the NOEs being made obsolete by lowered DAR alt?
The radar setting change was made near the end of tour 125, late June 2010
-
Oh right, surprising retention once it stabilised +200ish pilots.
Still, that sharp decline 2009-10 is crazy, I think that was the period of the NOEs being made obsolete by lowered DAR alt?
I believe that was about the time during the arena split, and many squads couldn't fly with each other anymore. I was very much against it from the start.
While the #s have been slowly decreasing. I think the biggest reasons is the lack of aircombat on the maps that has reduced time/kill. While more players leave, the far distances and time/kill had a bigger impact. Now with huge maps during off hours, players have a lot longer time to find action. With bigger maps and lower #s, the fights are spread out across the map and it produces less big fights in one area. I also believe the 12 hours rule hurt fighters because if there is a big fight across the map, and you cannot fly there or switch, While you side has 0 action, they will log in boredom for something more actionable. I've always thought that 3 hours was a much more reasonable time.
I actually think we need a GV dar, just not one that pinpoints where thr tanks are. If there is no dar, you have no idea how many tanks there are, and a flashing base doesn't represent how much action there is. Do you roll for only one guy? Or is there 10 guys there that pops you 5 minutes after you get out there. Only a flashing base doesn't show how much action there is for new players.
I think non perked planes like the spit16, la7, yak3 and 190D, have also deterred a lot of vet players because they constantly get tracked down and ganged by them. These planes get thousands of more kills than others and it creates an embalance where everyone flys super planes to compete. It makes it very challenging.
Just my thoughts.
Regarding this issue, I don't know enough about tanks, but if they shoot and the bullet hits, that's the way it is. Would happen in real life if by accident. I do think enemy tanks should not show distance on planes. It would make it a little more challenging for wirbles to end your 10 minute sortie in a 1 ping Instant death out of no where. That's what really grinds my gears sometimes.
-
But you don't have to sit there. You could scan & aim from commander position, then jump to gunner in split-second just to pull the trigger.
I have wondered if the way to fix issues like this one with the gvs was to have the gun point fairly close to where the commander view is but have it randomized somewhere in the circle and the only way to get true aim is to be in the gunner seat.
Wiley.
-
Should be based on experience...
First starting out you are at Montgomery level and can't hit the side of a barn...
As you gain experience you graduate to Patton and Rommel level where you can hit 262's crossing in front of you at 1.5k out..
Or just get your old arse into a fighter as the game was intended :)
Eagler
-
It is based on the skill of the pilot or driver. So it is, effectively, based on experience, and training.
-
I have wondered if the way to fix issues like this one with the gvs was to have the gun point fairly close to where the commander view is but have it randomized somewhere in the circle and the only way to get true aim is to be in the gunner seat.
Wiley.
I play exclusively in VR, including in GVs. When in VR the commanders view is unusable for shooting as in VR your head is never truly centered. So every maingun kill of an aircraft is done from the gunners seat. Sometimes you just can't fix stupid, some people just insist on flying shallow attack paths.
-
I play exclusively in VR, including in GVs. When in VR the commanders view is unusable for shooting as in VR your head is never truly centered. So every maingun kill of an aircraft is done from the gunners seat. Sometimes you just can't fix stupid, some people just insist on flying shallow attack paths.
agree......there is no way to fix stupid. I do not remember how many planes I have main-gunned that came in really low, then complained on 200 you should not
be able to do that. IL2's, B-25's, P-51's, 110's, just about any plane LOL I did not use commander view, but used the turret view because it is much more precise.
:salute
-
agree......there is no way to fix stupid. I do not remember how many planes I have main-gunned that came in really low, then complained on 200 you should not
be able to do that. IL2's, B-25's, P-51's, 110's, just about any plane LOL I did not use commander view, but used the turret view because it is much more precise.
:salute
PERK the M-8!!!!!!! :aok
-
HAHAHAHAHA! That's rich!
The numbers suck now because he coddled the GVer's and armchair generals several years ago by altering the GV icon rules and side switch timers. Most of the dedicated fighter pilots left because of these changes. The MA has been trash ever since because all that's left are you entitled people.
What you wrote was rich.
GV's have nothing to do with being trash, that's the player base.
Unless maybe all the people circling a GV spawn with bombs takes them away from furballing could be considered one example.
-
:D :D :D That is pretty funny !
How many pilots flying heavy fighters or A-20's could be furballing instead of eggin' GV's at the spawn or at a Vehicle Base that is a half a sector or even
or further from the nearest air field ?
It would seem there could be more fighter pilots enjoying some action with other fighter pilots if they were not eggin' gv's.
:salute
-
:D :D :D That is pretty funny !
How many pilots flying heavy fighters or A-20's could be furballing instead of eggin' GV's at the spawn or at a Vehicle Base that is a half a sector or even
or further from the nearest air field ?
It would seem there could be more fighter pilots enjoying some action with other fighter pilots if they were not eggin' gv's.
:salute
When I first returned to aces high last April my first sortie was in a M-4 as I didn't have my joystick setup yet. As soon as I spawn out a B-25 hits me with his MAIN gun which is considered way cool in Aces High. I shot the B-25 with the main gun and took its wing off. Not bad for a first sortie back after ten years away.
But the crys that were logged over me doing that.......
-
I don’t think it’s a problem.
-1
-
What's worse is their invisibility from the air
Nice to see a dust trail, smoke or something and not have to fly to tree top level to see its icon
Eagler
-
if someone is good enough to get a main gun hit on a plane from a tank, they should get an award. shame on the plane for being that close!!
-
What's worse is their invisibility from the air
Nice to see a dust trail, smoke or something and not have to fly to tree top level to see its icon
Eagler
Maybe that is something HiTech could adjust in the arena settings........the distance that the dusty cloud trails behind the gv when it is moving.
Typically veteran gv'ers shut their engine off and park under some trees when the heavy fighters show up. If they were moving the dusty trail behind them would
definitely give their position away and add another element to the game that has not been explored yet.
When planes are down at tree top level they run the risk of being main gunned.
:salute
-
Maybe that is something HiTech could adjust in the arena settings........the distance that the dusty cloud trails behind the gv when it is moving.
Typically veteran gv'ers shut their engine off and park under some trees when the heavy fighters show up. If they were moving the dusty trail behind them would
definitely give their position away and add another element to the game that has not been explored yet.
The extensive hiding of GV is already a really bad thing. It will only get worse if you make moving vehicles even more visible while not touching the stationary ones.
-
Did GV's hide in WW2?
Did they hide in the Battle of the Bulge?
What happened when the cloud cover went away?
:salute
-
Did GV's hide in WW2?
Did they hide in the Battle of the Bulge?
What happened when the cloud cover went away?
:salute
This is a game, not WWII.
Coogan
-
Did GV's hide in WW2?
Did they hide in the Battle of the Bulge?
What happened when the cloud cover went away?
Did pilots die permanently in WW2? :)
-
Unless maybe all the people circling a GV spawn with bombs takes them away from furballing could be considered one example.
If there were really so many circling with bombs, there would be fighters waiting to kill them. There aren't.
Hunting GV's from the air is a currently fool's errand, so very few players spend the time doing it.
The extensive hiding of GV is already a really bad thing. It will only get worse if you make moving vehicles even more visible while not touching the stationary ones.
Restoring pre-Storch GV icon rules would help solve this problem.
-
Did pilots die permanently in WW2? :)
They respawned and had to go through an 18 year tutorial... :D
-
If there were really so many circling with bombs, there would be fighters waiting to kill them. There aren't.
Hunting GV's from the air is a currently fool's errand, so very few players spend the time doing it.
Restoring pre-Storch GV icon rules would help solve this problem.
I told you this once before when we had a discussion about this very topic on discord.
bring yourself out there in a tank and see how many planes start circling.
a good number of these players " Kills " is gv kills. KONG for one example, try hiding from that dude in a tank.
And theres no fighters to kill the circling bomb****s because they are to busy hiding in the ack.
-
I told you this once before when we had a discussion about this very topic on discord.
bring yourself out there in a tank and see how many planes start circling.
a good number of these players " Kills " is gv kills. KONG for one example, try hiding from that dude in a tank.
You still miss my point when you are talking about a few select players who are good at hunting GV's from the air. It's takes hours of time and practice to even be competent at it.
I want things reverted to when an inexperienced GV hunter has a chance to get a kill. Even if they don't succeed they will feel that they were close enough to make another sortie worth their while. As it is now, they are hopeless and they learn very quickly not to bother.
-
I want things reverted to when an inexperienced GV hunter has a chance to get a kill. Even if they don't succeed they will feel that they were close enough to make another sortie worth their while. As it is now, they are hopeless and they learn very quickly not to bother.
Why don't you come find out then.
I'm telling you that what your saying is incorrect about the amount of players bomb****ing. The only way you could know this is to come find out. Until you do that you look like a out of touch politician.
-
Why don't you come find out then.
I'm telling you that what your saying is incorrect about the amount of players bomb****ing. The only way you could know this is to come find out. Until you do that you look like a out of touch politician.
I'm willing to grant you that there's probably more GV hunters than I think when it comes to defending a town and guys are hovering over it looking for GV's. But how often do you see anyone fly to a different base/spawn to hunt GV's? This used to be common. I used to fly to the spawn between V bases and was rarely wanting for low air targets to bounce.
-
So then maybe you start a group of people looking for the GV bomb****s. People hide in the trees so the bomb****s dont get them.
-
I love how the "answer" seems to always be "well change your style of play!" Fighters have to become bombt**ds, GVs arent allowed to hide and so on and so on. Well many play this game the way they do because it is why they came here in the first place. Some guys only want to fly ponies, others only want to pop other GV from a great hiding spot time after time. Others want to roll base after base to win the map, 22 vs 2 vs 2 is a perfect setup of them and they love it.
Telling these players to change how they play does only one thing..... It makes more and more players sign off, many for the last time. The only thing that will save this game is for there to be more players. The fighters will have enough people to fight, the GVers will have enough players to lay in wait for and the base grabbers/win the war guys will have enough to grab bases and NOT interfere much with the other players doing there own thing.
I hope HTC works out a way to either drop the price to bring in more players, or give away half dozen planes for free in the MA to play WITH the subscribers.
-
Hooray for the tank that main guns a plane...it's about all the defense the tank has except for the machine gun. If you get main gunned, tell the tank player "good shot you SOB" and laugh it off. Get a brand new plane that is free loaded with eggs and go bomb him...sheesh.
One-eye
-
You guys do realise that the OP has not chimed in at all.
Yet here you all are just "blah blah". 🤣
Coogan
-
You guys do realise that the OP has not chimed in at all.
Yes, but does it matter?
-
You guys do realise that the OP has not chimed in at all.
Yet here "we" all are just "blah blah". 🤣
Coogan
I adjusted your statement
-
I adjusted your statement
Thank you Dick.
Coogan
-
Hooray for the tank that main guns a plane...it's about all the defense the tank has except for the machine gun. If you get main gunned, tell the tank player "good shot you SOB" and laugh it off. Get a brand new plane that is free loaded with eggs and go bomb him...sheesh.
One-eye
:aok
-
Thank you Dick.
Coogan
Your welcome coogar
-
Hooray for the tank that main guns a plane...it's about all the defense the tank has except for the machine gun. If you get main gunned, tell the tank player "good shot you SOB" and laugh it off. Get a brand new plane that is free loaded with eggs and go bomb him...sheesh.
One-eye
:aok :salute
-
killing gvs feom the air was so easy they changed the icon rules to give gv a chance. you all forgot how easy bomb****ing was. Bomb-tatding made gv-ing a waist of time. the only people who decry the current icon set up/hiding are bomb****s.
No need to give them an easier time.
what next? longer range and more accurate base ack to reward the pony and Dora runners?
learn to find GVs and shut up.
-
killing gvs feom the air was so easy they changed the icon rules to give gv a chance. you all forgot how easy bomb****ing was. Bomb-tatding made gv-ing a waist of time. the only people who decry the current icon set up/hiding are bomb****s.
No need to give them an easier time.
what next? longer range and more accurate base ack to reward the pony and Dora runners?
learn to find GVs and shut up.
The icons were changed with the introduction of the Storch to make it somewhat useful, not because bombing GV's was "too easy". But it was easier in AH2, I'll give you that. But easier bombing of GV's is a GOOD THING. It promoted more players to fly anti-GV aircraft and generated air combat away from base captures. If it was so bad for GV'ers then,they would have all quit 10 years ago, but there were always plenty of tanks for the bomber pilots to kill.
The GV'ers have just gotten too comfortable with their invisible tanks in AH3 and feel they are entitled to their unassailable hide-and-seek gameplay, no matter how much it is a detriment to the game as a whole.
-
The icons were changed with the introduction of the Storch to make it somewhat useful, not because bombing GV's was "too easy". But it was easier in AH2, I'll give you that. But easier bombing of GV's is a GOOD THING. It promoted more players to fly anti-GV aircraft and generated air combat away from base captures. If it was so bad for GV'ers then,they would have all quit 10 years ago, but there were always plenty of tanks for the bomber pilots to kill.
The GV'ers have just gotten too comfortable with their invisible tanks in AH3 and feel they are entitled to their unassailable hide-and-seek gameplay, no matter how much it is a detriment to the game as a whole.
Wow, your hatred of gv's knows no bounds, good thing you don't Control the game. :O
-
The icons were changed with the introduction of the Storch to make it somewhat useful, not because bombing GV's was "too easy". But it was easier in AH2, I'll give you that.
Personally, I was fine with the icon range changes in AH2. Yes, it made locating vehicles a bit more difficult, but still wasn't crippling, and it gave the Fi 156 purpose.
Today, the Storch is being used much less, because his doubled icon view range doesn't help him any more as icons are now often totally hidden by trees and even building.
It's the combination of new terrain and GV dar that, in my opinion, really messed things up.
-
The icons were changed with the introduction of the Storch to make it somewhat useful, not because bombing GV's was "too easy". But it was easier in AH2, I'll give you that. But easier bombing of GV's is a GOOD THING. It promoted more players to fly anti-GV aircraft and generated air combat away from base captures. If it was so bad for GV'ers then,they would have all quit 10 years ago, but there were always plenty of tanks for the bomber pilots to kill.
The GV'ers have just gotten too comfortable with their invisible tanks in AH3 and feel they are entitled to their unassailable hide-and-seek gameplay, no matter how much it is a detriment to the game as a whole.
Giving the Storch a purpose was not the only reason for gv Icon change. learn to find gvs by actually spotting the vehicle instead of it ICON. Gvs under trees are not invisible. You wave to fly low and slow. If that makes you susceptible to ground fire, perfect! why should be able to fly above ground fire range in an A-20, see the icons and just egg them? what do you guess the plane to gv kill ratio was before the rule change? what do think it is now? It much better balance gameplay now.
-
what do you guess the plane to gv kill ratio was before the rule change? what do think it is now? It much better balance gameplay now.
Well, don't keep us guessing, what are the ratios now vs then?
-
Well, don't keep us guessing, what are the ratios now vs then?
...ruh roh...
- oldman
-
Wow, your hatred of gv's knows no bounds, good thing you don't Control the game. :O
I don't hate GV's. I hate the way most of the players use them. And I hate that their methods have become the prevalent mode of game play.
Personally, I was fine with the icon range changes in AH2. Yes, it made locating vehicles a bit more difficult, but still wasn't crippling, and it gave the Fi 156 purpose.
Today, the Storch is being used much less, because his doubled icon view range doesn't help him any more as icons are now often totally hidden by trees and even building.
It's the combination of new terrain and GV dar that, in my opinion, really messed things up.
Yes, the change was not crippling in AH2, at first. I think the demographic shift that came with the fallout from the 12-hour rule, turned the Storch icon rule change from a minor issue into a proper problem because the bulk of the players who played just to fight left and were replaced with those who played to capture. Once AH3 arrived, That problem became crippling because GV's went from difficult to find to nearly impossible. The GV dar was an attempt to shift the scale back in the air/ground balance but not well enough, in my opinion. I still maintain that reverting the icon rules to the pre-Storch settings will help a great deal.
Giving the Storch a purpose was not the only reason for gv Icon change. learn to find gvs by actually spotting the vehicle instead of it ICON. Gvs under trees are not invisible. You wave to fly low and slow. If that makes you susceptible to ground fire, perfect! why should be able to fly above ground fire range in an A-20, see the icons and just egg them? what do you guess the plane to gv kill ratio was before the rule change? what do think it is now? It much better balance gameplay now.
How is it better balanced now when the dedicated GV killer aircraft are rarely used any more? Where are the IL-2's, Hurri2D's, and Ju 87G's? In the hangar, that's where. When was the last time anyone rolled a 190F-8 to do anything other than rocket down a radar? What are the kill ratios for carpet bombing GV's now vs. then? I bet it's even worse now for GV's because dumping many bombs in the general area of a suspected GV is likely to be much more successful than a targeted strike against a known one.
-
How is it better balanced now when the dedicated GV killer aircraft are rarely used any more? Where are the IL-2's, Hurri2D's, and Ju 87G's? In the hangar, that's where. When was the last time anyone rolled a 190F-8 to do anything other than rocket down a radar? What are the kill ratios for carpet bombing GV's now vs. then? I bet it's even worse now for GV's because dumping many bombs in the general area of a suspected GV is likely to be much more successful than a targeted strike against a known one.
where are you getting your data from?
-
Well, don't keep us guessing, what are the ratios now vs then?
Haha, I asked him to guess. I don’t have it. Was hoping you would jump on it though. 😁
-
where are you getting your data from?
The same place you did, apparently. :devil
-
I couldn't help it, I just had to...
(https://i.imgur.com/K5kYXr8.png)
K/D is by year. The new icon system was introduced in January 2012, the switch to AH3 in September 2016
-
Lusche, you are a treasure. :salute
-
I couldn't help it, I just had to...
“There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." :D
I always enjoy your stats posts. It gives framework to discuss things a little more rationally.
My first reaction…
1. Hmmm. The plane:GV K:D seems too GV weighted. Aircraft should be the terror of GV without sufficient air cover to protect them.
2. This chart doesn’t appear to illustrate a big change with AHIII.
But, there might be more needed data along with this to draw a proper conclusion. This may not be enough to tell the whole story.
If you could product a companion chart that combines number of GV kills of planes PLUS number of plane kills of GV. That should be a rough estimate of the frequency of attempts of planes trying to kill GV regardless of outcome. Not perfect. It won’t count attacks that resulted in neither plane or GV death, but there is probably no way to measure that.
While the success ratio of plane attacks on GV might not have changed much, the volume of attempts of planes attacking GV may have changed. e.g. The K/D ratio may have remained steady ~0.85:1 for attacks attempted, but the number of attacks attempted might have dropped off precipitously after the tree-pocolypse. :cool:
Or maybe not. But you might need both metrics to draw a useful conclusion.
:salute
-
Cpt Trips,
Without pulling up the numbers in detail, I can confirm that the ratio of attacks on GVs by planes has increased a lot indeed, from 22% in 2015 to 31% in 2020.
But here's the problem with these numbers: The gameplay has changed massively with the transition to AH3. There is no Tank Town anymore, and very little 'whack-a-mole' spawn battles are left. This kind of battles had a very high kills/per hour, so that's why the amount of g2g kills has significantly decreased. Way more tanks are now proportionally being killed inbound to a town than slugging it out against each others in a tank town. GV also survive their sorties much longer now, while once ago they suffered 7 deaths per hour it's now only about 4.
Planes are not more dangerous now, it's just that a huge part of ground to ground kills just went away.
-
Cpt Trips,
Without pulling up the numbers in detail, I can confirm that the ratio of attacks on GVs by planes has increased a lot indeed, from 22% in 2015 to 31% in 2020.
But here's the problem with these numbers: The gameplay has changed massively with the transition to AH3. There is no Tank Town anymore, and very little 'whack-a-mole' spawn battles are left. This kind of battles had a very high kills/per hour, so that's why the amount of g2g kills has significantly decreased. Way more tanks are now proportionally being killed inbound to a town than slugging it out against each others in a tank town. GV also survive their sorties much longer now, while once ago they suffered 7 deaths per hour it's now only about 4.
Planes are not more dangerous now, it's just that a huge part of ground to ground kills just went away.
I think I see your point.
That's interesting. Thanks.
-
In 2012 when the icon rules where changed kill ratio for planes vs gv dropped 20% and stayed there. Unless you think 2011 was an anomaly.
My feeling is not that icon rule stopped planes from killing GVs, but that it can help to make it take longer to kill them. That’s a good thing.