Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Saurdaukar on April 04, 2002, 12:44:08 AM
-
----Was looking forward to a night of flying - grabbed my trusty F4U-1 and went hunting... low and behold I find a fight... Ive got alt and I dive in... straight down... N1k points his nose skyward, we ram... myself at about 400 IAS and him at about 75IAS... wonderful start.
----Now, spare me the "avoid" HO discussion here and hear me out... I have finally thought of a solution to the problem in the Main Arena.
The Problem: Dweeb mentality = Fly around and seek out the destruction of enemy aircraft with no thought of survival. To destroy the bad guys in red as aggressively as possible in a kamakazi style because who knows when my next chance will be. Hell, it doesnt even matter if I die, Ill just re-up another N1k and kill more bad guys.
The Question: Dweebs wasnt to fly perk planes, its one of the first questions most ask upon learning how to use the radio.
The Solution: Award absolutely ZERO, thats right folks, ZERO perks unless the sortie is landed.
The Reason: This will effectively ELIMINATE 95% of the hot mearges, 95% of the suicidal ACM, 95% of the rams, and 95% of the whining.
The Result: A "combat simulation" not a neverending suicidal furball. Survival will be the paramount priority, killing enemy aircraft a close second. More "realistic" aircraft behavoir, real world tactics actually working, and last but certainly not least, an appreciation for an earned kill.
Perhaps Im off my rocker here - thoughts?
-
if you were diving on him and he was hanging in the air in stall... Im just wondering why didnt you blast him out of the sky with those .50 you had... Its so easy to kill those prop hanging dweebs... And yes you could have avoided the colision since he was hanging on prop and so he could not du much else at the moment... So plain and simple - you blew yur chance for very easy kill and you paid for it the highest price... :p
-
Originally posted by Saurdaukar
The Solution: Award absolutely ZERO, thats right folks, ZERO perks unless the sortie is landed.
There are already too many cowards waiting for the perfect advantage before they will attack.
-
Originally posted by Saurdaukar
----Was looking forward to a night of flying - grabbed my trusty F4U-1 and went hunting... low and behold I find a fight... Ive got alt and I dive in... straight down... N1k points his nose skyward, we ram... myself at about 400 IAS and him at about 75IAS... wonderful start.
----Now, spare me the "avoid" HO discussion here and hear me out... I have finally thought of a solution to the problem in the Main Arena.
The Problem: Dweeb mentality = Fly around and seek out the destruction of enemy aircraft with no thought of survival. To destroy the bad guys in red as aggressively as possible in a kamakazi style because who knows when my next chance will be. Hell, it doesnt even matter if I die, Ill just re-up another N1k and kill more bad guys.
The Question: Dweebs wasnt to fly perk planes, its one of the first questions most ask upon learning how to use the radio.
The Solution: Award absolutely ZERO, thats right folks, ZERO perks unless the sortie is landed.
The Reason: This will effectively ELIMINATE 95% of the hot mearges, 95% of the suicidal ACM, 95% of the rams, and 95% of the whining.
The Result: A "combat simulation" not a neverending suicidal furball. Survival will be the paramount priority, killing enemy aircraft a close second. More "realistic" aircraft behavoir, real world tactics actually working, and last but certainly not least, an appreciation for an earned kill.
Perhaps Im off my rocker here - thoughts?
Saurdaukar,
I am one of those dweebs. When I am in the mood, I will dive into a mass of enemy, no matter what the odds, in hopes of killing one or two of them. Often, I don't care if I die. I love underdog fights. Dying is part of the game to me.
I have a gazillion perk points. I fly a lot of different planes, and my only regular perk ride is the CHog. 0 perks at death would not change the way I fly a bit.
I am not saying that your idea is good or bad. I just don't think that it would be nearly as effective as you may think. I also wouldn't assume the motives for how/why people fly.
My guess is that no matter what you do with scores or perks, most people are going to fly exactly the same.
eskimo
-
Originally posted by eskimo2
My guess is that no matter what you do with scores or perks, most people are going to fly exactly the same.
eskimo
Agree. You might even say they're going to fly what they want to fly the way they want to fly it. ;)
-
There are already too many cowards waiting for the perfect advantage before they will attack.
That's a sign of smart flying and good tactics, you don't see a bad pilot or a newbie waiting for a good shot.
Don't complain about people who fly realistic and call them cowerds.
-
Originally posted by Wilbus
That's a sign of smart flying and good tactics, you don't see a bad pilot or a newbie waiting for a good shot.
Don't complain about people who fly realistic and call them cowerds.
You are just a coward trying to justify your cowardice
-
Originally posted by Wilbus
That's a sign of smart flying and good tactics, you don't see a bad pilot or a newbie waiting for a good shot.
Don't complain about people who fly realistic and call them cowerds.
Heh heh. How about if we call them wussies, instead?
I'm with Eskimo and Toad. There are probably some people who fly so that they can build up enough perk points to fly their perk planes, but I'll bet they're quite a minority, and that most of us fly a non-perked plane as a matter of choice.
And, while an arena composed of conservative B&Z types might be more realistic, it wouldn't be more fun.
- Oldman
-
I like this idea. I might modify it to no points except for lands bails or ditches over friendly territory, but I could live with it your way also.
But those who say it wouldn't change anything are probably right--unless you perked all the late war planes. I personally wouldn't have a problem with this, at all. N1Ks, p51Ds, etc., etc., all perked (although not very much, about the level of the 152 now). However, that aint gonna happen. No way, no how. Not that I think it would lead to a huge exodus of people, but the powers that be seem to believe that it would, and that's what counts.
I guess when it comes down to a choice between sticks and carrots, much as I derive enormous satisfaction from wielding the big stick on occasion, I think carrots are generally a better idea. So one alternative to this proposal is actually to substantially increase the rewards for landing a mission, since the difference between dying with kills and landing with kills is pretty miniscule at the moment.
I'm sure that suicide dweebs are a real problem for some, but if you fly with a good squad, they're just, well, lunch.
And those who say that picking fights to your advantage is cowardice--well, obviously their advice counts for considerably more than that of every WWII fighter Ace. Galland, Bader. . .all cowards obviously.
-
Wussies? To fly a plane in the way it was ment to fly and was flown in real life? To use every advantage you have? To say those are cowerds, wussies or whatever is nothing but a sign of bad confidence in your own flying ability.
For the Arena with Pure B&Z planes, if it would be more fun or not, that's a matter of taste. Also, if all planes were in fact B&Z, that would give us alot of turn fights, even more then now pherhaps.
Don' fly around in a slow good turning plane then call people who don't turn with you for cowerds or wussies.
-
Translating this whine:
"A 300 mph closure rate seemed like a good idea at the time"
I can't even begin to count how many times I've seen someone with an obvious energy advantage point his nose at the enemy and then complain that the enemy attempted to do the same thing.
If you have a distinct advantage and fail to capitalize... its not because the other guy was a dweeb.
AKDejaVu
-
Sard.... you are driving down the road at 50mph, granny pulls out in her shopping cart... do you not alter your course at all??
You did exactly what it is you accuse others of doing...
no points if ya don't land will encourage the run wuss... Though I imagine most of the arena doesn't care for perks.
SKurj
-
I thing guys that its called evolution.... Everyone starts in TnB'ners but after some time they realize that flying the planes as they should be is actually much bigger challenge and fun than just low furballing so they move slowly to the other side... It has 2 effects - it forces the players to learn to fly better and it teaches them (mostly the hard way) that tactics and successful advantage employment is essential in every type of combat... Well but I admit that some people never reach this stage... :D But lets not publish their names... ;)
When Im checking my stats for the period of time I am flying AH I can clearly see the development process... It takes a lot of learning and a lot of diing... But you can just click on tower and reup again here and that is the advantage you have over any RL fighter ace no matter from which time period. They had only 1 life and thats why they needed to think before engaging, they needed to think during the fight as well. And you can be sure that they used every advantage they could gain over their enemy because it was their own and only life what were they fighting for.
Maybe Im just completely wrong but could not help myself... $0.02
-
Originally posted by Wilbus
Don't complain about people who fly realistic and call them cowerds.
Engaging when you only have an advantage is no more realistic than furballing. Stop trying to rationalize the "superiority" of your stye of flying through such blatant nonsense.
Think about what you said. If engaging with an advantage is "realistic," indeed even historically accurate... then wouldn't someone by definition have been at a disadvantage? Far more often than in Aces High, pilots didn't have a choice in whether they engaged with or without an advantage.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Originally posted by Dead Man Flying
If engaging with an advantage is "realistic," indeed even historically accurate... then wouldn't someone by definition have been at a disadvantage? Far more often than in Aces High, pilots didn't have a choice in whether they engaged with or without an advantage.
But then the tactics and thinking becomes even more important especially if the disadvantaged pilot is yourself. You need to employ the right tactics to even the chances or better to gain an advantage -> and get the kill (not killed) ;)
-
So, why did you run into him?
Originally posted by Saurdaukar
----Was looking forward to a night of flying - grabbed my trusty F4U-1 and went hunting... low and behold I find a fight... Ive got alt and I dive in... straight down... N1k points his nose skyward, we ram... myself at about 400 IAS and him at about 75IAS... wonderful start.
----Now, spare me the "avoid" HO discussion here and hear me out... I have finally thought of a solution to the problem in the Main Arena.
The Problem: Dweeb mentality = Fly around and seek out the destruction of enemy aircraft with no thought of survival. To destroy the bad guys in red as aggressively as possible in a kamakazi style because who knows when my next chance will be. Hell, it doesnt even matter if I die, Ill just re-up another N1k and kill more bad guys.
The Question: Dweebs wasnt to fly perk planes, its one of the first questions most ask upon learning how to use the radio.
The Solution: Award absolutely ZERO, thats right folks, ZERO perks unless the sortie is landed.
The Reason: This will effectively ELIMINATE 95% of the hot mearges, 95% of the suicidal ACM, 95% of the rams, and 95% of the whining.
The Result: A "combat simulation" not a neverending suicidal furball. Survival will be the paramount priority, killing enemy aircraft a close second. More "realistic" aircraft behavoir, real world tactics actually working, and last but certainly not least, an appreciation for an earned kill.
Perhaps Im off my rocker here - thoughts?
-
Originally posted by Grizzly
So, why did you run into him?
Maybe it seemed as a good idea at the moment? :D
-
Originally posted by MadBirdCZ
But then the tactics and thinking becomes even more important especially if the disadvantaged pilot is yourself. You need to employ the right tactics to even the chances or better to gain an advantage -> and get the kill (not killed) ;)
Flying effectively with a disadvantage is different than what Wilbus describes, which is always flying with some sort of advantage (be it numbers, energy, altitude, etc). It's one thing to turn a disadvantageous situation into an advantageous one; another thing entirely to fly so conservatively as to never allow oneself at a relative disadvantage.
I fail to see how the latter in any way represents "realistic" combat flying.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Originally posted by Dead Man Flying
to fly so conservatively as to never allow oneself at a relative disadvantage.
-- Todd/Leviathn
This would mean staying in Tower and watching the map... Everytime you climb into the cockpit you risk facing the disadvantage situation, arent you? :confused:
-
Originally posted by MadBirdCZ
This would mean staying in Tower and watching the map... Everytime you climb into the cockpit you risk facing the disadvantage situation, arent you? :confused:
In Aces High, unlike reality, it's possible to grab to enormous altitudes in a fast plane, run from even odds, fly (safely) into friendly ack for protection, use your own countrymen for bait while you cherry pick, etc etc.
Such tactics assure an advantage to conservative players willing to use them. However, claiming that such tactics are historical is what bothers me, because very clearly they are not.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Originally posted by AKDejaVu
Translating this whine:
"A 300 mph closure rate seemed like a good idea at the time"
I can't even begin to count how many times I've seen someone with an obvious energy advantage point his nose at the enemy and then complain that the enemy attempted to do the same thing.
If you have a distinct advantage and fail to capitalize... its not because the other guy was a dweeb.
AKDejaVu
Ok... now I asked very nicely to be spared the "Avoid" discussion... my 'simple' reply to your 'simple' translation is 'simply' "Ever try turning a hog at 400IAS?" Doesnt work too well. especially when the NME counters by turning into you constantly... Now that 300 kts of closure you refer to - it was closer to 100 kts when I was d 2.0 behind him... he turned completely and faced me. Regardless... couple trends I am noticing here that disturb me a little bit and some I am pleased with.
Now Im not going to mention any names but heres the score...
1. Seems to me that most of you are missing the argument here.
-A. The argument is NOT "He rammed me." (Read, "we rammed")
-B. The argument is not "The N1k is an AH-64 with top side firing guns"
2. A few of you however were good enough to respond to my IDEA as opposed to the example I cited which plays itself out every night.
-A. The IDEA is not awarding perks for kills gained during a sortie which results in death.
-B. The reason I have raised this IDEA is because I (read, individual) think the solution would work.
-C. The reason I posted the IDEA is to see what you all thought of it. IE 1. Is it a good idea? 2. Would it work? 3. Am I alone in my frustration? (read, "Am I off my rocker?")
In conclusion, I believe a wrote a rather tame post and sure enough I get moronic responses from most (read again... sorry for you guys that can pick up on this without help... most, not all) people who bothered to read 1/2 of the thread. For those of you that responded to the IDEA thank you - for the rest...
-
Im saving my perkies for the P-47M or N HTC you listening?
-
Well maybe you wont die by doing it that way Leviathan but you wont get many kills neither ;)
You are right of course... AH is missing quite a lot of limitations which were , are and will be present in RL. But come on! Its just a game :D
-
Originally posted by Saurdaukar
we rammed
BEEEP buzzer goes on! Collision system in AH does not work like that ;) Please spare us of begining the discussion about 'why the ramm is only 1 sided' it has beend discussed/explained by official sources so many times before that we don't want to bring this up again.
So you rammed him and he shot you (or vice versa) or you both shot yourselves or any combination but only 1 of you (if he really did) rammed the other guy.
The Reason: This will effectively ELIMINATE 95% of the hot mearges, 95% of the suicidal ACM, 95% of the rams, and 95% of the whining.
Unfortunately I have to disagree on this one... really... REAL dweebs are dweebs... they never change... thats the first thing you have to have in mind.
HO merges? Why not? well IMHO there is a slight difference between HO Merge and a HO. From my point of view HO is when 2 planes afe closing at high speed noses pointing at each other guns blazing and both hoping that they manage to blast the other guy away from the sky soon enough not to colide with him... but a HO merge is really something else....
Ramms - you cant eliminate ramms by not giving perks for mission. Ramming will happen...
Suicidal ACM - like what? Keep in mind that many players are new to the game and maybe they are new to flight simulations or flying in general. You just cant expect them that they will do every ACM by the book from the scratch.
Whining? - Im affraid it would encourage the whining actually.
But again I might be wrong ;)
-
The Solution: Award absolutely ZERO, thats right folks, ZERO perks unless the sortie is landed.
Absolutely disagree: it's too easy to be bounced while you're landing for a start, and you're going to discourage a lot of newbies.
-
Originally posted by MadBirdCZ
Well maybe you wont die by doing it that way Leviathan but you wont get many kills neither ;)
[/B]
Actually, flying very conservatively is one way to obtain an incredibly high K/D ratio. It may take you forever to do it, but it will happen.
You are right of course... AH is missing quite a lot of limitations which were , are and will be present in RL. But come on! Its just a game :D
Yep, of course. :) I don't mind if someone flies this way, since it is after all just a game and their money. What I do mind is people arguing that such tactics are either preferable (and as such should be enforced via perk points), or are more "realistic," or somehow require more skill than some other method of flying. It certainly requires more patience, but more skill? Please.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
1. Again I belive Im being misunderstood.
2. This topic is not about the ram but since you seem so set on this issue - how is a ram not two-sided? Two planes collide - where did I state that one survived and the other didnt? Far as I can tell you lack the information required to make such assumptions about me wondering about the collission system.
3. A hot merge is what Im going after - if people have a reason to survive the sortie, I imagine we'd see alot less kamakazi behavior.
4. Again, I am not out to stop rams, they are a necessary part of the game. I am looking for a way to prevent the "Picket's Charge" mentality of flying that results in rams.
5. I understand the learning curve is steep for this game - I came to AH from 2 years off from AW and I am still learning. I am not stating that new drivers should "FLY MY WAY AND THATS THE END OF IT!" Im stating that for those who dont really care about surviving, this system might change that, "suicidal ACM" (Hot merges, kill at all costs, no value placed on returning to base, ram em if you cant shot em, etc (Im quite certain you know exactly what Im talking about, please dont pretend you dont)) might be reduced.
6. Whining - yes there will always be a contingent of whiners, myself included according to Mr. Ak apparently, who simply get joy out of shooting their mouths off, however some of excuses for whining wold be reduced with this system methinks.
Again let me reiterate that this is only an idea, all Im doing is trying to see what is thought of it... dont take it as a whine because its not and dont assume that Im ranting and raving about the current setup - if I didnt like the game I wouldnt play... Im simply offering suggestions for improvement. Most of you dont like the idea - thats fine - thats why I posted - wanted to find out but there is no need to go around hanging people because they dont agree with you. A whole lot of interesting aruments here... whining to prevent whining... yelling about relaxing... etc. Lets think though these arguments first, please.
Perhaps the error is on my part, and my words have been taken out of context - in this case I offer you multiple smily faces with which I plan to appease the witch hunting population.
:) :) :) :) :) :) :)
-
Leviathan I have nothing else to say ;)
Well maybe this - Im tired, I need some sleep! :D
<S> cya up there...
-
If you are coming in with speed and altitude... you are the only one responsible for what happens at the merge. The victim of this bounce will be reacting in a totally defensive manner.
The problem with most situations like this is that the attacker feels that he should push the attack because he can see the enemy in his sights. It is always this mentality that seems to overlook the fact that the enemy is attempting to achieve the same thing.
In a situation where a lower and slower plane is trying to immelman or climb to bring his guns to bear on you... it is much better to climb away forcing him to stall (making it IMPOSSIBLE for him to come around on you). Some call it a rope-a-dope... and alot of people fall for it.
The collision, in this instance, was entirely the fault of the individual that could have broke off the engagement and still hold a distinct energy advantage. It is time to head to the TA and work with a trainer on fast closure attack strategies.
AKDejaVu
-
Never said anything about always having advantage, that is more or less impossible in the MA and most other arenas. The way you guys sound attacking with an advantage is proof of lack of courage and skill.
Would you think real life combat pilots agree? No matter what time since the great war, pilots have always favoured advantage, why do you think tactics with attack from the sun, up and under etc etc have been "created"?
Of course someone is always at an disadvantage, if they were smart, and found them selves outnumbered and out "alted", they would bug out, and so many of them did, do this in AH and you WILL be called a run dweeb, cowered, runstand or hunstang etc, whenever the pilots don't fight on YOUR terms and YOU can't get a kill, it's boring fighting and newbie cowerd fighting.
Not saying turnfighting is dweebry, nor saying anything about people flying good turning and yet fast planes. Don't come acuse people of being cowerds though only because you get your bellybutton whiped out of the sky by a pilot who happens to use what he has and then kills you, a good pilot WILL turn an disadvantage to an advantage.
-
Originally posted by Toad
Agree. You might even say they're going to fly what they want to fly the way they want to fly it. ;)
Toad, I'm not sure that's correct for the majority of the arena. To be sure, it describes Eskimo and you, but perk points (or the lack of them) can drastically change the composition of the arena.
Recall the days when we had no perks. You encountered large numbers of F4U1Cs and yet today, they're relatively rare.
Let's suppose the F4U1C was perked at 1 point. Would the average joe (the proud owner of 7 perk points) try to land his kills? I think so. So yes, I think Saud's idea has merit --- provided HTC takes a more active role in adjusting perk points.
I think HTC needs to spend more time thinking about perk costs and eny values. I think they need to try some drastic changes just to see the immediate effect.
For example, if HTC thinks x points is probably too high for a particular airplane, I think they should change it to x/4 and observe the effect rather than subtracting a small amount.
curly
-
Originally posted by Saurdaukar
2. This topic is not about the ram but since you seem so set on this issue - how is a ram not two-sided? Two planes collide - where did I state that one survived and the other didnt? Far as I can tell you lack the information required to make such assumptions about me wondering about the collission system.
Oh come on! I really wan to go to bed!
In a commons sense when 2 planes ramm in RL they both suffer damage right? OK so when I stated that ramming in AH is just single bladed sword well... It is! Let me put it this way: You are closing on a plane at 300 closure speed thats quite fast... Im not the developer but acording to what HiTech said (several times and he repeated it evenmore times again) and from what I have found out while trying to fly over the LAN is that when YOU colide (on your front end) you might be d100 away on the other guy's front end. So basicaly thats why YOU colide and get damage and he keeps on flying... Please dont ask me why the system works like this. I would trust to HiTech on that this is the best way to do it right now. So actually there is NO WAY the enemy pilot can willingly ramm you all is just a bad luck.
Why Im making such assumption?
N1k points his nose skyward, we ram...
Its not me whos making asumptions its you stating it as a solid fact. Im just trying to tell you that its highly unlikely (i dont say its impossible because Im not HiTech so I dont know much about it) for 2 planes in AH to colide in such way for both of them to take damage. At least for the lenght of the time Im flying it always was just on 1 end. And trust me I have seen it from both ends (either me coliding with someone - me taking catastrophic damage and him flying like if nothing happened and of course I have seem many enemy planes trying to get me and then a saw them going down in flames mising parts crashing into ground and no kill awarded -> they colided with me because I was not shooting at them).
Real dweebs will stay 'dweebs' (even now I wonder what does it really mean although I looked this up in my dictionary so I know the expression in my language) as long as there are perk free rides available. And since you can NOT distinguish whether the player is a hardcore dweeb or just a newbie all this is just a hypotetical debate anyway...
In some other thread someone else put up an idea where death would give you 0 perks, capture would give you some, ditch some more and successful landing would give you 100... Well basicaly it is a good idea and I have nothing against puting it into the AH but as for your original question: I dont think it would eliminate the problems you are adressing...
And now If you dont mind il try to rest in piece... err in my bed ;)
ZZZzzzz......
-
OK
to put it simple (for those who aren't getting the questions asked by mazz)
Do you think it is a good idea to not to award perk points when you don't land a sortie?
And also, if you notice it's Mazz asking the question, not Lev.....
Oh btw pass along the beer please. :D
CharlieB
-
The problem with this kind of system is that there is nothing forcing people to engage in AH. In reality you had a job to do and you couldn't simply "bug out" if you didn't like the odds.
There are plenty of accounts of British, German, Japanese, American, Russian, et al, pilots climbing into vastly superior forces. They were doing so to try to save their nations.
In AH there is no such motivation, so if there is too large a death penalty, people will fly in a manner that is just as unrealistic as they do now, but with less action.
-
I'm flying what I want, when I want, how I want. I may dive in kamikaze or I may run, I may re-up on that vultched field over and over, I never know until I do it. I am a wuss, a coward, a dweeb, a fool, or any other attendant appellation you care to apply. :cool:
The points don't have a darn thing to do with me or the way I fly, so speaking for myself, no, it won't be a good idea if you want to control what I do. OTOH, you start controlling what I do, I leave.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
The problem with this kind of system is that there is nothing forcing people to engage in AH. In reality you had a job to do and you couldn't simply "bug out" if you didn't like the odds.
There are plenty of accounts of British, German, Japanese, American, Russian, et al, pilots climbing into vastly superior forces. They were doing so to try to save their nations.
In AH there is no such motivation, so if there is too large a death penalty, people will fly in a manner that is just as unrealistic as they do now, but with less action.
First of all Cherlie, thank you. :D
Secondly... Karnak, I wont pretend to be an tenured dean of aviation history and Im sure your statement has some merit however... I was always of the impression that the reason fights (bomber escort aside) lasted all of about 90 seconds was because it took you about 5 seconds to realize whether or not you had the advantage, 5 seconds to deciede to press the advantage or bug out, and 80 seconds to act on one or the other before you had a kill or were killed. In other words, fighter vs. fighter combat happened rarely after 1941 in the ETO, by that I mean without bombers to protect/attack, for a reason - if you were at a disadvantage, you went straight for the deck, that simple. Why risk an $80,000 aircraft and your life for a 20% chance of success? It also needs to be considered that "stall/turnfighting" wasnt really the norm in the ETO - the reason "better" planes are "faster" is because thats how they fought - stay fast, get in, get out - again I might be wrong, but I dont think extended fights lasted any more than 2 minutes before the 2 groups in question completely lost sight of eachother and regrouped to RTB - minimum exposure was pretty much the norm from what Ive read - the only reason you stayed engaged was if a buddy needed help. Death is a pretty big demotivator if you ask me, the absence of death in this game encourages fighting IMO. :)
-
Saurdaukar,
You misunderstand me, or I misunderstand you.
The thing I'm talking about is AH players who won't engage if there is the slightest risk of them losing. They only go for the fights they've already won. Its boring.
I'm not talking about staying fast or getting out of Dodge when it looks bad. I do those things.
I'm talking about the willingness to actually have a fight.
-
Ok - I see what you mean. =) Yes, your point is a good one - lots of good points here - I havent had the time to sort everytihng out - just kindof shot this idea out in the dark.
-
RAM? RAM???
Is RAM back? Did he quit again or both?
Would people stop posting about RAM and just ignore him!