Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: lazs on March 27, 2001, 08:20:00 AM
-
couldn't we have all planes available at a field till all the hangers and all the fuel are gone? I mean.... Can anyone concieve of a "real life" situation where bombers would be able to take off but not fighters? Certainly the guys at those fields aren't dumb enough to stack up every fighter in a big pile in those two fighter hangers? Also, So long as there's fuel, any plane should be able to take off.
More realistic, less gimicky and phony, better gameplay, easy fix. seems pretty win win to me.
lazs
-
lazs... more realistic? What? An endless suppy of fighters for you to go up.. kill.. get shot down... go up.. kill... get shot down.. etc. ?
Just quit your whining. play the way it is. That's how it is. You see me whining about missions anymore? No. I quit that subject. Not enough care about it. So do us a favor.. quit yours.
------------------
Midnight
13th TAS[/i]
midnight@13thtas.com
"You tell them I'm coming.. And Hell's coming with me!" -Kurt Russel Tombstone
-
I agree Lazs.
-
You're right, I can't conceive of any "real life" situation where fighters can continually spawn and re-up after being shot down.
If that's the case Lazs, then each field should get only a limited number of aircraft. After all in "real life" no airbase can hold an unlimited and infinite amount of planes. So once that allotment is shot down, no more aircraft. That should solve the downed hangar issue.
Cobra
-
midnight.. do as you please, i will do the same. The fighters would not be an "endless stream" as you say. A feild would still be destroyed just in a more realistic manner.
I also think it would be a win for the strat "guys" like yourself. If the fields could send up planes longer then the action would increase and people would wittingly or unwittingly participate in "strat" or "missions" instead of hiding from each other or gangbang B&zing a couple of helpless cons in fast planes.
lazs
-
Sorry Lazs have to disagree with you on this one, as Midnight pointed out its just as gimmicky to watch the same guy spawn endlessly at the field you are bombing everytime you shoot him down. This happened to me two nights ago where a P51 made a few poor passes on me before saddling right on my 6, I managed to shoot him down after a few very long bursts from my tail gunner and he went down, as I made my bombing run I watched him in my norden spawn straight away at the runway and come back to get me. When I fly I try to fly in a historical fashion so I make my runs at the operating altitudes I've read about usually between 25-28k and my bomb runs I make a proper egress from the target and not flip the plane around and game the fact that the norden needs no settling time so the buffs only defense against fighters like this who constantly respawn is to fly 'stratto buffs' I don't like to do it but you can surely see where the frustration comes from for the buff pilot so alot resort to this tactic.
I mentioned this in another thread about buffs, perhaps we could have parked vehicles that all need to be destroyed as well as hangars before a certain plane is disabled at that field, it makes more targets for buffs which would make us happy and also it would require alot more work to disable either fighters or bombers at a field which would keep you fighter jocks happy..how about trying that?
-
Lazs,
Take a second and think about what you are asking. The hangars currently rebuild in 15 minutes. The fuel bunkers take 30 minutes.
What is worse, not being able to launch from a field for 15 minutes, or not having any fields available with more than 25% fuel?... pretty much endlessly.
AKDejaVu
-
I guess it depends on which side of the fence you're on. Do you capture fields or prevent the capture of fields. I know I would rather fight than watch from the tower.
-
Certainly the guys at those fields aren't dumb enough to stack up every fighter in a big pile in those two fighter hangers?
Two words: Pearl Harbor
Lazs, HTC gave you your own arena for furballing. What more could you ask for?
-
pearl harbor? I wasn't aware that any operational ac were in hangers and that as soon as both hangers were destroyed they couldn't send up fighters. And wank... Ht didn't give me a furball arena that I know of. In fact... I never even asked for a furball arena. In fact... I have consistently stated that multiple arenas don't work.
I really don't see how it can be justified that a field could take off bombers but not fighters or how a field could be operational in every respect except that two buildings were no longer weathertight and so now.... the field can't send up fighters? And that doesn't seem contrived?
Sure, you can respawn but if you land you can't take off again if a couple buildings are down? If you land from another field you can't take off?
If you think about it.....If you are a strat player in AH then you are not playing for any simulation value. You are not interested in simulation so much as gaming. You might as well be playin backgammon. OTOH, the "mindless" furballers are simply simulating fighting other ac with the best flight models and gunnery/damage models available today.
lazs
-
oh, revvin... sorry but you don't disagree. I have posted that i wanted "revetments" for fighters and splash damage from bombs and realistic bombing accuracy. As you say... more targets for bombers and more realistic fighter availability. less gimicky etc. but.... That would be perhaps a little complex. This idea would be much easier and accomplish much the same hence.... "at least" i didn't say it was a perfect solution or even the best available only that it would be an improvement and easily done.
And deja... the percent of fuel thing is just as gimicky and silly as the rest. Why would you send up what fighters you had with only 25% fuel in theory, endlessly? If nothing else 25% can be from 20-75 gallons depending. Let em take off with 50 or 100% till there is no fuel left. that is just plain nitpicky on your part.
lazs
[This message has been edited by lazs (edited 03-27-2001).]
-
But endless spawning of aircraft is gamey and gimmicky now if planes were allowed to fly regardless of what hangars you destroyed then its even more gamey and gimmicky, if this was the case then I would have no choice but to bomb spawn points to stop this happening either that or give buffs floating power-up balls that repair damage and refuel and re-arm the plane..but hey that WOULD be gamey eh? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
I don't think placing parked planes on the sides of the runways as being too much to ask for, iEN managed to do it with the aged Warbirds code and HTC could take it a step further and tie these planes in with the availability of aircraft at a field. I don't expect to see them roll as players have to use up the last few planes, just have them as static objects that require destruction with hangars to disable either fighters or bombers at a field, next time you pass over a field look at the large spaces between targets such as acks, imagine those areas populated by parked aircraft, rows of bombers and fighters. I think this is quite achievable right now and could perhaps satisfy both sides.
-
Gamey?
From the Aces High Bomber operations manual:
Load bombs, fly to enemy field. Line up laser guided bombs on 2 targets, 3 at most. Drop bombs with pin point accuracy. Flight ops at enemy field disabled. Fly to next field and repeat.
Note: If large field, take 2 bombers.
-
Yep revvin apache hit it. All strat is gimicky. I too would like to see "revetments" but all I really asked for is that "at the least" fighters be able to take off untill all the hangers are down. That is not any more "endless" respawning" than what we have now...
Right now the bombers are the most gimicky part of the game, They are so concession ridden that they are embarassing. I don't know if they can ever be "fixed" cause if they were.... very few would be interested in flying em.
I think that eventually they will have to have huge area targets like cities that will affect the war without such a dramatic and instant effect on fighters in order to stop the animosity.
Right now... A good fight is happening and you look up. A lone bomber is 8-10K above everyone and allmost over your undamaged field... People say "gee I wonder what he will do" There goes the fighter hangers... You can go up and kill him but why bother? The real damage is done and he was on a sucicide mission anyway and will just "endlessly respawn".... Plus, there are only about 6 guys in the whole arena that enjoy attacking or even killing the current buff anyway. I'm not one of em.
Heck, I would rather see a "counter" for fighters and bombers. small field get's say 30 fighters and 2 bombers and a large one gets 60 fighters and 4 bombers... fighter or bomber ops closed when the counter hit's zero or the field is closed whichever comes first.
lazs
-
Lazs, Why does it matter I thought you'd be in the dueling arena!??
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Mox
[This message has been edited by Mox (edited 03-28-2001).]
-
Lazs said:
couldn't we have all planes available at a field till all the hangers and all the fuel are gone?
Lazs later says:
In this new era of (choke) realistic strat we have decided to switch to whatever country still has dar and fuel.
ROTFLMAO!
AKDejaVu
-
lasz, I'll say this as politely as I can.
Give it a rest won't you? Almost every post I've seen from you basically says 'I want to furball all day and don't care about anything else, lets make it so fields can't be captured/closed so nothjing can stop me furballing all day'.
The Main arena isn't for that, it isn't meant to be 'historical' or 'realistic' it's just what it is. The vast majority of people seem to understand that and get on with the game of 'capture the airbases' which is what the Main Arean is all about, wether you like it or not.
If people want 'historical' they fly the scenarios. If you want enless furballing there is now an arena with an area expressly for that, go there. Please stop this constant going on about the same things and deal with the fact that the Main Arean is the Main Arena and isn't igoing to be (and in my opinion shouldn't) be changed along the lines you're suggesting.
------------------
Graywolfe <tim@flibble.org>
-
I wasn't aware that any operational ac were in hangers and that as soon as both hangers were destroyed they couldn't send up fighters.
Lazs, well ok, you got me on a technicality. I admit that all the planes at PH weren't lined up in two hangers, but they were grouped into huge "piles" sitting in the middle of the field, making it easy to take out the whole lot with a couple of well-placed bombs. I didn't include that explanation in my original post because I figured everyone knew what I meant.
If you're trying to end gimmicky play and head more toward making AH more "realistic", then I'm right with ya.
-
deja said.. "
quote:
Lazs said:
couldn't we have all planes available at a field till all the hangers and all the
fuel are gone?
quote:
Lazs later says:
In this new era of (choke) realistic strat we have decided to switch to
whatever country still has dar and fuel.
ROTFLMAO!"
you are easily amused for an amish guy deja. I have no trouble imagining you as the mole in the "whack-o-mole" from your posts but ROTFLMAO.... doubt anyone believes that one but...
If you are pointing out (as greywolf does) that i am consistent then I don't get the joke. It seems to me that I am saying in both posts that i want to have fuel and fighter availability. It would be best if the strat were a little less lopsided but switching countries will work as a last resort. Everyone games the game in their own way it seems.
and wank... not really so much of a technicality as even that.. The U.S. was not even at war at the time. the planes were lined up for inspection, something that would probly not be acceptable in a front line airfield latter on right? As for realism... i only care about realistic flight models damage and gunnery. More realistic strat is ok so long as it doesn't hurt gameplay (6 hour flights and never seeing an enemy your entire tour for instance). We can never get realistic strat in such a small game so i will settle for balance. If we get MORE realism at the same time that we get more balance.... so much the better. We both come out good.
lazs
-
Ah I give up, I can't be bothered trying to reason anymore with you Lazs and certainly not Apache as
1. I'm in my hotel room right no working away from home viewing on my laptop connecting through a toejamty 9600 baud infrared connection on my mobile phone
and..
2. Although on the face of it Lazs you seem to want a reasoned debate about this topic but then you clearly show as does Apache that you don't want bombers in the game at all...well I got news for you guys, this is the main arena so the bottom line is GO FLY IN THE DUELLING/FURBALL arena and let the rest of us guys play the sim as it was intended by HTC and thats with bombers in place and a certain level of strat.
I know now to ignore such posts about bombers and strat from you Lazs.
-
Revvin:
Let me restate the case:
The arena is a better place if it is more fun for all player types. This means more players and the more players the better the game is for all. Currently it is too easy to ruin the fun of the guys who just want to pit their fighter skills against other fighters.
There is no reason that I can think of that the arena design could not be changed so that it is consistently easy to get into dogfights that are not hugely one-sided and to also give the bomber/strat guys a rich variety of targets and goals. Maybe it makes more sense for skilled buff usage to both rapidly capture terrain and cripple enemy buff availablity without hurting enemy fighter availability.
Hooligan
-
Don't Mess with revvin man.
He's a KILLER!!
-
revin if you want things to go all your way then no... we will probly not get along. If me advocating you having more targets to bomb and realistic bomb accuracy and realistic damage, including splash, means that i am totally against bombers in the game then so be it..... Get the gimicky, concession ridden jokes and their silly bellybutton "strat" out of something that should be a sim.
If you want to talk about improving things for everyone tho.... then we can talk about it.
lazs
-
You are going to have "strat" shoved down your throat laz. Might as well get use to it. The dueling arena shows how much anyone at HTC cares about furballs. In H2H there are more people using my pitiful attempts at arena building (walls) (2sides), then are using the dueling arena. I spent all of 15 min. on building them. If they wanted it to work all they have to do is put in one of Nutzz arenas and disable anything that shoots up, or backwards.
-
actually easy... I still believe there is room for everyone in the MA. The balance is wrong now and I bet people realize it pretty soon. It can work with a few concessions i think.
lazs
-
<sigh> no I don't want it all my own way, I've already discussed toning down the buff guns in return for a slight increase in buff durability, I've also come up with a possible solution to the problem you see in the game but its still not good enough..why?...
Because all your discussion on strat is just plain BS double-talk downright misleading garbage..there can't say it any simpler than that. Time and time again you dangle the carrot and give the illusion that you want to discuss your perceived problem and yet underneath it all you just want bombers out of Aces High, you asked for a furball arena and you got it but hey thats not enough for Laz gimme gimme gimme you want it all the whole damn moon on a stick! HTC designed a WW2 flight sim...WW2 had bombers and so we have bombers and strat in Aces High and thats how it should be. If you want to talk about gamey and gimmicky things then its the BS 15 mins rebuild times of hangars that let you furballers get it all your own way and endlessy spawn like some deranged quake-o-maniac
You have a furball arena and you have 8-way H2H so give it a damned rest, the MA is there for the rest of us who want a more complete WW2 sim and not mindless quake in the sky!
-
rev said...."Because all your discussion on strat is just plain BS double-talk downright misleading
garbage..there can't say it any simpler than that. "
Yes.... you say it one hell of a lot plainer than that..... you can say EXACTLY what it is that you think is BS or "double talk" or even misleading.....
Worse...The only person being misleading is you! you are saying that i asked for a furball arena. That is at the very least "misleading" Truth is I have said over and over that I did not want a seperate arena and that seperate arenas do not work. This is exactly the opposite of what you claim I have said. One of us is wrong or a liar. I prefer to think that you are simply mistaken and mis-spoke. Perhaps you have me confused with someone else?
lazs
-
Lazs, at the heart of this is you do not wish for the bombers to stop you from flying.
No matter what else is said, nor how it is said, you do not wish the bombers to impact
your fun.
You by inference do not wish the tanks to impact your fun, nor the field captures,nor the resets.
In short, you only want to fly fighters against fighters.
With that as a given I could understand your desire to change things to allow you your fun, but "perk jerks" "strat potatos" "buff dweebs" these are your terms I believe, terms that indicate an elitist attitude that anyone who doesn't wish for the game to be as you envision it should not be playing.
And you wonder why you draw flak? If anything, your attitude towards the rest of us (all of us, even the uncommitted ones) only invites any suggestion you make to be discredited at outset simply for you making it.
Free advice, even though I know you don't care what others say or think, gods know you've told us that too,
If you want change and you wish for others to agree, then do not start by insulting them. And try to suggest a change that is more amenable to improving the quality of the game, not merely your time in it.
I, like all of you, pay $30 bucks a month to enjoy a game, I do not see a notice that I must enjoy the game in any manner except that which is outlined in the terms of service. HTC gave us bombers,and tanks,and strat. Somehow I don't think they're ready to go and rip it all out to appease a minority opinion, no matter how vocal, or vulgar.
Thank you for your time.
------------------
pzvg- "5 years and I still can't shoot"
-
Its BS and double talk to say you want bombers in the game when every other post you make seems to be an attack on buffs, either you whine their gunners are too leathal or you whine they take too many hits...whine whine whine you want concession after concession made to make the game in the form you want, just one large H2H arena, that ain't what Aces High is about or there would be no bombers, there would be no destroyable targets and there would be no need for troop carriers.
I see the same thing over and over from guys like you and Apache who whine because buffs won't fly straight and level while you hit them with your turbo lazer death star BFG's, same old whine Lazs thats why its double talk because I've read one too many of your posts and they all sound the same.
-
rev... just as i thot... you are either an idiot, a liar or you have me confused with someone else. I would hope it is the latter.
pz.... your advise is worth every penny. since you are also unable to come up with anything other than speculation as to what i think then i would hope that you also have me confused with someone else. If you are interested in what i think then i would suggest yopu read what i write. I believe that the suggestions i make would improve the game for everyone. How do you feel that they wouldn't? specifically that is.
It does amaze me that with such a clear position so plainly stated i can be misrepresented so badly.
lazs
-
Not to horn in on someone else's furball (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif). But just a word on the turbo lazer death star comment. HT makes an attempt to portray the guns in a realistic way. With one exception. The bombers. Back in beta he admitted to gaming up the guns on them. Because he said no one would fly them otherwise. Now if it took 10 people to fly a B17, and the guns were the same 1.0000 as one fifty on a P51. I would have some respect for them, and would hunt them enthusiastically.
-
Revvin, you're interpretation skills need improving. Let me help. I, in approx. 8 years of online flights sims, have never advocated the removal of any aircraft, whether it be bomber or fighter. Where in my posts you discerned that is beyond me.
I'm not going to bore you or the rest of the community with my position again as it doesn't really matter in the end.
BTW, I could care less if the bombers fly level or not, I don't shoot at 'em.
-
Same usual faces tryign to justify the castration of buffs until they can no longer defend themselves or better yet even be there in the first place.
While you guys are in denial there is just no reasoning with you, I've tried before and failed to hold a reasonable discussion with you and now my patience has worn a little too thin,its just the same tired old lines from you Lazs and it seems Apache is following in your footsteps...one thing puzzles me though Apache, you say you've flown online flight sims for 8 years and yet you've still to learn how to make an effective attack on a buff?? Same goes for you bud, just another whining fighter jock who is not interested in taking the time to make a proper run on a buff or has any desire to fly more than 5 mins to a furball. Guess the day the Quakebirds get their wishes is the day Aces High dies as a serious sim...floating powerups and BFG's won't be far behind on their list of requests I guess <shrug>
-
the big problem is this small map we have now
-
I don't have to speculate what you think Lazs
You print your thoughts quite readily (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
I offer ideas,you offer ideas, there should be no difference correct?
But you have generated a, (for lack of something more descriptive) fan club.
They don't care what you say, they just follow you around from post to post, vulching your words with abandon.
Now why is that? It's because you've antagonized them.
Now before we go overboard, yes fields need some adjustments made, bombers are too lethal and IMHO The problem's with strat are entirely due to there being no such thing as strat in this game, People hit targets for their TACTICAL value, not strategic.
What is missing here is the direct ability to impact one side's warfighting ability,
bomb a factory and it slows production of radar,troops, Etc. But you cannot go all out to knock out a side's bomber production, or curtail tank production.
There is no front, bombers are rarely intercepted by any side that isn't taking it's turn in the gangbang bucket.
Everything in the game is geared towards producing massive dogfights with a distinctive edge in numbers for one side, yet only the tactical air battle is labelled "gamey" So tell me anyone, At what point in the BoB or the Battle for Germany, did the fighter controllers say "Ignore that chaps, it's just some bombers heading for our factories, but there's a beauty of a low level knifefight out in the Channel"
Let me give you guys, (and not just lazs)
something to consider, If they actually put in a cause and effect method of affecting a side's capabilities, bombers would really become the main war winning machines.
And would this mean the end of the furball?
not really, You see if the bombers become so dangerous that they cannot be ignored, then people will have to make an effort to keep them out of their airspace, So that in order to use your bobmbers, a side will have to escort them, and try to wrest control of the air away from their opposition, not less furballs, but more, and with a purpose, not the mindless circle,kill,die that passes for air combat in multiplayer games.
Can HTC make something like this?
More than likely,
Will they? That's up to you now, ain't it?
------------------
pzvg- "5 years and I still can't shoot"
-
Originally posted by lazs:
More realistic strat is ok so long as it doesn't hurt gameplay (6 hour flights and never seeing an enemy your entire tour for instance).
Lazs.. you truely make no sense. On one hand you say the strat guys are flying around hiding from each other, while on the other hand you are whining that they are coming over to bomb your Fighter Hangers. Then you double talk again and say give the strat guys some big cities to go bomb so they can stay away from my Fighter Hanger.
If you think about it, the true strat guys will send some bombers to your precious field to bomb the Fighter Hangers even if their main thrust will be to bomb the city. Why? So they can have less fighters shooting at them while they are trying to drop their bombs!
There are plenty of other games out there with the main focus being on "furballing" just go play one of those. Obviously, AH is not going in the direction you want.
------------------
Midnight
13th TAS[/i]
midnight@13thtas.com
"You tell them I'm coming.. And Hell's coming with me!" -Kurt Russel Tombstone
-
Midnight> While they are so very deep in denial they won't listen, thy just go round and round in circles saying one thing and then the other, there is no reason to their argument, they just want one big H2H arena and thats plain to see.
-
pz.. you have actually stated my point of view fairly clearly. I too feel that there is no strat in the game and that large cities would be great. the fields should be faily easy to capture and plentiful at the front with ac ability till the bitter end... As for the "fan club" of whack-o-moles ... Yeah... they're kinda fun. Sheesh, I say enough outlandish things you would think they could quote at least a couple even if out of context...
As you say.. the furballs would exist around the tactical targets like the (front line) close fields and the strat bombing and intercepting would exist (it doesn't now) around the large cities. when all the cities were leveled the 'war' would be over. maybe when the the city was leveled and all the tanks were killed... many possibilities. Course.... a lone suicide buff would no longer be able to get all the attention he wanted by spoiling the fight for dozens of guys who couldn't care less but it would be more realistic and fair.
with airfields and radar the only "strat" the animosity between furballers and "strat" (or as u correctly put it, tactical) guys continues with each side violently oppossed to any new element that will affect (and it allways does) their game. I agree with you that some simple things can be done to improve things for both.. probly one could go back to the original post and see one such improvement.
lazs
-
There is no front, bombers are rarely intercepted by any side that isn't taking it's turn in the gangbang bucket.
Everything in the game is geared towards producing massive dogfights with a distinctive edge in numbers for one side, yet only the tactical air battle is labelled "gamey" So tell me anyone, At what point in the BoB or the Battle for Germany, did the fighter controllers say "Ignore that chaps, it's just some bombers heading for our factories, but there's a beauty of a low level knifefight out in the Channel"
Let me give you guys, (and not just lazs)
something to consider, If they actually put in a cause and effect method of affecting a side's capabilities, bombers would really become the main war winning machines.
And would this mean the end of the furball?
not really, You see if the bombers become so dangerous that they cannot be ignored, then people will have to make an effort to keep them out of their airspace, So that in order to use your bobmbers, a side will have to escort them, and try to wrest control of the air away from their opposition, not less furballs, but more, and with a purpose, not the mindless circle,kill,die that passes for air combat in multiplayer games.
Only way to effectively accomplish this is with a two-sided war. Not Axis-v-Allies (with the inevitable aircraft/vehicle restrictions on both sides), but an unrestricted battle between two opposing forces. Fleets of escorted bombers, large scale ground battles ........ sounds like fun (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
However, HT's opinion on this idea is well known, so you might as well just keep on dreaming.
------------------
When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
Chapter 13, verse 11
-
well... let's look at reality here. There are a large group of players (me included) who will never be interested in escorting bombers or intercepting or the "big picture".. You can't force us you can only force us to log. If airfields easier to capture but planes availale to the bitter end we would be enticed to contribute to tactics if not really "strat" we would help because it would be fun to help.
The only thing in our best interest is getting to the fight... the bigger the better. The strat guys turn their nose up at that (for whatever reason) and that is fine. I believe they need something to do. With the big cities to be bombed and the war "won" that would be one element... furball/field capture would be another. People who like to do both would have more choice not less.
course that wouldn't stop the strat guys from hysterical vitriol on channel one when people werent playing the way they "should" nor would it make the furballers pay any attention to em. It would just offer choice.
lazs
-
sorry but this system would favour the allied jabos if you ask me......
In a 190f8 you can take out 1 maybe 2 hangers if your lucky but the allied planes all carry 2000lbs, rockets and those damn hispano cannons.1 plane can get 2 possibly 3 hangers with the same effort it takes the lightly armed axis planes to kill 1 or 2.
I dont want to be forced to fly allied stuff when Im in a small jabo attack because im forced to kill a minimum of 3 hangers.If you want to almost endlessly spawn go to the large bases or better still stop the bombers from killing the Fighter hangers.
Laz Im afraid if you have been stopped from upping in fighter that is their win.The buffs did their job and youve failed in yours if you are a defender.
Its always possible to fly from a safe base to cap a wrecked one.
I dont personally want to see fighters upping like crazy as soon as Ive destroyed the FH's.
and besides then all hangers would be just 'hangers' not bomber and fighter thus reducing the scope of an attacks objective.
Hitting Buff hanger kills enemies 'base taking' ability,fighter hangers kill the defence fighters etc. Thats the whole game if you ask me so why change it just so you dont have to fly an extra 25 miles?
Seems to me you are asking to simplify the defenders role.Make it easier to not bother with any strat and just play it like a 3D space invaders game.
BORING (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Hazed
3./JG2 (http://members.home.net/winyah999/3jg2.htm)
[This message has been edited by hazed- (edited 04-01-2001).]
-
well hazed.. good point. I never jabo so it doesn't occur to me but... we have no strat. if what we had were in a board game it would be the worst ever invented. It is beyond silly and so, for me, boring but...
If we had say revetments... any plane could kill a reveted plane with cannon or mg if they made a perfect attack but of course, allied (U.S.) planes with huge ordinance loads would still have the advantage... Hey.. I would rather have a lot more climb than a friggin bomb personally.
As for flying an extra 25 miles... well, If the only fun the strat guys get is making the game boring for a lot of people and ruining the experiance for them for hours on end then the strat is wrong. It really is that simple. You need things for both sides to do and intercepting the unrealistic buffs is not "something to do" so far as I'm concerned.
lazs
-
For the life of me I cannot see where Apache became a bad guy in all of this... Always have fun flying with you and Commanche, and Lazs for that matter, no matter what kind of sortie I am flying. I have seen you guys play strat as well as furball, so I think the appellation applied to you in this thread is totally misplaced.
Just thought that needed a clarification. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Thanks Kieran. I am at a loss myself. Never said I was against strat. As a matter of fact, I entered a debate in another thread by Lazs stating that very fact. I simply said here that I thought the current game play concession of the buffs was a little too much. If I am in the minority, so be it, I will live with it. I'm not gonna keep on rattling off and cause ill will towards anyone. Again, thanks Kieran, we enjoy winging with you as well (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).