Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: MANDOBLE on April 01, 2003, 10:14:48 AM
-
Surprisingly, the planes that benefict more of killing the fuel of a field are just these that load the greatest amounts of fuel. With 25% of a Ta152 u probably can fill up 100% of a 109E and so on. But a 109E with 25% have fuel enough to just take off, do a circle over the field and land while the Ta152 can go and fight over a field one quadrant away without problems.
With the actual system, porking the fuel of a base is affecting the planes in a very umbalanced way.
-
Hmmm...
Perhaps there can be a way to affect quality of fuel by hitting fuel refineries, as well as amount of fuel at local airflelds.
Yet another reason for more strategic bombing missions :)
Gainsie
-
Originally posted by Red Tail 444
Hmmm...
Perhaps there can be a way to affect quality of fuel by hitting fuel refineries, as well as amount of fuel at local airflelds.
Yet another reason for more strategic bombing missions :)
Gainsie
now thats a good idea.
hit the refineries and the fuel is of poorer quality and therfore affects peformance! :D I like that
-
Didn't AW have something along the same lines?
-
Yes, but it was poorly managed.
AW had localized fuel quality issues, hit fuel at any given base, and only that base would be affected. No attention was given to amount of fuel available.
I would also think that...nevermind...thats for another thread! (country Morale, and base capture....rambling here...)
given the measures available in this game, it would be easier modeled, and more effectively implemented in game play here.
-
I have recently posted something rather similar and entirely agree.
-
you are right Mandoble. But the average player grabs his spitn1kla7 and sees the fuel is not good :)
So he decides to go to another field.
Or do u think these quaker can fly something different ?
-
Originally posted by fffreeze220
you are right Mandoble. But the average player grabs his spitn1kla7 and sees the fuel is not good :)
So he decides to go to another field.
Or do u think these quaker can fly something different ?
Let them. these clowns NEVER intend to land their planes anyway, so in fact, they will get more flying time with the new scenario :D
"I might be wrong, but I doubt it"
-Charles Barkley
-
25% fuel doesn't stop the spits and n1k's.. especially the n1ks!!
If fuel is porked to 25 and i have the chance to takeoff... the n1k is what I will up in.. n1k gets good mileage
SKurj
-
the fuel percentage system represents the advantage of a fighter's range.
otherwise p-51, p47, ta152 and zeke would get little advantage for heaving a good range.
it ain't perfect, but it's something to concider.
Bozon
-
Originally posted by FTJR
Didn't AW have something along the same lines?
Yes it was hated and eventually dropped in favour of the zone limit........... less fuel = less planes.......... not poorer performing planes............
-
Originally posted by Tilt
Yes it was hated and eventually dropped in favour of the zone limit........... less fuel = less planes.......... not poorer performing planes............
I thought that poorer performing plane happen when someone hit the hangers in AW.
-
In AW if fuel was porked you could only take planes that didn't require very high octane fuel .
Some planes have bigger guns than others, some planes have bigger wings than others, some planes have bigger fuel tanks than others. All planes have disadvatages and advantages .
Asking for equalizing measures in respect to fuel capacity is just as stupid as asking for equalizing measures in respect to firepower or anything else .
When fuel is porked planes that have small internal fuel stores SHOULD suffer more than planes that have large internal fuel stores .
-
Originally posted by Suave
When fuel is porked planes that have small internal fuel stores SHOULD suffer more than planes that have large internal fuel stores .
I just don't understand the logic in this:rolleyes:
Anyone remember the mid seventies gas crunch? Stations limited you to "X" number of gallons, so a little bitsey car would get 1/4 tank, while a huge land yacht would get just enough to et out of the parking lot. Thats how limited supply works.
Please elaborate in why a plane that carries 100 gallons of fuel should suffer more than a similar plane that carries 200 gallons durring a time of limited fuel.
-
I did .
-
I gotta agree with ALf here....WHAT does amount gas available have to do with how many gallons ya can put in plane?...if plane can only get 100 gallons due to a supply issue...then what ya are lookin for is plane with best miles per GALLON (or liter...for yall dopesmoking-maggotinfested-pinko-commie-libs) at any rate..the fact that a P38 flies forever on 25% and a spit or 109 goes about 5 min on 25% is ONLY because of the teeny tank...if ya put same amount of gas in each plane...they would stay aloft similar times. ..unless I was drivin the 38....would get kilt of course.
-
Originally posted by Suave
In AW if fuel was porked you could only take planes that didn't require very high octane fuel .
AW4W yes
AW2 yes
AW3 (early) yes
AWME no......... the link between fuel quantity and qwuality was broken...........by AWME the zone limit was adjusted by the fuel attririon.
.
When fuel is porked planes that have small internal fuel stores SHOULD suffer more than planes that have large internal fuel stores .
I kinda agree with this from a game play perspective however the % factor is all wrong................. its the gas guzzlers with big tanks that should be penalised............they are the more sensitive to fuel attrition
eg if ac 1 has a 200 gal tank and ac 2 has a 350 gal tank then fuel should be shared out in absolute quantities rather than %'s.
Hence when we consider 500 gals equal to 125% then at 75% (300 gals per plane) ac 1 can take a full load of fuel plus (upto 100 gals) drop tank (if available) but ac 2 has to take only up to 300 gals (86% of its max nom cap)