Incorporation of A/C Frame Loss...

[crockett]

Originally posted by 4440
I'll have agree with strafing on this one:



It still takes 2 to HO, so if you don't like getting HO'd learn to get out of the way.

That's not really true. Sure in a one on one merge it's easy to say it takes two, but there are only so many you can avoid when fighting mutable cons.

[Motherland]

Originally posted by Chapel
I've noticed a LOT of 190's cruising in to cripple fields with thier most abundant and dangerous Cannons. And then they die. Either crashing, or shot down by ack mostly.

 

All we have is 190's beside a few wayward 109G feilds. We cant be flying 109E's against your countless Spit 9's.

[Chapel]

This thread has degenerated into a finger pointing fest, which was not it's intent. Personal attacks can get left in the can where they belong. If you really WANT to point fingers and make personal attacks, start your own thread, which will promptly be closed for violating forum rules.

As for the original issue...

I think trying out the 2min timer might be a good idea. It might actually PROMOTE smarter flying, not upping from a CAPPED base, or diving in hard to pork a target only to get flying quickly again. I've seen both sides guilty of the same thing, weather intentional or not.

All i'm saying, is that it's worth a try to get some sembalance of feeling the effects of airframe/ground frame loss. It may make taking a base more of a strategic thing, and defending one even more important.

As it stands, a base doens't really need CAP to defend. Instead you just up countless times until the planes overhead run out of ammo, and go for the C47's. If you're FORCED to actually initiate a CAP for defense, it'll make all those extra bodies doing thier own thing more important.

If people are AFRAID of diving into 6-8 cons, then that's EXACTLY what I'm looking to see. That is a direct EFFECT to promoting a good tactics.

Just my opinion, even though it'll mean more tower time for me as well.

[republic]

Originally posted by Chapel

I think trying out the 2min timer might be a good idea. It might actually PROMOTE smarter flying, not upping from a CAPPED base, or diving in hard to pork a target only to get flying quickly again. I've seen both sides guilty of the same thing, weather intentional or not.

-----
Just my opinion, even though it'll mean more tower time for me as well.

Unfortunately, a 2 minute timer is a deal breaker for me.  You cannot punish everyone in the arena because a handful of people are dive bombing lancs/88's. If you want to stop people from upping a base the solution is simple...\bomb the fighter hangers.  It's a very easy thing to do, and the game mechanics are already there.  Instant 'no upper'.  They stay down long enough to do what is needed to secure and capture the base.

Respectfully, the very thought of this timer makes me want to vomit.  We already have players on both sides who are afraid to fight and lose...this just gives us all a reason to climb to 25k and attack only when we have an absolute advantage.  It would mean that whichever side had the numbers at any given moment would have absolute control.

The only hope the underdog has right now is the ability to up very quickly and continuously, in a coordinated effort, in order to stop an attack.  Add that timer, and the country with the numbers will just steamroll across the map.

A timer of any kind would absolutely need a community vote.  If the majority of the community want it, so be it.  I'll find another place to fly.

Again, I have to stress....a timer is punishing EVERYONE in the arena for a handful of miscreants. Why don't we be men and just call out the offenders?  If anyone sees someone causing a problem doing this, film it, and turn it in.  Problem solved.

[crockett]

I agree a death timer wouldn't be a good thing. Would make people even more timid.

[indy007]

An inability to bail and re-up instantly would see me never coming back to the arena.

It's simple. If I'm looking for a fight, and one starts somewhere else, I'm not going to fly over there, or circle around and make a nice approach.

ENTERENTERENTER / .move wherever click to roll.

I go through planes like they're free, because.. well, they are. Pay to play, not stare at the hangar screen because I got bored waiting on somebody to grow a pair and come up after me.

[sparow]

Hi Chapel!

Since WB that I strive for having a finite number of planes built into the code and linked to an "historical" total, divided by the number of TOD days and spread by the total number of airfields, linked with the in-game supply sistem to the aircraft factories that don't exist...

This issue is ancient history and I gave up to bring it up to an open arena a long time ago...

But there is a very simple solution, better than extended times in tower, perking planes and all that: it's the ratio of total number of sorties vs total number of sorties landed, affected by the simple kill/death - 1 ratio and the extrapolation of this indicator to an automatic aircraft type/model disabler...

Pretty simple, in fact: the side landing more sorties with a positive K/D ratio keeps fighting because saves it's resources; the side that lands less sorties, even with a positive K/D ratio, suffers higher attrition and loses some models, thus hampering his fighting abilities.

To this I call "Sparrow's Factor".

Cheers,

[republic]

Often times in this game we reach a point where realism must give way to the fact that this is a game that we are paying to play to have fun.  This is one of those times.

Frankly, I'm just not seeing a big problem.  In the last map we had entire allied squads taking B-26's dumping on our cities and bailing, not just one night, several nights.  It wasn't a problem.  It was irritating, but that's it.

I don't understand how the sky is suddenly falling and we need limits to the numbers of planes upped, or timeouts for pilots that are shot down/bail/etc.

[Slash27]

Originally posted by republic
You should read before you post...I am not complaining about anything, I'm trying to give a suggestion to those who are...

We don't need the admins running around like our nannys making rules to stop people from hurting feelings.  If we start a timer after deaths before we can up, I don't understand how that helps.  You punish everyone to deal with a few miscreants.

If there is a problem, film it, turn it in...end of story.  CO's will admonish squads, Generals will admonish CO's and admins will kick those who don't follow the rules.  Simple.  No one but the offenders are punished.

The best option there is.

[TheBug]

Originally posted by republic

If there is a problem, film it, turn it in...end of story.  CO's will admonish squads, Generals will admonish CO's and admins will kick those who don't follow the rules.  Simple.  No one but the offenders are punished.

Sometimes I'm REEEAL BAD and need to be punished.

Come spank me Slash.

[bustr]

By talking about limiter formulas aren't you reducing the war down to the following:

1. One death per 24hr play period.

2. Define the time duration of the war, ie 7days, 30 days, and issue a finite number of available vehicles from the factories per day.

3. Define production factories, so by damage, have a direct limiting factor on the number of vehicals(aircraft, GV, CV) available each 24hr play period. Allow changing of the number by active resupply missions to the 24hr period allotment.

4. Define rebuild periods for the factories and have 1 non destroyable or capturable resupply only feild for each country. Allow destruction of convoys, trains and human resupply to impact speed of factory rebuild.

5. Make the factories huge, and hard to wipe out by a small hand full of greifers.

6. Make a standard objective at wars end that 50% of each factory is still in production.

Other wise keep with the current agenda. When you place drastic limitations then you are reproducing the SEA where squads sign up to volitairaly accept these limitations for 2hrs a week.

[Mister Fork]

Originally posted by TheBug
Sometimes I'm REEEAL BAD and need to be punished.

Come spank me Slash.

I just got a visual - and now I don't feel so good.

[TheBug]

Don't feel so good as in "you're going to lock yourself in the bathroom with the cocoa butter" so good?

[Chapel]

Well I'm glad the conversation got back on track. Lots of insightful stuff there. It would indeed be punishing everyone who flies in a professional manner and doesn't bomb n' bail.

Perhaps using something like deployment points, or suffering a -1 to the number of aircraft chosen after each round?

Take the Kills/Death ratio of fighters and bombers or some combination or parameter there-in. If your side has a worse K/D ratio than the other side, they lose the ability to chose 1 plane, or say, 2-3 deployment points?

For that to work though, you'd have to enable proxy kills and make sure that all deaths/bails are attributed to that statistic.

[sparow]

Hi Chapel!

Well, the K/D factor alone is very unfair and stimulates timid flying. That's why I chose to put it only as a moderator of the total sorties/total landed ratio, wich shows more accuratelly the attrition factor.

The only twist here is the moderation of the raw sorties ratio by the K/D factor, in itself a raw success indicator. The point is in landing the planes with kills, not bailing out to avoid beeing killed.

This would have to be calculated for each and every player, split by fighter/bomber/GV class, then calculated to the whole Axis or Allied side.

One side could be doing very well in fighters and poorly in bombers...so, it would keep his fighters but would have one bomber model disabled since his Sparrow Factor got activated, until performance improved again and that model was enabled again. Like a switch, do well, all fine, start losing too many machines, you're disabled until you recover your ratio...

The beauty of this system resides in not needing to introduce supply code and mechanisms like fighter factories, bomber factories or GV/Boat factories, and force to keep supply lines open by server action.

All it needs to do is recalculate the factor for both sides every hour or so...and proceed as instructed...

Cheers