It ain't the graphics that are bad, its the way the game is made

[Shuffler]

Well, I was kidding you know. Intended fail in other words Kurwa!

[Anaxogoras]

1- So you're saying that being part of any discussion/dissent over gameplay makes it hypocritical to point out how a rude and baseless rant on gameplay is rude and baseless?

The funny thing about accusations of hypocrisy is that the hypocrite might actually be right.  For example, I litter and I say "it's against the law to litter."  Just because I'm a hypocrite doesn't make what I say untrue, but it does make me kind of a jerk.  Discussing poor gameplay is one thing, frequently whining about it on the bbs is another, which is what many of our members like to do.  But then to jump all over another whine that all too closely resembles their own, well, that makes them hypocrites.

2- Let's hear em... The sooner they're suggested, the sooner they can be implemented if they're feasible and better than what we have.

I've brought them up many times, but just to write out the laundry list again:

• Pitch limit on dropping bombs.  As things are now, you can drop them while inverted.  How many times have we watched a spinning, wingless lancstuka still manage to unload bombs on a CV?
• Disable all weapons in F3 view.
• A small perk on 500 and 1000lb bombs.
• Disable enter-enter-enter for aircraft that haven't sustained damage.

That's a start.

[AApache]

 

[toonces3]

Moot,
I've been a reader of the boards for a few years now.

Prior to the beta or update or whatever, how many posts/threads/whines were about perceived gameplay issues?

Now same question, but how many were about graphics or graphics quality?

That was the essence of what I perceive as the meat of the OP's point, no matter how badly he made it.

[shiv]

I like the game just fine myself.   And one of the appealing things is the lack of restrictions.  

Though as to the LancStuka issue I would favor upping the hardness on CVs, so a single formation couldn't kill one.  There's probably implications to that I haven't considered though.  

[moot]

Anax - Agree to disagree.  The OP blaming HTC for gameplay from hell and dandruff etc, and people giving legitimate rants on real trends from other players... One is bogus, the other isn't.  Equating the two as ridiculously off-base is incorrect.

Toonces the only things I'll argue is that he's basing this whole rant on a faulty premise, and that the usual rants aren't equivalent to the OP.

[Crash Orange]

TBH I think it's probably a bad idea because nothing stopped a Lanc pilot IRL from doing that

Wasn't there? I'm just speculating, but would the release mechanism have worked properly at such a steep angle? Could a real Lanc survive the pullout if it still had 10k lbs. of bomb onboard? Is the latter currently modeled?

Anyway the game has a lot of features that increase playability at a small cost to realism, I don't see how this one would be a bad one. And no bombing in F3 view mode would be better from both POVs. As for suicide bombers, how about this: if you bail out of an undamaged plane or vehicle within con range of any enemy (or enemy tower) you lose 10 perk points, they get the proxy, and any of your bombs/torps/troops that are still going disappear immediately rather than waiting for you to re-up. Just a thought, anyway.

I am glad about the feet-dry spawn and ords disappearing after re-upping fixes, I think it shows HTC are concerned with fixing the traffic signals. One more I think would be nice is that puffy ack would not operate within 6k of an enemy base - I think it's a little silly parking a CV 3k offshore and having puffy ack kill anything that climbs out immediately after takeoff. Another one: kills against any plane with wheels touching the ground don't count as a kill for the killer or a death for the victim (the sortie is still ended, of course). That would cut down on runway-camping flaks too, which I think would be a good thing. Likewise for vehicles still in the VH. If you want to camp the hangar for tactical reasons, fine, but how does that reflect superior skill, and why encourage it?

(None of this is to say anything either way about the OP; I've got no dog in that fight.)

[Masherbrum]

I like the game just fine myself.   And one of the appealing things is the lack of restrictions.  

Though as to the LancStuka issue I would favor upping the hardness on CVs, so a single formation couldn't kill one.  There's probably implications to that I haven't considered though.  

I sink CV's with a formation of 88's while divebombing.   Because they were an excellent Dive Bomber in WWII.   That and I never have good luck with Torps.  

But upping the hardness, screws someone over like myself who doesn't "game the game".   I'd rather see the ordnance being UNABLE TO DROP in a dive on 17's, 24', Lanc's and 67's.   Penalize the people exploiting the BS, not the majority of us who try to absorb some of the Historical Accuracies from time to time.  

[Rich46yo]

A big 4 engined heavy bomber has no business being able to be flown like a Stuka. 17s, 24s, Lancs, should only be able to drop bombs when in bombdoor view. Getting rid of F-3 is just a selfish crybaby complaint by a few players who want to be able to slaughter bombers at will.

But every time I see 3 Lancs working a field of GVs with their 14 1,000 lb dive bombs I really want to barf.

I'd like to see CVs hardened up a bit more as well.

As for GVs I'd like to see a better way for them to tower out after they spawn. I dont GV, and the ones who do dont seem to care, but I think it would be fairer to them if the distance needed away from an enemy was shortened. I also think it would energize the GV war if the distance before a base alerts, from non-firing GVs, was shortened too.

I think its a great game that is only getting better.

[AApache]

Good grief Clutz !!  Complain there's no new planes , no new terrrain , no new maps , no new graphics, no new this , no new that. Then the second HTC steps up and tries to make the game more enjoyable for us you pick that apart too. With all new additions and patches there's going to be a few glitches. Shoot man I could care less if my screen stutters a bit . I'm just glad to see some new stuff man and I thank them for at least trying. It feels good to see some of our money being returned to the game rather than a 401K or an off shore account    Give the damnn people a break man and all will come in due time or make a few small upgrades to your PC maybe. This makes 7 years for me and the squad and one thing you better learn is when to holdem and when to foldem bro. trust me ... have a coke and a smile and STF well you know the rest        I'm OUT  

[Masherbrum]

A big 4 engined heavy bomber has no business being able to be flown like a Stuka. 17s, 24s, Lancs, should only be able to drop bombs when in bombdoor view. Getting rid of F-3 is just a selfish crybaby complaint by a few players who want to be able to slaughter bombers at will.

But every time I see 3 Lancs working a field of GVs with their 14 1,000 lb dive bombs I really want to barf.

I'd like to see CVs hardened up a bit more as well.

As for GVs I'd like to see a better way for them to tower out after they spawn. I dont GV, and the ones who do dont seem to care, but I think it would be fairer to them if the distance needed away from an enemy was shortened. I also think it would energize the GV war if the distance before a base alerts, from non-firing GVs, was shortened too.

I think its a great game that is only getting better.

Anytime I have EVER rolled a GV and not been the recipient of a "ping"; I have ALWAYS received a "Landed Successfully" message regardless of where I'm at near my base.    If one bullet pings your GV, you have to hit concrete as I see it.   This has been a certainty for me for the 7+ years I've been playing.  

[Shuffler]

Anytime I have EVER rolled a GV and not been the recipient of a "ping"; I have ALWAYS received a "Landed Successfully" message regardless of where I'm at near my base.    If one bullet pings your GV, you have to hit concrete as I see it.   This has been a certainty for me for the 7+ years I've been playing.  

He means every time..... it is a common occurrence for him to roll a GV.  

In fact he cringes if you use the term..... "Let's Roll" when taking off. 

[toonces3]

I like the game just fine myself.   And one of the appealing things is the lack of restrictions.  

<snip>

See, you're looking at this as someone suggesting you shouldn't be able to do something- a restriction.

THE GAME DRIVES GAMEPLAY. 

Yes, I said it again.

"Toonces, you're crazy!  It's the players that drive gameplay!"

Think about the rules of the game:

1.  3 teams, instead of 2 or 4.

2.  Big maps vs. small maps.  Does the experience change at all between them?

3.  EW vs. MW vs. LW.

4.  Killshooter.  Would the game be different without killshooter?  (the game drives gameplay)

5.  Perks.

6.  ENY.

7.  Close bases vs. far bases.

8.  Rank/score system.

9.  Icon range.

10.  Radars.

and so on.

The game drives the gameplay.  You change something in the game, it changes how players PLAY the game.

[RTHolmes]

TBH I think it's probably a bad idea because nothing stopped a Lanc pilot IRL from doing that

I posted the lancs bombing angle limits a while back, pretty sure they exist for all level bombers somewhere. I think the problem with this isn't coading but picking suitable angles, the lancs are pretty straightforward but someone else posted the ?B25's table and they were specified for each type of bomb, for each station.

[texastc316]

I'm starting to miss summer