New VGuys foot wear

[kilz]

You can't win a friend worth having by trying to spread hate.

You can't earn respect by treating others disrespectfully.

And most importantly, you can't find the truth amongst the "facts" you've invented.

you should tell your CO that. i have met some Vguys that i like and didnt mind flying with but i dont like when vDALLAS sends stupid PMs to insult you cause you shot him down

[Guppy35]

Troll on dude.

The typical 'got nothing' response.

I note what's written in your sig.   Nothing in it from Patton about augering before the fight that I can see

I do believe the point has been made

[The Fugitive]

No, I actually understand your side of the argument.  Had I been in that mission (rather than having just come in on vox) I would have voted to drop ords and try to make my way out.  They elected (after some discussion on vox) NOT to play into your hands, and instead bailed to rally a potentially successful attack.  

I'm not actually debating the tactics side of this at all.

What I AM suggesting is that either:
1) you can't see it from the side of the "mission oriented" group resetting after a spied out mission
2) you are pretending not to understand in order to continue to troll the subject

At this point I am leaning toward the latter, as I find it hard to believe you’ve never seen people bail before.  

I’ve only been playing AH for about a year, and I’ve seen players on the Rook and Knight side bail out repeatedly to avoid being attacked.  Then again, maybe I have a better perspective from over 1000ft AGL.  

What I'm seeing is a group of players who once their one and only tactical advantage was blown ( being spotted) decided to auger. Could it be that their lack of skill called for an auger instead of fighting it out and maybe pushing thru and fighting for the base?

You clowns complain about how your treated and then you just add fuel to the fire being doing things like this.  

[Melvin]

The typical 'got nothing' response.

I note what's written in your sig.   Nothing in it from Patton about augering before the fight that I can see

I do believe the point has been made

Sorry Guppy. I respect you and all, but give it a rest... please.

[Guppy35]

Not to worry Melvin.  I'm done

[Melvin]

Not to worry Melvin.  I'm done

 

[SunBat]

First of all, you are aware that a P-38 is a fighter not a "BOMBER" aren't you?

Man, if that doesn't say it all. 

Take a step back and try to understand the community that you are interacting with.

[SunBat]

BTW, does vDallas ever post on the BBS?

[hubsonfire]

I wasn't going to say anything, but I can't resist. Just ignore these clowns. They've had their 15 minutes, just wait for them to fade away. Remember how another group was going to revolutionize gameplay by not fighting? Same deal. Dweebs > Lemmings. Just let it go.

[Bear76]

I wasn't going to say anything, but I can't resist. Just ignore these clowns. They've had their 15 minutes, just wait for them to fade away. Remember how another group was going to revolutionize gameplay by not fighting? Same deal. Dweebs > Lemmings. Just let it go.

 

Seems that over the years there is at least one squad that is the butt of AH threads (jokes too). Hubs right. This too shall pass. 

[SEseph]

Your example 1 shows almost exactly my point.  If you want to be an elitist and try to insert 'scientific fact' to this conversation go ahead.  It's a forum for a WW2 simulation.  Not "can we create a cure for hand warts."  The 'fact' is you took a spectrum of numbers, which you admit the high end is 40, and used the exact high end.  That would be a no-no in the 'scientific community' as it does not hold true representation to mean value of the spectrum.  I'm willing to do that leg work for you, basically what I just said is that if you wanted to be most accurate, which so you're aware the scientific community takes accuracy pretty serious, you should have referenced the average number (or mean value) of planes we require to launch a mission.  Instead, like Al Gore takes only the extremes in his argument, you chose to reference the extreme number in an attempt to further smear our squad.  So your personal feelings have affected your argument.  Another no-no in the 'scientific community'.  You silly Man-Bear-Pig you.

I stated it was an extreme example because it was the best I could remember, again you are violating the rules of reply posting. Next time, I shall phrase it like so: They had a mission, which, being one of the vGuys missions, it should have fell within certain means such as the average of ## pilots per mission because, I can't use the number of this event which was 40 as it is not all encompassing and gives a bad image to the vGuys, which we assume because of the reply.
Science is about facts and theoretical facts and the fact is not all situations have the exactness you desire to have your point validated. I gave you the reason I remembered that particular situation, which is better than you've given to disprove me.

Example 2 is also flawed as your exact words I referenced was, "they wouldn't go on their hvy fighter mission with any less than 40 planes."  I guess you should have been more specific and said, "they wouldn't go on their hvy fighter mission until they had 40 planes in the mission."  Those have different meanings and when YOU don't convey your message properly typically humans fill in the blanks on their own.

So if I say: "I won't go play paintball unless I have at least 6 friends to go with me," that would mean I won't go at all, ever, because today I only have 5? Or maybe I would wait and wait and wait until I got my magic number. That's almost exactly like what I said.. the time was pushed back and I said they wouldn't go unless the number 40 was reached. "Would" means intention or inclination, stop trying to make it to be something more.

Your example 3 shows your true colors.  Keep talking down to me and see what it will get you.  Nothing.  Cause this is a digital environment and I will never meet you in real life, so I guess if you enjoy acting like you are superior to me in all ways...  Have at it.  I chuckle at your need for importance.  Others will read it and if only for a slight moment think that your being a jerk and that will diminish your integrity in their eyes, which even for a mere second, still harms you and not me.  After all, I'm proudly a vGUY.  How much more 'marked' can I get.  What you said, exactly, was "with little thought put forth in terms of tactics aside from numbers win."  I gave you a LIST of things we tactically do ASIDE from numbers.  So I guess to correct my post, "As for your intent on believing we have no tactics" should have read, "As for your intent on believing we have little tactics."  Either way it was you that claimed we do not think of how to tactically achieve our objective and I cited numerous examples as to why you are ignorantly incorrect.  And I use the word ignorant not in the "uneducated or unsophisticated" way, I use it in the "lacking knowledge, information, or awareness about something in particular" way, to be clear.  (Hope you enjoyed my use of Google Search there)

Your list is something, for the most part, I'd expect of any squad or group of players with any common sense. Bravo, you're doing War 101. How about multiple frontal assaults? How about using this superior tactical know how to use those numbers with much more effectiveness. I mean tonight I was telling the country where your missions would go before we had finished off the last one. That means your tactics are predictable and unoriginal. So please, forgive my ignorance in not being able to see the brilliant planning behind these assaults.

I completely agree that numbers are a valid tactic, as well as selecting the field that will have lower resistance.  The objective after all is to take the base.  Not spend 45 minutes dying for a bust.  I could spend another paragraph attempting to explain in detail they why's and whatnot but that would do no one on this forum any good, so I digress.

See above. Bases with little to no resistance do not require advanced tactics. If a base is undefended, why would you use a well timed pincer attack when a simple deliberate assault would do?

I don't dislike you, as a matter of fact anytime I've ever flown with or around you I feel you are a great asset and always kind.  I dislike your persistence to join all these people who hate us cause we play a different style of game than they do.  I don't think I've ever seen a single thread from us pounding hate on people who like to furball for hours to gain nothing, spend days at TT, or who are nothing but fighter jocks.  Our focus is OUR choice of gameplay.  It's really disrespectful to tell someone how to play who isn't by their own choice in your squad.  That and talking down to other people is definitely not what a person who values their 'honor and integrity' does.

I don't like the group and only 2-3 specific names. I don't have an individual dislike for any beyond those 2-3 and have had positive individual or small group encounters. With that said, that is also why I never list the names; I believe it's the group as a whole that does the negative things, aside from those few I mentioned. If you remain with a group that does negative things, or has a leading figure who brings a bad reputation without attempting to change the behavior of the group, it means you're supporting the negative behavior. Here's another example of why I dislike the group as a whole.
Last week on my squad night we leveled a base you guys I guess planned a mission for after we had started to assault the base. When you arrived on scene to the V-Base with a plethora of GVs only to find we had already leveled it, we were told you wanted it to be left uncaptured so it could be camped. We ignored you and had our goon continue in and begin a drop only to see your M3s hauling butt all of a sudden to nab that capture as if your lives depended on it. I mean we had troops in the air floating and your M3's continued toward that Map Room and drop on mass. When the base was taken, even the credit was taken.
While it was a small base, it's the principle of the matter. This is just one in a long line of grievances from me.

[AAJagerX]

BTW, does vDallas ever post on the BBS?

Skuzzy won't let him.  The replies would overload the BBS server and cause space-time to become unstable.  Kinda like dividing by zero...

[hubsonfire]

I'll comment one more time. Quote and then reply. Replies within quotes are hard to read.

[PFactorDave]

I'll comment one more time. Quote and then reply. Replies within quotes are hard to read.   I totally agree...

 

[vNUCKS]

you should tell your CO that. i have met some Vguys that i like and didnt mind flying with but i dont like when vDALLAS sends stupid PMs to insult you cause you shot him down

Tell him yourself, to my knowledge I'm not his father, and have no responsibility for his behavior. Secondly, I have never received an insulting pm from him, so its really none of my business.  Finally, I would suggest you report his abusive behavior so that HTC can deal with the issue. 

I've seen many of his pm's posted here on the forums, which I must assume are among his most grievous if they were worthy of posting here .  I would call some silly, and some taunting, and frankly not too much dissimilar to the ones I've often received from other player's in the game.  In a word, they're harmless, and put in the context of the public forum vs a private message, I would comment that at least he keeps his "cartoon differences" between himself and his "cartoon opponent". You however, choose to post your differences with him in public, in a discussion that he isn't included in, for the purpose discrediting another that has nothing to with his behavior.

So, nice trolling.  What did you catch, other than a response from a poster that knows which hand to watch when playing Three-card Monte?