Why the Icon Range Change for GV's?

[Raphael]

 been killed in my IL-2 11 times (out of my 42 total deaths so far) by GV's, only 3 of those were AA, rest are tanks  but considering I'm just getting the hang of the plane by now I think this won't be a problem anymore, getting shot down by main gun guys is not a big problem, just adapt your flight style.

 as for the planes getting shot by "single rifle shots" ... well let's model infantry then!  can't wait  I'll actually be able to hit something with the bombs

[killrDan]

I can't wait until the icon range changes!  Less competition for bomb**** kills  

 

[Karnak]

Last tour GVs were 82% of the IL-2's kills compared to 42% of the Lancaster.  The IL-2, from my understanding, main purpose was ground attack, mainly armor.  The Lancaster was a high altitude heavy bombers, but still racks of 42% of it kills being GVs.

Like I said, you want to know the true effects, go GV a few hundred sorties and then come back a talk to me.

Might want to take a look at this:  http://scienceblogs.com/worldsciencefestival/2010/08/85_of_statistics_are_false_or.php

Fred

Who cares?  The Lancaster hardly killed any tanks.  You are whining about a complete non-existent problem.  The only reason GVs made up 42% of the Lancaster's kills is because it is a free kill to any fighter and is hardly able to down other aircraft.

Would you whine about a plane that had 100% of its kills as GVs, but only killed 221 GVs in a tour?  That is what your focus on the Lancaster's kill percentages are.  You are strictly looking at how the Lancaster gets affected, not how the GVs get affected.

[Tank-Ace]

Tank-Ace,

How about you address the actual discussion instead of posting more unrelated crap?  The issue here has nothing to do with anti-GV, unless you feel that limiting the ability to be a hidden bubble of death is an anti-GV thing.

I am sick of flyers hugging friendly Wirbelwinds.  The icon range change is going to make that tactic even more effective.

Find a solution to that problem that doesn't leave GV's overly vulnerable to aircraft and you'll be one up on everyone. Till then....... Well till then, saying that wirbs will be overly effective is just whining.

Increase icon range for wirbs? Fine, when they're out in the open or just stopped. But if they're under cover, no. For one, if they're under cover, not getting shot is a matter of avoiding flying right at their narrow fields of fire, and for two, wirbs will be less effective than they are now because they'll be bombed even more heavily than they are now.

[Tank-Ace]

Tank-Ace,

How about you address the actual discussion instead of posting more unrelated crap?  The issue here has nothing to do with anti-GV, unless you feel that limiting the ability to be a hidden bubble of death is an anti-GV thing.

I am sick of flyers hugging friendly Wirbelwinds.  The icon range change is going to make that tactic even more effective.

[Krusty]

...that doesn't leave GV's overly vulnerable to aircraft...

Of all the ignorant things to claim....

I'm speechless!

Hey, HTC, my plane is overly vulnerable to enemy 20mm rounds! And 50cal rounds! Can you make me invisible to enemy planes so I can go around without them seeing me? What if i complain SUPER loud for about a year? How about 5 years? Will I get it then? Because that's what the established precedent now is. Whine and get "power ups"...

[Tank-Ace]

See Rule #4

[bmwgs]

Who cares?  The Lancaster hardly killed any tanks.  You are whining about a complete non-existent problem.  The only reason GVs made up 42% of the Lancaster's kills is because it is a free kill to any fighter and is hardly able to down other aircraft.

Would you whine about a plane that had 100% of its kills as GVs, but only killed 221 GVs in a tour?  That is what your focus on the Lancaster's kill percentages are.  You are strictly looking at how the Lancaster gets affected, not how the GVs get affected.

Awwwww, the old "Who Cares".  Coming from someone who doesn't have any idea what GVing is about.  

You argument has no merit when you haven't done it.  You know, I can get books that can tell me how to fly a plane.  I can read and study those books for years and eventually know every nut and bolt that is in that plane.  I can also get books about how to fly planes and study them until I know everything in those book.  I can talk to real life pilots and have them instruct me on what it is like to fly a plane.  I will be the most knowledgeable person in the world about flying planes, because I have read the books and talked to people who have flown then.  Would you be the passenger in the plane on my first real life flight?   I think not....  Up a GV, heck you might like it, it brings a whole new perspective to the game.

As for the whine, I have not whined about anything.  I even said I could care less about the changes.  So don't accuse me of something I am not doing.  The only thing I remember suggesting is having Kill Shooter on for the bombers when dropping eggs.  I know that won't happen because it will get abused.  You are the one that is so concerned that you might get waxed when chasing a low flying plane.  My suggestion is don't fly low!..

Fred

[wiskyfog]

not really liking the new distance "to see the icon" of a GV. You assume it's in the general area but don't see the icon until you are crashing into the trees close by.
We  should put the distance required b4 seeing the icon to a vote for distance. If we are the support (our 15 bucks) we should have a voice to at least say "wait a minute! let's put it to a vote for a REASONABLE visible icon distance reached by GV and a/c drivers.

[MK-84]

The Idea I believe is:

Make it harder for aircraft with questionably accurate and loadouts to easily destroy a GV.
create a purpose for spotting GV' and thus directing the ords laden aircraft. (hmm the storch)
Seperate the GV fight from the air fight.  How often does everyone complain about "bomb****s?"  While this will be diminished, it will still exist as a threat, but we will no longer have to deal with the :ahandplayer upping a P47 just to kill the GV'er that repeatedly killed his tank, so that he can brag on 200

The GV's themselves in beta are just as visible as they are now, but only with reduced icon ranges.  I identify many of my targets before icon range (particularly if they are moving)  Shorter distances would require that I CONFIRM what my target is (like not a wirbl)  and then make sure I do not lose visual while I set up an attack run.  That sounds fun to me!

IMHO The GV'ers can GV better, and the anti-tank guys have a real challenge, in a fun way.

The downside would be a wirbl opening up on an aircraft far before it can be spotted, which isnt bad except i can see this exploited, particurally in purpose of "vulching an airfield"  Then again after this happens once, it gave it's position away

Then again, with a storch's better viewing distance, this would make that pilots transmissions all that more valuable.

[Delirium]

The downside would be a wirbl opening up on an aircraft far before it can be spotted, which isnt bad except i can see this exploited, particurally in purpose of "vulching an airfield"  Then again after this happens once, it gave it's position away

I'm going to take off with eggs every flight, I guarantee I will quadruple my GV kills as soon as the patch is released.

[Karnak]

Tank-Ace,

In what way does my suggestion make GVs more vulnerable?  I'd think that it would make GVs even safer from aircraft.

bmwgs,

We'll just have to agree to disagree.

[Raphael]

The Idea I believe is:

Make it harder for aircraft with questionably accurate and loadouts to easily destroy a GV.
create a purpose for spotting GV' and thus directing the ords laden aircraft. (hmm the storch)
Seperate the GV fight from the air fight.  How often does everyone complain about "bomb****s?"  While this will be diminished, it will still exist as a threat, but we will no longer have to deal with the :ahandplayer upping a P47 just to kill the GV'er that repeatedly killed his tank, so that he can brag on 200

The GV's themselves in beta are just as visible as they are now, but only with reduced icon ranges.  I identify many of my targets before icon range (particularly if they are moving)  Shorter distances would require that I CONFIRM what my target is (like not a wirbl)  and then make sure I do not lose visual while I set up an attack run.  That sounds fun to me!

IMHO The GV'ers can GV better, and the anti-tank guys have a real challenge, in a fun way.

The downside would be a wirbl opening up on an aircraft far before it can be spotted, which isnt bad except i can see this exploited, particurally in purpose of "vulching an airfield"  Then again after this happens once, it gave it's position away

Then again, with a storch's better viewing distance, this would make that pilots transmissions all that more valuable.

+1 in overall it is a gameplay change decision (not realistic worried but gameplay/community worried) and it will make the game funner.
hopefully for people woçç be interested in counter tank flight dedication instead of upping a figther dropping a bomb to increase kill count(not really worried about support) and then go to dogfights to land with tons of kills. 

[Zoney]

I want to voice my dislike/complaint but I really have nothing of relevance to add to this discussion.

I play this game, as the name "Aces High" implies in aircraft, any aircraft.  I don't want to play in GV's.  I don't want to interact with GV's and I don't want them to interact with me.  If I'm in a fight in the near future on the deck over an enemy base, now I get to get shot down by a guy who isn't in a plane and is going be very difficult to see.

I never fly to an enemy base to vulch, but I do chase the runners back to them from time to time.

I really don't like GV's and don't understand why GV'ers are really needed and find it incredible that some GV'ers do virtually nothing but GV.  Seriously, did yall look up Aces High and think, "Cool, I can drive a tank in an aircraft game" ?

I understand that HTC gets some income from these players, thats cool give them their own arena then, but I'm betting it will just be empty.  If you're GV'n and havin a fine old battle with other GV's thats great, but when you start shooting at aircraft, I think your just a griefer, kinda like how you GV'ers feel about guys that bomb you from aircraft when your in a GV fight.

[Traveler]

I've been waiting for this "Rant" to be.

Everyone screams make it Real.....more realism!  It's amazing how many stories I've read about WWII pilots AND their "Icons"!  The ability to identify their targets because the targets were "Icon'ed".  I also read how many pilots became so pssted because Command decided to reduce the Icon range (yes I'm being quite sarcastic!).

You want to play a game, then may I suggest "Go Buy One" and break out your Play Station.  You want to play something a little more realistic, Welcome to HTC!  NOW, you have to depend on ground control to take it to the bad guys on the ground..........JUST as it was in the day.  They spot it, advise it, then YOU MUST spot it....and hope the hell you're not dropping on friendlies.........just as it was back then.

Your whine lacks.....both in taste, and in reality.

<S>
Rokit

You are wrong on ground control.  My Dad flew P47’s and later P51’s out of England.  He was credited with two 410’s and as he put it, about 1000 trains.   According to him, the mission briefing  consisted of latest intel on flak , Barrage Balloons, enemy fighter cover and possible troop locations, theirs and ours and latest weather.  Once they left the bombers on their sweep back to home plate, the were free to attack any target they could find.   The easy things to spot were trains, Armor Vehicles , Trucks, horse drawn wagons and lastly troops, in that order.  They didn’t have local air controllers directing them onto targets.   He said they would reduce throttle , drop down to 4K and have a look see.