GV Camouflage

[Karnak]

No. Before entering protracted combat, I do a quick check of the pertinent areas

No you don't.  Stop lying.

[gyrene81]

No you don't.  Stop lying.

i think he meant he did a quick check of his perineum...

[Tank-Ace]

No you don't.  Stop lying.

Not every time I up a fresh plane, but if I'm upping to defend, first place you'll see me go is the spawn, if it isn't already a toejam - storm.

[danny76]

No. Before entering protracted combat, I do a quick check of the pertinent areas (though if I can get a quick snapshot, I'll obviously take it) prior to lowering my personally imposed floor of 3k. This typically consists of a two-leg flight path at 3k. Base-spawn and spawn-town, to check on flackers, enemy vehicles, as well as personally checking the status of town.

Obviously this is dynamic, as I will break that 3k floor if necessary to evade, but I try not to enter maneuvering combat or fly extended distances below 3k in a high-risk area I haven't yet checked.


Because it would be highly illogical, and rather ineffective for a wirblewind to stray very far from those two lines, I can reasonably assume that anywhere beyond the immediate surroundings are relatively safe. I can also assume the far side of my base, and the far side of town to be clear of flackers, as little benefit is gained from occupying those positions with a flack, and doing so is both difficult and time-consuming. Likewise, I can assume that the vast majority of any vehicles on the far side of their spawn are perk vehicles attempting to egress, which means that this area will be relatively safe, if not as safe as the areas behind my base or town.

Because of this, I will freely operate below 3k in these areas prior to checking, but will not cross the spawn below 3k, and I will not cross the spawn-town line unless I'm either 3k+, or literally flying below tree-top height prior to a check.



Now once I do that, I freely operate below 3k over the whole area. And if an enemy is trying to drag me to that line, or to the spawn, I make an assessment of the threat, and either pursue, or break off.

Just nodded off a sec then. Sorry

[Karnak]

Not every time I up a fresh plane, but if I'm upping to defend, first place you'll see me go is the spawn, if it isn't already a toejam - storm.

One cannot do an effective check for Wirbelwinds from 3k, or whatever, to cover the area over which a fight will happen.  You cannot see them to do such a check and to advocate it as a viable tactic is to advocate for a fantasy.

[lunatic1]

I have had a notion after reading another thread.

With regards to people asking for no GV icons because in RL, GV's would be covered in cam nets and difficult or impossible to see from the air.

This gave me the idea. I have in an Armoured unit since 1993, when we cam up vehicles, whether it be MBT's or Command Post vehicles, it takes a certain amount of time, probably 30 mins + to properly camouflage a vehicle with IR sheeting and Cam Netting. When done properly it involves the use of extendable poles and cages in order to break up the outline of the vehicle and to blend it with the surroundings.

I suggest that a similar concept is used for GV's in game.

If you want to have no icon, you would drive your vehicle to a hull down position, select an option to camouflage it, this would have a time penalty, say 45 seconds or whatever to replicate the time it would take to cam the vehicle correctly in RL.

At that point the vehicles icon would disappear and although it could still be seen you would not have a large red neon sign advertising trade to those that shall remain nameless, who enjoy killing GV's.

Whilst camouflaged the fields of fire would be reduced, as they would in reality by being under cam netting, the player could then choose to de-cam and move, again with a time penalty, and move to a new location to re cam again, or alternatively could simply drive out of the position if the situation warranted, as you would in real life, destroying the cam netting and preventing its re-use that sortie.

your :banana:s

[Tank-Ace]

From what I've seen, unless a friendly is dragging you to them, wirbles are pretty damn aggressive, especially when in groups. On occasion I've seen them make serious attempts to shoot me down at 5k, but 3k (1k icon range for them) seems to pretty reliably stir them up.

Not perfectly reliable, but its the balance I've personally found as acceptable.


Besides, the goal is not to spot them or their icons, but to make them open fire. Unless the guy shooting at you is either incredibly skilled or uncommonly lucky, you'll exit their effective range before they get too close (it takes only 7.6 seconds at 300mph), and you know roughly where he is.

[Tinkles]

From what I've seen, unless a friendly is dragging you to them, wirbles are pretty damn aggressive, especially when in groups. On occasion I've seen them make serious attempts to shoot me down at 5k, but 3k (1k icon range for them) seems to pretty reliably stir them up.

Not perfectly reliable, but its the balance I've personally found as acceptable.


Besides, the goal is not to spot them or their icons, but to make them open fire. Unless the guy shooting at you is either incredibly skilled or uncommonly lucky, you'll exit their effective range before they get too close (it takes only 7.6 seconds at 300mph), and you know roughly where he is.

That is true, there are some who can't hit anything; and astonish me when they try and shoot someone waaay out of their effective range.

However, I think that if GV icons are shortened, you give the skilled in wirbles/ anti-air vehicles, even more power and room to work with.  Which is something I don't want, I like a challenge. 

[Karnak]

From what I've seen, unless a friendly is dragging you to them, wirbles are pretty damn aggressive, especially when in groups. On occasion I've seen them make serious attempts to shoot me down at 5k, but 3k (1k icon range for them) seems to pretty reliably stir them up.

Not perfectly reliable, but its the balance I've personally found as acceptable.


Besides, the goal is not to spot them or their icons, but to make them open fire. Unless the guy shooting at you is either incredibly skilled or uncommonly lucky, you'll exit their effective range before they get too close (it takes only 7.6 seconds at 300mph), and you know roughly where he is.

Relying on your attacker's incompetence is not a good way to live long.  In addition the speed at which a P-51D being chased by a Mosquito moves covers a lot more ground that 5,000 yards in short order.

[Tinkles]

Relying on your attacker's incompetence is not a good way to live long.  In addition the speed at which a P-51D being chased by a Mosquito moves covers a lot more ground that 5,000 yards in short order.

I have a film on my computer of me hitting a 262 with an m16 and doing enough damage to make him land, and he was going 450+, I damaged his left engine. Meaning this "I am going THIS fast so I am untouchable" debate is quite... odd.  It isn't true for some.  Point being, what is with the Icon range debate anyways? My earlier suggestion (post right before this), I think would suffice and make everyone generally happy. If you make a wish and expect 100% of it to be added, and won't compromise, then you are in for a rude awakening.

To be honest, for me, if the plane is moving faster they are an easier target. Because they can't turn sharply to avoid my rounds, however, they are only in my window for a short time, which does make it more difficult.


Note: This isn't directed at you Karnak, but just a general statement on the topic.

[save]

Good luck trying to track a 450mph plane without a wirbie target computer (icon), they did not have IRL.

[BaldEagl]

A similar wish from a few years back:  http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,309652.0.html

[ddotS]

+1 to original suggestion.