New GV dar

[wil3ur]

I don't believe the air guys are saying get rid of GV's.  The GV guys are saying they should be able to operate with impunity and not have the same crutches provided to flight to make things easier such as Icons for Friendly and Enemy aircraft for example, or sector counters to let other players know where action is at.

I think dar is taking it too far personally, but at the same time I also think tank columns driving 50 miles behind enemy lines into a major city and pretending they wouldn't be noticed is just as lame.

Both of these I think hurts the game overall.  We want some sort of immersion and realism, or we'd all be in WoWP or War Thunder...  but we also want action, or we'd be playing IL2 offline.  What the main point is, there is a very large sub-group of players in this game that don't want anything done to hinder their avoidance operations.

This isn't new...

Dar being dropped to 65 feet was decried by these same people as ruining the game.  You can still fly NOE, but now you actually have to pay attention to what you're doing, what your height is, and insure you're staying below it.  That also ONLY matters when you're inside a dar ring with the dar up.  The actual height of Darbar didn't change, but that didn't make people whine more.

New cities in AH2 were decried by these same people as ruining the game.  You could no longer take down an entire city with 2 110's and sneak capture bases well behind enemy lines without any support.

Reducing the amount of city was both decried and praised by these people.  At first, because 100% was too difficult to get down and made taking bases too hard, and then because it was too easy to lancstuka the town and white flag it in two passes.


The fighter jocks main complaint is, that all of these changes have been meant to increase combat opportunities, and there's still a huge group of people that thinks the point of a MMO combat sim is sneak around other players and avoid combat because you might end up fake dead.

As far as I can tell, there's a group of people that think they should have a Bird of Prey that can fire while cloaked, and be able to ingress/egress at will with no chance of being spotted or shot, unless it's by another GV that you most likely have the spawn or hangar camped preventing any sort of real chance of combat anyways.

[Wiley]

Does that mean the radar in my plane will detect enemy CV and BB groups.......Brilliant

Nope.  But IMO when a facility's getting shelled by anything, there should be an indicator.  Unfortunately, I don't set policy.

Wiley.

[JimmyD3]

In a nutshell, hiding.  Taking something out from outside base flash distance is crap.  Shelling a base to death from a CV with no indication it's happening to the opposing players is crap.  Being invisible in enemy territory is crap.

Simply put, if you're in an area, there should be some kind of indication to the opposing players you're there.

For some people, apparently if they can't avoid all enemy players at will, they're leaving.

Wiley.

CV's shelling a base without any remote indication, that has been the case since AH2 and has nothing to do with GV's, the minute an LVT is launched the base will flash, as does an aircraft.

As to GV's in the Base area, the Town or Base will flash when they are within a certain distance, in plenty of time for a defensive response. If no one responds, well there you have it.

[Dundee]

there is an easy way around this maybe, create a GV only arena, or one with limited aircraft.

I think an even better solution would be give us a game that is done.....this game plays like it's still in Beta with all the changes that are happening.

[wil3ur]

I think an even better solution would be give us a game that is done.....this game plays like it's still in Beta with all the changes that are happening.

You realize this game has been constantly patched and updated since its original launch right?

You also realize that even offline games will often have patches to fix issues that come up after playing that aren't always spotted in testing.

I'm starting to think you're just trolling, or really don't understand online gaming at all...   

[Dundee]

CV's shelling a base without any remote indication, that has been the case since AH2 and has nothing to do with GV's, the minute an LVT is launched the base will flash, as does an aircraft.

As to GV's in the Base area, the Town or Base will flash when they are within a certain distance, in plenty of time for a defensive response. If no one responds, well there you have it.

They say that it's wrong because we sneaked it.....but all the bells and whistles were going off, go figure.

[Wiley]

CV's shelling a base without any remote indication, that has been the case since AH2 and has nothing to do with GV's, the minute an LVT is launched the base will flash, as does an aircraft.

You are correct, doesn't mean it's a poor system.  You can effectively level a base and if nobody happens to randomly check it, it's done without any resistance.

As to GV's in the Base area, the Town or Base will flash when they are within a certain distance, in plenty of time for a defensive response. If no one responds, well there you have it.

Sure.  With no difference in indication between a single tank hiding under a tree flashing it somewhere within 25 square miles of the field and a dozen vehicles rushing the field.  What people do quite often is flash a base for a while until people get sick of looking for the singleton GV flashing it, then after the defense leaves due to boredom they roll in the actual attack.  Wee.

Wiley.

[Dundee]

You realize this game has been constantly patched and updated since its original launch right?

You also realize that even offline games will often have patches to fix issues that come up after playing that aren't always spotted in testing.

I'm starting to think you're just trolling, or really don't understand online gaming at all...   

well by the response of many on here I think many of us don't understand what direction this game is going....you mean they forgot to put this radar in at the beginning? is that what you are saying?

[redcatcherb412]

What effect would it have if say HT just displayed no icons at all friend or foe ? Aircraft and GV dar would be a great tool then.

or

For GVs, why have GV dar at all? Have enemy GVs display an icon. Would solve camping for sure.

or

Just leave it like it has been and let the players have at it.

on edit: first 2 on a try for a month like the troopless M3's would be interesting. oh the screams 

[wil3ur]

I'm saying if you want 16 bit polygon graphics from 1999, that is what you would be flying right now if it weren't for constant updates to the game.


Oh, and you wouldn't have any ground vehicles, because they were not a part of the original concept of the game.

I'm thinking you need a nap.   

[Wiley]

Just leave it like it has been and let the players have at it.

Like it has been when GVs threw a 6k icon?  Sounds reasonable to me.

Actually what I think would be the most organic solution would be 1 or 2km of tank tracks trailed behind every GV.  Yes, you are invisible under that tree, but the treadmarks leading up to it aren't.

Wiley.

[redcatcherb412]

Like it has been when GVs threw a 6k icon?  Sounds reasonable to me.

Why not ?  As long as icon visibility is hampered by solid objects (bldgs./foliage) for GVs and clouds for aircraft. I believe I lose as many GVs average to aircraft in AH3 as I did in AH1 and 2.

[JimmyD3]

I don't believe the air guys are saying get rid of GV's.  The GV guys are saying they should be able to operate with impunity and not have the same crutches provided to flight to make things easier such as Icons for Friendly and Enemy aircraft for example, or sector counters to let other players know where action is at.

I think dar is taking it too far personally, but at the same time I also think tank columns driving 50 miles behind enemy lines into a major city and pretending they wouldn't be noticed is just as lame.

Both of these I think hurts the game overall.  We want some sort of immersion and realism, or we'd all be in WoWP or War Thunder...  but we also want action, or we'd be playing IL2 offline.  What the main point is, there is a very large sub-group of players in this game that don't want anything done to hinder their avoidance operations.

This isn't new...

Dar being dropped to 65 feet was decried by these same people as ruining the game.  You can still fly NOE, but now you actually have to pay attention to what you're doing, what your height is, and insure you're staying below it.  That also ONLY matters when you're inside a dar ring with the dar up.  The actual height of Darbar didn't change, but that didn't make people whine more.

New cities in AH2 were decried by these same people as ruining the game.  You could no longer take down an entire city with 2 110's and sneak capture bases well behind enemy lines without any support.

Reducing the amount of city was both decried and praised by these people.  At first, because 100% was too difficult to get down and made taking bases too hard, and then because it was too easy to lancstuka the town and white flag it in two passes.


The fighter jocks main complaint is, that all of these changes have been meant to increase combat opportunities, and there's still a huge group of people that thinks the point of a MMO combat sim is sneak around other players and avoid combat because you might end up fake dead.

As far as I can tell, there's a group of people that think they should have a Bird of Prey that can fire while cloaked, and be able to ingress/egress at will with no chance of being spotted or shot, unless it's by another GV that you most likely have the spawn or hangar camped preventing any sort of real chance of combat anyways.

Wilbur based on your comments I assume you are one that plays the game for Fights, and that's fine. I don't play for fights, I play to win the war, roll the map, what ever term you wish to use. Now I will have to fight to win the war, but I don't takeoff looking for a red guy to fight. I take off to defend a base or capture a base, the same is true for Bombing missions, or GV attacks, spawn camping, sneaking a base capture. Its all about winning the war. The way the game is currently structured that is how it is intended to be played, to win the war.

You are grossly over simplifying GV tactics. There has always been a means of finding GV's in trees (at least since I joined in 2012), for both aircraft and GV's. I fly the A20 on base defense a lot, out of 100 GV searches we will find at least 80% of them. If I'm in a GV searching for GV's, I'll find 90% to 95% of them. I don't need the GV dar in the air or on the ground.

It sounds like what you want is the MA to be nothing but a Furball arena. If that happens I'm out cause in a fighter all I do good is die. The diversity of play in this game is what makes it great, don't help screw it up.

[Devil 505]

Like it has been when GVs threw a 6k icon?  Sounds reasonable to me.

Actually what I think would be the most organic solution would be 1 or 2km of tank tracks trailed behind every GV.  Yes, you are invisible under that tree, but the treadmarks leading up to it aren't.

Wiley.

Problem would be drawing the trails from the individual GV's would be a huge hit on the system. That's what the simple icons are supposed to represent: the ability to accurately spot and track the enemy at realistic ranges beyond the capabilities of the game.

Like you said, restoring the 6K icon would solve many of the problems.

[redcatcherb412]

If I'm in a GV searching for GV's, I'll find 90% to 95% of them. I don't need the GV dar in the air or on the ground.

That statement is true any time I drive near a base you're patrolling.