Jump to content
Welcome to the virtual battlefield, Guest!

World War II Online is a Massively Multiplayer Online First Person Shooter based in Western Europe between 1939 and 1943. Through land, sea, and air combat using a ultra-realistic game engine, combined with a strategic layer, in the largest game world ever created - We offer the best WWII simulation experience around.

waldojr

i refuse to fly or use an AAA gun.

Recommended Posts

waldojr

So these little adjustments over time ended up doing a disservice to the game mechanics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
waldojr

kDHsQDW.png

 

How many times does AA gun have to hit a plane to kill it? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
waldojr

Most were pretty good, but occasionally you get the invincible plane that won't die no matter the number of times you hit it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
moe5000
1 hour ago, madrebel said:

clear sky will absolutely be a step in the right direction. i know a lot of guys who quit over this on all sides. this was put in the game in part to add 'flavor' but also to alleviate air quake. this one feature has been backed in and out of the game how many times and yet its still here? the answer was always give the ground guys much better and far more numerous AA options, not add an ugly graphic affect that makes people log off man. that's just bad design, not this team's fault ... but they still haven't really done anything here yet.

Been saying this for literally YEARS. 

I always asked the question "How many people have quit this game over the weather? And how many have quit because it was sunny all the time". 

Never get an answer from a RAT, but the obvious answer is obvious. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ltarflak
4 hours ago, merlin51 said:

Just before Forest went on vacation, and flew the entire LW Bomber fleet by himself and  put the allied factories into oblivion By himself
while you cried the entire time he was doing it that it was impossible.
The man flew 6 aircraft at the same time, HE-111's, by himself.
No one flew as escort, no one came as tailgunner, nothing.

And he shut french resupply as close to off as it goes.
So until you can even come close to doing a fraction of what he did by himself , you dont get to talk about bombers

Thats a cool story, but I think your missing what im saying. Im saying that our bombers are slow and easy to kill compared to allies bombers. the DB-7 can take 5-7 shots like a champ and still fly while our HE111 or stukas take 1 MAYBE 2hits and explode. 

what your saying is like this:  "damn these tanks that camp an AB is BS, our tanks cant do that!"  

your response: well I knew someone who drove 4 Sherman's to frankfurt and shot there factories to [censored], no  protection, nothing. 

thats a cool story but that has NOTHING to do with tanks camping an AB...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
moe5000
49 minutes ago, Ltarflak said:

Thats a cool story, but I think your missing what im saying. Im saying that our bombers are slow and easy to kill compared to allies bombers. the DB-7 can take 5-7 shots like a champ and still fly while our HE111 or stukas take 1 MAYBE 2hits and explode. 

what your saying is like this:  "damn these tanks that camp an AB is BS, our tanks cant do that!"  

your response: well I knew someone who drove 4 Sherman's to frankfurt and shot there factories to [censored], no  protection, nothing. 

thats a cool story but that has NOTHING to do with tanks camping an AB...

Stop replying to that guy, he doesn't play the but knows everything lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ltarflak
7 minutes ago, choad said:

Listen, Axis can not have superior weapons in all facets of the game. Oh, forgive me - French tanks dominate in tier 0!!

But enough about that, i couldn't help myself.....

This type of complaint will always have a place in this type of game. 

CRS trying to achieve historical accuracy of weapons yet maintain balance. Good luck, but i do appreciate them at least trying! 

Historically accurate may be the Tiger was pretty rare in terms of numbers on the battle field but then again, how well would that go towards balance? And maybe because it is overly represented in this game compared to what it really was,  it is under armored compared to what it actually should be?

Historically accurate may be the grease gun wasnt introduced until very late in the war, but maybe CRS put it in place  in the name of balance? 

Historically accurate may be that the Italian forces should be on the Axis in tiers 0, 1 and 2 .... then flip to Allied in tier 3.

I don't fly (yeah i know, i dont have the right to comment on this post) but i am told that some allied bombers have 250 lb bombs when they actually had 500 lb bombs.

I am sure that the list is endless. But ya know it is a game after all and constructive criticism is a good thing ... but some of the whining gets old.

Maybe the answer is CRS just models some new fantasy land, made-up weapons. Both sides get the exact same stuff - then everyone can zip it.

 

then if tigers were limited in numbers then make the 88 devastating. the 88 should kill ANY tank from tier 0-2 in ONE hit. same with the tiger, its BS that it takes way to many hits to kill a sherman. 

furthermore if CRS wanted to be "historical accurate" like it says on their website, then they would give Axis more of a variety of AA guns (flak 38, flak 43, ostwind, whirbelwind, flak panzers, flak 38 on HT ETC..) and a spit shouldn't be able to absorb  2 bofors hits and fly away, same goes with the DB7 and Havoc taking 5-7 shells to kill...NU HUH, those planes weren't as thick as tank armor, they were as thick as a car door...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PITTPETE
2 minutes ago, Ltarflak said:

then if tigers were limited in numbers then make the 88 devastating. the 88 should kill ANY tank from tier 0-2 in ONE hit. same with the tiger, its BS that it takes way to many hits to kill a sherman. 

This is not a hitpoints game, when will you get this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bogol
10 hours ago, bmbm said:

- Bombable airfields is a concept that would strike both ways. Are you sure you want it? What if all your forward airfields are bombed and there's nothing to spawn?

- Not sure what you mean with interdiction of rear airfields. Do you mean road/rail infrastructure damage? Ferry drones that you can shoot down?

- RDP does mean something but if, like it was before, it means to much, its limiting effects makes people log off. Draconian results means less targets, less battles, less enjoyment.

- I'd say both sides needs that. 

In sum, you're describing items that are not LW-specific but applicable to all.

- Yes, I want it. And make engineers in combination with Trucks able to fix the AFs. We need a larger variety of gameplay for both ground and air. Especially for the air.

- Don't know either.

- RDP needs to mean something if the air is to be back to its glory days. CAS gets old quickly. I am not saying bring the old Spit summers back, but make it in such a way that pilots have a real incentive to group up and bomb factories. Although with the current numbers, there is no critical mass of pilots on the Axis side to actually either put up a good intercept or a raid themselves. So, if the effects of RDP are to be increased, it has to be done gradually, as LW gains more strength. Otherwise it will make the Axis ground quit as well, as you point out. There ought to be a right balance, I am sure CRS could find it, if they wanted to.

- Yes and no. It seems that RAF/FAF numbers are not really suffering as much as LW. And one of the causes could be because the gameplay their plane sets are superior at is CAS, or air-quake.  So, no. It really is LW that needs some other type of air game, in which their strengths to shine. Well, thinking about it, RDP ain't it either, unless we get a faster bomber. But I know, LW is a bunch of spoiled brats that keep whining and ask for the impossible...


As explained above NO. LW would benefit more. I wont reiterate the same argument, hope you see it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bogol
8 hours ago, bmbm said:

BTW, I think that the worst disservice LW (or any perceived disadvantaged party) can do is to perpetuate a defeatist attitude. Sure, it's kinda hard to deal with Spits and heck yea the A2A fighting is pretty one-dimensional on the deck at the AO - but it IS the players who has the power to change that, to adapt and to create circumstances that are more to their liking.

OMG you really dont get it. Madrebel is not perpetrating a defeatist attitude. He is just saying that LW would really benefit from some variety in game play. At least this is how I am reading his posts.

I am willing to bet you 100 USD that if the RDP is increased you will see a very rapid raise in LW numbers. Wanna take me on this bet? 

Edited by bogol
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bogol

And at the risk of getting one more warning, I will say it. With your attitude bmbm you are only alienating players away. I am not sure what your motivation is, but those players you are alienating are not known biased players... 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
madrebel
58 minutes ago, choad said:

Listen, Axis can not have superior weapons in all facets of the game. Oh, forgive me - French tanks dominate in tier 0!!

You're missing the point. This is less about the weapons themselves and more about the compression of the zone of conflict to a smaller area closer to the ground with nothing to do other than this one compressed type of play. the byproduct of this compressed cas centric gameplay favors air planes that turn well and can stay on station longer to shoot more stuff that moves on the ground.

 

expanding the zone of conflict and adding new gameplay like bomb-able airfields gives all players options and gives the LW mission types where the planes strengths can be best employed again. all while reducing (in theory) air quake.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merlin51
4 hours ago, Ltarflak said:

then if tigers were limited in numbers then make the 88 devastating. the 88 should kill ANY tank from tier 0-2 in ONE hit. same with the tiger, its BS that it takes way to many hits to kill a sherman. 

The 88 is devastating.
So is the Tiger, more so than the 88 as the 88 in game is a T0 early war model which fired a much different ammo than a later war 88 and than the Tiger and Tiger II would.

EDIT (adding info)

Flak 36 T0 shooting 88mm PzGr something like 9kg shell
Tiger T3(or T2 doesnt matter) shooting 88mm PzGr. 39 little over 10kg shell, trades some velocity for increased penetration
PzGr. you get 97mm @30° @100m down to 72mm @30° @2000m roughly

PzGr. 39 you get 127 mm @30° @100m down to 88mm @30° @2000m

That may seem kind of crappy, but in early 1940 there were only 2 things Germany had a lot of trouble shooting
One was the Matilda II, and they did not have to face tons of them
The other was the B1 bis, of which there also were a limited amount, and they also bypassed where it made sense.
But that was enough penetration to deal with both issues at 1500m in good confidence and deal with anything else from much farther.
But dont just believe it, go look it up in detail.


But the hit does matter very much how placed, just being an 88 alone does not instantly guarantee a win
All the math and geometry still counts, it only takes one hit, but it has to be the correct hit.

That goes for all tanks, there is no accumulating factor, you just have to get the right hit (providing you can actually penetrate what you are shooting), which is sometimes harder than others cause you dont get much say so over how the other guy moves or parks etc.

4 hours ago, Ltarflak said:

furthermore if CRS wanted to be "historical accurate" like it says on their website, then they would give Axis more of a variety of AA guns

How do you know they aren't/won't?
But it does take time, there is texture art, 3d modeling, rigging, doing all the mechanics which entails everything from how much it weighs to how much torque the engine has to how the the parts move. Any parts that are not made from a known existing like say a new gun type, have to be researched so they work and fire properly, have the correct ammo etc.

And you have to slot that into its proper priority and place on the work plan and stick to it or you never get anything done in a proper fashion, and that's no good.
 

4 hours ago, Ltarflak said:

and a spit shouldn't be able to absorb  2 bofors hits and fly away, same goes with the DB7 and Havoc taking 5-7 shells to kill

No, you're right, nor should a stuka or H75 any other plane probably unless we are talking heavy bombers which do sometimes limp along missing some good chunks.
1st have to wait for the HE/KE/Ammo audits, and see how much effect they have on that situation.
Hard to properly look at an issue when you have multiple bad guys instigating it, so that eliminates one of them.
Then you can properly see how much of it is the DM at fault and how and know that you are not actually jacking up the wrong thing to
to correct for something external, which has happened a few times in the past and the outcomes were messed up.

 

3 hours ago, bogol said:

RDP needs to mean something

While i do not disagree with you because i personally though the whole bomb the other guy to delay his tier so i get mine in hours or a day or so earlier was great, i think what he means it there was a deluge of hate and unsubs and threats of unsubs from whom ever was on the receiving end of who ever had the better RDP runs going at a given time.

I thought it was great at the time, but way more people axis and allied disagreed with me on it than agreed.
Id be cool with bombing airstrips to damage the AF field so its super bumpy, and splitting fights and bombers to separate hanagers
and if you bomb one flat, you can not spawn that plane type at that field until you repair it with a ton of engineers, and even rolling that out to
AB's and Docks in some fashion cause back in the way before WWII Online Airwarrior/Warbird days we did that.
We bombed DAR and took out the other sides radar, we bombed the runways so they couldnt use the AF until repairs, we bombed fuel supply and ammo, we bombed the bomber hangars, we rolled flak panzers and osty's to their airfields to shut them down and drop troops to cap them.

I dont know if the players at large though would be cool with that extent now beyond a week end scenario type thing?
 

Edited by merlin51
Added Info on rounds

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
moe5000

Spam bomb Merlin. No clue what he's talking about. 

 

How many 88 sorties do you have? How many kills with the 88 do you have? I have THOUSANDS and I can say, without a doubt, you have no clue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ltarflak
3 hours ago, Pittpete said:

This is not a hitpoints game, when will you get this?

then what type of game is this please inform me...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
biggles4

Radar would be a great target. And if it ever were in game, it ought to be a PPO placed by HC so it would be in a different spot each time. One tower per square, which goes blank when the tower's down. And it ought to be an MS that spawns flak.

I'd like to see a certain percentage of an airfields supply around the edges of the field, which you could bomb or strafe and take off the list. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merlin51
21 minutes ago, Ltarflak said:

then what type of game is this please inform me...

In case you really arent just teasing, dredging up from 2008 post.
Also a few components being hit inside noted here you might find interesting.

Lets take the first line.

STUG 75mm APHE round hitting panhard right hull door
at 714 m/s, Energy 1730949 joules, thickness 14.00 mm at 7 deg


stug 75mm aphe is of course the ammunition that was fired.
It hit the right side of the panhard in the crew door.
The round was traveling 714 meters per second.
It had an energy of 1,730,949 joules.
For refference, it takes about 10,000 joules to blow a track
and about 3000 joules to damage the 25mm gun on the panhard.

We have nearly 2 million joules of energy on initial impact.

Thickness, is the thickness of the surface being hit, the panhard door is only 14mm thick.
The round hit at 7 degrees to the armor, almost perfectly straight
angle.
 
So lets lock load and fire!
Stug IIIB at range 400meters firing ONE round of APHE on a Panhard right side crew door. 
Gunner commence firing!!          
 
STUG 75mm APHE round hitting panhard right hull door
at 714 m/s, Energy 1730949 joules, thickness 14.00 mm at 7 deg,  
 
STUG 75mm APHE fuse started, timer = 0.0010 seconds  

Oh look here! the APHE is fusing on impact, very good, we want this
it will detonate in 1/1000th of a second. 

75mm APHE hits with 120746.653868 joules to right hull door  
 
STUG 75mm APHE spalling 46 pieces of right hull door

********the round has not yet passed through the armor********
this is just the spall, it shows you what speed and angle its hits
objects at and with how much energy.
46 pieces were created. 
We wont list all 46 pieces, but enough of them for you to see the crew dying. 
 
 
Spall chunk(0) striking  left side of hull of panhard at 803 m/s, Energy 641 joules, thickness 15.00 mm at 57 deg 
 
spall chunk hits with 641.438818 joules to left side of hull  
 
Spall chunk(0) stopped in left side of hull, penetrated 0.00 mm, lost 803 m/s, speed now 0 m/s  
 
Notice the speed of 803 meters per second and over 600 joules?
this stuff is almost like rifle bullets going off inside.
 
Spall chunk(1) striking commander's legs at 665 m/s, Energy 106 joules, thickness 1.00 mm at 0 deg 
 
Damage was 105.870682 joules to commander's legs  
 
Spall chunk(1) stopped in commander's legs 0.00 mm, lost 665 m/s, speed now 0 m/s  
 
Spall chunk(2) hits commander's legs at 1001 m/s, Energy 1009 joules, thickness 1.00 mm at 0 deg  
 
Damage was 1008.526877 joules to commander's legs  
 
Spall chunk(2) stopped in commander's legs 0.01 mm, lost 1001 m/s, speed now 0 m/s  
 
Spall chunk(3) Hits the 25mm ammo storage at 1244 m/s, Energy 1287 joules, thickness 3.00 mm at 0 deg  
 
Damage was 1287.401488 joules to 25mm ammo storage  
 
Spall chunk(3) stopped in 25mm ammo storage(2) 0.01 mm, lost 1244 m/s, speed now 0 m/s 
  
Spall chunk(4) hits back of hull at 282 m/s, Energy 38 joules, thickness 15.00 mm at 34 deg  
 
Damage was 37.656510 joules to back of hull  
 
Spall chunk(4) stopped in back of hull 0.00 mm, lost 282 m/s, speed now 0 m/s  
 
Spall chunk(5) Hits bottom of turret at 310 m/s, Energy 81 joules, thickness 14.00 mm at 65 deg  
 
Damage was 80.642116 joules to bottom of turret  
 
Spall chunk(5) stopped in bottom of turret(2) 0.00 mm, lost 310 m/s, speed now 0 m/s  
 
Spall chunk(6) spalls from outside of armor  
 
Spall chunk(6) strikes the ground at 428 m/s  

This is very interesting, the armor actualy spalled on the outside also.
this piece hit the ground.
 
Spall chunk(7) Hits commander's legs at 1412 m/s, Energy 1833 joules, thickness 1.00 mm at 0 deg, t = 3054.615326 s  
 
Damage of 1833.295896 joules to commander's legs  
The commander has long since passed death
 
Spall chunk(7) stopped in commander's legs 0.01 mm, lost 1412 m/s, speed now 0 m/s  
 
Spall chunk(8) Hits commander's torso at 1437 m/s, Energy 1647 joules, thickness 1.20 mm at 0 deg

 
Damage of 1646.681433 joules to commander's torso
Commander is now unidentifiable organic soup  
 
Spall chunk(8) stopped in commander's torso(10) 0.01 mm, lost 1437 m/s, speed now 0 m/s  
 
Spall chunk(9) Lands in gunner's torso at 1546 m/s, Energy 93 joules, thickness 1.20 mm at 0 deg  
 
Damage of 93.100734 joules to gunner's torso
Gunner is a fond memory  
 
Spall chunk(9) stopped in gunner's torso 0.00 mm, lost 1546 m/s, speed now 0 m/s
 
Spall chunk(10) hits bottom of turret at 477 m/s, Energy 6 joules, thickness 14.00 mm at 65 deg
 
Damage of 6.310749 joules to bottom of turret
this is equivelant of a fly landing on it  
 
Spall chunk(10) stopped in bottom of turret 0.00 mm, lost 477 m/s, speed now 0 m/s  
 
Spall chunk(11) Hits left side of hull at 1030 m/s, Energy 1159 joules, thickness 15.00 mm at 32 deg
 
Damage applied 1158.589382 joules to left side of hull  
 
Spall chunk(11) stopped in left side of hull 0.01 mm, lost 1030 m/s, speed now 0 m/s
 
Spall chunk(12) hits bottom of turret at 710 m/s, Energy 32 joules, thickness 14.00 mm at 66 deg
 
Damage was only 31.843677 joules to bottom of turret  
 
Spall chunk(12) stopped in bottom of turret 0.00 mm, lost 710 m/s, speed now 0 m/s  
 
Spall chunk(13) hit bottom of turret at 471 m/s, Energy 217 joules, thickness 14.00 mm at 70 deg
 
Damage was minor, 216.815958 joules to bottom of turret  
 
Spall chunk(13) stopped in bottom of turret 0.00 mm, lost 471 m/s, speed now 0 m/s  
 
Spall chunk(14) hits commander's torso at 1275 m/s, Energy 949 joules, thickness 1.20 mm at 0 deg
 
Commander ate another 949.268661 joules to commander's torso  
 
Spall chunk(14) stopped in commander's torso(10) 0.01 mm, lost 1275 m/s, speed now 0 m/s
We will have to ressurect him to apply any more damage.  
 
Spall chunk(15) hit the 25mm ammo storage(2) of panhard(beta1) at 706 m/s, Energy 424 joules, thickness 3.00 mm at 0 deg  
 
Damage was 424.228619 joules to 25mm ammo storage  
 
Spall chunk(15) stopped in 25mm ammo storage(2) 0.00 mm, lost 706 m/s, speed now 0 m/s
Not enough energy or penetration to cook off the ammo, darn 
 
We skip down to chunk 36 because there are tons of repeated crew hits and spall hitting the armor.
 
Spall chunk(36) hits transaxle at 445 m/s, Energy 102 joules, thickness 100.00 mm at 0 deg
 
Minscule damage of 101.949308 joules to transaxle  
 
Spall chunk(36) stopped in transaxle 0.00 mm, lost 445 m/s, speed now 0 m/s  

The transaxle has made a wonderful spall shield for the driver
100mm of shielding
 
Spall chunk(38) again an exterior spall  
 
Spall chunk(38) hits right front fender at 253 m/s, Energy 19484 joules, thickness 7.00 mm at 61 deg
 
Damage of 19484.321335 joules to right front fender
  
Spall chunk(38) stopped in right front fender 0.07 mm, lost 253 m/s, speed now 0 m/s  
If this was alive it would be dead.
Since spall chunk 38 is low speed but high joules, i am guessing its a larger chunk
you will notice some are fast but low energy.
This would suggest they have different mass, that is a very intricate detail.
 
************** Ok now we actualy penetrate ***********************
after 46 pieces of spall have ripped the place up. 
 
STUG 75mm APHE penetrated right hull door 14.00 mm, lost 25 m/s, speed now 688 m/s  

14mm is the door thickness, it didnt slow the round down much, it only lost 25 meters per second of speed.
 
STUG 75mm APHE slamms into commander's legs at 688 m/s, Energy 1610203 joules, thickness 1.00 mm at 0 deg 
 
A traumatic 4398.429960 joules to commander's legs  
 
STUG 75mm APHE penetrated commander's legs 1.00 mm, lost 1 m/s, speed now 687

This poor guy has had it, he is toasted.
If this wasnt APHE you would see the round keep going through stuff,
but since its APHE something cooler is going to happen

*****************************************************************
Now the APHE explodes!!
*****************************************************************
 
STUG 75mm APHE detonating  BOOM
 
STUG 75mm APHE explodes into 30 pieces of shrapnel 

We will skip to some more interesting shrapnel, but they go on ripping crew to pieces just like the spall. 
 

Shrapnel shard(2) Severs gunners legs at 779 m/s, Energy 39361 joules, thickness 1.00 mm at 0 deg, t = 3054.616761 s  
 
Damage was 39360.979559 joules to gunners legs  
What legs? they are gone now.
This poor guy needs 5 body bags and a broom.
 
Shrapnel shard(2) stopped in gunners legs 0.26 mm, lost 779 m/s, speed now 0 m/s
 
Shrapnel shard perferates gunner's torso at 849 m/s, Energy 29655 joules, thickness 1.20 mm at 0 deg  
 
Damage was 29655.306813 joules to gunner's torso  
 
Shrapnel shard(3) stopped in gunner's torso 0.19 mm, lost 849 m/s, speed now 0 m/s
 
Lots of repeated crew hits, driver took a near fatal one to his head
Now look at this.

***********************************************************
CONCUSSIVE DAMAGE!!
***********************************************************
There were about 90 something concussion events here
below are some of the highlights

STUG 75mm APHE concussive explosion  
 
Effect of concussion to  left side of hull  at 0.8 m 

Now lets skip to someone getting hurt. 
 

Damage of 10.913030 joules to radiator  
 
Effect of concussion to component antifreeze at 1.5 m from detonation  
 
Damage of 14.395833 joules to antifreeze  
 
Effect of concussion to component driver's head
 
energy 29.883825 joules to damage driver's head, threshold 40.000000 joules 
Drivers head survives, too bad shrapnel already hurt him.
He bleeds out, poor guy 
 
 
Effect of concussion to component commander's torso  
 
Damage of 127.093132 joules to commander's torso  
Too bad he is already dead
 
Effect of concussion to component commanders arms
 
Damage of 88.672264 joules to commanders arms  

And of course his arms are now on the floor

The end result here was commander and gunner laying about in pieces on the panhard floor
the driver bled out from a nasty head wound.
There was also damage in the engine compartment to the radiator, and a coolant line(antifreeze)
It also showed that APHE does infact fuse and then detonate inside the armored car bodies.
There was alot of spall and shrapnel inside, and every single piece was calculated.
We also learned that there is concussive damage, and it can injure and kill crew if they take
a big enough hit from it.
All the above data is real game data, retyped to make it humanly readable.
Hopefuly you find this both interesting and helpful

Disclaimer: A Panhard and crew were actualy killed during this testing
but no sheep were harmed.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bogol
7 hours ago, Ltarflak said:

then what type of game is this please inform me...

Its a critical damage type of game. You can hit a billion times in area of no consequence and the unit still survives. As opposed to hitpoint games where a unit has a certain number of hitpoints and it is destroyed once enough hits, ANYWHERE are achieved. The latter is a very simplistic DM, ours is much better. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ce

Hit points are like participation medals in sports. Pointless and for the useless

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dre21
12 hours ago, bogol said:

- Yes, I want it. And make engineers in combination with Trucks able to fix the AFs. We need a larger variety of gameplay for both ground and air. Especially for the air.

- Don't know either.

- RDP needs to mean something if the air is to be back to its glory days. CAS gets old quickly. I am not saying bring the old Spit summers back, but make it in such a way that pilots have a real incentive to group up and bomb factories. Although with the current numbers, there is no critical mass of pilots on the Axis side to actually either put up a good intercept or a raid themselves. So, if the effects of RDP are to be increased, it has to be done gradually, as LW gains more strength. Otherwise it will make the Axis ground quit as well, as you point out. There ought to be a right balance, I am sure CRS could find it, if they wanted to.

- Yes and no. It seems that RAF/FAF numbers are not really suffering as much as LW. And one of the causes could be because the gameplay their plane sets are superior at is CAS, or air-quake.  So, no. It really is LW that needs some other type of air game, in which their strengths to shine. Well, thinking about it, RDP ain't it either, unless we get a faster bomber. But I know, LW is a bunch of spoiled brats that keep whining and ask for the impossible...


As explained above NO. LW would benefit more. I wont reiterate the same argument, hope you see it. 

Here one more time , if anybody wants too read more I have put that in the suggestion forum countless times. 

I have proposed Radar or a way to implement AWS better where players can actually have an impact of capturing or destroying it . I have proposed Mobil AF ( truck driven and set forward air strip for only Fighter planes, no player wants to run a Truck no forward Airfield , you need to find a suitable spot to set up) 

Destroyable AF should be something we should have, even if it only means debris littered around the AF from the bombing run to make take off  harder or nearly impossible ( it will need Engineer to clear the AF )  . Same with PORTS *imo* . More targets for Bombers is a good thing , more for Fighters to do is a good thing. 

I have been proposing this idea now for some time. Yes it goes both way  , but it would actually give the Bombers not only new targets ( and let's be honest we lost so many bomber pilots because of the lack of targets in game) 

Here are the upsides of Bombable Airfields , it would keep fighters on search and destroy missions instead of just buzzing FBs,  Fighters  would not  always be around towns or FBs, but have another purpose and would actually have to defend their Airfields.

The ground troops maybe can set more FMS again , cause the way we have it now , either a Truck will get strafed before it even gets close to town or the FMS get bombed right away and a good ground fight is really hard to get off to a good start. ( or do u think a player will keep trying running a truck over and over just to feed some fighter jock kills ? No they will quit either log or use another unit cause they just got sick of trying)

The Bomber pilots would have another target.

yes it will go both ways but I see nothing but a good change for the ground guys , and the pilots will need to choose  , Run RDP , protect Airfield in search and destroy missions, or go on CAS and escort Bombers to town for surpression , each decision will have a ripple effect in game which in my eyes will make the game so much more appealing. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
madrebel

question for players and CRS - hypothetical ...  if we had 100% functional naval gameplay to include carriers - would we the players be able to sink the carriers? please explain your answer too.

 

in game right now, our "carriers" aren't "sinkable". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stankyus
17 hours ago, Ltarflak said:

Thats a cool story, but I think your missing what im saying. Im saying that our bombers are slow and easy to kill compared to allies bombers. the DB-7 can take 5-7 shots like a champ and still fly while our HE111 or stukas take 1 MAYBE 2hits and explode. 

what your saying is like this:  "damn these tanks that camp an AB is BS, our tanks cant do that!"  

your response: well I knew someone who drove 4 Sherman's to frankfurt and shot there factories to [censored], no  protection, nothing. 

thats a cool story but that has NOTHING to do with tanks camping an AB...

I put 14 into a stuka Sunday with a camle38.. he flew off.  Got another with a single hit.. A HE111 took a entire mag, all hit, he turned around and dropped his bombs before I flamed him.. The DB7 does not take 40mm hits well but by and large I would submit it does sustain damage better than the HE111.  I have shot at both the DB7 and 111 many many times. The 25mm is a much better AA round both in velocity and explosive power over the 20mm rounds. So the chances you are going to get a better result hit per hit.  NO plane that I shoot down takes the same amounts of hits, some one some multiple. It depends on where you hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merlin51
3 hours ago, madrebel said:

question for players and CRS - hypothetical ...  if we had 100% functional naval gameplay to include carriers - would we the players be able to sink the carriers? please explain your answer too.

 

in game right now, our "carriers" aren't "sinkable". 

Yes, i think we would.
We may also want them AI maintained that follow orders from the PB as those would kind of be persistent capitol ships
But yes, you would want to be able to damage and sink them, as well as the AI to accept crew members insitu so that players could 
spawn into the defensive guns to help defend it.

I think not being able to sink an enemies carrier with great effort would be really anti climatic 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ltarflak

Man after reading all of this I am really considering unsubbing and moving on. This is a load, its sad to see the air so unbalanced that people bring up the issues to CRS and they dont do a damn thing. Then people like BMBM and merlin51 who HAVE to chime in on everything you f**king know-it-alls, and you guys BARELY  play the game, but yet know EVERYTHING in the game. This just adds to the frustration and REALLY makes me want to un sub for good....

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PITTPETE

Those guys help develop the game.

Honestly it seems like this game may be too difficult for you at this time.

It's also really sad that some people actually liked your post about unsubbing.

I mean if you can't enjoy the game, no one else should either, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...