Jump to content

71st_AH_Barnacles

Members
  • Content Count

    639
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

309 Excellent

About 71st_AH_Barnacles

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Lincolnshire, UK

Recent Profile Visitors

1199 profile views
  1. 1. Pow! Right in the kisser! 2. I love those bombs' aesthetics; they look like a child's drawing of a space rocket.
  2. I imagine they'll behave like an ai aircraft, so they'll be able to do all those things.
  3. I find, in VR, 'high' presets and 'high' clouds together with 100k visibility draw is the best comprise of performance and limiting the cloud flickering. Ps. By selecting 'balanced' presets, you'll effectively make the game give you clouds drawn below 'high', even if you select 'high' clouds.
  4. It's weird how the battle is remembered (quite rightly) as an utter disaster, yet the stuka seems to have been an effective plane, yet their performance and defensive armament are very similar. In fact the stuka performed just as badly as the battle in the battle of Britain, just goes to show how success is so dependent on the theatre, and how meaningless saying x plane is better than y plane sometimes is.
  5. A. Fairey Swordfish. B. Twin tempest (like the twin Mustang or 109z)
  6. Yes, but I think strafing was still important too. What little supplies the Germans did have couldn't be moved without getting shot up.
  7. Max continuous seems like a low setting to us sometimes, because we get indoctrinated into the engine limits by the way they're implemented in game, but in reality it's a relatively high amount of power. A Mustang wouldn't have made it to Berlin and back on max continuous, so, although it's a sensible cruise setting in game, it's really actually giving the engine a good thrashing, relatively speaking.
  8. Too right, I don't think that's a desirable thing to implement, in my opinion.
  9. They have, you can adjust the ipd in game now. You just have to find out what the keystroke is by default, because I can't remember. It's in settings,,key assignment.
  10. I don't think dogmatically discounting everything (even the good stuff) used on TAW just because it has some nonsensical rules is necessarily the way to go; yes I don't want a TAW clone but if something could add value to the server it should be considered on its merits and acceptability to the current player base, regardless of if TAW uses it or not. What specific mechanic did you have in mind?
  11. It's be interesting to find out if the people flying those planes are doing so because it's purely their 'pet' plane, or just because they see it as the most effective for what they want, or they simply do not have BoBP. It does seem to me that 110s are popular because of their effectiveness in this environment. (twin engine resilience, large bomb load, good guns and R2D2 to warn you of incoming attack), so maybe it's not such a deal breaker to get rid? I personally like the occasional A20 jaunt because it's awesome, but if it's not available I'd happily ride shiny and chrome into Valhalla in a p47.
  12. I think a good compromise here would be to have most airframes limited, with the exception of one sort of plane on each side. A particularly good choice would be a plane that's under represented, in the opinion of the admins. From my experience from just what I see when I play, it seems that 190A8s and P47s are overlooked in favour of things that really shouldn't be so ubiquitous such as 110G2s and A20s together with p38s, at least on the ground attack side, and it's not surprising as they are, in the confines of the server with the objectives how they are arguably more effective. So I'd have an airfield or two with those unlimited (190A8s and 47s) which means you can always bomb or go fighter in the same plane. That way if you were in a large squad you'd always be able to have a homogeneous flight of planes, (being a mature set of folks I'm sure they wouldn't be too picky about having to have exactly what they want and were flexible enough to fly maybe not their first choice, but a choice which adds to the authenticity of the server.) Also, it won't compromise Alonzo's vision of valuing airframes too much, as demonstrated, people value the other airframes more. Of course there are other factors, people do have their pet planes, I'm not privy to the figures of what is actually flown (p47s may be a lot more common than I think), and it would be important to make sure every time you wanted to fly in a squad with the same plane, you weren't stuck in exactly the same airframe every time. Absolutely don't mind this at all, I like the peril of encountering a plane and (not that I'm good enough to have tactics anyway) have a bit of jeopardy in what tactics you choose to fight it. after all, in real life they didn't have the luxury of saying "ok Hans, we know they don't have 150 octane so we will definitely be safe if we attempt to run" or, "Biggles, you can outclimb that 109, it doesn't have the engine mod" 😄 All of these are just suggestions of course, I'm well aware that most people (including me) are perfectly happy with the server exactly how it is, and are concerned that excessive tweaking could make it start being one of those servers which is too prescriptive. But overall I trust Alonzo and the crew to strike the right balance, stagnation is also a bad thing too.
  13. I really like this idea, as it makes it more likely that you'll meet representative aircraft, rather than rare or anachronistic planes with unicorn loadouts. It also satisfies people who want to fly what they want, or you can put in things like p39s and 110 g2s for people who don't have bodenplatte.
  14. Totally agree. I wish it was possible to improve upon the stats' system's effectiveness without alienating people. Sadly it's probably not possible; is what I meant.
×
×
  • Create New...