Jump to content

Finnish VirtualPilots - Dynamic War


Recommended Posts

LLv34_Temuri
38 minutes ago, LLv34_Untamo said:

We pit contemporary planes against each other according to their entry into combat operations and progress these sets so that every plane gets their chance to be useful.

Some balancing in terms of performance is also considered.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
=LD=dhyran

Just a short thought from a more overall perspective:

 

Thanks Untamo & Temuri for the wonderfull dynamic war server you created in your personal free time for the community!

There are some game code issues you can't solve, but the dynamic war server is the ultimate best for us Loose Deuce pilots! We love and enjoy it everyday!

 

Again Thanks, and once you both might join us at the eurocon in the netherlands, i pay all beer for you 🙂

 

S!

dhyran

 

 

Edited by =LD=dhyran
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
LLv34_Temuri
5 minutes ago, =LD=dhyran said:

There are some game code issues you can't solve

The invisible planes issue really seems to be about network configuration. We are looking into that.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Black-Witch

I think having limited 262's is the best way forward, you can't exclude them completely but neither can you have lots of them, even if some 262 pilots do fly them badly.

 

You have to have balance as this is a simulation and there needs to be "gameplay", otherwise, if you truly created the conditions of 1945 it would be a very one sided battle.

Edited by Black-Witch
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
dogefighter

Could you consider making it so that the 262s only become available when the server has a certain number of players, like 50 for example? Currently during low population half the enemy team could be flying 262s which is kinda dumb. And also if the teams are heavily stacked in favor of the Axis the 262 shouldn't be available imo.

Edited by dogefighter
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
CountZero
4 hours ago, Mollotin said:

 

🤦‍♂️  u saying cause axis lost the war they should not win any single battle?? im pretty sure they were able to win number of battles despite losing the war.

Well they already have some battle wins but they should not be able to win war, server name is finnish virtualpilots dynamic war, not battle.

 

But you wont be having that as if any 24/7 server have historical settings no one would be playing it, what you get is always balance hiding behined historical airplane types, and that will always favor axis as in real war they were desperate late in war so they gambled on prototypes insted on quantity to win, and when you eleiminate quantity advantage allieds had but you have prototypes axis have your favoring one side, and that is always axis when servers go for semi-historical balance like they do so people play as most players play axis in this game, and even devs see that and always force axis airplanes in DLC to have 5v5balance, ending up with more options for axis and less for allieds compared how things were in real ww2.

1 hour ago, Black-Witch said:

I think having limited 262's is the best way forward, you can't exclude them completely but neither you can't have lots of them, even if some 262 pilots do fly them badly.

 

You have to have balance as this is a simulation and there needs to be "gameplay", otherwise, if you truly created the conditions of 1945 it would be a very one sided battle.

Yes servers would be empty, so axis side always gets benefits, they are ones dictating conditions in game online.

Edited by CountZero
Link to post
Share on other sites
=Elite=BlitzPuppet
4 hours ago, Black-Witch said:

I think having limited 262's is the best way forward, you can't exclude them completely but neither you can't have lots of them, even if some 262 pilots do fly them badly.

 

You have to have balance as this is a simulation and there needs to be "gameplay", otherwise, if you truly created the conditions of 1945 it would be a very one sided battle.

 

I agree, would be good to introduce them in tiers based on server population.  But I also think that they should be rearmed by JU52 supply runs, maybe 1 or 2 per run...but have a max in the air at once rule or something like that?

Link to post
Share on other sites
13/JG5_Luck
On 3/14/2021 at 11:18 PM, Enigma89 said:

 

This explains everything. The pilots rating hasn't changed. The only difference is that the new buckets ONLY sorties from planes from that plane classification. The mod was installed but it is NOT retroactive. I would put more weight on overall pilot stats for now until the stats reset in April 1. The individual rankings for plane classification/split ranking only started a week or so ago so if you have a high rank but your individual ranks are low its because it's not counting all of your sorties from this tour.

 

 

Thx for the detailled explaination! I really admire all the work which is put into this server! Great job from all of you!

On 3/14/2021 at 11:18 PM, Enigma89 said:

 

This explains everything. The pilots rating hasn't changed. The only difference is that the new buckets ONLY sorties from planes from that plane classification. The mod was installed but it is NOT retroactive. I would put more weight on overall pilot stats for now until the stats reset in April 1. The individual rankings for plane classification/split ranking only started a week or so ago so if you have a high rank but your individual ranks are low its because it's not counting all of your sorties from this tour.

 

 

Thx for the detailed explanation. I really admire all the work which is put into this server. Great job from all participants! You provide a very enjoyable playground for so many enthusiasts! 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13/JG5_Luck
7 hours ago, CountZero said:

Well they already have some battle wins but they should not be able to win war, server name is finnish virtualpilots dynamic war, not battle.

 

But you wont be having that as if any 24/7 server have historical settings no one would be playing it, what you get is always balance hiding behined historical airplane types, and that will always favor axis as in real war they were desperate late in war so they gambled on prototypes insted on quantity to win, and when you eleiminate quantity advantage allieds had but you have prototypes axis have your favoring one side, and that is always axis when servers go for semi-historical balance like they do so people play as most players play axis in this game, and even devs see that and always force axis airplanes in DLC to have 5v5balance, ending up with more options for axis and less for allieds compared how things were in real ww2.

Yes servers would be empty, so axis side always gets benefits, they are ones dictating conditions in game online.

 

I agree that the Me 262 needs to be limited due to it's superiority. It would ruin the fun for allied pilots if it would appear en masse.  And it is also "historical" correct to limit them, because this plane did not see so many sorties due to the  lack of fuel, spare parts, training, political games in the Nazi-establishment etc.. There have been many reasons. But I want to comment that the 262 was no prototype, this is wrong. More than 1000 units have been build and from mid 1944 on some units have been in combat action. (JG 7, JV44 in fighters role, not to forget KG 51 (J) which was transformed jn 1944 to the 262 for "Blitzbomber".

Link to post
Share on other sites
SCG_Callahan

Hi, I think there should be a rule against tanks camping an airfield from a hangar. Not only is it unrealistic (ground crew would open the hatch and gun down the driver and gunner) it can really break the game. I don't think people are having fun driving an hour to get to an airfield and people are definitely not having fun being blown up 5 seconds after spawning. I don't mind being strafed by an airplane as I'm spawned in because that makes sense in an historical perspective.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
LLv34_Untamo
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, SCG_Callahan said:

Hi, I think there should be a rule against tanks camping an airfield from a hangar. Not only is it unrealistic (ground crew would open the hatch and gun down the driver and gunner) it can really break the game. I don't think people are having fun driving an hour to get to an airfield and people are definitely not having fun being blown up 5 seconds after spawning. I don't mind being strafed by an airplane as I'm spawned in because that makes sense in an historical perspective.

 

If you ignore the big blinking enemy tank icon on the airfield, don't blame the enemy, it's on you. Only temporary airfields are susceptible to tank attack. All others are covered from tanks by invulnerable heavy guns. The choice is yours.

Edited by LLv34_Untamo
  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Mollotin
4 hours ago, SCG_Callahan said:

Hi, I think there should be a rule against tanks camping an airfield from a hangar. Not only is it unrealistic (ground crew would open the hatch and gun down the driver and gunner) it can really break the game. I don't think people are having fun driving an hour to get to an airfield and people are definitely not having fun being blown up 5 seconds after spawning. I don't mind being strafed by an airplane as I'm spawned in because that makes sense in an historical perspective.

had this happen to me yesterday. Felt a bit stupid not seeing the tank icon. well, hoppep in a fighter with a bomb. took off from another af and ended the tank guys fun. Was enjoyable on my part at least.

Link to post
Share on other sites
LLv34_Untamo
1 minute ago, Mollotin said:

had this happen to me yesterday. Felt a bit stupid not seeing the tank icon. well, hoppep in a fighter with a bomb. took off from another af and ended the tank guys fun. Was enjoyable on my part at least.

 

This is the correct attitude. When you see the icon -> "Oh, haven't had an anti-tank mission in a while. Let's go tank busting." :)

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
ACG_Talisman
On 3/10/2021 at 5:14 AM, Charlo-VR said:

As someone who flies both blue and red, including Tempests, I’d like to see some limits on Tempests. Perhaps not as limited as ME 262s, and also perhaps limiting Tempests to rear airfields. 

I suggest that the Tempest V is already somewhat limited if you consider that it could be introduced in earlier plane sets than it currently is on this server.  Consider the following:

 

A.  The 11lbs boost Tempest (in-game modification) was common for Autumn/Winter 1944 (including operations over/on continental Europe) and would be correctly applicable for introduction earlier than on the current plane set; plane set 8 could be a fair historical representation and in line with how other aircraft, on both sides, have been introduced in the plane sets. 

 

B.  It is historical record that the LW lost 3 Bf 109 G shot down over France by Tempest V aircraft on the 8th June 1944.  Also, the in-game IL-2 GB aircraft specification notes by the developers state the debut of their in-game Tempest V as May 1944.  Therefore, the Tempest V would be correctly applicable for introduction earlier than it is on the current plane set; plane set 6 could be a fair historical representation and in line with how other aircraft, on both sides, have been introduced in the plane sets.

 

Therefore, I suggest that the Finnish server admins are already cutting the Axis some slack with regard to the Tempest V, which is of course their prerogative. 

 

Not sure why you think the Tempest V should warrant limiting anyway, especially considering it is a piston engine aircraft in line with all the other piston engine aircraft.

 

Happy landings,

 

Talisman

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Charlo-VR

For historical accuracy it sucked to be a German pilot in G 109s going up against a squadron of Tempests in your assigned area of the front.

 

For gameplay purposes it sucks to be a pilot who flies blue (because the map has more reds and you prefer to balance the sides) going up against mostly Tempests during the two hours of flying you have before bedtime.

 

But it’s great fun to fly Tempests when the reds have fewer pilots on their side 🙂

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
ACG_Talisman
8 minutes ago, Charlo-VR said:

For historical accuracy it sucked to be a German pilot in G 109s going up against a squadron of Tempests in your assigned area of the front.

 

For gameplay purposes it sucks to be a pilot who flies blue (because the map has more reds and you prefer to balance the sides) going up against mostly Tempests during the two hours of flying you have before bedtime.

 

But it’s great fun to fly Tempests when the reds have fewer pilots on their side 🙂

 

 

Don't forget all the sucking for I-16 pilots, Lag pilots, Yak-1 pilots, etc, for earlier in the war, lol.

Not so many folks want to balance pilot numbers on the red side then when so many LW outnumber the other side in early war maps.

 

Happy landings,

 

Talisman

Edited by ACG_Talisman
  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
=LD=dhyran

Gents, 

 

what about a little more out of the box thinking

 

>>> if you found yourself in a fair fight, you have done something wrong in the beginning!

 

If you are outnumbered:

 

if you got a slower bird -> climb higher, better attack planning, attack from above only

if you are in a more boom and zoom bird, climb and Bz once. maybe twice, than reclimb

if you are in a more turn and burn oriented one, try to drag away energy from the BZ attacker, once equal your game begins

if you're in a faster bird (make some BZ runs, escape NOE)

 

Never go alone into a combat co alt vs multiple opponents

 

Learn the Hartman Rules, Attack only if you have the initiative in your hands, dictate the fight, otherwise coffeebreak (climb away/stay away)

 

At least stop lonewulfing, find a squadron, than you can have more impact on the action and outcome

 

S!

dhyran

 

  • Upvote 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
ACG_Talisman
6 hours ago, =LD=dhyran said:

Gents, 

 

what about a little more out of the box thinking

 

>>> if you found yourself in a fair fight, you have done something wrong in the beginning!

 

If you are outnumbered:

 

if you got a slower bird -> climb higher, better attack planning, attack from above only

if you are in a more boom and zoom bird, climb and Bz once. maybe twice, than reclimb

if you are in a more turn and burn oriented one, try to drag away energy from the BZ attacker, once equal your game begins

if you're in a faster bird (make some BZ runs, escape NOE)

 

Never go alone into a combat co alt vs multiple opponents

 

Learn the Hartman Rules, Attack only if you have the initiative in your hands, dictate the fight, otherwise coffeebreak (climb away/stay away)

 

At least stop lonewulfing, find a squadron, than you can have more impact on the action and outcome

 

S!

dhyran

 

I would say that is very much 'in the box' thinking.

 

Happy landings,

 

Talisman 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Haza
19 hours ago, ACG_Talisman said:

Don't forget all the sucking for I-16 pilots, Lag pilots, Yak-1 pilots, etc, for earlier in the war, lol.

Not so many folks want to balance pilot numbers on the red side then when so many LW outnumber the other side in early war maps.

 

Happy landings,

 

Talisman

 

Or you can be an old fart and just play the IL-2 1941 😉.

Link to post
Share on other sites
von_Tom

 

 

Anyone know the reason for the mass disconnects that happen?  It isn't a deal breaker for me but I'm curious if there is something we can do client-side to reduce the chance of it and invisible stuff.

 

von Tom

Link to post
Share on other sites
ACG_Talisman
2 hours ago, Haza said:

 

Or you can be an old fart and just play the IL-2 1941 😉.

I love that aircraft ❤️. I fly it more than the Spitfire.  You've not been looking at the stats have you, lol.

Come up and see me some time and I can teach you the ways of the IL-2 1941 :)

 

Happy landings,

 

Talisman 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Enigma89

I have seen people asking about paras, what they do, how to do it, etc etc. I went ahead and made a video to document the rules about it for the Finnish server so people know.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Haza
6 hours ago, ACG_Talisman said:

I love that aircraft ❤️. I fly it more than the Spitfire.  You've not been looking at the stats have you, lol.

Come up and see me some time and I can teach you the ways of the IL-2 1941 :)

 

Happy landings,

 

Talisman 

 

Caught me out, looking at the stats. Hopefully will be over next year, so will try and visit. 

Your pedals are still working and saving me.

 

Take care mate

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
JG1_Wittmann
On 3/16/2021 at 8:31 PM, SCG_Callahan said:

Hi, I think there should be a rule against tanks camping an airfield from a hangar. Not only is it unrealistic (ground crew would open the hatch and gun down the driver and gunner) it can really break the game. I don't think people are having fun driving an hour to get to an airfield and people are definitely not having fun being blown up 5 seconds after spawning. I don't mind being strafed by an airplane as I'm spawned in because that makes sense in an historical perspective.

I think this doesn't really happen  that much  because the majority of  regular flyers  check the map before spawning in.  It can be that the temp is so close to the front that they  are willing to risk a plane spawn even though a tank symbol is clearly on the map.  1 tank  takes out 2 planes  it's a winning mission.  1 tank kills 1 plane and ties up several others who could be elsewhere  is also a win.  The real icing  on the cake for a temp airfield  tank  camping trip is the opportunity  to destroy the supply plane before he/she can resupply the base.  I have been able  to do this 1 time,   after  destroying a good number of AC   I had  many  dropping bombs on me,  eventually I was killed.  1 tank lost vs 10 planes lost and a large # tied up  for quite some time.  A win for my side in that instance to be sure.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Leifr

On the Loose Deuce server this evening... I provided two air collisions late this evening, I should not drink and fly... it is troublesome.

Apologies to the two pilots involved. 🤔

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
beresford

Playing Red this morning (about 10am) there was no smoke indicating the paradrop zone. I dropped them anyway, using landmarks to try to get the position, but guessed wrong. Same thing happened the previous time I tried a paradrop (in another mission).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Enigma89
24 minutes ago, beresford said:

Playing Red this morning (about 10am) there was no smoke indicating the paradrop zone. I dropped them anyway, using landmarks to try to get the position, but guessed wrong. Same thing happened the previous time I tried a paradrop (in another mission).

If the smoke is not there then I don't think you can drop successfully. 

Edited by Enigma89
Link to post
Share on other sites
ACG_Talisman
23 hours ago, JG1_Wittmann said:

I think this doesn't really happen  that much  because the majority of  regular flyers  check the map before spawning in.  It can be that the temp is so close to the front that they  are willing to risk a plane spawn even though a tank symbol is clearly on the map.  1 tank  takes out 2 planes  it's a winning mission.  1 tank kills 1 plane and ties up several others who could be elsewhere  is also a win.  The real icing  on the cake for a temp airfield  tank  camping trip is the opportunity  to destroy the supply plane before he/she can resupply the base.  I have been able  to do this 1 time,   after  destroying a good number of AC   I had  many  dropping bombs on me,  eventually I was killed.  1 tank lost vs 10 planes lost and a large # tied up  for quite some time.  A win for my side in that instance to be sure.

This is illustrates why combined arms on MP is nothing like ready yet and I believe tanks should have their own tank MP servers so they can have fun that is not at the expense of flight sim pilots.  There are simply no proper ground forces to counter the tanks when combined with a flight simulation server and the tanks get a completely unrealistic free ride when compared to the pilots in terms of a realistic experience.  Mixing tanks in with a MP flight simulation server that has no proper sophisticated ground army vs ground army functionality is just a jolly for tanks, who I think would be better off having tank vs tank battles on a MP server for tanks.  Also, I think it is a shame to penalise pilots who want to fly but find the server is full and some of the slots are taken up by tank drivers and not pilots. 

 

Happy landings,

 

Talisman 

  • Confused 2
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
JG1_Wittmann
4 hours ago, ACG_Talisman said:

This is illustrates why combined arms on MP is nothing like ready yet and I believe tanks should have their own tank MP servers so they can have fun that is not at the expense of flight sim pilots. 

 

Players in tanks have fun on this server.   For pilots that have a beef with tank players there are other MP servers that  do not have any playable tanks  but only AC.  In fact,  this is one of the few servers that has tanks.  As far as pilots missing out on flying,  I haven't yet, (I won't say it has never happened ) seen both the main finnish server and the finnish/Ld server both full to capacity.  Trying to make this server  like the other servers with no tanks seems to be much more difficult than just flying on those other servers.

Once again,  before you spawn in an AC,  check the map  and don't spawn at a temp if you see a tank symbol.  Probably a good idea as well to not spawn if you see a red AC symbol either, as that happens at the temps  far more often than the flashing red tank symbol.   I would think that for those pilots that like to fly  Ground attack AC like the IL2,   taking out a human controlled tank is much more challenging than flying down and bombing and strafing ones that aren't moving and present no danger to the pilot.

 

If you prefer to sit out flying the allied fighters until the uber AC show up in game, those can carry bombs as well I believe, and can take  out a tank as well.

 

This server seems to be the biggest draw  in the community,  why fix it if it isn't broken ?

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Haza
6 hours ago, JG1_Wittmann said:

Players in tanks have fun on this server.   For pilots that have a beef with tank players there are other MP servers that  do not have any playable tanks  but only AC.  In fact,  this is one of the few servers that has tanks.  As far as pilots missing out on flying,  I haven't yet, (I won't say it has never happened ) seen both the main finnish server and the finnish/Ld server both full to capacity.  Trying to make this server  like the other servers with no tanks seems to be much more difficult than just flying on those other servers.

Once again,  before you spawn in an AC,  check the map  and don't spawn at a temp if you see a tank symbol.  Probably a good idea as well to not spawn if you see a red AC symbol either, as that happens at the temps  far more often than the flashing red tank symbol.   I would think that for those pilots that like to fly  Ground attack AC like the IL2,   taking out a human controlled tank is much more challenging than flying down and bombing and strafing ones that aren't moving and present no danger to the pilot.

 

If you prefer to sit out flying the allied fighters until the uber AC show up in game, those can carry bombs as well I believe, and can take  out a tank as well.

 

This server seems to be the biggest draw  in the community,  why fix it if it isn't broken ?

 

The server draws players in, as did WOL, CB and TAW until another server comes along! Players will flock to where more players are!

 

Doing nothing, as the numbers are high, will be the doom of any server, thinking that it doesn't have to change!

 

For me, I will continue to play this sever as when I log in, most players are here!

 

Is this server becoming stale? YES, I would say so at 6:1 and with the same outcome week after week and very little appearing to be done to address the imbalance.

 

I really enjoy tanks, but watching as one tank can roll an objective, or a tank spawn site is surrounded with water or requires 1.5 hrs travel just to get to the closest CP point, to me would suggest that tanks need to be either reviewed or withdrawn. 

 

Regards

 

 

 

 

Edited by Haza
Link to post
Share on other sites
102.R.dd_Blade18

Hi There,

 

is TacView recording enabled on the server side? If I try to record anything, only .trk file is generated, no TacView .acmi. It works in single player flawlessly tough.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites
Heliopause

🔍 🛩️   😀

recon.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
Haza
3 minutes ago, Heliopause said:

🔍 🛩️   😀

recon.png

 

Must be Venlo!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Heliopause

Somewhere on Stalingrad map ......

Link to post
Share on other sites
beresford

When assessing tank losses, does the server take any account of tank quality? Obviously none of the Russian tanks are equivalent to the Panther or Tiger, and the only thing keeping the Ferdinand out of that list is that it is so slow that it takes half a mission for the German player to get anywhere. Loss of a Panther or Tiger should be worth considerably more than a mass-produced T-wagon welded by children. Perhaps a Panther should count as two tanks and a Tiger as three. Even the KV1s is the less armoured version of the KV1.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Haza
9 minutes ago, beresford said:

When assessing tank losses, does the server take any account of tank quality? Obviously none of the Russian tanks are equivalent to the Panther or Tiger, and the only thing keeping the Ferdinand out of that list is that it is so slow that it takes half a mission for the German player to get anywhere. Loss of a Panther or Tiger should be worth considerably more than a mass-produced T-wagon welded by children. Perhaps a Panther should count as two tanks and a Tiger as three. Even the KV1s is the less armoured version of the KV1.

 

Both the Panther and Tiger are so limited and only available in the latter plane-sets, penalising the blues again just seems a little OTT. When you consider admins have only just increased the number of Tigers and Panthers yet the reds are still winning hands down at 6:1, perhaps it should be the T-34s and KV s that should be counted as a greater lose.

 

I can't fathom why there is a belief in this fictional server, that blue's need to be further constrained when it is obvious that reds are winning.

 

Perhaps for the next Quarter, there should be no locks and no aircraft/tank limitations. 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
beresford
1 hour ago, Haza said:

 

Both the Panther and Tiger are so limited and only available in the latter plane-sets, penalising the blues again just seems a little OTT. When you consider admins have only just increased the number of Tigers and Panthers yet the reds are still winning hands down at 6:1, perhaps it should be the T-34s and KV s that should be counted as a greater lose.

 

I can't fathom why there is a belief in this fictional server, that blue's need to be further constrained when it is obvious that reds are winning.

 

Perhaps for the next Quarter, there should be no locks and no aircraft/tank limitations. 

 

 

 

 

How are the blues 'penalised' by only getting a limited number of wonderweapons? IRL the Russians made up for shortage of quality with weight of numbers, but the server aims to have equal numbers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
ACG_Talisman

Suggestion:

 

Run the second Finnish pilots server as the Finnish Virtual Tank Drivers - Dynamic War.  Focus the server on tank action and tank battles.  Keep the majority of slots for human tank drivers, but allow limited numbers of selected anti-tank attack aircraft for human flight and an even smaller number of fighter aircraft, if AI pilot aircraft are not viable.  Start a thread for the server in the Tank Crew forum in the multiplayer section.  Design the server for more realistic tank action experience to benefit tank fans.  No temporary airfields.

 

Remove human tank drivers from the Finnish Virtual Pilots - Dynamic War server.  Focus the server on air action.

 

The reason that I suggest this is because I don't believe that combined arms is sufficiently developed yet to do justice to both tank drivers and pilots in terms of parity and realism on the server map.   Lets do justice to both tankers and pilots and do away with stuff like, amongst other things, this:

"The real icing  on the cake for a temp airfield  tank  camping trip is the opportunity  to destroy the supply plane before he/she can resupply the base.  I have been able  to do this 1 time,   after  destroying a good number of AC   I had  many  dropping bombs on me,  eventually I was killed.  1 tank lost vs 10 planes lost and a large # tied up  for quite some time.  A win for my side in that instance to be sure."

 

And this:

"Hi, I think there should be a rule against tanks camping an airfield from a hangar. Not only is it unrealistic (ground crew would open the hatch and gun down the driver and gunner) it can really break the game. I don't think people are having fun driving an hour to get to an airfield and people are definitely not having fun being blown up 5 seconds after spawning. I don't mind being strafed by an airplane as I'm spawned in because that makes sense in an historical perspective."

 

Thoughts?

 

Happy landings,

 

Talisman

Edited by ACG_Talisman
  • Confused 2
  • Sad 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Leifr

Ugh, no thanks.

We choose to fly on Loose Deuce because the server connection is (seemingly) much better and it is less of a squeeze to fit five or six pilots in as a group than waiting for Finnish proper to open up.

 

I'd rather tanks were just removed to be honest, and that Finnish chooses to run a third server specifically for armoured players.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
JG1_Wittmann

 

2 hours ago, ACG_Talisman said:

 

And this:

"Hi, I think there should be a rule against tanks camping an airfield from a hangar. Not only is it unrealistic (ground crew would open the hatch and gun down the driver and gunner) it can really break the game. I don't think people are having fun driving an hour to get to an airfield and people are definitely not having fun being blown up 5 seconds after spawning. I don't mind being strafed by an airplane as I'm spawned in because that makes sense in an historical perspective."

 

Thoughts?

 

Happy landings,

 

Talisman

 

On 3/17/2021 at 12:33 AM, LLv34_Untamo said:

 

If you ignore the big blinking enemy tank icon on the airfield, don't blame the enemy, it's on you. Only temporary airfields are susceptible to tank attack. All others are covered from tanks by invulnerable heavy guns. The choice is yours.

 

Seems  like this has already been answered.

 

Thoughts ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...