ability to rearm, refuel, and repair

[Gambit21]

Gambit, can you create a SP mission where a person can exit and respawn? Or would that have to be a MP mission where the server is pw protected so only one person can access it?

Nope - has to be multiplayer for that.

[Gambit21]

Say no more on the wife bit. Totally understood.

 

The aspect you want works for missions like Po-2, because they are the simplest of aircraft and operated at night where very little, if any, damage occurred - basically radial versions of rotary or inlines during WWI where all that needs to be done is refuel and rearm. Unless damaged, which of course requires a whole lot more effort.

 

I just don't understand the need to rearm/refuel when landing and grabbing a new plane would be quicker in every sense. Unless the airfield couldn't provide new planes. Now, that's for MP.

 

For SP, I guess it could be an argument but it wasn't used as much for day time attacks mostly due to both damage the aircraft sustained but also that they most likely came back with dead crew that they had to be pulled off the flight line for a day or two.

 

So I only see this as something that rarely happened but lots of development time will be spent on it when there are far better items to work on.

 

To be clear I don't want rearm/refuel. Simply understand those that do...and don't frankly.

 

My only point to begin with is that if it were already present, I'd use it once in a while...but I'm not lobbying for the functionality to be developed.

That would be maybe 4 missions total, and I have no time to create a Po-2 campaign, too many other things coming that I have plans for.

 

So what it comes down to is that I can't mount an argument against either side.

Edited October 28, 2017 by Gambit21

[VesseL]

To be clear I don't want rearm/refuel. Simply understand those that do...and don't frankly.

 

My only point to begin with is that if it were already present, I'd use it once in a while...but I'm not lobbying for the functionality to be developed.

That would be maybe 4 missions total, and I have no time to create a Po-2 campaign, too many other things coming that I have plans for.

 

So what it comes down to is that I can't mount an argument against either side.

 

But could you do RR or RRR if you would try? Or can you tell if someone exept the devs can do RR. Noone are against the idea, but some would not use it, and others dont want it take devs time. Thx for the answer Robin. For me it would be really nice to have, but not must.

[Royal_Flight]

To answer Dietrich's questions...

 

 

 

• Would the R+R work for all aircraft types? Or only fighters?

   

  All aircraft types.

• Would the R+R work if the aircraft was damaged? If so, would there be any limit to the amount of damage?

   

  Yes, still works if damaged. As long as it can still be flown though, so no belly landings, no flying into the ground by accident, and if you crash into something before you stop then that's too bad.

• Would the R+R also include repair of damage?

   

  Yes, I think it should.

• What about if there was an injured pilot or crew?

   

  Yes, as above, injured crew would be given medical attention so this should be reflected.

• Would R+R also re-arm bombs?

   

  Yes, of course.

• Would the R+R also re-arm rockets?

   

  Yes.

• Would the R+R also re-load cargo on the Ju 52?

   

  Definitely, these alone would allow Ju-52s to conduct fully fledged transport missions, flying a cargo to an airfield and then 'rearming' with a nominally different cargo to fly elsewhere (e.g., flying munitions in and casualties out, etc).

• Would the R+R also permit new loads of paratroops?

   

  Yes, as above, to simulate large-scale tactical paradrops. Doesn't concern me if it's not mega-realistic as these ops on the eastern front are ahistorical anyway.

• Would the R+R also re-load supply canisters?

   

  Yes, as above.

• Could pilots change the loadout during the R+R, or does that need a re-spawn?

  Yes, loadouts can be changed, the 'unlocks' screen should be available here and any that the mission allows can be selected.

• How long should the R+R take?

   

  Maybe 20secs or so, that seems the rough consensus. Not long anyway. A concession to 'gamey-ness' as the alternative (disappearing and magically dropping in elsewhere with a brand-new plane = despawning) is obviously not 'realistic' either.

• Does the R+R need an animation (e.g. trucks driving out to the aircraft, or ground-crews in attendance)?

   

  No. DCS has a good system, call up a notional ground crew who are assumed to invisibly do the necessary actions and will tell you when they are done and you're good to go. Also makes this feature far easier to implement than if it required extra assets and choreography.

• Would R+R take the same amount of time, regardless of the task (e.g. in real-life, topping up a Bf-109 would not take long; re-fuelling and re-laoding an empty He-111 would take ages)?

   

  Yes, same amount of time. Another concession to being a game, and to avoid penalising bombers and attacker ms who after all hit the targets, rack up the points and carry the match for the team.

   

• If R+R only happens in certain areas (e.g. at a certain dispersal point, rather than just parked in the middle of the runway), how will pilots find out where those areas are?

   

  I wouldn't set a specific point, rather trigger this by after landing, the plane comes to a halt and the engines are stopped. Maybe, if the above conditions are met the canopy is opened which launches a dialogue asking if you want to rearm/reload and if yes, like DCS brings up the loadouts/unlocks window allowing pilots to choose from available weapons and fuel amount, along with a timer counting down. Any time after say, 20 seconds and you're good to go, any longer than two minutes and you are despawned and taken back to the 'aircraft select' screen to avoid airfield ms being littered with nominally rearming aircraft whose pilots have gone to make a cup of tea or something.

• Would "hot-refuelling" (refuelling with the engine still on) be permitted?

   

  No. See above.

• Would "hot-repair" (repair with the engine still on) be permitted?

   

  No, as above.

There's my proposal, keen to hear your thoughts.

[[APAF]VR_Spartan85]

I feel it would be a neat feature, every time I have to exit and respawn I become disconnected...

I was on a Kuban map server, full realism and that had cold engine start ( even just that made me feel more involved with the aircraft) we were all lined up in p-40s with bomb load spinning our props and watching needles move.

Wheels up, target hit, wheels down..

Target was not destroyed so we had to make another run but we had to finish flight, click respawn, and start up our cold aircraft again..

Ideally it would have been more efficiant if we were able to r&r and be back up in the air in no time..

 

It's not something needed absolutely now, but I would love to see it developed.

 

Especially with coops, this mission felt like a coop run and it was awesome..

 

 

One love everyone.

 

We all have the same dream and that is for this sim to be the best it can be for everyone who plays it. Different styles of play, different favourite load outs, convergence settings, paint, planes..

I'm just glad to be part of a very active community that has the same passions as I do..

I've learned more in these forums then history class, lol

More about planes then any documentary.

And some excellent flying all around...

And an amazing development team that makes our dreams come true..

 

Happy landings everyone!

[[APAF]VR_Spartan85]

 

[*]Would the R+R also re-load cargo on the Ju 52?

 

Definitely, these alone would allow Ju-52s to conduct fully fledged transport missions, flying a cargo to an airfield and then 'rearming' with a nominally different cargo to fly elsewhere (e.g., flying munitions in and casualties out, etc).

.

This would be cool for limiting airfield players and resources,

Any aircraft that land that couldn't be repaired could collect as 'scrap' and injured players could collect as 'casualties'..

When they get capped there mus be a transport to relieve the airport of conjestion...

Maybe silly but I feel it would enforce transport roles for those who like to do it

[VesseL]

Gambit21, it was not a challenge for you, i was just wondering is it possible to do RR outside the Company, if some third party could make this addon.

[6./ZG26_Gielow]

Just a thought, at the most serious of online servers, how many people do you see taxiing all the way to the parking area after a successful landing?

 

Now how many people do you see landing, rolling off the runway and despawning or rolling to a halt?

I do

[Gambit21]

Gambit21, it was not a challenge for you, i was just wondering is it possible to do RR outside the Company, if some third party could make this addon.

 

No worries.

As stated above the functionality is not present, and no it will never be a 'mod' - this simply is not possible as it's code that would have to be written.

[Ribbon]

I feel it would be a neat feature, every time I have to exit and respawn I become disconnected...

I was on a Kuban map server, full realism and that had cold engine start ( even just that made me feel more involved with the aircraft) we were all lined up in p-40s with bomb load spinning our props and watching needles move.

Wheels up, target hit, wheels down..

Target was not destroyed so we had to make another run but we had to finish flight, click respawn, and start up our cold aircraft again..

Ideally it would have been more efficiant if we were able to r&r and be back up in the air in no time..

It's not something needed absolutely now, but I would love to see it developed.

Especially with coops, this mission felt like a coop run and it was awesome..

One love everyone.

We all have the same dream and that is for this sim to be the best it can be for everyone who plays it. Different styles of play, different favourite load outs, convergence settings, paint, planes..

I'm just glad to be part of a very active community that has the same passions as I do..

I've learned more in these forums then history class, lol

More about planes then any documentary.

And some excellent flying all around...

And an amazing development team that makes our dreams come true..

Happy landings everyone!

Well put and excellent example!

[DD_Arthur]

I have to say I remain completely unconvinced by any of the arguments in this thread for the devs to spend their valuble time introducing a RR+R feature to this game.

 

  The idea that it will change peoples behaviour in a dogfight server is laughable and there is absolutely no evidence that it would.   Most people who fly online don't give two hoots about their stats and quite frankly why should they?   

 

I've used the RR+R feature in modded IL2 as part of a squad and once the novel absurdity of sitting in your aircraft for a couple of minutes whilst it was re-armed, refuelled and made airworthy again  had worn off the unanimous opinion of twenty-five guys was "why are we bothering with this?"

 

 I'm also at a loss to understand why this feature would be deemed useful in coops.  Sorry to be a bore but I've flown hundreds if not thousands of coop missions in IL2 over the years and for coops RR+R is an almost completely useless feature.

In a typical twenty slot mission, after twenty minutes of search and combat you might have five to six players able to return to base.  What are they then going to do?  RR+R and then do it all over again against the remaining two or three players who are on the opposing side?

 

Your 'gonna need a host with plenty of patience!  As to the other players who crashed and burned first time round?  They'll have f#@ked off to another server! 

[BlitzPig_EL]

I remember flying on a server in the original game with RRR implemented.

 

All it did was draw enemy planes like a magnet to bomb and/or strafe the hapless pilots sitting there waiting for the cycle to finish, and hence drew fighters away from the real mission, to protect the forward field where RRR was taking place.  After getting blown up a couple times, no one bothered anymore and just respawned in a "new" aircraft, the end result being the same, fresh load of fuel land ammo and no broken parts.

[Wulf]

Do we have any evidence that aircraft were actually "patched-up" as a matter of course when being re-armed and re-fueled, during a quick turn-around?  I genuinely don't know but I have to say it seems most unlikely to me.  Just imagine, an aircraft comes in with holes in it's wings, tail plane or fuselage - whatever, and without undertaking a thorough check, you just slap some patches over the holes on the outer skin and send the thing (plus pilot) back into combat.  Really?  And what if a control cable or the 02 system or some other critical component had been damaged in the preceding combat  - that's just too bad.  Seriously??

Edited October 30, 2017 by Wulf

[LLv44_Damixu]

There are many simulation fans who would get more immersion and enjoyment by having some kind of Refuel, Rearm (and Repair) system in place (for example when 'Expert realism' setting on server or single player mission is selected).
​Without any incentive this is only a novel feature no-one uses, so the question is what's the proper incentive to use R & R and worth to spend development time and resources on this feature?

 

If pilot do not land successfully his/her plane to airfield or exits the mission without proper Refuel & Rearm & Repair, the plane is written off on available planes roster e.g. 30 minutes.
​If plane RTB to airfield and taxiis to rearm & refuel spot and is damaged and needs repair, the delay could be 5 minutes and in same time the plane is refueled and rearmed. Off you go then.

If plane is undamaged and taxiis to R & R spot, the delay could be 2,5 mins to get fully armed and fuelled plane in action.

 

On limited stock of available aircraft types this incentive will direct airjockeys to nurture their planes way more better.

 

These delays could be scaled to meet the need of refuelling, rearming or repairing.

Edited October 30, 2017 by LLv44_Damixu

[BraveSirRobin]

​Without any incentive this is only a novel feature no-one uses, so the question is what's the proper incentive to use R & R and worth to spend development time and resources on this feature?

 

Actually, that’s not the question I’m asking. I’m asking why development resources should be wasted on a feature that no one will use unless you force them to use it?

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

It's popular in DCS, though part of that is owed to how it is easier to taxi a tricycle gear modern jet compared to the aircraft here.

 

I use it often since it's quicker to shut down the engines and repair/rearm than it is to reset every single switch by respawning.

 

There is no doubt that some people will use it and others won't, the question is within the scope of Il-2 does it offer anything in terms of gameplay?

 

In realism terms most pilots landed, cleared the runway and jumped off. Mechanics would then push the aircraft to the dispersal, pilots would debrief and if they had an assignment in such a short turnaround they'd take another aircrsft that had been readied before. Technically despawning and grabbing a beer then getting a new plane is the most realistic way.

 

The only realism I can see is refuelling at a friendly frontline airbase before heading for a long mission or during an extensive patrol time. The U-2 and transport aircraft in general are exceptions where it would be fitting to do it.

 

With realism largely out of the way, there is gameplay. Some people would just like to do it because it feels fun, and if it's done without much fuss it might be worth it down the line

[Boaty-McBoatface]

Absolutely no, there shouldn't be a refuel, rearm and repair option. Both highly unrealistic and a complete waste of development resources. The arguments that this would change player behavior on the server are just ridiculous. As someone else mentioned, if you want to address player behaviour then it's stats for return to base only, simple as that.

 

Land the plane and grab a new plane FFS.

Edited November 1, 2017 by boaty_McBoatface

[Gambit21]

Try the "Polls" forum

[Barnacles]

As much as I want the game to generate less warthundery behaviour. I prefer my time between sorties to be basically the time to pour a drink. I don't want players to be encouraged to do nothing, or be made to do nothing effectively for a better load out (I'm flying online to fly against/with people after all, not have them idle spamming the chat with rr<100).

 

Even though I recognise the time for a reload can be made quite short, if it is so short you might as well just have respawns with 'better' planes available as a reward for landing, as the realism argument kind of goes out the window.

 

I'm not trying to pooh pooh the arguments made by advocates of reloading; they are valid with some great ideas and as long as the implementation of such a feature doesn't rob the developers' capacity to do stuff like new maps/enchanced FM etc then by all means add it.

[Barnacles]

I've just thought that tying in landing after a successful sortie with the coming air Marshall feature may be possible .

 

Experienced and higher ranked pilots (ie ones that have returned alive) could be invited to the Air Marshall's briefing whilst their aircraft is being reloaded. You could be privy to an enchanced intelligence picture. These pilots would then be a valuable resource to their team, encouraging formation forming, tatics on chat etc. Also you wouldn't be wasting your time just sat there on the airfield.

Edited November 1, 2017 by 71st_AH_Barnacles

[xvii-Dietrich]

To answer Dietrich's questions...

 

{...}

 

14.  If R+R only happens in certain areas (e.g. at a certain dispersal point, rather than just parked in the middle of the runway), how will pilots find out where those areas are?

 

I wouldn't set a specific point, rather trigger this by after landing, the plane comes to a halt and the engines are stopped. Maybe, if the above conditions are met the canopy is opened which launches a dialogue asking if you want to rearm/reload and if yes, like DCS brings up the loadouts/unlocks window allowing pilots to choose from available weapons and fuel amount, along with a timer counting down. Any time after say, 20 seconds and you're good to go, any longer than two minutes and you are despawned and taken back to the 'aircraft select' screen to avoid airfield ms being littered with nominally rearming aircraft whose pilots have gone to make a cup of tea or something.

 

 

Thanks for the all the replies. They all make sense. The only one I'd query is #14.

 

Wouldn't that result in pilots simple parking on the runway? Apart from the traffic blockage, it would also lead to accidents, etc.. And, if there was an accident, and the R+R pilot was AFK, then the wreck would continue to sit their blocking the way.

 

This is why I think some sort of "dispersals" area is needed, which would be away from the main runway. However, then it needs to be marked in some way.

 

On the other hand, having a dispersals, means aircraft trundling over to them along the taxi-ways. This can result in aircraft unable to pass each other, as there would be no ATC and no conventions to dictate flow of ground traffic. Again, blockage at the runway.

[[APAF]VR_Spartan85]

Well as Barnacles mentioned, we will soon have the air marshaling mode to direct aircraft... that's a feature I forgot was in the works..

 

Perhaps it may work?

[Herne]

I like the idea of a quick turn around for refuel and re - arm, but not repair. Maybe repair could be available, but on a timer / increased timer, compared with refuel /re-arm.

[Royal_Flight]

Yeah, good point, I hadn't considered that. I'm keen to avoid going down the route of a War Thunder-style 'blank screen and then reappear facing the right way', or the immersion police will go bananas.

 

Not impossible to have the r/r function tied to a specific area, which mission makers could mark out with flares or flags, and potentially signs or lights or something to indicate the direction of travel.

Or maybe draw the area the opposite way, so the function won't work if the aircraft is still on an active runway area. Most of my multiplayer experience is in WoL where taxiing is rare and any flat surface is a potential runway, so I'm not sure how a dispersal area might catch on. Not that it isn't probably the best solution.

 

As to the Air Marshal co-ordinating the ground handling, it depends on how this feature is done. But there's a chance that adding an air-traffic control requirement to this might increase the workload and make for a lot to keep track of.

I guess it depends on what form the Air Marshal takes and whether they can see where going on or if they just get information fed to them or what.

[19//Moach]

What I insist is necessary for reasons beyond count, is an R+R (refuel + rearm) feature much akin to the <rr100 function on the ATAG server for CloD

 

 

This provided refueling and rearming of an aircraft, provided it:

 

- Had only minor superficial damage (bullet hole here and there, fine, but no components damaged or huge gaping holes)

- Was landed at a friendly airbase.  Anywhere on the field was fine.

- Had the wheels chocked, to secure the aircraft in place

- Engine completely stopped, fuel cocks shut, magnetos cold

 

Then one could enter the <rr100 command to the chat box, and a fuel truck would appear next to your plane.

 

A message instructed to wait two and a half minutes. One minute less than historical for the Battle of Britain, yet a valid compromise between realism and convenience.  The Authenticity of the experience remained unaffected, despite the less than realistic time it required.

 

 

This is what I strongly believe is necessary.  The whole premise of "Having to respawn anyways"  puts a very strong tinge of pointlessness to anything besides flying headlong unto the fray. As often as not, to die there. It makes little to no matter.

 

This lessens the value of the multiplayer experience as a whole, favoring a shooter-like "spawn-die-repeat" cycle which greatly detracts from all non-combat parts of a sortie.

 

 

How strongly this contributes to unwanted player behaviors can only be determined after the feature has been introduced and comparisons can be made.  But many a pilot's choice, both great and small, hinge upon the underlying notion of self-preservation.

 

Yet this notion is almost entirely absent from the game, given the ever-present understanding that respawning is inevitable.   

 

 

There is no need for any means of imposition for RTB. (This is the responsibility of scoring) The added possibility of continuing on a flight with a plane brought from the rear after a short stop at a base near the action provides encouragement by way of a convenience reward. That same airplane would have taken longer to turn around should it require a fresh spawn.

 

This introduces a whole new world of possibility for mission designs, as the logistic undertaking of flying from a more distant field offsets the added benefits of more advanced aircraft types.   This mechanic is very well worked in the ATAG maps for CloD.  It makes for a very interesting choice, and creates an entirely new element of play which is vastly satisfying.   

 

A sense of value appears when flying a plane brought from the rear. In BoX, however, that sense is defeated by the knowledge that regardless of outcome, that valuable plane cannot be kept operational without the same repeated inconvenience of distance.  In CloD, a successful pilot had the reward of continuing on from a much shorter trip, as conveniently as if he had chosen to fly a lesser type.  

 

This made a successful sortie a very different experience from a failed one:  You got to keep your plane.

Edited November 3, 2017 by 19//Moach

[Te_Pille]

But wait a minute. Just let me tell you guys I bought BOS 3 days ago. At this right moment I find myself in the Cockpit of my Yak searching this information because I have been hit and need go back to the enemy airfield AND... AND... I can’t because this game have nor rearm, repair, refueling whatever...

 

This is not a beta... why this...?

[Royal_Flight]

No idea. I imagine because, back in the early days there was a degree of BoS not quite knowing what it wanted to be, with elements like mouse control, pilot XP and the whole unlock system where airframe upgrades were tied to points scored through gameplay.

 

As the sim has grown and matured these elements have been removed and replaced to allow it to become a much better simulation platform, so I imagine that this 'instant action quit-restart-respawn' feature is a holdover from that and the option to refuel and rearm or change loadouts will (hopefully) be added in future as one of the progressive updates that is steadily turning BoX into the pre-eminent piston-engined combat flight simulator available today.

[JG52*ErmarShell]

Originally coming from DCS it was the first thing I was badly missing after I 'finished' a sortie and wanted to take off again with replenished amo and some more fuel and at least a few holes taped here and there. But no, seems to be luxury we're accustomed to in other games. And makes utterly no sense to have this feature not implemented. Just awkward, given how everything else is meticulously planned and designed, but when it comes to combat simulation this feature was... what ... forgotten? The most normal thing on earth when flying combat planes to return from a sortie and go out there again to finish the remaining enemies off or to back up your remaining comrades, especially during the WW era... ?

 

One really wonders what's the meaning of taking a new plane as long there's still your ol' victorious smoking heap of metal or wood able to take off again? It really doesn't add to the immersion to be forced to abandon your (basically intact) plane for no particular reason.

 

To me the biggest fail so far (aside from all these controller setup nightmares people are constantly reporting). At least an immersion, if not a game breaker. Could easily make one to want to go back to DCS again. Dunno if 1C has already heard of it, but they are catching up slowly but surely with all their WWII era stuff, maps and planes    

 

But other than that the most realistic air combat simulation I've ever bought, especially the flight physics feel frighteningly realistc. I don't know about the air combat part since I've never been a fighter pilot, but I know of a former US Navy pilot who said this league holds also true for the combat part and that he absolutely fell for it. Though it has its flaws, they're minor and thus I'll stick to it for a very, very long time, I fear.

[ACG_Smokejumper]

Sorry, but the idea that r/r increases your incentive to rtb is complete nonsense.

 

I play the game to attempt to realistically simulate WW2 air combat. Not to pretend that imaginary ground crew are servicing my aircraft in record time while I go get a beer.

 

 

Yesterday I just jumped out of my first perfectly good airplane to shorten my flight time. I have never done this in CloD. I would have re-armed.

Further, losing the aircraft that you carefully flew because someone grabbed it before you sucks. I've had the error "Airfield Conditions Changed" when someone got to my fighter I had painstakingly brought back first. Not all servers have to have it on but if I had one I like the option. Even if it was a Cliffs truck spawned in and bullets magiced into the wings I'd be fine with that as a placeholder. There are already gamey aspects in this sim which I can live with. A shorter than real life real refuel and re-arm for play-ability is a good thing in my view. I enjoyed it in other games too.

 

R&R is a reward for LARPing like a good simmer.

I'm pretty sure the devs are aware of this topic, since this is about the 500th thread related to it.  Do we really need thread 501?

 

Squeaky wheel gets the grease. Make 1001 polite threads until we get some grease and stop.

Edited January 3, 2018 by 7./JG26_Smokejumper

[BraveSirRobin]

Yesterday I just jumped out of my first perfectly good airplane to shorten my flight time. I have never done this in CloD. I would have re-armed.

 

Sorry, but that is nonsense. The current stats system gives you more points for returning to the field and landing. You decided to screw your self. R/R doesn’t provide any more incentive to not screw your self than the stats system.

 

As for the argument that r/r lets you screw someone else out of a limited access (and usually superior) aircraft. I don’t think that that behavior should be encouraged.

[ACG_Smokejumper]

You can't call what I did and what many others do nonsense. It's happening whether or not you think its "nonsense". I was in channel with another crew and got the advice to just jump out. It's not TAW. This is where I got the idea to just save myself time.....

 

If I had the option of refueling and rearming on a forward airfield instead of trucking it across the map I would have. It wasn't a TAW map. Why bother wasting 20 minutes on the round trip flight when I can shave off 10 or 15 by bailing out. This isn't my normal play style. Forcing a long flight on me is encouraging me to "jump out" along with others.

 

Not all map scenarios have short flight times. There are so many unused airfields and sometimes I don't have endless time but I don't want Berloga either.  

 

You also don't get to use the waste powerful fighters either with me. I fly everything. I enjoy the dogs as much as the rape fighters. 

 

I don't feel the burning need to fly epic 1 1/2 hour Wings sorties. There is my own ACG campaign for that or TAW.

 

Forward airfield use adds options for shorter flights and more dynamic and constant action for servers who wish to use this option. Even if it was a script like ATAG.

Edited January 3, 2018 by 7./JG26_Smokejumper

[BraveSirRobin]

You can't call what I did and what many others do nonsense.

You just screwed your self out of half the points you could have got for your mission. So, yes, I can.

 

You don’t care about points? Ok. Then explain why r/r give you more incentive than points? So far the only argument you’ve provided is that r/r allows you to screw someone else out of access to a limited aircraft. I actually consider that an argument AGAINST r/r. You got anything else?

 

BTW, ‘I’m too lazy to fly back to the field” isn’t as convincing an argument as you seem to think it is.

[ACG_Smokejumper]

I don't care about points. I swap back and forth balancing the server borking my points. I do like using the same aircraft as long as I can for some reason. If the round trip is going to be excessive and I can save myself a lot of time why not? There is no reward but a time sink grind of a flight for no real good reason. I want to come back and either dogfight or bomb something relatively soon. I don't want it to be 40 minutes. Some maps require as long as 20 in, 20 out. That is less fun stick time. This isn't a game I want to be a time sink grind for the sake of it.

 

An active airfield close by and I will land and rearm.. I don't mind if it's a bit away. I'm used to crossing the channel for another go in a 109. I'll even wait the 2.5 min instead of an instant respawn at that point. I don't even care if it's just a truck that spawns in and bullets just appear in my wings. Any animation would be nice at a designated point/shed would be neat but I don't expect it. DCS doesn't animate crew.... The ATAG server has a script where the truck spawns and you get bullets. This was fine. I don't expect heavy bombers to have the ability or they would roll too fast. Perhaps even the fighter bombers should only get bullets and keep the drag penalty.

 

Doesn't matter if you are not convinced. There are more on my side wishing this to be a dev consideration. I understand where you are coming from too. This is why I don't expect some amazing animation right away. Just a simple ability like ATAG or DCS has done. Anything more is a bonus.

 

The Animation ranks below netcode and server stuff for me. I would prefer a simple option that the server owner can use or not.

 

 

I came to the party late after 2150 Cliffs hours. All this is shiny and new. I want larger server numbers more than anything. I'd also pick re-arm and refuel over the 10km a/c spot limit as it is an easier fix.

 

I already see stuff spawn in out of no where. What's one more?

 

 

 

Good dogfights yesterday by the war Sir! O7

Edited January 3, 2018 by 7./JG26_Smokejumper

[BraveSirRobin]

There are more on my side wishing this to be a dev consideration.

People will say they want almost any feature when they’re asked in a poll. But tell them that they have a choice between r/r and just about anything else, and I’d be surprised if r/r wins.

[ACG_Smokejumper]

Depends on the execution and poll. I can make any poll win if I phrase questions a certain way.

 

Do I want r/r or a new map?

 

Depends on execution doesn't it. They are not comparable in scale of work. If it's a truck spawns and bullets magically appear this isn't a resource hog. If it's an animation it's still probably not a comparable man hours scale with a new map.

 

A comparable poll would be do I want a re-arm and repair animation or that Romanian A/C from another thread. I would still pick choice three, both. Give me the new airplane toy skip the animation and just put more gas in the tank and bullets in the bullet box with magic after a timer for all I care. Provided I am not damaged of course.

 

Kick the tires light the fires after having a slash and go again.

Edited January 3, 2018 by 7./JG26_Smokejumper

[=gRiJ=Roman-]

Honestly, I don't see the point of discussing topics like this for so long. This way will lead to nothing done. People who are against some ideas like this one are just spoiling the new innovations. If you do NOT like, fine, just do NOT use it but let the others enjoy themselves too.

 

Nothing will EVER please 100% of the pilots but we have to move on forwards, not blocking others ideas. Let's be more tolerant.

Edited January 4, 2018 by -=PHX=-Spartan-

[226sqn-RCAF_LYNX]

Wow! I left WT because of the lack of intelligence displayed in the community. Sad to see it here too.

It is only logical and rational to have the ability to reload, repair and refuel during a mission.

I cannot think of any other game where is not available.

[BraveSirRobin]

Wow! I left WT because of the lack of intelligence displayed in the community. Sad to see it here too.

It is only logical and rational to have the ability to reload, repair and refuel during a mission.

I cannot think of any other game where is not available.

It might be “logical and rational” on an arcade server, but not if you value realism.

[Royal_Flight]

It might be “logical and rational” on an arcade server, but not if you value realism.

How about - people who want to use the r/r feature can sit on the airfield to get rearmed/refuelled, and people like yourself who don't want to use the feature can land on an airfield and despawn/respawn.

Everyone wins, everyone's happy.

 

If you don't want it, don't use it and no-one will mind. And don't worry about how other people enjoy the sim.

 

There, I've just saved you a load of stress and lowered your blood pressure a bit.

 

o7

[BraveSirRobin]

How about - people who want to use the r/r feature can sit on the airfield to get rearmed/refuelled, and people like yourself who don't want to use the feature can land on an airfield and despawn/respawn.

Everyone wins, everyone's happy.

If you don't want it, don't use it and no-one will mind. And don't worry about how other people enjoy the sim.

There, I've just saved you a load of stress and lowered your blood pressure a bit.

o7

You can sit around on the airfield all you want now. I just don’t want the developers wasting any time working on this feature.