Would it be better if you could only access GVs through the M4 interface ?

I.e. Only aircraft selectable in the Warbirds inventory ? Switch to M4 tank interface if you want to play in the battlespace with a GV

Warbirds for planes
M4 for GVs

As far as I know, fields can be set up to automatically deploy AI GVs to defend against an incoming GV attack.
Forward deployment distances can also be adjusted.

Nobody really wants a 30 minute GV drive to get somewhere..
At the same time nobody wants to have enemy tanks spawning right on the edge of their field.

So perhaps a forward deployment range that still leaves something like an 8-10 minute drive to the target in a GV is more like it.

iEN have decided to implement it in some fashion. There are various possibilities and set ups.

So what are your thoughts about how it can work ??

_________________
VISIT OUR FACEBOOK PAGE HERE
https://en-gb.facebook.com/RAF-Duxford- ... 822661588/

My personal thoughts are this for example.

Only aircraft selectable in the Warbirds interface (oh how the WB purists will smile)
Only GVs selectable in the M4 interface

(shared battlespace)

I don't want to start seeing any additional flashing overlay crap on my inflight map in the WARBIRDS interface.
The radio buffer text messages are sufficient for all intel.

8-10 mins drive from GV forward deployment to target (about the same time it takes to get up to some alt in a plane)


Use Northsea Terrain next if you want some action.

_________________
VISIT OUR FACEBOOK PAGE HERE
https://en-gb.facebook.com/RAF-Duxford- ... 822661588/

Here's the deal. There's a check box for forward deployment when your in tower. The map from last weekend would spawn you almost mid field F4 from village 31. From village 69 you'd spawn at the field 77. No need to drive.

Myself since the game lets people roll, bomb, then die to reroll over and over and close fields, plus NOE buffs all over, then why not.

Stop the NOE stuff that people do at areas where no one is, then we can change the GV deal. Otherwise as I'm told "it's a game" by those players. Why live it's a game.

yes. nothing was announced or set up, it was just turned on.

_________________
VISIT OUR FACEBOOK PAGE HERE
https://en-gb.facebook.com/RAF-Duxford- ... 822661588/

My messenger chat with the child at iEnt, in response to various questions about the new game setup, what did they mean by M4 (I get it now though, thank you bollock), one running etc etc, and that the tanks were spawning at basically any field, with examples and fields that it happened at, did not go as hoped. I fear the worst for Warbirds. I pointed out that we were a flying simulation, not an arcade game and that was the reason we were here, for the simulation of flying WW2 fighters and bombers, not an arcade style game, or driving tanks and GVs all day long. I said their style of dealing with long term paying members was condescending, dis-respectful and the total lack of communication was unacceptable. Their response? “Thanks”.....so I think we can dismiss the idea of us having any input into how this game might evolve given the childish and amateurish way they communicate with their paying customers. I am actively looking for an alternative game, which is a shame, as no game has “gripped” me like this one did.

I also had no idea about this. GV's spawning right on an enemy field is just dumb, and I hope this will be fixed. I believe Ient really needs to start communicating via forums etc when making changes. I personally spend several hours writing the update notes whenever a new flight model update is ready for launch, to give all players a chance to keep informed about changes.

I could be ok with GV's allowed to spawn "near" one field at a time, but the spawning distance should be an 8-12 minutes drive as Bollok stated. Upping a bomber to attack enemy fields often requires more time for getting altitude etc. I also think that defensive GV's should be at a 5 min drive from a friendly field. This would stop people from going into an ack wagon, get killed and immediately respawn and start shooting again in a few seconds. This could make for some interesting tank battles where the defenders have an advantage, but players can't just respawn instantly and kill the enemy tank, they got killed by, from behind.

All being said I firmly think the focus should first and foremost be on making this a great FLIGHTsim.


<S>
/Robert

Get altitude? That's wasted time. Part of the reason that we see players use the NOE tactic to go close fields. They just
want to field farm and not have a Flight Sim. I know they want a Field Sim.

Would be really easy to remedy by just making a code that only allow multi engine bombers to drop bombs from a certain altitude. This alt should then probably be set at 0 ft for one engine bombers, and higher alt for two engine and four engine bombers. Maybe 8000 ft? If trying to drop bombs below that altitude then the buffer would simply say: "You cannot drop bombs below 8000 ft in a four engine bomber". Problem solved.

Don't get off topic! lol.

_________________
VISIT OUR FACEBOOK PAGE HERE
https://en-gb.facebook.com/RAF-Duxford- ... 822661588/

back on remote spawn points

It is what you make it. In my experience it will be the lowest common denominator, with the GVs having a definite advantage because they can instaspawn on target, while a defending aircraft will have to land and rearm. Its a 5 round bolt-action rifle against the Garand. Similar situations occurs when GVs defend a field against planes. It will get abused. Instead of suicide B25s, Lancs, and B24s dambusting ack, it will be a tank respawning (with wingmen) over and over again til field closes.
I can see how these sorts of tweaks could focus contests, but in practice it doesn't work out that way.
Perhaps some limits on respawning? number of remote spawns, ever lengthening distance from target, or time window?

_________________


Reisen pilots have big hinomarus