For the love of God, STOP AIRBORNE AIRSTRIKES IN BASE SECTORS

[winterflaw]

Maybe it would be possible to set it so that the plane, when destroyed, uses the "pull up and crash god-knows-where" death type more often than the "dive down and slightly to the side". This should (if it is possible to do) cause that the planes will crash directly into objects on their flight-paths less often.

Sounds okay.

Let us know what you find?

But this isn't the only problem, right?

The other problem is bombing/rockets on the base buildings.

I just played a game vs expert AI.

I just had *four consecutive base bombing runs*, right in front of my HQ.

Well that was it, everything was dead and gone.

Not bad for some hundreds of muni.

I might even argue disproportionate. A few hundred muni buys a couple LMG42, or, with airborne, wipes out the enemy base plus all units there.

In general, when the enemy can drop area explosives into your base area, it's over, because you can't reinfroce or organize.

I never really play airborne docs - I think you need vis to do a bombing run, right?

Can you sneak up a sniper, and then do bombing runs?

Arty of course can be fired blind into base areas, which is another problem.

[The New BK Champion]

I agree with mefisto

[winterflaw]

I agree with mefisto

You have not said why, which, although I may be wrong, I think significantly reduces the value of your agreement, because we cannot know why you agree - if the reasons for agreeing are crazy, agreement doesn't mean very much.

Mefisto in his post is arguing a view properly tantmaount to saying exploits should not be fixed, rather, we should all remember the names of people who use them and refuse to play again with those people, and that this principle, applied in this case, means we do not fix the exploit.

You agree with this?

If you do, if you *really* do, then I have a proposal.

I will play a version of the game with all the exploits fixed.

You can play a version of the game with no exploits fixed, and you can remember the names of all the players who abuse the exploits, and not play them again.

Deal? *really* a deal? because if you hesistate, if this seems crazy, then you don't really agree with Mefisto.

[Walderschmidt]

Can you guys at least make it so that you can't call airstrikes in base sectors like the rest of arty call ins?

Wald

[winterflaw]

Can you guys at least make it so that you can't call airstrikes in base sectors like the rest of arty call ins?

Don't forget, which-ever sector CW base vehicles are in are considered base sectors.

(Actually, is that true for all three vehicles, or just the first vehicle?)

It's a shame the game can't differentiate between mobile and static base sectors.)

[The New BK Champion]

I agree with him because this thing is not an exploit. I have over 4000 games in Bk and I have experienced planes landing on my base maybe 4 or 5 times. And no one does this on purpose. If someone does, he is the single one player in the whole community to do so and I have never met him apparently.

You call me crazy? Ok. I am glad I am not going to start calling you a crying noob... seriously.

[Mr. FeministDonut]

I agree with him because this thing is not an exploit. I have over 4000 games in Bk and I have experienced planes landing on my base maybe 4 or 5 times. And no one does this on purpose. If someone does, he is the single one player in the whole community to do so and I have never met him apparently.

You call me crazy? Ok. I am glad I am not going to start calling you a crying noob... seriously.

you actually met him, it's wurf

[MarKr]

Guys, yes, it is better if a person says why they agree with some but if they say just "I agree with X" then they stand for the same idea as "X" person. It is same as when someone quotes a person's post and only writes "+1". So it is not really necessary to add make a longer post if you have nothing more to add. Stop this arguing it is off topic.
Anyway:

Don't forget, which-ever sector CW base vehicles are in are considered base sectors.
(Actually, is that true for all three vehicles, or just the first vehicle?)
It's a shame the game can't differentiate between mobile and static base sectors.)

I am not 100% sure right now but I think the game considers an "HQ" sector to be the one where the "first" CW is parked, so the other two don't turn sectors into "HQ sectors". However it is still true - CW can deploy the first truck in some high-value sector and thus make it basically immune to many abilities which cannot be cast into HQ sectors which could be a problem. We cannot remove the "truck makes an HQ sector" because HQ sector is required for every player to calculate "supply routes" (which is important e.g. for the Vampire HT's "resource stealing" feature) - if there is no HQ sector, the supplies have nowhere to go which means the player gets no resources.

[winterflaw]

You call me crazy? Ok. I am glad I am not going to start calling you a crying noob... seriously.

You mean me?

No. I don't insult people, well, unless they're abusive and only then to shut them up, and you're not.

I do sometimes say what they're *arguing* is crazy.

I suspect you might be refering to the post where I "make a proposal" - and there I was saying if you think that *proposal* is crazy. Read it again and you should see it.

[Wurf]

I agree with him because this thing is not an exploit. I have over 4000 games in Bk and I have experienced planes landing on my base maybe 4 or 5 times. And no one does this on purpose. If someone does, he is the single one player in the whole community to do so and I have never met him apparently.

You call me crazy? Ok. I am glad I am not going to start calling you a crying noob... seriously.

you actually met him, it's wurf

I never use, AB airstrike in base sectors. You may have mistaken me, or you're somehow biased...

[mofetagalactica]

Mark, the easiest way to fix this would be to make planes do less or half damage instead of one-shooting everything where it fall, so i would go up for it since i already gave this advice long time ago, it was just a matter of time, even if isn't seen that much it still count as an exploit, same way you had to fix the *monster truck* CW exploit we had patchs ago, it wasn't often seen but you still had to fix it.

And sorry wurf, but i have seen you a shit ton of times droping stuka anti emplacement patrol on enemy HQ's followed by a rain of fallschs. And some of those stukas that get blow up crashes on buildings one-shoting them in the process.


If you want to find another way to fix this could be making a new unit for luftwaffe and reworking the recon AB squad then move such habilities as patrol runs , recon planes, or even new planes call in, into these units.
Something like a 2-3 man squad with a radio and binos'.

And if you want to keep pushing that idea you can also rework the attacking plane barrages changing them to patrol barrages on a really small zone by these new radio-recon units, that way we could start seeing stuka planes droping bombs on inmobilized tanks wich could be one way to delete henschell patrols that are impossible to balance out just because the way they shoot everything in their path even units outside the circle hability.

[Wurf]

Mark, the easiest way to fix this would be to make planes do less or half damage instead of one-shooting everything where it fall, so i would go up for it since i already gave this advice long time ago, it was just a matter of time, even if isn't seen that much it still count as an exploit, same way you had to fix the *monster truck* CW exploit we had patchs ago, it wasn't often seen but you still had to fix it.

Good idea

And sorry wurf, but i have seen you a shit ton of times droping stuka anti emplacement patrol on enemy HQ's

only on AA dude, remember it well!!

followed by a rain of fallschs

its prohibited, or its only your problem, with my strategy?

And sorry wurf, but i have seen you a shit ton of times droping stuka anti emplacement patrol on enemy HQ's followed by a rain of fallschs. And some of those stukas that get blow up crashes on buildings one-shoting them in the process.

Its only luck luck, same as all in this mod. You can not blame me that the enemy aa shot down my plane, thx for understood. I play fair, on the edge of possibility, its all. If anyone does not like it, so let's cry again for moderators, its not my problem.

[idliketoplaybetter]

Wurfik, u're totally missing the core sense of the topic with this prohibited and allowed, regarding it's the discussion about exploit, or so it is shown.


Though as sometimes even banal Arty strike can be "too fatal/rng" whilst the game, same is shot down plane falling on the base and one shot anything.

It doesn't happen often, not sure why this topic is on a hot place, or that sensitive. Again, it is totally rng like any offmap/onmap Arty.

Frustrating- yes
Critical - is it?

[Wurf]

Iwouldík, u're totally missing the core sense of my answers. I don't answer about this topic, but only if I was mentioned here and it wasn't true. thx for understood, but I understand you, you're just slower...

[idliketoplaybetter]

U're using the same argument of allowed/prohibited/my strategy everywhere, and it's out of place.
I'm not even the first one telling this to ya and that's it.

Keep your "speedometer" towards urself and drive safe, wurfik

[Wurf]

you finally understand, I'm very happy. Thanks for your attention Iwouldík

[idliketoplaybetter]

Apparently can't give you the same credit, not even in a sarcastic way.

[Wurf]

because you don't have to arguments, balls...

[kwok]

Stay on topic, gentlemen.

[Walderschmidt]

I think that if airborne strikes can be called in Axis base sectors, then let us call in Airstrikes in British base sectors.

Wald