PDA

View Full Version : Online server... "rules".



DKoor
04-27-2008, 07:11 AM
IMO prohibition of vulching, shoulder-shooting and "kill-steal" belongs in the same category with prohibition of BnZ.
It doesn't really matter how accustomed rule is.

They all serve one primary purpose; to give a "non-realistic" chance to opposite side, or implement some sort of "chivalry" or something like that in the game (as being secondary objective), and thus... gaming the game really. Those things didn't happen in WW2 for the most part. Several pilot accounts I read speak in favor of that ("...use every advantage you have against Hun..." citation of one US ace comes to mind).

What is or what isn't being "realistic" in a PC computer game, is another matter.

The last course of actions on servers provided us with some food for thought (but it really started a long, long time ago, and these guys with new "rules" soaked up heavy flak - quite un-rightfully so, if I may add). And while everyone has a right to make a server (rules) on his/her liking, that doesn't mean we can't disagree (or agree for that matter) with that... much less discuss about it. I see nothing wrong with that...

Maybe such servers with all this rules are for less experienced players, but then again; an experienced player will always come out on top, no matter what the rules are, no?
In fact, I can easily see those experienced ones taking the most advantage of such "rules" http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif .

Also, while online dogfight servers seems to have most online population, I wonder what would happen if dev team and community as a whole payed more attention to COOP form, thing that is closest to the WW2 combat in this game. Also I wonder, would the majority play the COOP's if they were made better, easier to do.
Something like 102nd_COOP_ded @ HL... they run COOP's in a form of online DF, made available thru the brilliant ideas of a few people... no rules there, except of those natural ones - comprehended by any online "pilot" who went into a regular elementary school http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif .

DKoor
04-27-2008, 07:11 AM
IMO prohibition of vulching, shoulder-shooting and "kill-steal" belongs in the same category with prohibition of BnZ.
It doesn't really matter how accustomed rule is.

They all serve one primary purpose; to give a "non-realistic" chance to opposite side, or implement some sort of "chivalry" or something like that in the game (as being secondary objective), and thus... gaming the game really. Those things didn't happen in WW2 for the most part. Several pilot accounts I read speak in favor of that ("...use every advantage you have against Hun..." citation of one US ace comes to mind).

What is or what isn't being "realistic" in a PC computer game, is another matter.

The last course of actions on servers provided us with some food for thought (but it really started a long, long time ago, and these guys with new "rules" soaked up heavy flak - quite un-rightfully so, if I may add). And while everyone has a right to make a server (rules) on his/her liking, that doesn't mean we can't disagree (or agree for that matter) with that... much less discuss about it. I see nothing wrong with that...

Maybe such servers with all this rules are for less experienced players, but then again; an experienced player will always come out on top, no matter what the rules are, no?
In fact, I can easily see those experienced ones taking the most advantage of such "rules" http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif .

Also, while online dogfight servers seems to have most online population, I wonder what would happen if dev team and community as a whole payed more attention to COOP form, thing that is closest to the WW2 combat in this game. Also I wonder, would the majority play the COOP's if they were made better, easier to do.
Something like 102nd_COOP_ded @ HL... they run COOP's in a form of online DF, made available thru the brilliant ideas of a few people... no rules there, except of those natural ones - comprehended by any online "pilot" who went into a regular elementary school http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif .

Xiolablu3
04-27-2008, 07:27 AM
ABout vulching rules, they are needed on some servers, particularly those which allow padlock or wonderwoman view. Otherwise pilots can sit above an airfieled tapping f6 until a plane spawns and then shoot it up immediatley. Totally unrealistic and no fault of the spawning pilot.

Bases were not so close togther in real life.

There was far far more flak IRL, attacking airbases far far far more dangerous.

Ita case of making poeple fly half an hour to 6 hours to the target or having vulching rules.

I know which I would rather have.

DKoor
04-27-2008, 07:30 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
ABout vulching rules, they are needed on some servers, particularly those which allow padlock or wonderwoman view. Otherwise pilots can sit above an airfieled tapping f6 until a plane spawns and then shoot it up immediatley. Totally unrealistic and no fault of the spawning pilot. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>What happened to the AA on those servers?
Guys went for a beer round or...?

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

DKoor
04-27-2008, 07:34 AM
On a more serious note, AA in this game is so effective that when you set up good positioned 20mm and 88mm (or so, newer 37mm models are true killers too) flak batteries it's a true miracle if you make one pass over enemy field without taking some hits.
Let alone, circling low on low/medium speed and picking your bandits.

Xiolablu3
04-27-2008, 07:37 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
ABout vulching rules, they are needed on some servers, particularly those which allow padlock or wonderwoman view. Otherwise pilots can sit above an airfieled tapping f6 until a plane spawns and then shoot it up immediatley. Totally unrealistic and no fault of the spawning pilot. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>What happened to the AA on those servers?
Guys went for a beer round or...?

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

AAA has to be toned down otherwise people get a lot of lag.

I know in map makers forums they have a strict limit on the amount of AAA in one place, so as not to cause lag.

Xiolablu3
04-27-2008, 07:39 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
On a more serious note, AA in this game is so effective that when you set up good positioned 20mm and 88mm (or so, newer 37mm models are true killers too) flak batteries it's a true miracle if you make one pass over enemy field without taking some hits.
Let alone, circling low on low/medium speed and picking your bandits. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No way, in that case one single fighter can take out the first 37mm or 88 with a small bomb, then shoot up the other, and he has free reign to sit above the airfield picking off spawners.

A squad of 2 or more fighters would be able to cause havoc at that airfield and ruin the game.

Its like allowing unlimited spawncamping in FPS. If you joined a server and each time you spawned you were shot with no chance to fight back, would you keep spawning.playing?

DKoor
04-27-2008, 07:47 AM
Now you see...

BnZ is the same thing.
It's just a variation of what you described.

Even worse; there is no AA that protects aircraft on 1,500m from high speed attack of E/A... from let's say - 4,000m.
He just waits in the airfield vicinity with his buddies and stalk...

And 2 or more such "vulchers" can effectively ruin the game too, especially if they take FW-190D, J2M5 or similar fighters which can retain speed in (zoom)climb exceptionally and have outstanding speed.

A fair fight?

Don't think so.

Like I say, experienced player will always take more advantage of any rule simply because he understands game better.

And if you have only inexperienced it doesn't really matter anyway.
They can lose a fight from an absolute position.

DKoor
04-27-2008, 07:54 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
Its like allowing unlimited spawncamping in FPS. If you joined a server and each time you spawned you were shot with no chance to fight back, would you keep spawning.playing? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Mate while it has some similarities it is not really comparable, you must see that.
All it takes for a sniper FPS'er to kill you is a small move of a mouse and left click.
That can last three seconds or less if we are talking of FPS ace.

The only way someone can kill you in IL2 in 3 sec. after you spawn is if you spawn right in front of his flight path at 800m distance (or so) and that he doesn't need to adjust course at all, he only need to press the trigger.

Of course you can always hit refly and wait for AA to chew him up.

Also, related to it, dead AA eventually respawns on airfields, no?

Also there is usually at least two bases on DF online maps... there is an option to simply switch the bases http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif . They can't camp everywhere in numbers.

Von_Rat
04-27-2008, 08:39 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">shoulder-shooting and "kill-steal" </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


these rules just make up for the lack of military disapline and comunication that a real airforce has.


irl im sure shooting over the shoulder of your flight lead, or even shooting him up, without warning him would get you reprimanded. just like it does on servers with shoulder shooting rules.

on servers where there are mature players and almost everyone is on teamspeak these rules arent really necessary. theyre only there for the new comers you arent on ts. guys who are on ts tend to cooperate and theres rarely a issue with kill stealing or shoulder shooting.

note; on the more realistic servers all forms of vulching are allowed. chute shooting isnt against the rules where i fly either, but it is frowned upon. much like real life.

DKoor
04-27-2008, 09:25 AM
My honest opinion is that no rule will really prevent people from doing dangerous stuff to their own mates online.
Maybe I have a loose definition of shoulder shooting but to me, shoulder shooting is of course shooting from dead 6 "thru" our friend who is closer to bandit, also on dead 6. But.
From my own point of view this is also a shoulder shooting;

http://i25.tinypic.com/206zmrm.jpg

Because I feel that the fighter on dead 6 somehow "deserves" the kill more especially if he fought with E/A for that position, and I'm only jumping him from above without previous engagement.
While in reality... he would probably get blasted by both aircraft.
That is especially true if we are talking about bomber as target.

IRL for instance Luftwaffe employed simultaneous group gang-bang as their tactic vs one US bomber, and with some success if I may add.
Their heavy armored FW-190 fighters ("stürmbock", I believe) got close in and formed line and would just make a pass (usually from behind) on one B-17, and if the pass was successful bomber was usually put out of action.
I remember reading how one FW-190 pilot said that if you are unlucky you would end up being on the border of that formation line, so sometimes there simply wasn't enough space for you to get a shot on B-17, as the line was wider than B-17 wingspan.

Some variations like joining the furball in the first place while you see that you mate have a clear advantage and that he will sure emerge victorious from the low-level twitching is not even worth mentioning.

And you see that online constantly on all servers ("realistic" and "airquake" like).
That is also as bad as shoulder-shooting if not even worse, because by joining that fight you have effectively lost one fighter with potentially good E state and perhaps risk being jumped by approaching enemy fighters...

Etc. etc., list of such wrong moves online is huge and they are all just as bad as good old plain dead 6 shoulder-shoot Mk.I.

IMHO.

VW-IceFire
04-27-2008, 09:39 AM
I'm not sure if its fair to lump all of those together DKoor. Vulching is all well and great and I've had fun with it and seen it be disastrous. If the intention is to have a dogfight server with short distances between bases then the vulching becomes a problem plus its not quite as sporting. You can pile on realistic amounts of flak but then lag would be a problem. So the substitute is just to say...don't shoot people on the ground. In the air anything goes.

In a more realistic server where the distances are large I'd say absolutely shoot the guy on the ground no problem. If you want to get away with that its much more difficult to get past the CAP and the flak and still fly all the way back afterwards.

Banning "boom and zoom" is different in that its difficult to define and can naturally flow from boom and zoom to turn and burn (not that you'd want it to). Its not as simple as saying don't shoot the guy on the ground. There's a definite state change between "on ground" and "in air". Easy to distinguish.

Shoulder shooting is harder to deal with and more loose but there are definitely some folks who are just out their to get kills and are happy to ram their fellow pilots without any regard. Its nice to have an out in the rules for someone who is that annoying. Its a bit more specific than "be a good team player".

I love COOPs but I don't see people running them much any more and the quality of the few that I've been in more recently have been decided sub par. Totally a-historical plane sets with the advantage clearly given to the side the host is on in one or two cases. Some of the others were more fun but not quite as fun.

I used to remember some fantastic ones with bomber escorts at high altitude and any of the VFC COOP scenarios were good fun one way or another. Everyone was jovial and there was a fair bit of effort to being team players. Now everyone flies off on their own, ignores the wing leader, ignores everyone...gets lost...can't find anyone and leaves the server.

Sorry I'm rambling but thats how I feel on these things.

DKoor
04-27-2008, 09:48 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
I used to remember some fantastic ones with bomber escorts at high altitude and any of the VFC COOP scenarios were good fun one way or another. Everyone was jovial and there was a fair bit of effort to being team players. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>VFC was my best online DF server experience to date.
Excellent server with a lot of good folks, a fair number of them frequented UBi forums back then, so it was nice to see them online.
*
About vulching... I've expressed my opinion. I don't care really - I know I would be able to deal with vulchers this or that way, there is always a way. Banning that was instituted simply because of newbie players who seem to have issues with switching bases, or taking some extra nimble fighters like I-153 and thus avoid being destroyed by BnZ or taking off in great numbers so they cannot all get hit in one pass, taking a bomber and fire from turret at E/A or whatever else works there...

It's a challenge really.

As much as is evading BnZ pass while you're flying at altitude.

Some of folks may disagree with me, but BnZ is simply "honorable" as a pass on fighter that takes off. It's not exactly the same thing, vulcher has greater chances to destroy his victim, but "honor" is same... that is of course, if someone really cares for "honor" anyway.
Great chances that BnZer/vulcher will destroy him & 0% chances for BnZer/vulcher to get killed. Literally.
And if he's got a buddy with him victim can not fight them at all, it must constantly run until destroyed or until it receives some help from its buddies.

There is really much "honor" in that http://www.acompletewasteofspace.com/modules/Forums/images/smiles/icon_lol.gif .

Sorry for a little irony... obviously I disagree with some of you guys.

Col.BBQ
04-27-2008, 03:28 PM
You could always bail, Dkoor, we BnZers just want the plane. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif

DKoor
04-27-2008, 03:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Col.BBQ:
You could always bail, Dkoor, we BnZers just want the plane. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>...says a Col.BBQ, BnZer to DKoor, another (avid) BnZer...

I just wonder where did you pick up idea that I don't implement this tactic everytime I can? http://www.acompletewasteofspace.com/modules/Forums/images/smiles/icon_lol.gif

Col.BBQ
04-27-2008, 04:34 PM
Sorry, got the wrong vibe from your last post regarding BnZ as honorable as vulching.

SeaFireLIV
04-27-2008, 04:48 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
IMO prohibition of vulching, shoulder-shooting and "kill-steal" belongs in the same category with prohibition of BnZ.
It doesn't really matter how accustomed rule is.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif . </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Totally disagree here.

The BnZ rule is VERY different from more straight forward rules such as `no vulching, no-shoulder shooting or kill stealing`.

What you are doing is trying to muddy the waters by comparing EVERy sensible rule to the BnZ rule.

Of course, no one should shoulder shoot and good pilots will not take away a team m8s kill without prior communication, but it`s not comparable.

In real life, a pilot might accidentally (or on purpose) shoulder shoot over a friend. He can be warned by orders not to do it again. NO ONE can tell the OTHERSIDE "You are not allowed to B&Z!"

As for vulching and chute shooting, I believe they should be allowed in a server (since it`s realistic), but it can also be seen why this rule is made. Blowing away a guy on the ground is unfair and takes away from the fighting in the air. Shooting a guy in his chute also seems unfair and many cases more of a subjective act than an act of any real usefulness. They are also reasonable rules that are reasonable to enforce.

Also and what you are missing the most, these rules do not PHYSICALLY HANDICAPPED particular aircraft`s abilities. Abilities they were designed for. The `No B&Z` rule is similar to telling dolphins that they cannot swim in water and must struggle on dry land.

Bearcat99
04-27-2008, 05:30 PM
I say instead of crying about such things server admins should do things like:

1. If you are on this server be on this server's comms. Unless you do not have a mike.

2. Encourage things like teamwork, someone flying cap over the base.. etc.

3. I know that too much AAA can cause lag.. but there has o be some kind of sweet spot between none at all and too much... even if it comes down to spacing it out a bit.. so that even approaching a base can cause problems.

4. I always repawn at another base when the vulching is too hot..

5. Space the bases far enough apart so that pilots have the time to gain altitude.

Thats one reason why I just prefer coops with people I know.. less BS.. more fun.

DKoor
04-27-2008, 05:33 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
IMO prohibition of vulching, shoulder-shooting and "kill-steal" belongs in the same category with prohibition of BnZ.
It doesn't really matter how accustomed rule is.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif . </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Totally disagree here. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>It's your right to disagree. But let's see just where exactly do you disagree...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The BnZ rule is VERY different from more straight forward rules such as `no vulching, no-shoulder shooting or kill stealing`. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>It sure is.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">What you are doing is trying to muddy the waters by comparing EVERY sensible rule to the BnZ rule. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Every sensible rule?
You call "no vulching" sensible? Sensible where and to whom? To Winnie the Pooh in the Toyland?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Of course, no one should shoulder shoot and good pilots will not take away a team m8s kill without prior communication, but it`s not comparable. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Shoulder shoot is not really a rule it's a common sense that needed to be written because of people which are really, really rude. Or others who are just gaming the game, they're outhere just for a points and their personal amusement over everything else.
Believe me, even so they cannot really comprehend that "rule" because I see that kind of stuff online everywhere almost at regular basis.

This issue is very close related to the KS (kill steal) rules, but that is another matter.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">In real life, a pilot might accidentally (or on purpose) shoulder shoot over a friend. He can be warned by orders not to do it again. NO ONE can tell the OTHERSIDE "You are not allowed to B&Z!" </div></BLOCKQUOTE>I agree, every type of action where a friendly aircraft may actually get hit is out of question.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">As for vulching and chute shooting, I believe they should be allowed in a server (since it`s realistic), but it can also be seen why this rule is made. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>I agree here. 100%. If you are to play the game like you are supposed to, goal is to kill enemy in any form.
Other realities may exist only in UBi ToyLand.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Blowing away a guy on the ground is unfair and takes away from the fighting in the air. Shooting a guy in his chute also seems unfair and many cases more of a subjective act than an act of any real usefulness. They are also reasonable rules that are reasonable to enforce. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>You see... what people don't really get is that IRL -a popular phrase often spoken of here- vulching was so "popular" in WW2 that they did it every time they could. And while doing so, they constantly invented new dedicated weapons and aircraft which will excel in this...
Attacking enemy airfields was no different. No matter how close their bases were.

So when we have a vulch ban, we are... one step closer to reality or one step closer to a Toyland?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Also and what you are missing the most, these rules do not PHYSICALLY HANDICAPPED particular aircraft`s abilities. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>It didn't occured to you that most succesfull players of IL2 always engage from above i.e. always BnZ their victims? It doesn't really matter which aircraft they fly...?

Anyhow... it is just a rule flashing with sensibility among other so called sensible rules.
At this point, we may discuss whether it is or it is not the most controversial rule...

You can expect everything.
And this particular rule basically handicapped every single aircraft not just particular aircraft.
Every regular good IL2 player always, absolutely always seek to have an altitude advantage prior to engagement. Be it a Spitfire pilot, Bf-109, FW-190 one etc.
They know they wont last long without some sort of advantage, especially altitude one, so...
Arguably, I intentionally say arguably, some aircraft may be affected more some less. But usually aircraft that are more affected are the ones which usually happen to be really fast so it can be nullified to an extent thru this.
As I personally witnessed thru my yesterday's sortie on HeadHunters server (one which banned BnZ tactic). I never climbed above 2,000m and I managed to destroy 4 E/A in my first FW sortie.
Once when I picked up speed in shallow dive, I just extended in all directions while friendlies on my side helped each other... etc. etc.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Abilities they were designed for. The `No B&Z` rule is similar to telling dolphins that they cannot swim in water and must struggle on dry land. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>I agree 100%.
But I cannot stress enough that applies to every single aircraft in the game, as their pilots will all (good ones) always seek an altitude advantage over their enemy.

Once in inferior position (lower altitude) player in IL2 is a target.

DKoor
04-27-2008, 05:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bearcat99:
I say instead of crying about such things server admins should do things like:

1. If you are on this server be on this server's comms. Unless you do not have a mike.

2. Encourage things like teamwork, someone flying cap over the base.. etc.

3. I know that too much AAA can cause lag.. but there has o be some kind of sweet spot between none at all and too much... even if it comes down to spacing it out a bit.. so that even approaching a base can cause problems.

4. I always repawn at another base when the vulching is too hot..

5. Space the bases far enough apart so that pilots have the time to gain altitude.

Thats one reason why I just prefer coops with people I know.. less BS.. more fun. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>+10^10!

Several good points here.

DKoor
04-27-2008, 05:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Col.BBQ:
Sorry, got the wrong vibe from your last post regarding BnZ as honorable as vulching. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Not a prob.

It probably sounded like I don't regard BnZ high or that I dislike it for some reason.

On the contrary!

And it's a good thing that you mentioned it...

This is all very close to all this "honor" stuff; many people conjure in that thing.

Yet they see nothing wrong -regarding this, honor thing- when they BnZ their prey, which cannot really fight back.

But somehow their "honor is in question" lamp turns on when you mention vulching.

That's a school example of double standards.

I don't have a problem with either;
-being destroyed thru vulch, BnZ
-destroy others thru vulch, BnZ

Honor has little to do with that, because in a "game of war" honor plays... some role at the very bottom of the "important things in war" list.

VW-IceFire
04-27-2008, 06:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
I used to remember some fantastic ones with bomber escorts at high altitude and any of the VFC COOP scenarios were good fun one way or another. Everyone was jovial and there was a fair bit of effort to being team players. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>VFC was my best online DF server experience to date.
Excellent server with a lot of good folks, a fair number of them frequented UBi forums back then, so it was nice to see them online.
*
About vulching... I've expressed my opinion. I don't care really - I know I would be able to deal with vulchers this or that way, there is always a way. Banning that was instituted simply because of newbie players who seem to have issues with switching bases, or taking some extra nimble fighters like I-153 and thus avoid being destroyed by BnZ or taking off in great numbers so they cannot all get hit in one pass, taking a bomber and fire from turret at E/A or whatever else works there...

It's a challenge really.

As much as is evading BnZ pass while you're flying at altitude.

Some of folks may disagree with me, but BnZ is simply "honorable" as a pass on fighter that takes off. It's not exactly the same thing, vulcher has greater chances to destroy his victim, but "honor" is same... that is of course, if someone really cares for "honor" anyway.
Great chances that BnZer/vulcher will destroy him & 0% chances for BnZer/vulcher to get killed. Literally.
And if he's got a buddy with him victim can not fight them at all, it must constantly run until destroyed or until it receives some help from its buddies.

There is really much "honor" in that http://www.acompletewasteofspace.com/modules/Forums/images/smiles/icon_lol.gif .

Sorry for a little irony... obviously I disagree with some of you guys. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I see what you mean but I'm not sure if I agree. I think best to leave it at that. I definitely understand what you're getting at.

I would say that its more than 0% chance for the BNZer to get killed. Nailed a guy trying to do a BNZ on me today. He had a Mustang, I had a N1K2J, he misjudged the angle (I think there may have been a slight stall involved) and I got him as he sailed past (I put on a half roll heavy skid to make him miss). But I do see what you're saying...properly executed its a much less vulnerable position. Thats the idea right? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I still won't play on these servers that ban BNZing. I'm sure I'd be banned one way or another.

SeaFireLIV
04-27-2008, 06:30 PM
I will respond to your points, Dkoor, but since you`ve broke my previous words into separate paragraghs answering each one specifically, I will need time to do the same in response to you and at the moment i have more important stuff at work to do.

And I don`t want to give a short answer that you`ll no doubt attempt to take apart.

I`ll be back.

Whirlin_merlin
04-28-2008, 12:40 AM
DKoor you are of course right rules are 'unrealistic' but then the whole online flying around shooty people buisness is fairly unrealistic.

Our servers are probably more rule heavy than many and I think that is due to the play style we are trying to promote. (Shock horror yes servers do try to manipulate how you fly.) People refer to df servers but infact there is a whole spectrum of df servers some are just that dgfight servers others like ours try to be objective based with ground targets and all that jazz. Our rules on vulching etc encourage action away from bases and to the objective areas.
Is that realistic?
No but then neither are the constraints of the game.
Not everyone has a new super-dooper computer, ground objects do hit FPS, so AAA at aifields is a double edged sword.
In a pure df map you can stick a couple of bases anywhere, big grey rectangles are fine. However if you are making a quality objective based (dare I say realistic) map your options are more limited. Enemy bases will be closer than in real life, you may not be a sensible place to put an alternative airbase etc.

You should set up a 'no-rules' server it would be interesting, give people the choice and all that. However I suspect you wont end up with the hyper-realistic WW2 airware simulation you seek.

csThor
04-28-2008, 02:12 AM
Ruling out B&Z is like setting up a car racing sim server and trying to enforce a 60 mp/h speed limit. Just doesn't make any sense in the context of the game.

Whirlin_merlin
04-28-2008, 02:50 AM
BTW I was referring to 'rules' in general I too can't get my head around the No BnZ rule. I wouldn't fly there but it's their server so their buisness I suppose.

WOLFMondo
04-28-2008, 07:15 AM
IL2 is an online game, online games have smacktards. As long as you have smacktards who show other people they are playing with no respect rules like shoulder shooting will have to be around.

Personally I like vulching. Its a skill to vulch and survive and its immensly satisfying to use a real tactic but shoulder shooting and kill stealing, in the worse context i.e. point *****s trying to get more points no matter how they get them is bad and shouldn't be condoned.

DKoor
04-28-2008, 07:19 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
I would say that its more than 0% chance for the BNZer to get killed. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>That is debatable, but I admit it is true that it is somewhat greater than 0%.
I was just making a point there with that 0%.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Nailed a guy trying to do a BNZ on me today. He had a Mustang, I had a N1K2J, he misjudged the angle (I think there may have been a slight stall involved) and I got him as he sailed past (I put on a half roll heavy skid to make him miss). But I do see what you're saying...properly executed its a much less vulnerable position. Thats the idea right? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Yes, that's true. A good BnZer will always have much more energy than his victim.
That usually means very shallow final approach on target @ extreme speed (climb or dive) so BnZer effectively covers all victim's moves that include any kind of climb or flat horizontal turn.
BnZer knows that if he allows his victim to climb up without being punished, he is slowly losing his initial advantage...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I still won't play on these servers that ban BNZing. I'm sure I'd be banned one way or another. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Ice czech this out; http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/134...441043556#1441043556 (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/1341094456?r=1441043556#1441043556)

We are talking about server that is meant to have fun... totally non-historical planesets and everything that comes with it.

So people are having fun then few individuals join and spoil the party for the rest.
Especially so when fair number of people playing there are newcomers (I know because I've been able to shot down two bandits in 1 vs 2 fight, we all flew Spitfires, they even had slight initial alt advantage).

I can understand the server admin for doing what he did.

TgD Thunderbolt56
04-28-2008, 07:38 AM
A couple points reflecting my own personal outlook on relevant discussions:

1. You can post in the brief regarding persistent "vulching", and kill-stealing etc,..will be dealt with as they detract from team play, but someone's got to monitor and police such things as well which is difficult at best and nigh impossible at worst.

2. I personally like to encourage pilots to get on TS. Even if they just listen. It's incredibly difficult to type "109, break!") while maintaining proper SA and trying to render aid to your friendly.

3. The only way to really deal with persistent vulchers is beef up the base AAA and have almost everyone spend a few minutes doing CAP before heading out to slaughter. IMO, a combination of 4-5 ea. 22/23mm emplacements combined with 3-5 87/88mm emplacements is adequate to defend most all bases when combined with even modest CAP. I very much do NOT like to see rules against vulching.

4. Look closely at server settings. Relaxed settings have a much higher chance to bring relaxed pilots that aren't concerned with mission objectives or teamwork. I'm not "laying a blanket" here nor saying there isn't a place where there can be relaxed settings and great teamwork. I AM saying it's just less likely.

WOLFMondo
04-28-2008, 08:06 AM
40mm bofors are lethal AA and have almost 0 tracer fire. High ROF and a single hit is enough to down most aircraft.

SeaFireLIV
04-28-2008, 08:39 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:What you are doing is trying to muddy the waters by comparing EVERY sensible rule to the BnZ rule. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Every sensible rule?
You call "no vulching" sensible? Sensible where and to whom? To Winnie the Pooh in the Toyland?. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Compared to the highly difficult to quantify `No B&Z` rule it`s much more sensible. Don`t tell me you can`t see this.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
Of course, no one should shoulder shoot and good pilots will not take away a team m8s kill without prior communication, but it`s not comparable. <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:Shoulder shoot is not really a rule it's a common sense that needed to be written because of people which are really, really rude. Or others who are just gaming the game, they're outhere just for a points and their personal amusement over everything else.
Believe me, even so they cannot really comprehend that "rule" because I see that kind of stuff online everywhere almost at regular basis.

This issue is very close related to the KS (kill steal) rules, but that is another matter. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You probabaly see it `everywhere` on quake-like dogfight servers. Fly in a Squad, or with people you KNOW. Squad members will stay out of your way if you`re on the better end of a target and simply will not attack unless you lose the advantage. I cannot count the times my good former pilots would ask me first if it`s ok for them to go in and attack before doing so when I`ve lost the advantage. But if you`re flying on a `quake` server well, you gotta expect some Rambos to ignore all attempts at team work co-operation. Even rules won`t stop them.

But even here kill-stealing can be subjective. I was on a dogfight server and I saw a friendly Spitfire take on a 109. I stayed above, watching, protecting, unknown to both the fighters. then I saw the 109 actually out-manouever the Spit and get on his 6. there was no doubt to me that the friendly was in trouble. There were no coms, so I dived in and (a sort of B&Z, I guess) and took out the 109 on the tail of the Spit.
"That was my kill!" The guy wrote in the chat bar. I tried to explain that I was watching and he lost the advantage, but he wouldn`t have it. The guy had LOST, but he just wouldn`t accept it.

anyway...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:In real life, a pilot might accidentally (or on purpose) shoulder shoot over a friend. He can be warned by orders not to do it again. NO ONE can tell the OTHERSIDE "You are not allowed to B&Z!" </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
I agree, every type of action where a friendly aircraft may actually get hit is out of question.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

There are rare times when you can risk shooting a friendly. You have an enemy aircraft on the dead 6 of a friendly and you`re behind that enemy plane. There`s a risk of shooting down the friendly too. I once shot down an enemy plane on my m8`s 6, who`s controls had been damaged, and actually damaged the friendly too, but it still saved the friendly who would`ve defintely been taken out otherwise.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV: As for vulching and chute shooting, I believe they should be allowed in a server (since it`s realistic), but it can also be seen why this rule is made. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Originally posted by DKoor:I agree here. 100%. If you are to play the game like you are supposed to, goal is to kill enemy in any form.
Other realities may exist only in UBi ToyLand.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

But as I said, it`s a reasonable rule and can be accepted as such.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:Blowing away a guy on the ground is unfair and takes away from the fighting in the air. Shooting a guy in his chute also seems unfair and many cases more of a subjective act than an act of any real usefulness. They are also reasonable rules that are reasonable to enforce. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>You see... what people don't really get is that IRL -a popular phrase often spoken of here- vulching was so "popular" in WW2 that they did it every time they could. And while doing so, they constantly invented new dedicated weapons and aircraft which will excel in this...
Attacking enemy airfields was no different. No matter how close their bases were.

So when we have a vulch ban, we are... one step closer to reality or one step closer to a Toyland? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What you have done here is ignored my point and instead ranted on what you want to rant. You aren`t really reading what i`m writing. If I were the server host i would allow vulching and allow chute-shooting because they happened. I would simply give airfields AAA and such (recurring) to make such tasks much difficult. Pilots would need to cover airfields to enable others to get airborned etc (a vulching target is an easy target to kill by CAPPING planes). The point is, it`s a REASONABLE RULE that`s enforcable. We also must allow some compromise for Server hosts who are not so up to date with airfield defence or just want to start a quick server session. These simple `no vulch` and `no shoot-chuting` are a reasonable compromise for all.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:Also and what you are missing the most, these rules do not PHYSICALLY HANDICAPPED particular aircraft`s abilities.[QUOTE]Originally posted by DKoor:It didn't occured to you that most succesfull players of IL2 always engage from above i.e. always BnZ their victims? It doesn't really matter which aircraft they fly...? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Do you have stats for this? Where do you get this info from?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
Anyhow... it is just a rule flashing with sensibility among other so called sensible rules.
At this point, we may discuss whether it is or it is not the most controversial rule...

You can expect everything.
And this particular rule basically handicapped every single aircraft not just particular aircraft.
Every regular good IL2 player always, absolutely always seek to have an altitude advantage prior to engagement. Be it a Spitfire pilot, Bf-109, FW-190 one etc.
They know they wont last long without some sort of advantage, especially altitude one, so...
Arguably, I intentionally say arguably, some aircraft may be affected more some less. But usually aircraft that are more affected are the ones which usually happen to be really fast so it can be nullified to an extent thru this. . </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It`s not arguable at all, some aircraft are heavily affected if they are restricted from the ability to B&Z. Other aircraft (especially Russian planes) cannot B&Z effectly. Try it with an LA5 for example and see its wings fall off. Many of these planes don`t have the power (except the energy from a dive) to outrun many planes once the dive is done. Their only chance to gain height again, which, with the `no B&Z` rule will screw them.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
As I personally witnessed thru my yesterday's sortie on HeadHunters server (one which banned BnZ tactic). I never climbed above 2,000m and I managed to destroy 4 E/A in my first FW sortie.
Once when I picked up speed in shallow dive, I just extended in all directions while friendlies on my side helped each other... etc. etc.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am not a B&Zer. I can B&Z, but not very well. I`m a natural turner. What you just wrote there would be Heaven for me. An I16 flies at its best at around 2000m as well as many other turning planes. But I still would not fly this server, because to me, I am artificially cheating by handicapping the enemy unrealistically.

1.There are many ways to handicap a B&Zer and be realistic. It just takes time and discipline. The Russians used to fly their I16s in close circles while the 109s circled above waiting to B&Z. whenever a jerry tried diving in, he was always exposed to the guns of another I16. i remember a good squaddy and I used actually this method to fend off a 109 trying to b&Z us.

2.Mission types.
If you can do servers with missions that force B&Zers to come down then you have a chance (or they lose the mission).

3. On start, extend away, climb, then return to the enemy at their (or above) altitude.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:Abilities they were designed for. The `No B&Z` rule is similar to telling dolphins that they cannot swim in water and must struggle on dry land. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:I agree 100%.
But I cannot stress enough that applies to every single aircraft in the game, as their pilots will all (good ones) always seek an altitude advantage over their enemy.

Once in inferior position (lower altitude) player in IL2 is a target. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, Yes, he`s a target, it`s better to be high, but I disagree in that it`s NOT impossible to overcome B&Zers if using the tactics I describe and more... It`s VERY difficult for a B&Zer to hit a target below that`s AWARE of them. Me, I watch, when they start their shallow dive, I still keep watching, I don`t change. When they`re in shooting range (where they MUST shoot), I turn out. they always miss. Now while he`s arsing around doing this, your friend/s should be manouevering onto him. the bogey might keep trying to attack,or as in most cases he will runaway because he knows he will sooner or later be caught.

The problem with such a server like the `No B&Z` one is that it has given up taking on pilots who `B&Z` when there are numerous ways to fight and overcome them. It`s a rule of quitters.

DKoor
04-28-2008, 01:42 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
What you are doing is trying to muddy the waters by comparing EVERY sensible rule to the BnZ rule. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Every sensible rule?
You call "no vulching" sensible? Sensible where and to whom? To Winnie the Pooh in the Toyland?. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Compared to the highly difficult to quantify `No B&Z` rule it`s much more sensible. Don`t tell me you can`t see this. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>OK. So are we now stuck with what is more sensible and what is less sensible from out of nonsense?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
Of course, no one should shoulder shoot and good pilots will not take away a team m8s kill without prior communication, but it`s not comparable. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Shoulder shoot is not really a rule it's a common sense that needed to be written because of people which are really, really rude. Or others who are just gaming the game, they're outhere just for a points and their personal amusement over everything else.
Believe me, even so they cannot really comprehend that "rule" because I see that kind of stuff online everywhere almost at regular basis.

This issue is very close related to the KS (kill steal) rules, but that is another matter. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You probabaly see it `everywhere` on quake-like dogfight servers. Fly in a Squad, or with people you KNOW. Squad members will stay out of your way if you`re on the better end of a target and simply will not attack unless you lose the advantage. I cannot count the times my good former pilots would ask me first if it`s ok for them to go in and attack before doing so when I`ve lost the advantage. But if you`re flying on a `quake` server well, you gotta expect some Rambos to ignore all attempts at team work co-operation. Even rules won`t stop them. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Among squad members this issue is practically a non-issue; even if it happens it is natural that you'll be friendly towards your buddies and they will probably type "sorry my bad" or something similar in a chat bar and situation is resolved.

But... too bad a public server doesn't consist of one squad fighting other squad on oppo side!

And also too bad you cannot limit "aces" from joining just about any public server outhere...

You are in a huge mistake if you believe that KS (or shouldershoot) happens only on airquake servers. Those servers are just more prone to this actions, but that happens everywhere but some closed squad thingies.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
But even here kill-stealing can be subjective. I was on a dogfight server and I saw a friendly Spitfire take on a 109. I stayed above, watching, protecting, unknown to both the fighters. then I saw the 109 actually out-manouever the Spit and get on his 6. there was no doubt to me that the friendly was in trouble. There were no coms, so I dived in and (a sort of B&Z, I guess) and took out the 109 on the tail of the Spit.
"That was my kill!" The guy wrote in the chat bar. I tried to explain that I was watching and he lost the advantage, but he wouldn`t have it. The guy had LOST, but he just wouldn`t accept it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I have zero doubt that he would engage your bandit, shouldershoot you and KS you if he could; even if you were in most favorable position... bigshot is outhere for his personal joy only regardless of anything.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
In real life, a pilot might accidentally (or on purpose) shoulder shoot over a friend. He can be warned by orders not to do it again. NO ONE can tell the OTHERSIDE "You are not allowed to B&Z!" </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I agree, every type of action where a friendly aircraft may actually get hit is out of question. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

There are rare times when you can risk shooting a friendly. You have an enemy aircraft on the dead 6 of a friendly and you`re behind that enemy plane. There`s a risk of shooting down the friendly too. I once shot down an enemy plane on my m8`s 6, who`s controls had been damaged, and actually damaged the friendly too, but it still saved the friendly who would`ve defintely been taken out otherwise. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>There are exception to almost every rule. This is one such case.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
As for vulching and chute shooting, I believe they should be allowed in a server (since it`s realistic), but it can also be seen why this rule is made. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>I agree here. 100%. If you are to play the game like you are supposed to, goal is to kill enemy in any form.
Other realities may exist only in UBi ToyLand.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

But as I said, it`s a reasonable rule and can be accepted as such. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>What's a reasonable rule? No vulching and no chute shooting? And No BnZ isn't reasonable?

Disagree 100% with that.

In a light of the recent "No BnZ" rule discussion they are as reasonable as banning the BnZ. Depends on the type of server really.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
Blowing away a guy on the ground is unfair and takes away from the fighting in the air. Shooting a guy in his chute also seems unfair and many cases more of a subjective act than an act of any real usefulness. They are also reasonable rules that are reasonable to enforce. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>You see... what people don't really get is that IRL -a popular phrase often spoken of here- vulching was so "popular" in WW2 that they did it every time they could. And while doing so, they constantly invented new dedicated weapons and aircraft which will excel in this...
Attacking enemy airfields was no different. No matter how close their bases were.

So when we have a vulch ban, we are... one step closer to reality or one step closer to a Toyland? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What you have done here is ignored my point and instead ranted on what you want to rant. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>In a way you are right... I should have stopped after you said that "vulching is unfair" out of context, yet somehow "No BnZ" is somehow "fair" also, out of context. I just argue your arguments in your way... with blanket arguments.

Arguing that something not-historical may be somehow "reasonable" while something else also not-historical is not reasonable... and all that without context.

ROFL!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
You aren`t really reading what i`m writing. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Disagree 100%

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
If I were the server host i would allow vulching and allow chute-shooting because they happened. I would simply give airfields AAA and such (recurring) to make such tasks much difficult. Pilots would need to cover airfields to enable others to get airborned etc (a vulching target is an easy target to kill by CAPPING planes). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Copy that.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
The point is, it`s a REASONABLE RULE that`s enforcable. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Hypothetically speaking, it's your server, you can do whatever you want and enforce any kind of rule there...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
We also must allow some compromise for Server hosts who are not so up to date with airfield defence or just want to start a quick server session. These simple `no vulch` and `no shoot-chuting` are a reasonable compromise for all. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>It's solely your personal decision whether you will or you wont "allow some compromise" to servers which are not up to date with airfield defenses... no one forces you to fly on a particular server.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
Also and what you are missing the most, these rules do not PHYSICALLY HANDICAPPED particular aircraft`s abilities. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
It didn't occured to you that most succesfull players of IL2 always engage from above i.e. always BnZ their victims? It doesn't really matter which aircraft they fly...? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Do you have stats for this? Where do you get this info from? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
ROFL

What I wont see on this forum...

So you feel really ready to say that you can be successful online by engaging E/A from inferior altitude position?

Makes one wonder just where you get your experiences...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
Anyhow... it is just a rule flashing with sensibility among other so called sensible rules.
At this point, we may discuss whether it is or it is not the most controversial rule...

You can expect everything.
And this particular rule basically handicapped every single aircraft not just particular aircraft.
Every regular good IL2 player always, absolutely always seek to have an altitude advantage prior to engagement. Be it a Spitfire pilot, Bf-109, FW-190 one etc.
They know they wont last long without some sort of advantage, especially altitude one, so...
Arguably, I intentionally say arguably, some aircraft may be affected more some less. But usually aircraft that are more affected are the ones which usually happen to be really fast so it can be nullified to an extent thru this. . </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It`s not arguable at all, some aircraft are heavily affected if they are restricted from the ability to B&Z. Other aircraft (especially Russian planes) cannot B&Z effectly. Try it with an LA5 for example and see its wings fall off. Many of these planes don`t have the power (except the energy from a dive) to outrun many planes once the dive is done. Their only chance to gain height again, which, with the `no B&Z` rule will screw them. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Also depends heavily on what you fly and what your oppos fly... but again - you have lost context on this, because server(s) which banned BnZ doesn't even sport certain planes... instead it sport mostly late war fast planeset same for both sides...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
As I personally witnessed thru my yesterday's sortie on HeadHunters server (one which banned BnZ tactic). I never climbed above 2,000m and I managed to destroy 4 E/A in my first FW sortie.
Once when I picked up speed in shallow dive, I just extended in all directions while friendlies on my side helped each other... etc. etc.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am not a B&Zer. I can B&Z, but not very well. I`m a natural turner. What you just wrote there would be Heaven for me. An I16 flies at its best at around 2000m as well as many other turning planes. But I still would not fly this server, because to me, I am artificially cheating by handicapping the enemy unrealistically. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Disagree 100%

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
1.There are many ways to handicap a B&Zer and be realistic. It just takes time and discipline. The Russians used to fly their I16s in close circles while the 109s circled above waiting to B&Z. whenever a jerry tried diving in, he was always exposed to the guns of another I16. i remember a good squaddy and I used actually this method to fend off a 109 trying to b&Z us.

2.Mission types.
If you can do servers with missions that force B&Zers to come down then you have a chance (or they lose the mission).

3. On start, extend away, climb, then return to the enemy at their (or above) altitude. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Note that you lost perception of what this is all about... on the server(s) in question, there are no "Jerry" no "Russians" and no I-16's for that matter...

These servers are created for quick fun. Planesets are same for both sides.

Whole hassle began when few people twisted the meaning of such server, thus ruining fun for other participants.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
Abilities they were designed for. The `No B&Z` rule is similar to telling dolphins that they cannot swim in water and must struggle on dry land. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I agree 100%.
But I cannot stress enough that applies to every single aircraft in the game, as their pilots will all (good ones) always seek an altitude advantage over their enemy.

Once in inferior position (lower altitude) player in IL2 is a target. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, Yes, he`s a target, it`s better to be high, but I disagree in that it`s NOT impossible to overcome B&Zers if using the tactics I describe and more... It`s VERY difficult for a B&Zer to hit a target below that`s AWARE of them. Me, I watch, when they start their shallow dive, I still keep watching, I don`t change. When they`re in shooting range (where they MUST shoot), I turn out. they always miss. Now while he`s arsing around doing this, your friend/s should be manouevering onto him. the bogey might keep trying to attack,or as in most cases he will runaway because he knows he will sooner or later be caught. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Thanks for sharing absolute tactic vs BnZers with us.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
The problem with such a server like the `No B&Z` one is that it has given up taking on pilots who `B&Z` when there are numerous ways to fight and overcome them. It`s a rule of quitters. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
It should be put in context...

Many of these constantly mentioned rules lose their meaning when they are put out of context.

Same is with "No BnZ" rule.

SeaFireLIV
04-28-2008, 02:45 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:

Note that you lost perception of what this is all about... on the server(s) in question, there are no "Jerry" no "Russians" and no I-16's for that matter...

Planesets are same for both sides.

. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I see. Then there`s no more for me to say.