BF1942 Changes

[Embattle]

I still have two small adjustments I would like to see happen in BF1942, although I doubt they will happen.

1. Planes can only carry one load of bombs before returning to the airfield to reload, this is more realistic and makes it possible to get to a new position before the plane comes round for another attack....although this could be slightly offset by making the bullets more effective at killing infantry.

2. Grenades to be almost ineffective against tanks, to be honest they're an anti-personal weapon and still do too much damage to tanks.

 

[xane]

Planes are way too overpowered, I wouldn't mind the regenerating bomb loads if they handled a bit less arcade like as them bombing wouldn't be such a doddle (even though I can't get the hang of it).

I hated it when they reduced AA gun damage a few patches ago, now a plane can dive bomb an AA gun and get a face full of shells but have a good chance of surviving to get a bomb dropped on it.

As for grenades, they did reduce the damage some time back, it used to be "3 nades and you're out", nowdays the Tiger seems to be virtually impervious and I think it takes into account the facing of the tank like everything else, i.e. frontal damage is small, what does need fixing is the hilarious distance you can throw a grenade.

 

[Embattle]

Originally posted by xane

As for grenades, they did reduce the damage some time back, it used to be "3 nades and you're out", nowdays the Tiger seems to be virtually impervious and I think it takes into account the facing of the tank like everything else, i.e. frontal damage is small, what does need fixing is the hilarious distance you can throw a grenade.

Oh I know they reduced it but I believe it should be reduced more, even on weak tanks like Shermans they wouldn't do a great deal of damage.

 

[Cdr]

Okay.

Firstly. You're saying that a fighter should only carry 1 bomb and a bomber 2?

If you're too slow to get 'into a new position' then thats your fault. There is nothing wrong with the planes carrying the amount of bombs that they do. It would make a massive hit on the gameplay if they were to change something this fundamental. Secondly, how can you increase the bullets being more effective? Surely a bullet is a bullet? If you get hit by one, its gonna hurt. It doesnt take a lot as it is to mow down some poor bugger on foot. A couple of bursts, and hes down.

Flak guns are just as deadly to planes as planes are to flak guns. If you cant hit and shoot down a plane thats heading directly for you then you are a terrible shot - and should practice. It is very easy to bring down a plane if you are a good shot - I mean come on, an assaulter using his primary gun can bring one down.

Xane, you say that bombing is easy, and yet, you cant do it? So how exactly did you come to the conclusion it was easy? Bombing is extremely difficult, and just because you get killed by a plane a lot - doesnt mean its easy.

I get killed by tanks a lot - does that mean they should change the damage system?

Why is it, the people who moan about planes, are the people that cant use them effectively?

 

[Anasyn]

I think they should turn the flak damage back UP, to stop gay-ass plane campers (who usually fly into hills as soon as they get into planes anyway). Surely it wouldn't take much for a skilled pilot to dodge a little AA fire right?

 

[Gumbo]

If a plane flies straight at my AA gun then it dies in about 3, maybe 4 shots, if it flies across me it's a little harder.

If a plane is pissing you off, just jump in the AA ffs, and if you can't bring it down with AA, practice harder.

 

[Embattle]

Re: Re: BF1942 Changes

Originally posted by Cdr
Okay.

Firstly. You're saying that a fighter should only carry 1 bomb and a bomber 2?

If you're too slow to get 'into a new position' then thats your fault. There is nothing wrong with the planes carrying the amount of bombs that they do. It would make a massive hit on the gameplay if they were to change something this fundamental. Secondly, how can you increase the bullets being more effective? Surely a bullet is a bullet? If you get hit by one, its gonna hurt. It doesnt take a lot as it is to mow down some poor bugger on foot. A couple of bursts, and hes down.

Flak guns are just as deadly to planes as planes are to flak guns. If you cant hit and shoot down a plane thats heading directly for you then you are a terrible shot - and should practice. It is very easy to bring down a plane if you are a good shot - I mean come on, an assaulter using his primary gun can bring one down.

Xane, you say that bombing is easy, and yet, you cant do it? So how exactly did you come to the conclusion it was easy? Bombing is extremely difficult, and just because you get killed by a plane a lot - doesnt mean its easy.

I get killed by tanks a lot - does that mean they should change the damage system?

Why is it, the people who moan about planes, are the people that cant use them effectively?

Planes should have one loadout of bombs...one bomb for planes, 2 for dive bombers and 8 for the B17 and then you have to return to the airfield.

ITS A FACT on most maps you have no chance of getting away before you get hit for a second time, should the person miss the first time......this doesn't come from someone who is bitter but from someone who has been on the receiving end and the giving end.

As for making a fundamental change to gameplay, it may but only to those good pilots. There aren't a great deal of planes on most levels but at the moment they have a fairly big impact because of this ability to continually pound a target every few seconds by flying near the target and heading in on a bomb respawn, esp when in the right hands...dare I say such as yours.

Bullets from planes should get a damage increase of some sort and maybe an increase in damage field..or something.

Why is it people who can fly well don't like to admit they are the most unrealistic thing in BF1942 and thus overpowered.

BTW I can attack ground targets very well now (esp since I use a different view) and I too use the above tactic to my advantage, which is very annoying for the person in the tank.

+ Tanks should also have more shells.

 

[Cdr]

If you think about it - none of Battlefield is realistic - yes its based on real weapons etc, but for gameplay issues, they have to balance it out - do you really think a sherman had any hope in hell of beating a tiger?

If we really wanted to make it realistic, there'd be a lot of changes needed - but realism isnt fun, realism's a bitch.

It's gameplay we're taking about - and if you're on foot, and you have a tank comming in, you call in for air support and he cant come in because he's back at base rearming because he's used his single bomb up on a jeep - where's the fun in that? You get mashed, you moan at the pilot and the pilot bombs you with his single bomb.

If you wanted to make it truely realistic, then the fighter shouldnt carry a bomb at all. And should only have enough ammo for a 11 second burst of gun fire, before he's outta ammo and has to go back to re-arm. And it should take the real amount of time for him to reload, not just by flying down the runway.

 

[7th]

um, just go play a sim... bf42 is fine as it is

7th

 

[Embattle]

Its not about making it totally realistic and in the game the Tiger easily beats the Sherman, unless you get behind and hit the Tiger on the rear...which is mainly true to life

I sorry but it still results in crap gameplay in most cases with planes and their current ability to respawn some 8+ bombs. The Mustang could carry two bombs on all versions bar the original, as could the Spitfire in later revisions.

I do believe they should land tbh, but I would imagine this would be very hard to implement....although as you say, realism is a bitch but so is overpowered planes -->IMO<--.

 

[Embattle]

PS If you really wanted realism you would give the Allies loads more Sherman Tanks too, but then it would be totally uneven...although it might mean I'm not the first one to find the Tiger and die

 

[throdgrain]

Actually, I agree with Embattle on this one . The planes should have a realistic amount of bombs, it's one of the things thats stopped me playing BF1942 to a lesser of greater degree.
Also to my mind when I get into a Tiger tank the only thing I should be worried about is the bloody thing breaking down, not 2 or 3 gimps with hand grenades .
I do appreciate the game has to be playable as well though.

 

[Gumbo]

So are you saying that Planes are too overpowered and you don't like that, but you would like to see a similarly overpowered Tiger?

Planes go down easy, just get in AA and learn to shoot straight. By all means complain about maps that don't have AA in them, or even campaign for a few more AA guns on most maps.

BTW in RL didn't some of the planes have cannons that could destroy tanks without need to resort to bombs at all?

The game plays fine, you just need to learn how to play it better. </rant>

 

[7th]

rockets i think Gumbo... now there's something i'd like to see in BF42

7th

 

[throdgrain]

Im sure they did have rocket firing tank buster planes yes.
But Tiger tanks were the king of the battlefield in them days, and it was kind of dissapointing for me to get into one in-game, drive off and get killed by some handgrenades
Still , as you say the game has to be playable .

 

[7th]

right, another post..... if you think certain elements of BF42 are over powerful, i suggest you download the latest Desert Combat... install it and play for 6 hours solid...

you'll come running back to BF42 screaming for mercy in no time at all, and you'll realise Dice have done a good job of balancing stuff as it is... Desert Combat proves this without even having to lift a little finger

If you can't shoot down a plane, then get some more practice in... i can't shoot shit with the engineer rifle, but im not going to start petitioning for them to make it shoot a 10 foot wide projectile just because i can't hit shit

and drop the reality bullshit, if you want realism, go play a sim. none of this "ok i understand BUT I WANT IT REALISTIC" shit please :/ the game is fine as it stands

with your proposal... one bomb... then the plane has to go back to reload, the person he was bombing can go hide somewhere new... which means the pilot has to do the job of finding a target all over again.. which greatly decreases the potential for air power....... you'd effectively be castrating it. flying a plane would be verging on useless. it'd be just a toy to play with if you got bored... which means more tanks... more tanks and more infantry... infantry can't handle tanks alone unless there's a healthy amount of engineers in the flock, even then its hard... and before you say a word, a tank has PLENTY of protection against planes.... you just have to learn to use it... cuppola mounted machine gun, near perfect for taking down planes once you get your aim right

buh

7th

 

[Embattle]

Originally posted by Gumbo
So are you saying that Planes are too overpowered and you don't like that, but you would like to see a similarly overpowered Tiger?

Planes go down easy, just get in AA and learn to shoot straight. By all means complain about maps that don't have AA in them, or even campaign for a few more AA guns on most maps.

BTW in RL didn't some of the planes have cannons that could destroy tanks without need to resort to bombs at all?

People would have to use the Panzefaust (SP) more on the rear of the tiger, which is fairly easy since the turret moves slow.

AA guns are good but fairly ineffective on planes using very steep dive tactics.

The Spitfire, in later revisions, had two bombs and 4 cannons IIRC.

 

[Embattle]

Originally posted by 7th
right, another post..... if you think certain elements of BF42 are over powerful, i suggest you download the latest Desert Combat... install it and play for 6 hours solid...

you'll come running back to BF42 screaming for mercy in no time at all, and you'll realise Dice have done a good job of balancing stuff as it is... Desert Combat proves this without even having to lift a little finger

If you can't shoot down a plane, then get some more practice in... i can't shoot shit with the engineer rifle, but im not going to start petitioning for them to make it shoot a 10 foot wide projectile just because i can't hit shit

and drop the reality bullshit, if you want realism, go play a sim. none of this "ok i understand BUT I WANT IT REALISTIC" shit please :/ the game is fine as it stands

with your proposal... one bomb... then the plane has to go back to reload, the person he was bombing can go hide somewhere new... which means the pilot has to do the job of finding a target all over again.. which greatly decreases the potential for air power....... you'd effectively be castrating it. flying a plane would be verging on useless. it'd be just a toy to play with if you got bored... which means more tanks... more tanks and more infantry... infantry can't handle tanks alone unless there's a healthy amount of engineers in the flock, even then its hard... and before you say a word, a tank has PLENTY of protection against planes.... you just have to learn to use it... cuppola mounted machine gun, near perfect for taking down planes once you get your aim right

buh

7th

I've played it and it is totally stupid.

TBH the engineer example is crap.

In your opinion its fine, in mine it isn't and that most probably applies to the people who don't/can't fly.

Not if you can aim properly and maybe give the plane two bombs max. A plane can almost stop an entire attack by itself because it keeps spawning bombs and coming rond for another go. Again I would list the same problem with mounted guns as I did with flak in the previous post, not that Tigers have a top mounted gun.

Although all of these problems are most probably more common to public servers, sadly.

 

[throdgrain]

Why are some people getting all stroppy about this subject ? Bit childish innit ?
I thought it was just a little debate on the realism of BF1942, sorry

 

[Gumbo]

Originally posted by Embattle


AA guns are good but fairly ineffective on planes using very steep dive tactics.

Thats bollocks, steep dive is the easiest to kill, Boom, Boom, Boom, dodge the falling wreckage. The most difficult attack from a plane on an AA gun is when they come in from too low to hit, but luckily that makes it hard for the plane to get you because their machine guns hit the sandbags and it's easy to lob the bomb clean over as the plane pulls up to avoid the blast.

Try spending a bit of time in AA over the next couple of days, if you can get the extra diagonal crosshairs to appear as you shoot the planes, you'll see them go down in 3 or 4 shots. If you can see a plane passing you and you can't get it smoking at any range then you're just not good enough.

Hey, I suck at counter Strike, I shoot guys for ages and they don't die, I accept that I'm rubbish at it, I just don't go bleating on forums about it being an unbalanced game.

 

[throdgrain]

Gumbo. I wasn't bleating dude, just chatting :/

 

[Flamin_Squirrel]

/me pats throddy

Were just trying to educate Emb

If your too inept to shoot down a plane that keeps coming at u again and again then your rubbish, and deserve to get blow to peices... Which has happened to me plenty of times /o\. After some practice tho i can more often than not, shoot planes down with an mg.

Planes arent overly powerful.. They have great firepower, but they are weaker than a tramps piss stream . Learn to shoot them down.

 

[Gumbo]

Originally posted by throdgrain
Gumbo. I wasn't bleating dude, just chatting :/

What the squirrel said Throdders, I know CS is your Game, so i can see how you'd think my rant was aimed at you but it wasn't.

 

[Deadmanwalking]

Mobile Anti-Air

 

[throdgrain]

*fluffles all round then *

 

[7th]

Originally posted by Embattle
I've played it and it is totally stupid.

TBH the engineer example is crap.

In your opinion its fine, in mine it isn't and that most probably applies to the people who don't/can't fly.

Not if you can aim properly and maybe give the plane two bombs max. A plane can almost stop an entire attack by itself because it keeps spawning bombs and coming rond for another go. Again I would list the same problem with mounted guns as I did with flak in the previous post, not that Tigers have a top mounted gun.

Although all of these problems are most probably more common to public servers, sadly.

I'll tell you what's crap.. this fucking thread!! the engineer example is fine, just because you can't shoot down a fucking plane, you want them to carry less bombs? and have to go back to reload every time?

i can't hit shit with an engineer rifle, so why can't peoples heads be 10 times bigger to make it easier and to give the engineer a chance of a fair fight versus infantry............... the planes are fine, the tanks are fine..... my example of machine guns mounted on tanks.......... WHY DO YOU THINK THE TIGER DOESNT HAVE ONE?! BECAUSE IT'D BE TOO POWERFUL! its a strong fuckin tank as it is, if it had something to fend off air power, it'd be indestructible.

that is if fucktards learned how to use it.

HNGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

/me fluffles throdgrain

7th

 

[.Cask]

Originally posted by 7th

HNGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Puncture repair kit on standby

 

[Embattle]

Originally posted by throdgrain
Why are some people getting all stroppy about this subject ? Bit childish innit ?
I thought it was just a little debate on the realism of BF1942, sorry

Sadly certain people just can't help themselves and find that they have to get stroppy to try and get through crap examples, or the continue to repeat the same repetitive flawed view or try and attack me personally by saying I can't do this that or the other and to some extent totally ignore some of what I've said etc....oh well.

 

[Embattle]

BTW I'm shit.

 

[Embattle]

Time to close before it gets worse and blows even more out of control.