A kitteh who thinks I 'made up' the lack of respect players have toward clickers...

[PanzerXO 8]

"Clickers" in WOT are not respected.  There is little skill required, and they might as well be playing a browser game (except for the few moments of excitement they get when a scout gets too near).  Look'em up if you don't know what they are.

I'm wondering if the mouse controls being so much easier than a joystick might make WOWP a full-scale version of a clicker's paradise...
...

 

http://forum.worldofwarplanes.com/index.php?/topic/17131-mouse-controls-a-clickers-dream-or-a-fun-idle-browser-game/page__fromsearch__1

 

 

I'm fairly certain you've made that up...


 

[Rexxie 10,757]

Lern2poast.

 

Thanks.

[PanzerXO 8]

Lern2poast.

 

Thanks.

 

No, iz tru, hue hue hue, I iz a bad poaster

[Deusmortis 4,618]

People hate arti, people hate ground attack aircraft.

 

Doesn't mean everyone does, but the hate is well documented.

 

I also find it is harder to respect an arti player.  There are only 2 arti players that I can think of who have gained my respect as "good players."

[Okeano 2,174]

Ok?

[Alesia 338]

People hate arti, people hate ground attack aircraft.

Doesn't mean everyone does, but the hate is well documented.

I also find it is harder to respect an arti player. There are only 2 arti players that I can think of who have gained my respect as "good players."

Why do people hate ground attackers now? I've never even heard of this. Aside from being harder to fly and with limited purpose if anything ground attackers are for more experienced players that can make the most of their horrible flight models....ground attackers are almost the complete opposite of arty actually.

[ArrogantWorms 970]

The new response that arty seems to like giving, and which I heard yesterday twice:

 

"Artillery takes more skill then tanks. You have to carefully calculate the shell timing, or else you will miss and have a long reload". 

 

[PanzerXO 8]

Why do people hate ground attackers now? I've never even heard of this. Aside from being harder to fly and with limited purpose if anything ground attackers are for more experienced players that can make the most of their horrible flight models....ground attackers are almost the complete opposite of arty actually.

 

I don't, and I know of at least one player who is highly skilled with them.  I think some people get frustrated by how difficult they are to shoot down.

 

WIth light fighters, I try to NEVER come at them from the front or back; Just BnZ from at least a 30 degree angle.

 

With Heavy Figheters, I will tail one and try to use my weapons to take them out, but the combo of high hitpoints and a nasty tailgun make them a frustrating target.

[Scrublet 58]

I don't, and I know of at least one player who is highly skilled with them. I think some people get frustrated by how difficult they are to shoot down.

WIth light fighters, I try to NEVER come at them from the front or back; Just BnZ from at least a 30 degree angle.

With Heavy Figheters, I will tail one and try to use my weapons to take them out, but the combo of high hitpoints and a nasty tailgun make them a frustrating target.

or we could do about how yak9t's in earth under basically one shot everything...

[Shackram 4,285]

I miss my Me.410 (in Wt, not WoWP).

[Deusmortis 4,618]

Why do people hate ground attackers now? I've never even heard of this. Aside from being harder to fly and with limited purpose if anything ground attackers are for more experienced players that can make the most of their horrible flight models....ground attackers are almost the complete opposite of arty actually.

 

Wish you'd tell that to the new crop of pilots.  Seems they're for the incompetent who can manage nothing more than hitting an immobile target with a 100% accurate aiming reticule.  I watched several games pissed away by heavy pilots who could not close out a win, despite having a numeric advantage.  I suppose I dislike the players more than the vehicles.  Though I hated flying the few I tried.  They're also quite frustrating to bring down, when you find your tier 3 facing tier 5 heavies. 

[Cartoonman 188]

As an owner of a ground attacker I have as much hate for arty as I do for the damn fighters that ruin my 10 ground target streaks. 

 

Then again, as a Fighter, I find ground attackers to be free food, so long as they stand still and be nice. Heavy fighters are annoying for both fighters and attackers, esp. the bf 109 Z, OP as hell.

[DracoArgentum 116]

Arty has a lot more effect on the match. I hate enemy arty. Ground attack aircraft have too little impact, I hate allied GA.

 

 

 

I hate Heavy Fighter pilots who waste time on ground targets even more though. That is just so annoying, they have an amazing air to air platform and they shoot houses instead. They're as useful as a base camping heavy tank.

[Alesia 338]

Arty has a lot more effect on the match. I hate enemy arty. Ground attack aircraft have too little impact, I hate allied GA.

 

 

 

I hate Heavy Fighter pilots who waste time on ground targets even more though. That is just so annoying, they have an amazing air to air platform and they shoot houses instead. They're as useful as a base camping heavy tank.

 

Beyond the AGO and FW.57 I don't even equip bombs to my heavy fighters, their an excellent air to air platform.

[PanzerXO 8]

I agree about the Heavy Fighters; I don't have any bombs on them either.  The same should be said of Carrier Fighters.  While you can carry bombs on them, it is stupid to; the loss of airspeed and maneuverability - even after you drop - is unacceptable.

 

Rockets can be fun - but their utility in an ATA role is limited to pretty much head-on-collision avoidance.  Similar to bombs, the loss of performance is unacceptable.

[Deusmortis 4,618]

Beyond the AGO and FW.57 I don't even equip bombs to my heavy fighters, their an excellent air to air platform.

 

Never got high enough along those lines to find anything worthy of air to air.  Though, the 109 Z looks great on paper, and I've seen them used quite effectively.  Now that I have the 109.... F I think?  I have a crossover point.  Just need to grind out 80k xp...

[eNumbra 41]

 

This boy is clearly retarded.

 

 

and I'm not being a prick and using it flippantly, I mean, literally, probably has to be restrained from time to time and medicated, retarded. The only way to succeed at A2A in WoWP is have something with a 20mm+ cannon, because only they do damage fast enough to allow you to kill things in the short periods of time you will have your cursor over an enemy plane.

[Lazar_Lyusternik 13]

 

This boy is clearly retarded.

 

 

and I'm not being a prick and using it flippantly, I mean, literally, probably has to be restrained from time to time and medicated, retarded. The only way to succeed at A2A in WoWP is have something with a 20mm+ cannon, because only they do damage fast enough to allow you to kill things in the short periods of time you will have your cursor over an enemy plane.

I've had far more sucess use my heavies and GA planes as air to air platforums because anything larger than a 23mm absolutely chews up enemy planes. The 50mm on the Me 410 and 37s on the IL-2s are really good at this. You just have to hope it fires while you're on target.

[Alesia 338]

This boy is clearly retarded.

and I'm not being a prick and using it flippantly, I mean, literally, probably has to be restrained from time to time and medicated, retarded. The only way to succeed at A2A in WoWP is have something with a 20mm+ cannon, because only they do damage fast enough to allow you to kill things in the short periods of time you will have your cursor over an enemy plane.

I have to disagree with you, calibers under 20mm are viable until tier 5ish, maybe 6.

[DracoArgentum 116]

I agree about the Heavy Fighters; I don't have any bombs on them either.  The same should be said of Carrier Fighters.  While you can carry bombs on them, it is stupid to; the loss of airspeed and maneuverability - even after you drop - is unacceptable.

 

Rockets can be fun - but their utility in an ATA role is limited to pretty much head-on-collision avoidance.  Similar to bombs, the loss of performance is unacceptable.

 

Some of the aces use them in stern chases too. The key is the random fuse timer plus the blast radius. If you know the ranges really well you can bracket the enemy with blasts from a few rockets.

[Moonrider 23]

people hate ground attack aircraft.

 

 

 

Wait . . . WHAT????? If anything, GA aircraft take MORE skill to fly well than fighters!

 

 

[Moonrider 23]

I don't, and I know of at least one player who is highly skilled with them.  I think some people get frustrated by how difficult they are to shoot down.

 

Difficult to shoot down? They're freaking big fat HP piñatas. They don't call 'em sky whales for nuttin' ya know!

[Deusmortis 4,618]

Wait . . . WHAT????? If anything, GA aircraft take MORE skill to fly well than fighters!

 

I agree.  Sadly, most of the people I have seen lately figure they're just a means by which they can shoot at nice, immobile ground targets, instead of doing all of that fighting stuff.

[Lazar_Lyusternik 13]

I agree.  Sadly, most of the people I have seen lately figure they're just a means by which they can shoot at nice, immobile ground targets, instead of doing all of that fighting stuff.

 

I go for the ground targets first, and if I run out of those, I move to dogfighting.

A downed plane and a destroyed target count the same for the supremacy counter, y'know?

[Deusmortis 4,618]

True, but one of my chief annoyances is when we're already ahead in supremacy, and the heavies/GA/whatever keep going for ground targets.  The fighters lose an uneven matchup, and then the whales get eaten.  Had they gotten into the fight, they could have given the enemy fighters something to think about.  Perhaps one breaks off to attack the GA, which opens him up to attack. 

 

I tend to play in a similar way to what you said.  I'll drop my bombs, and then find something to point my impressive frontal firepower at.