I guess my cup is half empty. That email sure made it look like they were releasing it right now; instead it was just another delay letter. Regardless of when it comes, what to me is even more important, is what happens after that. That is when we find out if that plane is the last they ever release for RoF.
Post by BH Vfw. Lotharludwig on Nov 28, 2013 10:43:23 GMT -6
The above mentioned tournament... I can hear the poles salivating...
I cherry picked some of the more interesting aspects, *no pups... what a surprise... could it be 777 KNOWS??? I have NO idea what they are talking about with regard to aircraft selection.
2.6 Height of the first convergence is free to choose. Fuel amount is 20%. Weapons are standart. In the first round (1x1) on the first convergence (merge) fire is forbidden. In 2nd and 3rd rounds (2x2 and 4x4) fire on sight is allowed. 2.7 The ram (collision) is considered as an element of war and a way of conducting fight in all times.
1.7 Tournament plane set Group A 1. Fokker Dr.I 2. Sopwith Triplane 3. Sopwith Camel ------------------------------- Group B 1. Fokker D.VII 2. SPAD 13.C1 3. Albatros D.Va ------------------------------- Group C 1.S.E.5a 2. Nieuport 28.C1 3. Pfalz D.IIIa
2.3 The aircraft choices are defined by consecutive deletion of aircraft-groups and then aircrafts by the teamleaders. The teamleaders have the right to "delete" or deny one plane of a plane-group and the opposing teamleader can cancel the next plane till one plane-set of a group remains as match-aircraft. This right is defined by toss, as described in p. 2.19. The toss winner defines the side.
Post by BH Vfw. Lotharludwig on Nov 29, 2013 12:17:42 GMT -6
That was my first thought was if you really want to see who can win, put them all in the same plane. I thought it would be interesting, something I have wondered about for a long time... if you had a 1v1 contest what plane would be chosen the most often. They have passive flying rules to prevent you from leaving the area, otherwise the Spad XIII would be the choice, just fly away and climb and then come back with the advantage. I don't know of a plane that could stand up to it. The way I read the rules, the last plane in the air wins even if you have a dead engine. Since the Entente planes can take engine damage far better than the Central, just a series of head-on passes would be enough. The Spads guns shoot so much faster, and probably more accuate...can't say for sure... a fuel hit without one in return would be a win. Just delay your next pass as much as possible you get a warning after X amount of time.. to respond within 1 minute. Make another half-hearted pass, pull off early to prevent a return shot being accurate and wait. Same thing basically works with engine damage. No firing on the initial pass... big deal.. the Spad can dive past you and extend and you are right back where you started.
It will be fun to watch, and one thing for sure, if there is a way to "game the game" we know who will be doing it the hardest and longest. It will expose the game for it's flaws and maybe, just maybe some good will come of it. Also be interesting to watch individuals who fly both sides, such as Krusty... to see if they enter, which side would they take. I don't think he would enter because he doesn't seem the type for this (JMHO) but it would be interesting if he does.
There are no sides, LL; just teams. If you think the Entente planes are better, you can arrange it so you get to fly at least one from the Entente side. The debate could be endless. But considering that the rules force engagements over running, it might turn out that the maneuverable, or easy to fly, planes win. What you have to know is how far apart the dromes are, and possibly what the starting altitude is, to know how much time to climb you are going to have. If it is enough to get an appreciable advantage, give me the best climbing plane every time; especially in the 1 v 1 round where there is no firing on the first pass.
We may never know; I doubt they'll advertise who flew what, and beat whom in whatever. I think you'd have to be there to watch it, which might actually be the most fun thing you could do, even more so than actually flying in it.
The more I think about it, the less I want to get involved in it. I mean, I don't need the money, and I don't have anything to prove. The only possible reason for doing it would be for this squad, and as far as that goes, it almost looks hurtful for most of this squad. In choosing pilots, who wants to be relegated to the second string....or the bench? What the smart ones will do, is pair their top two pilots together for the 2 v 2 event, giving them the highest probability of winning at least one of them, and then in the tie-breaker, those two fly again, winning those points. And of course in the 4 v 4 event, they will be together automatically. If you can pull off the 2 v 2 and the 4 v 4 at least, you are going to advance. Nothing nice about it, win at all costs.....at what cost to the squad....?
In terms of "gaming the game", with the rule set I've seen, could you imagine this? Generic team decides that the best course of action is to IMMEDIATELY RAM 3 of the 4 pilots they face, leaving everything up to one uber-pilot for the win. They could even do it on the first pass; there is nothing saying you can't, considering you didn't actually FIRE YOUR GUNS....and most people, without prior knowledge, would never suspect it. It's legal in the rules, and a viable strategy. And since uber-pilot doesn't know who he's fighting, and vice-versa, there is only a 25% chance that it would be the other team's best pilot, making it as easy to win as it could possibly be made.
Such is the stupidity of some of the rules, as written.
Last Edit: Nov 29, 2013 15:43:13 GMT -6 by Hawkeye
Post by BH Vfw. Lotharludwig on Nov 29, 2013 16:52:39 GMT -6
I would have made it so you had to either fly the same planes, or fly a round and then trade planes until someone won with both. At least that would make you learn both sides. I have no interest because I am not good at playing the game. You can't take collisions out of the game, and as long as the are in the game it's a viable tactic. Big stumbling block there. I don't know about learning the who flew what and score business... I have a feeling that will be well discussed. The thing that got me is it implies that the matches will be monitored which I thought was more than could be done. Oh well... will be kinda fun to see how it plays out. I would really have enjoyed it if it were more open, just to see the trends in what was chosen and how it was handled... at least as far as aircraft types.