Tuck wrote:

=£= Ziza wrote: Lol, go and say that to USA AIR FORCE , a about " unfair" . You gonna a fair play? Play candy crush, or change your plane to a lowest plane when you figth vs a lowest rang. This game is about air superiority, and that's means an " unfair game" , all missions it's about that, and camping it's an air superiority. And no, no one can camping, I'm sur I can shoot you down if you are camping me... No one can camping, that's require special skills. If you don't see specials skills in a camping, I see now why you see specials skills in face to face. in a face to face, a pilot low range has a good chance to kill you, because you're giving him a static target, but I assure you that a pilot of low rank could not do camping as simply

btw, is funny you mention the example of the zep. For if we consider that minimum will need 3 pilots to bring him down. How can something so hard to bring down need an escort, but not a single pilot? You can tell the difference is that a bomber pilot can defend itself. Well, if so, simply would not have so many "deaths" in the final stages of the game.We should emphasize also that a pilot has only one bomb, making it even more valuable their safety

As I've said before, this is a game. Fairness & playability are important here as they are not in the real world. Fairness brings & keeps players. I see low ranked players camp all of the time, so your point is moot & clearly, the game is not all about AS. I was USAF for 26 years & have an extremely good understanding of the real word. Been flying online for over a decade too & understand the difference. At the outset, EVERY pilot has a bomb, no? For the record, the most effective tactic I've seen is the group formation, not dropping.

If you need 3 guys to bring down a zep, even outnumbeted, you aren't doing it right...it's TOO easy to bring down. There you go being worried about dying again.

I entered this discussion to make a point at that time. I'd love to see the issue die, but it won't until something changes to end the divide. That was my whole deal, understanding & talking solutions, but we can argue it for as long as you want. I have 15 essays to write in a short amount of time & this is helping the writer's block.

Woohoo !! You are telling me that the p-51 pilots did not use drops when they had to figth? You are telling me that stationary tanks are not released for agility? You are telling me that in the ww1 there were no escorts bombers? How can you be part of the Air Force and your opinion it's against tactics?!! You are telling me face to face is effective?

I do not understand why they complain that " this is not a real life" if you are playing a real life based game. When we will cite historical facts is to give logic to the argument, not because we want things that way , while those opposed to change, they have no argument that " we did this always the same way and you can not come to tell me there are other ways, and if you do something different I will tell you coward because you are taking advantage ". I assure you, a tactic based on custom and repetition ( face to face) is much less logical than one based on history

ZIZA. YOU ARE NOT A HEAD-TO-HEAD FIGHTER, SO STHU, AND GTFO OF OUR THREAD!

Mac McMaster wrote: ZIZA. YOU ARE NOT A HEAD-TO-HEAD FIGHTER, SO STHU, AND GTFO OF OUR THREAD!

Hahaha! Can we print that on a sign and hammer it into the other threads he's defending is 'evasive tactics of bravery'

Public forum, dude. Anyone is allowed to post here.

Mac and Whip can we stop the "personal attacks" and/or support for the personal attacks?...I know Ziza at times did this....but "cursing a player out even using abbreviations seems WAY over the top and shouldnt be supported.

gees pilots should be able to say their opinion as long as one isnt "personally attacking" a person.

|111th|tSwopCaml wrote: Mac and Whip can we stop the "personal attacks" and/or support for the personal attacks?...I know Ziza at times did this....but "cursing a player out even using abbreviations seems WAY over the top and shouldnt be supported.

gees pilots should be able to say their opinion as long as one isnt "personally attacking" a person.

Swop if you look back I asked Ziza to agree to disagree and let's drop the argument since we've said it all and we get no where. It would appear he is quite defensive about his acts of bravery and feels the need to laugh and taunt players here. He won't stop and I'm not going to sit back and watch him bad mouth people. The best part is the more he says the more he is going to have to sneak because he certainly isn't making friends.

I dont see any comment Whip on this thread from you regarding Ziza except for the most recent comment. For me, I have seen others do the same if not worse than Ziza...I'm not defending Ziza on certain comments, but many many others who support the tactic of dropping had things to say....I dont think we need to "drop the discussion" when others have things to say.

There is never an excuse to attack the person and/or curse.... you can address a view but not degrade the person. Other than a "woohoo" I dont see Ziza "attacking the person" or bad mouth. there were a couple of times he did but I saw comments by others WAY WAY worse...

It appears the discussion is diminished so we need to just let it go. No comment EVER deserves a person to EVER be cursed out...

We all should just agree to disagree upon the entire topic.. some will dislike those that drop for whatever reason, and others will think that it's their right to play this game however they see fit to do so.

I can see that none of us are going to change the others way of thinking.

I think the only thing that will convince anyone on the either side of this argument of carrying vs dropping will be Squadron Wars. That will be the crucible test to determine whose tactics are superior.. carrying thru the valley of death corridor shooting head to head never dropping, or utilizing fighter escorts to get your bombers to the enemy base. I believe it will become truly clear then as to which school of thought on this over-argued topic will become the 'new' accepted way of battle.

Ok.this thread was started for head to head fighters and asking that when its a game of of such players that it stays that.type of game so telly why when its a game of head to head players that someone would jump in and tell us we want fighters all.that.was asked is that we be respected in the game going on if it a game of h to h players we only ask that we be allowed to play that way

Mickey Rooney died........
My daughters cat puked on the kitchen floor. (daughters at school)
fly fell in my morning coffee
ran out of toilet paper, extra was in the mudd room
toilet clogged
plunger was downstairs
printer was out of paper
computer froze up
phone fell in the toilet while playing DF


NOW THATS A DROPPER RIGHT THERE FOLKS..............

|111th|tSwopCaml wrote: I dont see any comment Whip on this thread from you regarding Ziza except for the most recent comment. For me, I have seen others do the same if not worse than Ziza...I'm not defending Ziza on certain comments, but many many others who support the tactic of dropping had things to say....I dont think we need to "drop the discussion" when others have things to say.

There is never an excuse to attack the person and/or curse.... you can address a view but not degrade the person. Other than a "woohoo" I dont see Ziza "attacking the person" or bad mouth. there were a couple of times he did but I saw comments by others WAY WAY worse...

It appears the discussion is diminished so we need to just let it go. No comment EVER deserves a person to EVER be cursed out...

This is what I was talking about

DD | v/hiplash wrote: It is best to say the discussion is now over...we have both stated our sides over and over and there is no need to make any further accusations of each other. I believe that Ziza and I have made wrong assessments of each other in the short time we made our judgment. The more I read what he has to say the more I feel there is a lot of confusion and we most likely agree on a lot of this it more the circumstances we are placing on the answers we give and so it comes off that we are complete opposites.

Overall we have decided to agree to disagree if by language barrier or by different schools of thought but its starting to drift into personal attack and that's not good for anyone. Thanks for the support everyone and Ziza is right in that he doesn't have the same tenure to have this kind of backup so he will feel alienated and that is also not good. Away from this topic he seems very respectfull and a great pilot so let's let him show us who he is in the games he plays and let's agree this discussion is over.

I was very pleased that he wished me well in my then upcoming battle so to return the favor I wish him well in his dogfight life and I hope to leave this all behind and we can kill reds together some day soon.

dentinhead wrote: Mickey Rooney died........
My daughters cat puked on the kitchen floor. (daughters at school)
fly fell in my morning coffee
ran out of toilet paper, extra was in the mudd room
toilet clogged
plunger was downstairs
printer was out of paper
computer froze up
phone fell in the toilet while playing DF


NOW THATS A DROPPER RIGHT THERE FOLKS..............

I'm serious.....

I still dont see on "this specific thread"...I'm talking about on this specific thread...I'm just saying that there were WAY more stuuf said worse than Ziza..including curse out and way worse personal attacks. I do agree that some of what Ziza said was that and I acknowledge that Whip...You know I respect you big time...one of my favorite pilots.

FYI:. my views I have mentioned here and elsewhere come from myself being a "head to head pilot"...I just happen to support all forms of tactics in the game of dogfight except for spawnkilling and teamkilling for the winning of the mission but I have said that way too many times. So sorry

I echo Zebra's comment....and agree this discussion appears diminishing...

|111th|tSwopCaml wrote: I still dont see on "this specific thread"...I'm talking about on this specific thread...I'm just saying that there were WAY more stuuf said worse than Ziza..including curse out and way worse personal attacks. I do agree that some of what Ziza said was that and I acknowledge that Whip...You know I respect you big time...one of my favorite pilots.

FYI:. my views I have mentioned here and elsewhere come from myself being a "head to head pilot"...I just happen to support all forms of tactics in the game of dogfight except for spawnkilling and teamkilling for the winning of the mission but I have said that way too many times. So sorry

I echo Zebra's comment....and agree this discussion appears diminishing...

Your right Swop and this I guess I wasn't clear in that I chose this topic to voice my opinion but really Ziza has jumped into every topic available and since there are so many I just chose one. I have to admit I haven't really read the majority of them after the comment that I just reposted, since this was over for me. Sadly not so for Ziza and continues to follow around players I very much respect and know have honor to seemingly taunt them. My comments are isolated to those actions. Really I would rather be figuring out another tournament or scavenger hunt but bicker and argue is the game lately so I am keeping up my side. Let's all drop all of it...please.

I agree and I hope all agree like Whip and I to drop it...I just wish cursing and cursing out people as well as personal attacking the person would not be part of the lexicon...I agree 100% with what whip said previously.

I will preface by validating some of the arguements made:

1) Dropping is a tactic, and can be effective.
2) There are certain times when most agree that dropping is called for.
3) There is no "dogfight law" against it.
4) No one in the game has the right to dictate another's play (I note here the clowns that like to ride around in tanks when down 6-2, habitual sneaks that are so predictable they never bomb a hangar as all the opponents are always looking for them, the guy who thinks he can out-infantry aircraft that can simple fly around, etc.)

I don't care how people play. If your style is to drop and create advantage, knock yourself out.

Here's the base problem I have; do not pretend that dropping is some altrustic thing you do to help the team, some cross you have to bear.

1) Not once have I seen a dropper in a game say, hey guys, stop carrying, it's my turn to bomb now. One burst in their general direction and here comes the bombless spinner, trying to get behind the laden aircraft.
2) Not once have a heard a pilot renkowned as a dropper say to his team mates, hey why don't you drop, get way out front and be in my line of fire so I can't shoot, and suck up all the kills while I fly slowly toward the base to get my measly 50 points (or whatever it is) for dropping a bomb. Oh, maybe I can get two hangars and double up, yay.
3) Most players of skill don't need an escort, and I note the droppers don't stick so much against them either.
4) Dropping is most effective against new pilots with inferior aircraft. What a win for you, dropper.
5) Pilots like me will not carry and let you press the advantage, and will swirl with you on the field, negating you notional escort argument
6) I laugh when I hear the "historical" argument. You want historical, the scout planes in this game that could carry bombs (and most represented did not have the capacity) carried small loads that did not have the performance drain of the game. Most are badly represeted in their performance, speed and turning ability and climb, as they are "game friendly". Want real historical? Turn off the radar and the pipper. Half the self described "turn fighters" swirl behind an aircraft and follow the pipper. That's not dogfigting skill in any historical sense. I also disgree with the laser ammo that starts engagments hundreds of meters before realistic, and guns that don't overheat, but that is another thread.
7) The "it's a combat simulator" argument. Ludicrous. It's a video game very, very loosely based on WWI aircrat. There is no rudder control, wind effects, ground fire, mechanical problems, weather, guns jamming, the plane's perfomances are not close to actual, there aren't even any trenches to fly over. WWII aircraft carrier patrolling lakes? Two shot kills, every time? Only one aircraft goes down in a crash? Chutes were not prevalent in the war and jumping with a hyper accurate rifle capable of taking down flying aircraft is absurd. Ever seen the cockpit of a scout? Where are you going to stash that rifle? If anyone wanted a real combat experience there were plenty of wars to fight over the last twenty years, and the ground forces never put out a sign stating they were no longer taking applicants. Where i was we had new openings every day. It's goofy to equate "combat conditions" to taking advantage in a video game.

So there's my argument, once more. Drop all you want, all's fair, but don't pretend that it is for some greater good or dogfight social service, it's simply gaining advantage through personal gratification. I don't have qualms about dropping when I need that advantage to chase a high sneak or when half a wave gets through to the base , etc., but I understand that repeatedly dropping off the runway and heading out in a swirl to get behind laden aircraft in the middle is nothing more than gaining an advantage for the pilot that does it. There are guys that never, ever carry, and plenty of pilots that won't play with them. I won't carry against a dropper, but I'll play with one. Nothing more fun than to run one off.

Ziza, you asked if an hour long game with a 2 to 1 kill ratio is effective? Yes, if you win and have fun. I've had noob massacres with 30-2 KDR that were over in minutes that weren't a lot of fun, so is it completing the mission that's the fun part, or racking up the kills, is that the fun part? For me it's duking it out with good pilots on equal footing, with none seeking advantage. Pushing up the middle against the class of the field to bomb a hangar with two on your tail, that's the fun part.

Let me ask this; if you are the dropper that enters a game and start dropping and swriling, and the "escorted planes" all pipe up to cut it out, would you?

Longrifle. we personally dont think we need a preface or a continuation of the argument....all of these points have been point and counterpointed in agnosium (spelling)...all 7 of your points I could address one by one and give an awesome reason of disagreement to each....but I will not in honor of others who said to drop the conversation and in my agreement to drop the subject as well.

I thought we were going to be done on this conversation...again...I echo Whippy's (name of respect I give to Whip every once in awhile ) statement.

I can't post on weekends from my phone or tablet, so I'm often late to reply. As to Whip's statement, it took me three hours to put those few lines together, as I pick up and drop as needed for work, so I often come in behind the latest post.

As long as I keep getting replies with counterpoints, I don't consider the argument over, ad nauseum or not. I don't think you can dispute those points effectively or I would not have made them.

Longrifle wrote: I can't post on weekends from my phone or tablet, so I'm often late to reply. As to Whip's statement, it took me three hours to put those few lines together, as I pick up and drop as needed for work, so I often come in behind the latest post.

As long as I keep getting replies with counterpoints, I don't consider the argument over, ad nauseum or not. I don't think you can dispute those points effectively or I would not have made them.

It covers my point of just let people play how they like. I usually carry a bomb but if a game is not moving along and is just stuck at a stalemate in the middle of the map I will say screw it and fly to were I am the most skilled. Gen Jack I know drops his bomb because his devices always has a crapy frame rate like what you get over water. Trying to do a head on in that is near impossible.

Why not join in the sh!tstorm? This is really a simple game. For the most part, the rules have also been simple. Everyone agrees on teamkilling, profanity, repeated and constant sexual innuendo, and most forms of direct personal harassment of other players. Beyond that, the water gets murky. My personal feeling is that if one doesn't like the way this game is and can be played, find another. If people continue to complicate this game, then it's going to be no better than a simple arcade game, with most of the control not in the users hands. At that point, this game will suck. Honestly, as people are breaking their necks here to take something very simple, and make it very complicated, you are already making the game suck.

If someone uses a tactic that you can't overcome, learn to overcome it. Gen Jack's drop and spin is kryptonite for me. I can't hit him. Eventually, I may learn how, but until then I am not going to come on to the forum and try to get every tactic that makes the game hard for me banned. That's effectively what some of you are trying to do. I would like to call it pathetic, but I just lectured a newbie forum spammer about being nice, so I'll just call it "a practice that one may want to reevaluate."

From Longrifle post


I will preface by validating some of the arguements made:

1) Dropping is a tactic, and can be effective.
2) There are certain times when most agree that dropping is called for.
3) There is no "dogfight law" against it.
4) No one in the game has the right to dictate another's play (I note here the clowns that like to ride around in tanks when down 6-2, habitual sneaks that are so predictable they never bomb a hangar as all the opponents are always looking for them, the guy who thinks he can out-infantry aircraft that can simple fly around, etc.)

I don't care how people play. If your style is to drop and create advantage, knock yourself out.

Here's the base problem I have; do not pretend that dropping is some altrustic thing you do to help the team, some cross you have to bear.

1) Not once have I seen a dropper in a game say, hey guys, stop carrying, it's my turn to bomb now. One burst in their general direction and here comes the bombless spinner, trying to get behind the laden aircraft.

You've never seen anyone doing that because no one has put into practice, only me

2) Not once have a heard a pilot renkowned as a dropper say to his team mates, hey why don't you drop, get way out front and be in my line of fire so I can't shoot, and suck up all the kills while I fly slowly toward the base to get my measly 50 points (or whatever it is) for dropping a bomb. Oh, maybe I can get two hangars and double up, yay.

then here is what bothers you that someone is going to take more points than the other? really hard for me to interpret your question. But what I understand is that you say it's not fair that the bombers earn fewer points than the escorts?


3) Most players of skill don't need an escort, and I note the droppers don't stick so much against them either.

Well, that brings us to the point that I noted. If a Droper makes face to face, it is not helping much. And that you mention about the "necessity" of escorts, and many do not need it, it is precisely because an escort you will not defend yourself from a bomber, he will defend you from the enemy escort
Also, back to the same point, the strategy of the game is only face to face, even formations are used, that is why many "seem to need the escort," the simplicity of the game because it is not demand that , because face to face it’s a individual strategy and no team strategy.



4) Dropping is most effective against new pilots with inferior aircraft. What a win for you, dropper.

return to the same point, if a guard does face to face, he just is not making use of their advantage. he is another pilot whit out a bomb making face to face


5) Pilots like me will not carry and let you press the advantage, and will swirl with you on the field, negating you notional escort argument

You are not denying me my argument, you are confirming me. Because at the moment you drop the bomb to bring down a guard, you're becoming an escort

6) I laugh when I hear the "historical" argument. You want historical, the scout planes in this game that could carry bombs (and most represented did not have the capacity) carried small loads that did not have the performance drain of the game. Most are badly represeted in their performance, speed and turning ability and climb, as they are "game friendly". Want real historical? Turn off the radar and the pipper. Half the self described "turn fighters" swirl behind an aircraft and follow the pipper. That's not dogfigting skill in any historical sense. I also disgree with the laser ammo that starts engagments hundreds of meters before realistic, and guns that don't overheat, but that is another thread.

When I say "historical arguments" do not think of making a detailed comparison of the realism of the game, obviously not. When I say "historical argument" is to give back to the styles and infinite possibilities of the game. Imagine you're playing FIFA (which by the way I am 'very bad player). And you only are using strikers in your team. Well, if someone comes and tell you that “defense, goalies, midfielders” are used in real life, is not making a comparison of realism, is giving argumentation of the possibilities and expansion of the game.

7) The "it's a combat simulator" argument. Ludicrous. It's a video game very, very loosely based on WWI aircrat. There is no rudder control, wind effects, ground fire, mechanical problems, weather, guns jamming, the plane's perfomances are not close to actual, there aren't even any trenches to fly over. WWII aircraft carrier patrolling lakes? Two shot kills, every time? Only one aircraft goes down in a crash? Chutes were not prevalent in the war and jumping with a hyper accurate rifle capable of taking down flying aircraft is absurd. Ever seen the cockpit of a scout? Where are you going to stash that rifle? If anyone wanted a real combat experience there were plenty of wars to fight over the last twenty years, and the ground forces never put out a sign stating they were no longer taking applicants. Where i was we had new openings every day. It's goofy to equate "combat conditions" to taking advantage in a video game.

“taking advantage” well, far as I have understood, to win you need to "take advantage". And if you do not like or consider that unfair advantage, I think the whole game is wrong. Everything in the game is to take advantage. Why you want the "6" of the enemy? for take advantage, why buy a new plane? to advantage, why develop your skills in face to face? to take advantage. The problem is when you can not adapt to a new advantage, and so now if "take advantage" is something wrong


So there's my argument, once more. Drop all you want, all's fair, but don't pretend that it is for some greater good or dogfight social service, it's simply gaining advantage through personal gratification. I don't have qualms about dropping when I need that advantage to chase a high sneak or when half a wave gets through to the base , etc., but I understand that repeatedly dropping off the runway and heading out in a swirl to get behind laden aircraft in the middle is nothing more than gaining an advantage for the pilot that does it. There are guys that never, ever carry, and plenty of pilots that won't play with them. I won't carry against a dropper, but I'll play with one. Nothing more fun than to run one off.

“Drop all you want, all's fair, but don't pretend that it is for some greater good or dogfight social service, it's simply gaining advantage through personal gratification.” I wonder if face to face is more altruistic? what do you think? well, that’s it's something you do alone, with an ratio of time / deaths / friends covered / hangars destroyed real questionable.

“personal gratification “ well, this can be answered in many ways, the first is that if both parties use different tactics, ie, one is doing the same and the other guards used, of course that is questioned altruism, but still, if there is a rotation of roles ( fighter/bomber/fighter/bomber), which would not see the problem. The other way to respond is quite philosophical, and my English is not enough. but it's basically in the sense that the personal rewards are more obvious in who are looking for a long lasting bombing game who seeks to win quickly using different tactics, for example, sneaker, because the sneaker no charges, only grave hangars, but his altruism is interpreted as cowardice. But as I said, it's something social very complicated and interpretive sense to explain in English.
I give you all the reason, the important thing is to have fun, so I do not go to games bombing, but if I see a friend. Because the absence of different styles and take off to play call of dutty (face to face) on another plane, is not very fun for me.

And about what you said about the success rate, well, I just quoted it to measure the effectiveness of the styles, and if one is more fun than the other, is personal question


Let me ask this; if you are the dropper that enters a game and start dropping and swriling, and the "escorted planes" all pipe up to cut it out, would you?

I really tried to translate your question, but I could not, I can not contextualize it, someone could translate me?
And one more thing, whip mentioned that bothered him how I respond to some pilots, well, I respect every pilot, but if he insults me, I will not respect him, that's why I respond to that style reply against some. I can not understand English, but still I will will defend myself.

and well, this will be my last post on the subject, for the health of a pilot who has asked me, I will

And also important to clarify that I am a sociologist, and if someday know any sociologist will explain why I keep debating this issue, and it's not because I'm looking to see who opens another topic about this lol. It is simply an action against those who monopolize the style and contaminated with offenses those who do different things

If you are red you are dead thay say, but with the bomb on, they said


thanks to all pilots who suport to me

=£= Ziza wrote: From Longrifle post


I will preface by validating some of the arguements made:

1) Dropping is a tactic, and can be effective.
2) There are certain times when most agree that dropping is called for.
3) There is no "dogfight law" against it.
4) No one in the game has the right to dictate another's play (I note here the clowns that like to ride around in tanks when down 6-2, habitual sneaks that are so predictable they never bomb a hangar as all the opponents are always looking for them, the guy who thinks he can out-infantry aircraft that can simple fly around, etc.)

I don't care how people play. If your style is to drop and create advantage, knock yourself out.

Here's the base problem I have; do not pretend that dropping is some altrustic thing you do to help the team, some cross you have to bear.

1) Not once have I seen a dropper in a game say, hey guys, stop carrying, it's my turn to bomb now. One burst in their general direction and here comes the bombless spinner, trying to get behind the laden aircraft.

You've never seen anyone doing that because no one has put into practice, only me

2) Not once have a heard a pilot renkowned as a dropper say to his team mates, hey why don't you drop, get way out front and be in my line of fire so I can't shoot, and suck up all the kills while I fly slowly toward the base to get my measly 50 points (or whatever it is) for dropping a bomb. Oh, maybe I can get two hangars and double up, yay.

then here is what bothers you that someone is going to take more points than the other? really hard for me to interpret your question. But what I understand is that you say it's not fair that the bombers earn fewer points than the escorts?


3) Most players of skill don't need an escort, and I note the droppers don't stick so much against them either.

Well, that brings us to the point that I noted. If a Droper makes face to face, it is not helping much. And that you mention about the "necessity" of escorts, and many do not need it, it is precisely because an escort you will not defend yourself from a bomber, he will defend you from the enemy escort
Also, back to the same point, the strategy of the game is only face to face, even formations are used, that is why many "seem to need the escort," the simplicity of the game because it is not demand that , because face to face it’s a individual strategy and no team strategy.



4) Dropping is most effective against new pilots with inferior aircraft. What a win for you, dropper.

return to the same point, if a guard does face to face, he just is not making use of their advantage. he is another pilot whit out a bomb making face to face


5) Pilots like me will not carry and let you press the advantage, and will swirl with you on the field, negating you notional escort argument

You are not denying me my argument, you are confirming me. Because at the moment you drop the bomb to bring down a guard, you're becoming an escort

6) I laugh when I hear the "historical" argument. You want historical, the scout planes in this game that could carry bombs (and most represented did not have the capacity) carried small loads that did not have the performance drain of the game. Most are badly represeted in their performance, speed and turning ability and climb, as they are "game friendly". Want real historical? Turn off the radar and the pipper. Half the self described "turn fighters" swirl behind an aircraft and follow the pipper. That's not dogfigting skill in any historical sense. I also disgree with the laser ammo that starts engagments hundreds of meters before realistic, and guns that don't overheat, but that is another thread.

When I say "historical arguments" do not think of making a detailed comparison of the realism of the game, obviously not. When I say "historical argument" is to give back to the styles and infinite possibilities of the game. Imagine you're playing FIFA (which by the way I am 'very bad player). And you only are using strikers in your team. Well, if someone comes and tell you that “defense, goalies, midfielders” are used in real life, is not making a comparison of realism, is giving argumentation of the possibilities and expansion of the game.

7) The "it's a combat simulator" argument. Ludicrous. It's a video game very, very loosely based on WWI aircrat. There is no rudder control, wind effects, ground fire, mechanical problems, weather, guns jamming, the plane's perfomances are not close to actual, there aren't even any trenches to fly over. WWII aircraft carrier patrolling lakes? Two shot kills, every time? Only one aircraft goes down in a crash? Chutes were not prevalent in the war and jumping with a hyper accurate rifle capable of taking down flying aircraft is absurd. Ever seen the cockpit of a scout? Where are you going to stash that rifle? If anyone wanted a real combat experience there were plenty of wars to fight over the last twenty years, and the ground forces never put out a sign stating they were no longer taking applicants. Where i was we had new openings every day. It's goofy to equate "combat conditions" to taking advantage in a video game.

“taking advantage” well, far as I have understood, to win you need to "take advantage". And if you do not like or consider that unfair advantage, I think the whole game is wrong. Everything in the game is to take advantage. Why you want the "6" of the enemy? for take advantage, why buy a new plane? to advantage, why develop your skills in face to face? to take advantage. The problem is when you can not adapt to a new advantage, and so now if "take advantage" is something wrong


So there's my argument, once more. Drop all you want, all's fair, but don't pretend that it is for some greater good or dogfight social service, it's simply gaining advantage through personal gratification. I don't have qualms about dropping when I need that advantage to chase a high sneak or when half a wave gets through to the base , etc., but I understand that repeatedly dropping off the runway and heading out in a swirl to get behind laden aircraft in the middle is nothing more than gaining an advantage for the pilot that does it. There are guys that never, ever carry, and plenty of pilots that won't play with them. I won't carry against a dropper, but I'll play with one. Nothing more fun than to run one off.

“Drop all you want, all's fair, but don't pretend that it is for some greater good or dogfight social service, it's simply gaining advantage through personal gratification.” I wonder if face to face is more altruistic? what do you think? well, that’s it's something you do alone, with an ratio of time / deaths / friends covered / hangars destroyed real questionable.

“personal gratification “ well, this can be answered in many ways, the first is that if both parties use different tactics, ie, one is doing the same and the other guards used, of course that is questioned altruism, but still, if there is a rotation of roles ( fighter/bomber/fighter/bomber), which would not see the problem. The other way to respond is quite philosophical, and my English is not enough. but it's basically in the sense that the personal rewards are more obvious in who are looking for a long lasting bombing game who seeks to win quickly using different tactics, for example, sneaker, because the sneaker no charges, only grave hangars, but his altruism is interpreted as cowardice. But as I said, it's something social very complicated and interpretive sense to explain in English.
I give you all the reason, the important thing is to have fun, so I do not go to games bombing, but if I see a friend. Because the absence of different styles and take off to play call of dutty (face to face) on another plane, is not very fun for me.

And about what you said about the success rate, well, I just quoted it to measure the effectiveness of the styles, and if one is more fun than the other, is personal question


Let me ask this; if you are the dropper that enters a game and start dropping and swriling, and the "escorted planes" all pipe up to cut it out, would you?

I really tried to translate your question, but I could not, I can not contextualize it, someone could translate me?
And one more thing, whip mentioned that bothered him how I respond to some pilots, well, I respect every pilot, but if he insults me, I will not respect him, that's why I respond to that style reply against some. I can not understand English, but still I will will defend myself.

and well, this will be my last post on the subject, for the health of a pilot who has asked me, I will

And also important to clarify that I am a sociologist, and if someday know any sociologist will explain why I keep debating this issue, and it's not because I'm looking to see who opens another topic about this lol. It is simply an action against those who monopolize the style and contaminated with offenses those who do different things

If you are red you are dead thay say, but with the bomb on, they said


thanks to all pilots who suport to me

Yawn!! Has it finished yet?

Yes it is finished.. at least by myself & Ziza & Whiplash... we have agreed to disagree.. you won't see anymore posts about this subject from any of us.

I think that the hopefully upcoming Squadron Wars will be the deciding argument on this long running argument.. differing schools of fighting tactics in this game opposing each other.. those that fly carrying their bomb down thru the middle of the valley of death doing head to head shooting versus those that try various tactics to win the mission... and the final verdict will be who wins most often I suppose.

I look forward to it!

I thought most of us are mature enough to handle an abbreviation but I guess not, I apologize for implicating such a wicked word to all of the fragile psyche's out there. Let ignor the fact that my opionions specifically have been attacked over and over by ziza...when I fact iv never mentioned his name or said anything to him ever to provoke such behavior. Really now I could care less how u play head to head or sneak or drop either way ill drop u regardless. Its nice to know that my attacks are ignored and replaced with even more personal attacks on myself. Everyone keeps saying to each his own..well if that's the case why am I being singled out for my opinions? Makes no sense to me....and yes I already apologized for an abbreviation so lets try finding oit why I DESERVE to be attacked

Joker...we didnt ignore the attacks and in fact I and others mentioned it regarding Ziza. ...no fragile psyche here...just stating a fact regarding cursing someone out someone is attacking the person . I dont think attacking an opinion is attacking the person unless someone is hostile and some of Ziza'a as that from my opinion. though people have the right to be entitled to their opinion. However, I observed Joker what Ziza said to you and some of what he said was "over the top" and I mentioned that.

I echo Whip, Zebra, Crazed Psycho, myself and other's comment to let it go

[DD]*joker* wrote: I thought most of us are mature enough to handle an abbreviation but I guess not, I apologize for implicating such a wicked word to all of the fragile psyche's out there. Let ignor the fact that my opionions specifically have been attacked over and over by ziza...when I fact iv never mentioned his name or said anything to him ever to provoke such behavior. Really now I could care less how u play head to head or sneak or drop either way ill drop u regardless. Its nice to know that my attacks are ignored and replaced with even more personal attacks on myself. Everyone keeps saying to each his own..well if that's the case why am I being singled out for my opinions? Makes no sense to me....and yes I already apologized for an abbreviation so lets try finding oit why I DESERVE to be attacked

sometimes it is not necessary to write the name of the person to attack her. you're making an aggressive coment saying that you will tell everyone "cowardly" who use tactics that I am advocating , that's is a prejudice. maturity also requires an understanding of a position and when a person speaks between the lines, a kind of threat disguised sarcasm. Sorry joker,but I was not born yesterday. and the obviousness of your comment become a threat is enough reason for me to answer you in the way that I did. you are not respecting the game modes from the time you accuse someone of cowardice. Like a say, I don't gonna make more post about this, but this important clarification

"Like a say, I don't gonna make more post about this, but this important clarification"

Ziza thank you.,.....we all agree now..so lets move on...

I'll try and make it my last post as well, as the points have been made clearly all around. Ziza, I appreciate your command of English as I don't have the vocabulary in Spanish to made clear arguements.

1) You've never seen anyone doing that because no one has put into practice, only me - That reinforces my belief that for the most part, the pilots who drop are usually not playing for the team, but just happen to be playing with a team. If each member does not rotate escort/bomber duties, then the escort argument is a selfish one.

2) But what I understand is that you say it's not fair that the bombers earn fewer points than the escorts? - Essentially yes; I don't believe the majority of pilots in Dogfight need an escort. Dropping one's bomb and flying in front to gett kills with a manuever advantage seems unfair to the guys who keep their bombs and are prevented from shootin by having a friendly spinning around out in front of them.

3) Well, that brings us to the point that I noted. If a Droper makes face to face, it is not helping much. And that you mention about the "necessity" of escorts, and many do not need it, it is precisely because an escort you will not defend yourself from a bomber, he will defend you from the enemy escort
Also, back to the same point, the strategy of the game is only face to face, even formations are used, that is why many "seem to need the escort," the simplicity of the game because it is not demand that , because face to face it’s a individual strategy and no team strategy. - Again, if both sides were using scout aircraft and bombers (one of the large ones, not a fighter/bomber) then I might buy it, and it might be fun especillay with rear guns for the bombers, but to arbitrarily call yourself an escort points to gaining advantage for self, not team.

4) return to the same point, if a guard does face to face, he just is not making use of their advantage. he is another pilot whit out a bomb making face to face - may not hae translated well, what I was really talking about is that dropping a bomb makes the best aircraft perform even better against the slower aircraft.

5) You are not denying me my argument, you are confirming me. Because at the moment you drop the bomb to bring down a guard, you're becoming an escort - The minute I drop my bomb, I am in anti-dropper mode. If I take out the red dropper, I don't escort the bombers, I go looking for the red dropper again. A lot of times I'll annpounce that I won't engage the bombers if they let me deal with the dropper.

6) When I say "historical arguments" do not think of making a detailed comparison of the realism of the game, obviously not. When I say "historical argument" is to give back to the styles and infinite possibilities of the game. Imagine you're playing FIFA (which by the way I am 'very bad player). And you only are using strikers in your team. Well, if someone comes and tell you that “defense, goalies, midfielders” are used in real life, is not making a comparison of realism, is giving argumentation of the possibilities and expansion of the game. - The comment was to point out the irrelavance of discussing historical escorts and bombers who flew different aircracft that had different purposes as opposed to the game where the scout planes have been repurposed to fly bombing missions they would never have received in the war, and to generally distance the game from advanced tactics.

7) “taking advantage” well, far as I have understood, to win you need to "take advantage". And if you do not like or consider that unfair advantage, I think the whole game is wrong. Everything in the game is to take advantage. Why you want the "6" of the enemy? for take advantage, why buy a new plane? to advantage, why develop your skills in face to face? to take advantage. The problem is when you can not adapt to a new advantage, and so now if "take advantage" is something wrong - Your arguement has consistently been "I seek advantage to help the team". My counter has been that you seek advantage for the benefits of advantage itself.


"Drop all you want, all's fair, but don't pretend that it is for some greater good or dogfight social service, it's simply gaining advantage through personal gratification.” I wonder if face to face is more altruistic? what do you think? well, that’s it's something you do alone, with an ratio of time / deaths / friends covered / hangars destroyed real questionable. - Some translation issue here, but to me, engaging pilots on an even footing is the height of the game. That's me. Other like to machine gun noobs on the run way while laughing like maniacs and playing Aces High at full volume. I like to duel in dogfights with pilots of equal skill and equipment, some like to enter a DF match aand see grey and red triplanes to cut down with their SE5. I don't feel like I am disadvantaging anyone by letting them engage me head to head, on the contrary if I dropped and swirled in behind a level 1-4 plane I would be gauranteed success, so in that case I would think I was being unfair. That's me.


Let me ask this; if you are the dropper that enters a game and start dropping and swriling, and the "escorted planes" all pipe up to cut it out, would you? I really tried to translate your question, but I could not, I can not contextualize it, someone could translate me?

The question restated is, if you entered a game, and you dropped your bomb, and your team mates saw this and told you that this was unacceptable behavior, would you stop, or at least leave the game? When I first started I was called out for doing things that made sense to anyone with a military background, but are not considered fair play by all.


And also important to clarify that I am a sociologist, and if someday know any sociologist will explain why I keep debating this issue, and it's not because I'm looking to see who opens another topic about this lol. It is simply an action against those who monopolize the style and contaminated with offenses those who do different things

I'm not seeking to monopolize the style of play. I accept dropping, camping, sneaking, swirling, etc. as part of the game, and it is a game. I am stating that if you engage iin this behaviour, it isn't for the team as much as it is for the individual. My problem is one of seeing pilots seeking advantage but stating that they are not doing it for themselves (which is true) but for the good of their team mates (which is not true).

My perfect DF match is a BTB game with guys like Monster Cannon, Hulk, TR, Frank, Davy, Blue Max, Arkangel, Bware, Hansone, Zandor, etc., guys that can throw punches. I was in a 5 on 2 with Arkangel and watched him defend his last hangar with a new pilot as his only comrade for over an hour, and rack up a big score. At any pass I could have probably told two of my low rank guys to go wide, sent one high, and kept him busy by dropping and swirling with him so we could get the last hanagr, but don't you see that is not the honorable thing to do to a pilot that is playing it square?

As mentioned elsewhere, I see sneaking and droppign as a last resort by the other guy, and it tells me I've got into their heads. Some of my best moments in DF; chase a dropper off the field, and force a damn good pilot to resort to sneaking because you have smacked him every pass for the last 50. Is dropping and sneaking part of the game? Yes, but it shouldn't be the go to tactic every time you clear the runway.

wheres that Beat a Dead Horse award when you need one

As long as the two of us are engagging in a civil dialogue, I don't consider it beating a dead horse. I'm open to his viewpoints and have been working to understand his position.