Ammo Belts Loadout/Exploit Poll

[JG52Krupi]

This poll is in reference to the discussion started in this thread...

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthr...688#post377688

So should it be left alone or should the server admins be given the option.

Mods: Please don't move this to another section where it will not be viewed!!!

[Flanker35M]

S!

Server to enforce historical setups if the server is running a historical mission setup or event etc. Otherwise I do not care really..if a player want's to make a Sissyfire of Doom with belting only the most lethal ammo then let him..I can do the same to my Bf109 or Me110..

[VO101_Tom]

Usually I use the default settings, so "i don't care".
In reality, how it was regulated? Do you have any info about this? If we rigidly dictates the setting, will it be "historically accurate", or just exaggerate things?

[ATAG_Dutch]

I voted for 'leave it alone'.

There's quite enough argument generated by 'Spit II/not Spit II' and now 'E4/not E4', without the server dictating loadouts.

If we take this to it's end point, so that all machine guns have ball ammo only and no cannons are allowed, what's next?

The server dictates fuel load I presume, so that everyone takes off with full tanks?

The bombers only get a certain bomb loadout?

I know I'm exaggerating here, but I have problems with being dictated to by server rules restricting what's available in the game.

If it's there, let's use it (albeit limited with the Spit II and also E4 in my view). It's part and parcel of 'playing the game', or 'simulating reality' (whichever), so if an individual's skill with loadout management gives him an advantage, so be it. That's as it should be.


Edit: Krups, your link goes to the main page for me, where is the discussion? Cheers.

[JG52Krupi]

Updated the link Dutch thanks for the heads up.

[JG52Krupi]

I find it quite interesting that people want a game as accurate as possible but then want to load there aircraft up with full with limited supplies of de Wilde and mine shells

This poll is simply asking MG to put another important aspect of the game in the sever runners hand if they want to, I don't see why anybody would be against it.

[ATAG_Dutch]

Originally Posted by JG52Krupi

I find it quite interesting that people want a game as accurate as possible but then want to load there aircraft up with full with limited supplies of de Wilde and mine shells

This poll is simply asking MG to put another important aspect of the game in the sever runners hand if they want to, I don't see why anybody would be against it.

I confess, I use 50/50 De Wilde and AP, at 150m convergence, but I'm no more successful with that than with the default loadout as far as I can recall.

I just have a pathological aversion to being dictated to, and if someone can, they probably will. And then the arguments start.

[csThor]

Leave it alone. The impression I'm having that this would cross that nebulous border between realism and excessive control. You can no more tell players what tactics they use so I don't think you should tell them which belting they have to use. That topic is far too diverse to begin with and comes with a general lack of solid information. Were there "official" loadouts? If so who decided what went in there?

[JG52Krupi]

Originally Posted by csThor

Leave it alone. The impression I'm having that this would cross that nebulous border between realism and excessive control. You can no more tell players what tactics they use so I don't think you should tell them which belting they have to use. That topic is far too diverse to begin with and comes with a general lack of solid information. Were there "official" loadouts? If so who decided what went in there?

I agree to a degree, but who knows what giving the option to the server runners would lead to?

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpos...9&postcount=11

And we are already bickering over the FM models of aircraft that are largely based on assumptions IMO.

[csThor]

I simply believe it's a non-issue. No need to overload the engine with more options,especially one which wouldn't see much if any use at all.