Moderator: ArmA Admins
Sky Monster wrote:It has me baffled and god knows what BIS have done...
Sky Monster wrote:Placidbox and Freeborn don't use the expensive attack aircraft and they seem fine with it...
UnderTow wrote:why is there a need to change prices?
is it u want games to be owned by aircraft?
its funny how the people that spam all teh aircraft are the ones wanting their planes cheaper
also if u want to edit the mission thats fine but make it a new version and dont overwrite the other version.
there is no need for 2 or 3 ppl dictating what the settings should be.
Goshawk wrote:Anyway, Im assuming its the jets that most people have a problem with? Why dont we just try chopper only games? As for you landing on an mhq with you huey, try that against a competent commander who actually does his job by placing defenses instead of sitting around with their thumb up their arse.
Freeborne wrote:Well said. I agree with Baskerville!
Sky Monster wrote:Kamov has 8 Atakas and 4 R73s. Don't even get me started on the EASA loudouts for the Kamov which I believe enables you to have 12 R73s...
Freeborne wrote:So, my points are:
- Aircraft is still very affordable if your team plays well.
- Top-end aircraft is affordable if your team pools resources.
- Top-end aircraft can't be spammed (especially if you're team has low income).
- Low-end aircraft are still very effective and affordable.
- .71 games have been longer and more enjoyable.
PlacidBox wrote:Also, freeborne, i meant cost effectiveness. With, say, an average player in an av8b, they'll usually get downed by a tung after killing as little as 4 tanks. Compared to sitting on a hill with an ambo, respawning for free javelins, it just doesn't compete at all.
Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot], Scott_NZ and 4 guests