So far, only naval battles have seaplane airfields, and if anyone has played seaplanes in naval battles you know that they never need to land there(because they get shot down).
Now, most of the time I use seaplanes in Air battles, where I have to land on the airfield without any landing gear which ends up wrecking the plane. It annoys me that my seaplane has to be heavily damaged whenever I land. Even though landing on rivers or seas near airfields is meant to work, I rarely manage to see them in most maps and even if I see them there is a chance they are not close enough. Therefore I am suggesting that seaplane airfields also be added to air battles and maybe test flight(which also has this problem and more minor) or ground battles(even though seaplanes are less common).
Blink blink do you not know how to land a sea plane? On a stone or dirt, or sand, or snow airstrip? surprisingly easy once you slow down enough.
It does do some damage no matter how you land it on an airfield(unless you are talking about the PBY-5A which has landing gear)
:) acceptable casualties. Good thing its not losing your entire tail. Heh
Yes, we know, but it kills the immersion. They could even implement a waterway along side of the maps, which don’t have a natural water source.
Not really. If your engine is severely damaged and an airstrip made of some material is located.
You’re gonna land there. This idea of "it’s not immersive "is a load of baloney. When you realize the amount batshite crazy things people did that would be considered “unimmersive”. Ex: Old 666, Pug Sunderland and his F4F, a B-17 tail gun landing, a B-17 landing without its tail(both likely the same
B-17). Jack Churchill(Mad Jack). Seeing a Catalina that doesn’t have wheels, or seeing another Japanese Sea-Plane land on an airstrip not designed for them is very tame. Compared to what’s shown throughout history.