Only time i tried, i got shot,… surprised? No,… it was just what should happen IRL.
Ps: btw you dodged the assignement,… that proves your wants aren’t realistic.
Would you keep calmly taking photos of a crashed spyplane while a T-64 is driving around trying to run you over or spraying machine guns everywhere while doing donuts?
Wtf?
I asked a question and you answere in fucking riddles.
Again How do you explain tanks being able to fortify a position while on the move and in combat without dismounting ot stopping?
1 Like
Would you do that if a Po-2 is 2 km away in the air firing at your postal code?
Or sitting parked on the point for that matter
My first example earlier in the thread of something a “cap zone” might represent in-universe, is a downed spy plane that both sides want to secure the crash site of before the other guys get there. Scientists/engineers are trying to photograph it on one side, or thermite scuttle it on the other side.
A tank does not have to be sitting still to very much so intimidate the scientists/engineers to run off for cover/leave the area, thus controlling the point for such a purpose.
I’m not sure why you think a tank SHOULD have to sit still to cap a point. They are very effective while moving around on the ground, it’s kind of one of their whole things.
Airplanes, on the other hand are unwieldy as hell and generally only go in a straight line while moving at any speed, and are about to leave or are trying to focus only on becoming still. They’re not trying to run you over or something WHILE also landing.
Are you trying to argue cap points should stop bleeding tickets while being strafed? Seems a bit off topic, right or wrong.
Yea and mine is about fortifying a position to defend against enemies after capturing it.
So how does that happen.
Again your stupid realism thing can not work and has no bearing on the discussion. If you do not want unrealistic stuiff in groiund RB you simply should stop playing it because NOTHING IN GROUND RB IS REALISTIC,
again my headcanon is that they fortify a position. which can not be done while moving.
Im responding to your argument of person nolonger being able to calmly take photoes. A Po-2 in the aie would do that just aswell as a lot of ground vehicles.
As far as capping points go your argument doesn’t exactly tell us that aircraft shouldn’t be able to cap. In fact it tells us they should be able to.
I just want aircraft to turn the letter Blue while im inside the chalk circle
Easy, your headcanon is just a bad one, then, since it doesn’t fit the game well.
As long as there are other, better examples that do match the way the game mechanics work with a plausible storyline, then quite simply “The War Thunder matches are representing those ones, and not the other ones”. That’s fine, it is not necessary for immersion for it to work for ANY/ALL possible articulable scenarios. Just some
We aren’t talking about in the air though. I think “should cap points be paused for ticket bleed while being bombed or strafed” is just an entirely different thread, which you should post if you think it’s a good idea.
yours fits even less.
How does “capturing a base and defending it from the enemy” not fit the gamaplay.
And again realism is no argument. So either you find a reason for the removal or you can stop.-
Im not talking about that, im directly responding to your suggestion of what one is stopping at a capture point:
Shooting at a capturepoint to stop ticket bleed is as silly as whatever that was
Precisely for the reason you just pointed out above: that the fortification part of defending doesn’t make sense while moving… YOU were the one that said you didn’t think it fit gameplay, not me… why are you suddenly arguing with yourself?
bro you are lost.
You said that a PO-2M in the air (I assume therefore either bombing or optshots with the gunner while it flies by) would stop people taking photos.
Yes, it would. Until it flew off, then they would resume. Without landing, there is obviously no way that the PO-2M created any sort of lasting presence to assist its side beyond those few seconds. So the most that could really make sense there is “pausing the ticket bleed” maybe. I didn’t say it was NOT silly, it’s just the only thing about cap points that would make any possible sense in response to attack from the air.
Regardless, it wasn’t relevant to the thread, which is about landings, not stuff in the air. So belongs in a different thread anyway.
YOU had a headcanon, and then you pointed out a flaw about YOUR OWN headcanon not matching the game mechanics.
That is you arguing with yourself. None of it had any bearing on MY headcanon’s plausibility. So how is your weird, bad, self-undermined example my problem? Textbook definition of a strawman. You designed it to be a bad example on purpose instead of actually trying to think of a scenario that fits all the game mechanics.
Anyway. Still waiting on someone with Gaijin’s reason as to why they removed this fun feature.
Good for you that you found a video expressing your POV,… but i still don’t care about that ^^"