Jump to content


Why so many haters of the il-10m that think it needs to be nerfed?


  • Please log in to reply
38 replies to this topic

CRASHChaffee #1 Posted 19 January 2017 - 08:02 PM

    Senior Airman

  • Member
  • 11813 battles
  • 12
  • [JACS] JACS
  • Member since:
    03-03-2014
Why do people think the plane is such a disadvantage and should be nerfed yet the tier 7 il-10 has been around forever and can do almost exactly what the il-10m can do if anything i think the il-10 is even at a higher advantage due to lower tier and twice the rockets makes it a little easier to grab more gt points to stack with the kills shot_004.jpg


MARS_REVENANT #2 Posted 19 January 2017 - 08:22 PM

    Major

  • Member
  • 32919 battles
  • 6,686
  • [SICK] SICK
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

No GA needs to be nerfed.  People that know how to take down a GA can do so easily.

 

The only issue is when a flight of GA kill your GA and then hide in AA.  It is extremely difficult to take out 2 GA working together while also being in AA fire.  On top of that stupid bots, even during what should be a win by supremacy, will dive right into AA and get killed therefore lose the game.

 

I think the issue is more to do with Bot stupidity than OP GA.  All they need to do is program the bots to stay out of AA if your team is winning.


I never lose; either I win or I learn.


losttwo #3 Posted 19 January 2017 - 09:31 PM

    which way do we go?

  • Community Ace
  • 29924 battles
  • 12,596
  • [S-S-G] S-S-G
  • Member since:
    05-15-2012

View PostMARS_REVENANT, on 19 January 2017 - 03:22 PM, said:

No GA needs to be nerfed.  People that know how to take down a GA can do so easily.

 

The only issue is when a flight of GA kill your GA and then hide in AA.  It is extremely difficult to take out 2 GA working together while also being in AA fire.  On top of that stupid bots, even during what should be a win by supremacy, will dive right into AA and get killed therefore lose the game.

 

I think the issue is more to do with Bot stupidity than OP GA.  All they need to do is program the bots to stay out of AA if your team is winning.

 

This in a nut.

You have to be real STUPID to lose a match to GA.



CrazyHeinz #4 Posted 19 January 2017 - 09:37 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 9390 battles
  • 887
  • [DRACS] DRACS
  • Member since:
    10-30-2012
Only those who hate it are ones who don't own it.


CRASHChaffee #5 Posted 20 January 2017 - 12:12 AM

    Senior Airman

  • Member
  • 11813 battles
  • 12
  • [JACS] JACS
  • Member since:
    03-03-2014

View PostMARS_REVENANT, on 19 January 2017 - 08:22 PM, said:

No GA needs to be nerfed.  People that know how to take down a GA can do so easily.

 

The only issue is when a flight of GA kill your GA and then hide in AA.  It is extremely difficult to take out 2 GA working together while also being in AA fire.  On top of that stupid bots, even during what should be a win by supremacy, will dive right into AA and get killed therefore lose the game.

 

I think the issue is more to do with Bot stupidity than OP GA.  All they need to do is program the bots to stay out of AA if your team is winning.Y

yes definitely agreed personally ive never flighted up with other ga but i constantly here people whine about certain vets for it and honestly i love the challenge i normally get creamed more like always but the truth be known thats the reason my stats been skyrocketing for the last couple months due to them forcing me to completely changed my gameplay going up against the best of the best out numbered is probably the only great challenge left in this game for maybe once just maybe ill be the victor thats real competition not spending hours aday shooting bots and think ur stats have any meaning



Texthor #6 Posted 20 January 2017 - 01:59 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 27662 battles
  • 769
  • Member since:
    12-27-2013

View PostCrazyHeinz, on 19 January 2017 - 03:37 PM, said:

Only those who hate it are ones who don't own it.

 

don't own it because it requires NO skill.................

MelBrooks #7 Posted 20 January 2017 - 02:26 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 29911 battles
  • 1,027
  • [DRACS] DRACS
  • Member since:
    01-18-2014

View PostMARS_REVENANT, on 19 January 2017 - 03:22 PM, said:

No GA needs to be nerfed.  People that know how to take down a GA can do so easily.

 

The only issue is when a flight of GA kill your GA and then hide in AA.  It is extremely difficult to take out 2 GA working together while also being in AA fire.  On top of that stupid bots, even during what should be a win by supremacy, will dive right into AA and get killed therefore lose the game.

 

I think the issue is more to do with Bot stupidity than OP GA.  All they need to do is program the bots to stay out of AA if your team is winning.

 

This.....GA have their place and very definite roll in the game, but they were never used or even considered as a plane to determine air superiority. I have no problem with plane or it's features. But as MARS states, bot programming is exploited.



clodhoppr #8 Posted 20 January 2017 - 03:19 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 14068 battles
  • 337
  • [WHAWK] WHAWK
  • Member since:
    02-13-2013

View Postlosttwo, on 19 January 2017 - 09:31 PM, said:

 

This in a nut.

You have to be real STUPID to lose a match to GA.

 

I respectfully disagree.

Those who know how to win on the meter with the a GA can be difficult to beat, especially 1 vs 1 and nothing but stupid-[edited]bots.



DInk_Spinkley #9 Posted 21 January 2017 - 10:08 AM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 10989 battles
  • 566
  • [-BFS-] -BFS-
  • Member since:
    03-09-2015
that run on sentence gave me cancer
My wife said if I can make money playing video games, she'd leave me alone, so....

FreeFOXMIKE #10 Posted 21 January 2017 - 10:09 AM

    G.A.T.P. (Global Alpha Test Pilot)

  • Member
  • 18107 battles
  • 6,474
  • [332ND] 332ND
  • Member since:
    10-25-2011

View PostTexthor, on 20 January 2017 - 07:59 AM, said:

 

don't own it because it requires NO skill.................

 all things require a skill in one form or another, its just not everyones cup of tea what your saying follow the bias the fighter pilots said about bomber pilot. in WW2 and to a little extent to this day.

View Postlosttwo, on 19 January 2017 - 03:31 PM, said:

 

This in a nut.

You have to be real STUPID to lose a match to GA.

 and again no if you have a non support team one can lose a battle if the opposition has their stuff together. 

 

 

see this falls in line with the win rate thing I would have  preferred a "Pilot" with a high hit ratio over a high win rate as a win is to a large degree a team / shared event but the hits are singular.  (granted there are a select few "pilots that can carry almost every game )


Edited by FreeFOXMIKE, 21 January 2017 - 10:12 AM.

           332 Virtual  Fighter  Group

 


losttwo #11 Posted 21 January 2017 - 11:48 AM

    which way do we go?

  • Community Ace
  • 29924 battles
  • 12,596
  • [S-S-G] S-S-G
  • Member since:
    05-15-2012

View Postclodhoppr1, on 20 January 2017 - 10:19 AM, said:

 

I respectfully disagree.

Those who know how to win on the meter with the a GA can be difficult to beat, especially 1 vs 1 and nothing but stupid-[edited]bots.

 

View PostFreeFOXMIKE, on 21 January 2017 - 05:09 AM, said:

 all things require a skill in one form or another, its just not everyones cup of tea what your saying follow the bias the fighter pilots said about bomber pilot. in WW2 and to a little extent to this day.

 and again no if you have a non support team one can lose a battle if the opposition has their stuff together. 

 

 

see this falls in line with the win rate thing I would have  preferred a "Pilot" with a high hit ratio over a high win rate as a win is to a large degree a team / shared event but the hits are singular.  (granted there are a select few "pilots that can carry almost every game )

 

you both are no fun at all.

 

Spoiler
Spoiler

 



CRASHChaffee #12 Posted 21 January 2017 - 12:12 PM

    Senior Airman

  • Member
  • 11813 battles
  • 12
  • [JACS] JACS
  • Member since:
    03-03-2014

View PostDInk_Spinkley, on 21 January 2017 - 10:08 AM, said:

that run on sentence gave me cancer

 

Lol sorry [edited]been stuck home all week and wowp's and booze leads me to ranting on the forum 

MARS_REVENANT #13 Posted 21 January 2017 - 04:27 PM

    Major

  • Member
  • 32919 battles
  • 6,686
  • [SICK] SICK
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Postlosttwo, on 19 January 2017 - 04:31 PM, said:

 

This in a nut.

You have to be real STUPID to lose a match to GA.

 

As usual you have read 1+1 and come to the conclusion that the sky is not blue.

 

The problem is not GA, the problem is not a flight of GA, the problem is stupid bot programming and the exploitation of that.  Prior to bots, if a flight of GA were hiding in their own AA, they would have to come out and hit more ground targets in order to win on supremacy, now, stupid bots dive in and get killed and give up the battle.  That is not smart play, it is an exploit.  If the bots were programmed to stay out of AA during a supremacy advantage, that would force the GA out of hiding, that is the smart play for bots.


Edited by MARS_REVENANT, 21 January 2017 - 04:27 PM.

I never lose; either I win or I learn.


Texthor #14 Posted 21 January 2017 - 04:56 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 27662 battles
  • 769
  • Member since:
    12-27-2013

View PostFreeFOXMIKE, on 21 January 2017 - 04:09 AM, said:

 all things require a skill in one form or another, its just not everyones cup of tea what your saying follow the bias the fighter pilots said about bomber pilot. in WW2 and to a little extent to this day.

 and again no if you have a non support team one can lose a battle if the opposition has their stuff together. 

 

 

see this falls in line with the win rate thing I would have  preferred a "Pilot" with a high hit ratio over a high win rate as a win is to a large degree a team / shared event but the hits are singular.  (granted there are a select few "pilots that can carry almost every game )

 

The Mighty IL in this game could have won WWll air war all by it's lonesome.....it would have required very little skill

 



CRASHChaffee #15 Posted 21 January 2017 - 09:43 PM

    Senior Airman

  • Member
  • 11813 battles
  • 12
  • [JACS] JACS
  • Member since:
    03-03-2014

Since when is pretending to fly around in a artificial atmosphere a skill. You really think any these planes flew like the video game.Have you ever even flew in a real plane. On wowp's did a down draft ever try suck u thru the trees. It's a game that requires strategy and teamwork. Skills are a talent that puts meat on the table

 



gambeirbay #16 Posted 21 February 2017 - 11:45 AM

    Airman Basic

  • Member
  • 6560 battles
  • 1
  • Member since:
    10-03-2016

I realize this is an old post but here is my 2 Cents.

 

This plane costs a lot. Then it turns around and loses money, and for no apparent reason other than your team loses.

You can hit half the enemy squadron and destroy all kinds of forts but you still lose if you are then shot down, and it doesn't matter how much damage you do if your team loses.  When they lose, you lose, and this sort of make for a game of chance just to fly it.

 

Like all attack planes you're often one of the last flying, and with this situation there is no incentive to engage the enemy, only to flee

and to hide just to try to not lose money.  The only other plane I've had so far that's like this is the XP-44, which I also hate and mainly

for the same reason.  It really isn't about whether or not you're good with the plane, it's about having to fly something that loses money

no matter how well you do personally.

 

The other complaint is that it isn't adequately armed for the next tier level and it takes forever to get even mildly basic guns, and that just doesn't make

any sense considering what kind of plane it is.  You can barely destroy a ground target with the stock guns and it takes a lot of flying and a lot more money just to get basic cannons which it should have to begin with IMO. 

 

 



losttwo #17 Posted 21 February 2017 - 12:52 PM

    which way do we go?

  • Community Ace
  • 29924 battles
  • 12,596
  • [S-S-G] S-S-G
  • Member since:
    05-15-2012

View Postgambeirbay, on 21 February 2017 - 06:45 AM, said:

I realize this is an old post but here is my 2 Cents.

 

This plane costs a lot. Then it turns around and loses money, and for no apparent reason other than your team loses.

You can hit half the enemy squadron and destroy all kinds of forts but you still lose if you are then shot down, and it doesn't matter how much damage you do if your team loses.  When they lose, you lose, and this sort of make for a game of chance just to fly it.

 

Like all attack planes you're often one of the last flying, and with this situation there is no incentive to engage the enemy, only to flee

and to hide just to try to not lose money.  The only other plane I've had so far that's like this is the XP-44, which I also hate and mainly

for the same reason.  It really isn't about whether or not you're good with the plane, it's about having to fly something that loses money

no matter how well you do personally.

 

The other complaint is that it isn't adequately armed for the next tier level and it takes forever to get even mildly basic guns, and that just doesn't make

any sense considering what kind of plane it is.  You can barely destroy a ground target with the stock guns and it takes a lot of flying and a lot more money just to get basic cannons which it should have to begin with IMO. 

 

 

 

Then you are playing it completely and utterly it wrong.

I would suggest you ask some of the top GA pilots how to fly them properly.



Shut_Up_and_FLY #18 Posted 21 February 2017 - 12:53 PM

    First Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 10645 battles
  • 2,588
  • Member since:
    07-15-2014

View Postgambeirbay, on 21 February 2017 - 06:45 AM, said:

I realize this is an old post but here is my 2 Cents.

 

This plane costs a lot. Then it turns around and loses money, and for no apparent reason other than your team loses.

You can hit half the enemy squadron and destroy all kinds of forts but you still lose if you are then shot down, and it doesn't matter how much damage you do if your team loses.  When they lose, you lose, and this sort of make for a game of chance just to fly it.

 

Like all attack planes you're often one of the last flying, and with this situation there is no incentive to engage the enemy, only to flee

and to hide just to try to not lose money.  The only other plane I've had so far that's like this is the XP-44, which I also hate and mainly

for the same reason.  It really isn't about whether or not you're good with the plane, it's about having to fly something that loses money

no matter how well you do personally.

 

The other complaint is that it isn't adequately armed for the next tier level and it takes forever to get even mildly basic guns, and that just doesn't make

any sense considering what kind of plane it is.  You can barely destroy a ground target with the stock guns and it takes a lot of flying and a lot more money just to get basic cannons which it should have to begin with IMO. 

 

 

 

Ummmmmm, the IL-10M is a premium.....

"Genius may have its limitations,

but Stupidity is not thus handicapped."

- Elbert Hubbard


Bubba_Zanetti #19 Posted 21 February 2017 - 05:21 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 28336 battles
  • 1,221
  • [DRACS] DRACS
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Post_Warchylde_, on 21 February 2017 - 07:53 AM, said:

 

Ummmmmm, the IL-10M is a premium.....

 

I...think he's talking about the XP-44?  Here we have the classic example of someone ground pounding in a MRF...ya...wrong.  That's why you're not making creds in it...it's not meant for GT (even though you can load it with rockets n bombs...don't)


Rosebud #20 Posted 28 February 2017 - 12:08 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 11975 battles
  • 1,032
  • [SICK] SICK
  • Member since:
    12-27-2011

The real strength of the IL-10M is its maneuverability. It has the ability to hit ground targets, but it shines brightest at attacking enemy Attack Aircraft. Like the German tier 7 & 8 AA the IL-10M is an anti-AA plane first and a ground pounder second. Two pilots flighted in IL's are formidable and just about impossible for a solo AA player to take down.

 

I imagine the main calls for its nerfing are coming from other AA pilots. It took me some time to figure out the proper strategy for facing these nimble minks. Trust me, it doesn't involve out turning them.



 





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users