Fighters returning to base unintentionally

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Fighters returning to base unintentionally

      Basically I'm being attacked so I had some set some fighters I had over in Europe to attack the invading stack expecting to find them bombarding it within a few hours. Instead later on I come back to see them heading back to base (in europe) to refuel, with the invading stack still on my land (in china) and now a situation that should have been fairly straightforward may now escalate to my opponent getting close to one of my home cities. What caused this? It should have been a straightforward case of the jets continuing on to the nearest base to the enemy then attacking him from there. Now they're flying back to start over for no apparent reason :cursing:
    • This kind of thing happens to me quite frequently too. I just take it as being intended to make air units a bit less reliable and powerful.

      I avoid trying to do anything clever with my air units anymore. And many times, midflight, if I see a better target I'll just let it go rather than changing targets to the preferable one.

      Just one more challenge as far as I'm concerned.
    • Well my friend...

      This is a new-ish update with refueling for aircraft... There's a fuel limit (Varied for different Aircraft) that has a time for hwo long the plane is going to stay up for. So that you wont be patrolling forever.

      A big nerf for many heavy units... (Awac, Naval Awac, Naval Patrol Aircraft)
      "YES WE CAN!" - Barack Obama
      Mr. Gorbechev, tear down this wall! - Ronald Reagan
      We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do other things. John F. Kennedy
      The only thing we need to fear is fear itself. - Franklin D. Roosevelt

      Do not let anyone tell you who you are. - Kamala Harris
    • The Destroyer 4 wrote:

      Well my friend...

      This is a new-ish update with refueling for aircraft... There's a fuel limit (Varied for different Aircraft) that has a time for hwo long the plane is going to stay up for. So that you wont be patrolling forever.

      A big nerf for many heavy units... (Awac, Naval Awac, Naval Patrol Aircraft)
      That brings up another point: the do-nothing dev manager should at some point this century ensure the UI makes it clear throughout the application that aircraft have flight times and what those flight times are for the various aircraft. Updating the wiki would also be a good idea so their nutriders dont feel the need to point towards google.com for players to try to find out its even a thing within the game now.
    • Hakaishin wrote:

      LOL
      Why recommend he google's it when you can simply say its a KNOWN TWO MONTH OLD BUG. No need to cover for the devs....right? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
      There are several answers to your question. I'll list a few:
      • I'm wiser than you
      • It's good advice for all questions
      • I didn't want to just say the OP should stop being so lazy, stop spamming threads, and look up the answer for himself.
      • This is a forum, not a chat.
      • Teach someone to fish . . .
      • Etc.


      But how about we settle on, "You do you, and I'll do me."
    • Narcissist....

      KFGauss wrote:

      I'm wiser than you

      KFGauss wrote:

      I didn't want to just say the OP should stop being so lazy, stop spamming threads, and look up the answer for himself.
      He said "I and I'm" Ok that's narcissist.

      #Enlightenment = Power
      "YES WE CAN!" - Barack Obama
      Mr. Gorbechev, tear down this wall! - Ronald Reagan
      We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do other things. John F. Kennedy
      The only thing we need to fear is fear itself. - Franklin D. Roosevelt

      Do not let anyone tell you who you are. - Kamala Harris
    • KFGauss wrote:

      Hakaishin wrote:

      LOL
      Why recommend he google's it when you can simply say its a KNOWN TWO MONTH OLD BUG. No need to cover for the devs....right? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
      There are several answers to your question. I'll list a few:
      • I'm wiser than you
      • It's good advice for all questions
      • I didn't want to just say the OP should stop being so lazy, stop spamming threads, and look up the answer for himself.
      • This is a forum, not a chat.
      • Teach someone to fish . . .
      • Etc.


      But how about we settle on, "You do you, and I'll do me."
      Counter-retort: You cant even point towards the CoN wiki for him to "fish"; you have to point towards "google.com". Why would frustrated players, especially new ones, bother googling how to play a game when said game can't even bother to note how their game works both in-game and on its own wiki?


      KFGauss wrote:

      Hakaishin wrote:

      LOL
      Why recommend he google's it when you can simply say its a KNOWN TWO MONTH OLD BUG. No need to cover for the devs....right? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
      But how about we settle on, "You do you, and I'll do me."

      lol, NO! :thumbsup:
      You're just trying to shut the argument down because you don't have any. Imagine someone asking you a question on how literally anything works and pointing towards google.com. Why does people complaining about the game being broken get you so upset??? You're even desperately grasping at ad hominem attacks to avoid discussing the game being broken.... :whistling: :whistling: :whistling:
    • KFGauss wrote:

      Here's why I point people toward using Google to search (only) the forum site: Because doing that works.
      Again: Why would frustrated players, especially new ones, bother googling how to play a game when said game can't even bother to note how their game works both in-game and on its own wiki?

      You're only inciting players to stop bothering with trying to learn how to play the game. Notice how you're insinuating that pointing to google "works" while you also felt the need to attack him. Not only couldn't you point towards a thread that answers his question, but you felt the need to imply that googling it only may or may NOT help him find the answer......


      KFGauss wrote:

      Google is your friend. Try using these search terms and see if your question has already been answered.

      site:forum.conflictnations.com returning
      LMAO :rolleyes:


      No. Let's draw this discussion out; the overarching main point being that aircraft are broken and your incessant need to slap down discussion of it. :thumbsup:
    • Watch how simple this is:


      bafa94 wrote:

      Basically I'm being attacked so I had some set some fighters I had over in Europe to attack the invading stack expecting to find them bombarding it within a few hours. Instead later on I come back to see them heading back to base (in europe) to refuel, with the invading stack still on my land (in china) and now a situation that should have been fairly straightforward may now escalate to my opponent getting close to one of my home cities. What caused this? It should have been a straightforward case of the jets continuing on to the nearest base to the enemy then attacking him from there. Now they're flying back to start over for no apparent reason :cursing:

      "Yes, this is a known bug. Please follow this link for the thread discussing it..." :

      Planes turning back from ferry command ;)
    • bafa94 wrote:

      Now they're flying back to start over for no apparent reason
      Yes, very annoying game behavior...


      The Destroyer 4 wrote:

      This is a new-ish update with refueling for aircraft... There's a fuel limit (Varied for different Aircraft) that has a time for hwo long the plane is going to stay up for.
      Just to add to this, your remaining flight time is visible when you are on a patrol command - it's a sucky work-around, but you can patrol your planes really quick to check their remaining fuel time, then send them to where you want them to go and make sure their new flight time is less than their fuel time.


      Hakaishin wrote:

      when said game can't even bother to note how their game works both in-game and on its own wiki?
      I have found this repeatedly frustrating. I believe that some of the CoN wiki is actually incorrect and not just incredibly incomplete.


      I wish someone would make a similar game, make it one-time purchasable instead of the whole gold mechanic, deal with the incredible in-balance toward people who are online more (add "playbooks" or "reaction" instructions for your units), and yeah... do better with bugs and quicks. :)
    • Rainmaker2112 wrote:

      Hakaishin wrote:

      when said game can't even bother to note how their game works both in-game and on its own wiki?
      I have found this repeatedly frustrating.
      Yes, which is why I am so harsh on those who defend it; it just helps drive players away from playing leaving open matches full of afk players. At one point I was tempted to file bug reports, but the people who manage the development of this game dont seem to care about the game outside of throwing new features in to show that they aren't sitting around doing nothing all day. I'm probably gone once my security council membership runs out in April if they still cant be bothered to fix the game by then.