Author Topic: AWACS Intercept (Read 5156 times)

AKDejaVu · « **Reply #45 on:** December 04, 2001, 03:29:00 PM »

Actually Nifty.. the point is more towards realism.

The dot dar did not guide him to the aircraft's alt. Real dar would have. He knew what alt the aircraft was most likely at because he knew exactly how the cloud layer was structured. More things told him where the planes were than the dar... yet what is declared unrealistic and in need of modification?

Dot dar only works at friendly bases and does not indicate altitude. Yet somehow, it is manifested as the end all be all of an advantage that shouldn't exist.

Its presented as an advantage during night flying. Its presented as an advantage during bad weather flying. Well... it is... but the unrealistic part isn't that the dot dar presents the advantage but rather that we are even flying in those conditions.

Basically... don't present an argument then pick and chose where realism should apply. I'd make considerably fewer posts in this forum if people could grasp that simple concept.

AKDejaVu

Nifty · « **Reply #46 on:** December 04, 2001, 03:46:00 PM »

gotcha Deja. your 2nd post made a helluva lot more sense than your 1st attempt to me.

K West · « **Reply #47 on:** December 04, 2001, 03:46:00 PM »

"He knew what alt the aircraft was most likely at because he knew exactly how the cloud layer was structured. More things told him where the planes were than the dar..."

I'll bet it was simpler than that. Using the WACS radar info he tracked the con but seeing no icon or dot above the clouds as he approached the glaringly obvious contact on the AWACS radar screen he there upon used his superior ultra-realism type intellect to deduced that the con was below the cloud layer.

Funkedup please tell us how you did it? Was it by analytical deduction based upon cloud layer structuring or did you use your two superman like mkI eyeballs and not spy a con above the clouds and there for you knew he was then below them.

We await the answer.....

Wait!

This just in.

"I went over the cloud cover and saw nothing there.

Aha! The secret was embedded within the post. Secretly hidden as the third sentence in.

Westy

funkedup · « **Reply #48 on:** December 04, 2001, 04:38:00 PM »

There's a big difference between AH's "chase the radar dot overlaid on windscreen" and the verbal heading/range/altitude updates they got in the war. If you can't see the difference then you don't have sufficient understanding of air fighting or history, and you obviously aren't going to "get it". A picture is worth a thousand words. And we have a moving picture that updates much faster than a controller could give updates.

[ 12-04-2001: Message edited by: funkedup ]

AKDejaVu · « **Reply #49 on:** December 04, 2001, 05:12:00 PM »

The point is that the only time this matters is in cloud layers. You would not be using dar to bring you within 500 yards of a con unless there was a visibility issue. You'd be using your eyes. So.. because of one totally unrealistic element (the cloud layer), you cite the dar as being unrealistic.

AKDejaVu

funkedup · « **Reply #50 on:** December 04, 2001, 05:23:00 PM »

What's wrong with the cloud layer?

Gadfly · « **Reply #51 on:** December 04, 2001, 05:28:00 PM »

Kind of off-topic, but not really, I have always wanted to run an ATC scenario. Clearance to take off, verbal intercept info, etc. To me, a sky-accountant, this would be great fun. I did some aspects of this before, and the response was very good, of the 70 or so that flew, only 1 had a problem, and it was a confusion issue more than anything else.

But then, I want to simulate the concept of an air war as well as the actual combat, so I am just strange, I guess.

J_A_B · « **Reply #52 on:** December 04, 2001, 07:26:00 PM »

Well Westy, as we've noticed before you and I simply have different interests in online gaming. I still fail to see why you view inflight dot dar as such a massive problem, unless you like to hide from people. But, you're entitled to your opinions and I'm entitled to mine.

I'm sure you'll agree AH has enough people now that there's no good reason for it to have only one main arena. Everyone could be happy.

J_A_B

CRASH · « **Reply #53 on:** December 04, 2001, 08:42:00 PM »

I'm waitin' for the day when you get an endless clip, unlimited fuel supply, everyone gets a 0 drag nik and no one gets blowed up or has to start from the ground again. If you get shot down the only way you'd know is that you get a text message that says "you've been shot down" (of course the other guy sees all of the pieces fall off ur plane and the flames and such, gotta keep the eye candy). This way all the rest of the mindless lemmings can just fly around in circles chasin' each other while holding their triggers down and sprayin' like mad. Sounds like fun...sign me up...oh, wait, I forgot, I am signed up...silly me

CRASH

Quote

Originally posted by O'Westy:
"Kind of silly for a WWII sim don't you think?"

Absolutely it is. And I'm sure the person you rode the signal to thought so also.

I can honestly say the only place that made it even easier and as ridiculously unreal was AW. It was the same there with one exception and it was what made AW's even worse; the bombers had an "L" shaped radar id which was different from the fighters regular radar dot.

Westy

[ 12-03-2001: Message edited by: O'Westy ]

CRASH · « **Reply #54 on:** December 04, 2001, 08:55:00 PM »

The ct in it's current form is a half hearted attempt to placate the core enthusiasts who have been the traditional supporters of these types of flight sims for the last 8 years or so and is recognized by these same people as woefully inadequate. Thats why it's empty Mav. Second reason it's empty is that 95% of all players go to where the crowd is to get into the action the quickest. If you shut down the ma and only had an historical arena the vast majority wouldnt complain one bit, they'd simply log in, hop in whatever suited them and was available and find their way to the quickest fight, like they've always done. Your confusing convenience and mindless habit with preference. Most of the "not in my MA" crowd who've been around any length of time realizes this which is why they are so vehement about not changing the ma one whit. They know that most people either a.won't care or b.will like the change, and that may mean a permanent alteration to the mindless furball the ma has become.

Quote

Originally posted by Maverick:
Went to the CT tonight. It was empty. Not just sparse population but freaking EMPTY as in NO players.

What I found there was:

No dot dar
Reduced icon range
A really decent looking map based on the BoB.

With all the pleas for removing the dar, why aren't these folks playing there??? If it is such a grand idea with a majority, or even a substantial minority of players wanting it, why is CT empty almost all the time? Hell, you guys already got most of what you have been demanding in the MA. Use it!

All that needs to be implemented, if it hasn't been already, is the strat thingie, base capture, scores and an expanded plane set. You guys got what you wanted why don't you use it?

I'm not trying to be sarcastic, I just don't understand why you're not using the very thing you have been asking for.

(Image removed from quote.)

Maverick · « **Reply #55 on:** December 04, 2001, 09:16:00 PM »

Crash,
You posted about a much earlier post. Read the emtire thred, tedious as it is. I have stated my opinion and am tired of the flaming and accusations I received about things I didn't do. I am done posting about it.

CRASH · « **Reply #56 on:** December 04, 2001, 09:22:00 PM »

My intention wasn't to flame you at all. Granted, I do get a bit carried away with the sarcasm....sorry

You raised a valid question about the ct and I wanted to see it answered. I just wish we were all a little more open to trying new stuff in the ma, even if the change doesn't make things more fun it'll at least provide some welcome relief to the same old thing.

CRASH

Quote

Originally posted by Maverick:
Crash,
You posted about a much earlier post. Read the emtire thred, tedious as it is. I have stated my opinion and am tired of the flaming and accusations I received about things I didn't do. I am done posting about it.

(Image removed from quote.)

Suave1 · « **Reply #57 on:** December 04, 2001, 10:42:00 PM »

Quote

Why was the AW AvA always empty?

First let me say that I don't understand why you don't understand that the CT arena and AW have no relevance to this subject .

Secondly: I don't know when you flew AW but I belonged to a squadron that only flew in the AvA arena, which btw had the same dar settings as the pork arenas . And when I played AW (97-99) there were allways 100+ players in the AvA arena in the evenings .

Bottom line for me is that the inflight radar display cheapens the experience for me like some <==*DEATHDAWGS*==> d00d blabbing on channel one in a scenario .

Geeze this is the most I've posted on these boards in a long time. I should get a job .

Toad · « **Reply #58 on:** December 04, 2001, 11:47:00 PM »

Quote

Crash: The ct in it's current form is a half hearted attempt to placate the core enthusiasts who have been the traditional supporters of these types of flight sims for the last 8 years or so and is recognized by these same people as woefully inadequate.

I don't know about this hypothesis.

The "core enthusiasts" would seem to be a pretty small group, if this is the case. If you look at the other <ahem> ACM games available, there were pretty huge numbers in some of them. Those guys certainly couldn't be considered "core enthusiasts" in search of <ahem> "realism". Enthusiasts, sure; desperately seeking more "realism"? I am totally unconvinced.

Quote

Second reason it's empty is that 95% of all players go to where the crowd is to get into the action the quickest.

So, the theory here is that even if the CT WERE an "adequate" attempt to satisfy the "core enthusiasts" then 95% would still be in the MA right? It's pretty much given that the MA will always provide quicker action than a "perfect" CT, isn't it?

Quote

If you shut down the ma and only had an historical arena the vast majority wouldnt complain one bit, they'd simply log in, hop in whatever suited them and was available and find their way to the quickest fight, like they've always done.

So, if we FORCE them into it, they won't complain... but if we give them a CHOICE 95% of them will pick the MA? Because the action is faster?

What does that say Crash? Should the 5% determine the menu is for the other 95%?

***********

My .02 (and I really don't have a dog in this fight; 99.9% of the "realism" threads and posts in this BBS generate an internal

or a belly laugh for me)

I seriously doubt if you could get even 15 of the CT-desiring "core-enthusiasts" to agree on the 4 most important changes needed _right now_ in the CT to make it "adequate".

If you could and HTC made those changes, I seriously doubt that you'd routinely see more than 50 of the 300+ logged on in there on any given night.

Note, however, that this would be FINE with me. I think everyone should have a chance to play the way they want to play. Bravo to the 50 fi they find what they want. (As long as they don't then get on their high horses and go around telling everyone how uber and elite they are because they fly <cough> "realistically". That would simply be another area of division in the player base that we don't need.)

However, for all the continual noise made about the CT and the various <cough> "realism" issues, I think we must all be honest with ourselves.

The vast majority of the player base just doesn't care about this stuff. They'll play what HTC builds.

So it's good and wonderful and fine to make suggestions and proposals. Let's not pretend, however, that this is anything but a small minority arguing over rather trivial details.

Just my .02. Flame away.

Rotorian · « **Reply #59 on:** December 05, 2001, 12:16:00 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Suave1:

First let me say that I don't understand why you don't understand that the CT arena and AW have no relevance to this subject .

<=======points at westy======> he started it. One more werd, experience, but hey make of it what you will.