Author Topic: AWACS Intercept (Read 5206 times)

Arlo · « **Reply #90 on:** December 05, 2001, 08:41:00 PM »

And a damned good thing you did!

Quote

Originally posted by O'Westy:

(came back to time stamp this at 16:47est as I bet this topic appears on BW within 24 hrs as "that bad Westy is trashing AW again")

[ 12-05-2001: Message edited by: O'Westy ]

funkedup · « **Reply #91 on:** December 05, 2001, 11:38:00 PM »

For explanation of editing I did in this thread, please see here: http://www.hitechcreations.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=012878

pbirmingham · « **Reply #92 on:** December 06, 2001, 01:07:00 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by hblair:

So you're saying Tokyo didn't even think they needed radar? or didn't use it. Either way, do we agree that in this case radar was either not used, or not used effectively?

Okay, this is rampant speculation following. You have been warned.

Radar was pretty rare in Japan in 1942. This page seems to indicate that Japan had not deployed land-based radar on a wide-scale basis until 1943.

Given that the Japanese could not fathom an attack on Tokyo, it seems reasonable that they would put what radars they had near where they did expect action.

Like I said, though, this is just speculation.

And yes, we can agree that radar was not used effectively (or at all) by Japan in 1942, just as we could agree that by the time most of the planes of AH appeared on the scene, Japan had learned their lesson about radar, even though their sets were never as good as Allied sets.

But as you will probably agree, this really is neither here nor there. It's the gameplay that's important. I still disagree that a change in radar is necessary for easing base capture (ND Islands lasted for what, a day? At least we'll have a week or more of Mindanoan bliss!)

K West · « **Reply #93 on:** December 06, 2001, 08:26:00 AM »

"I will save this for the day when AH is no longer the newest and prettiest"

Save it for the day that AH is 15 years old and it hasn't substantially advanced or been or enriched in the last ten of them.

Until AH showed up all that competed with AW ($10/mo) was WB's which was hourly and harder. When FA and AH came on the market the online flight crowd finally had more viable options. Superior options imo (as well as many others).
IF HTC did the same with AH then people will curse them for screwing up a good thing and cast derogatory remarks at the program itself too. And the fatal hemmorhage will begin for AH as it did for AW.
AW didn't die just because it wasn't the prettiest or the newest. There were many factors which imo were more lethal. IMO nothing external killed AW. It committed suicide. And the blame for that can be found from the top corporate suit right on down to the lowest rung in the company hierarchy.

"Bunny LUV" anyone?

Westy

Arlo · « **Reply #94 on:** December 06, 2001, 11:40:00 AM »

LOL! Hey, Westy .... guess who turned the thread into an "AW vs AH" thang. Why do you still bother? I think I know .... but do you?

(.... and Westy decided to say, "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.")

K West · « **Reply #95 on:** December 06, 2001, 11:48:00 AM »

I used an example of something lame from another game to stress my point. It was not an AW vs AH hijacking. I've slammed FA's glass cockpits too. Do you need to whip out your Cliff notes for "Beginners Psychology" again and look up what that also supposedly tells you about me?

Better yet let's stay slightly on topic. Arlo, why not tell us from your experiences in the AH main arena what your opinion of AH radar is? Or perhaps any other pro's and cons of AH gamplay that you've seen?

Westy

[ 12-06-2001: Message edited by: O'Westy ]

Arlo · « **Reply #96 on:** December 06, 2001, 12:59:00 PM »

" .... from your experiences in the AH main arena ...."?

You certainly don't want my "cliffnotes" opinion over the psychology involved in THAT attempted cheap shot, Laz ... errrr .... Westy.

So NOW you want to stick to nothing but an experienced AH pov! rofl! Maybe if you made a habit of that you wouldn't sound like you're bitter over your experience in AW or on BigWeek.

Oh ... and here's an epiphany for you:

Valid opinions can even come from someone who hasn't yet experienced AH online. Or are you going to backtrack on your claim that there are enough simularities to use AW as an example?

You want a fruitful exchanging? TRY to have one. You probably could if you tried (I'm giving you credit, here). Even back when you were a BigWeek regular. Don't turn it into your personal little problem with AirWarrior/BigWeek et al. In return, I'll try harder not to call you a butthead on the UBB (which obviously is no more productive than you're being one).

Now .... here's my opinion about DAR (both in AW and AH - from what I've managed to learn without yet experiencing the the main arena online in AH - go figure):

I've never been in favor of simulated WWII aircraft having any form of radar (unless the plane being simulated had it - and even then, it should work the same way it did in that plane). What was used in AW and is currently used in AH (from what I've managed to learn without yet experiencing the the main arena online in AH - go figure) is way too futuristic and simple for my tastes.

Granted, there are undoubtedly players who appreciate it, and that is the single best reason for its existance. That being the case, my opinion or desire, for that matter, won't have much of an impact on whether or not DAR continues to be a feature (even though what I've managed to learn came without yet experiencing the the main arena online in AH - go figure). I doubt it will ever go away.

I will advocate scenarios that have that particular feature disabled. Enemy positions and reports CAN be more accurately represented as they were in real life. The program CAN man the tower and broadcast positions from early radar and aircraft watchers (with a degree of error) - or not sometimes. And players (most of them) probably CAN be smart enough to figure things out without a global positioning satellite to guide the way.

And maybe when what I've managed to learn comes from actually experiencing the the main arena online in AH - go figure (and it will).... my opinion will be the same .... and maybe even will carry weight with you, Laz and a others that require that prerequisite.

[ 12-06-2001: Message edited by: Arlo ]

K West · « **Reply #97 on:** December 06, 2001, 01:22:00 PM »

"So NOW you want to stick to nothing but an experienced AH pov! rofl! Maybe if you made a habit of that you wouldn't sound like you're bitter over your experience in AW or on BigWeek."

I didn't get any further in your post as I really think discussing much of anything about online gaming with you is an exercise in futility. Everything you respond with is pathetically AWcentric, centers around your limited AW experience and in regard to me you have this fixation that everything I say with regard to AW is an outpouring of some imagined bitterness I harbor.

They're taking AW off life support tommorow Arlo are they not? I for one flat out honestly could care less. Tommorow it will be "well AW used to.." versus "AW does or has..." But the truth is AW will always forever now remain an example of what not to do with something that used to be good. I think you're the one with some internal angst and issues to resolve due to AW's demise. When they are resolved then maybe you'll have an easier time with AH and perhaps also with me. At the least it might help curb these inane ramblings you have about anger, bitterness or resentments towards AW or BW that you imagine I have.

Westy

[ 12-06-2001: Message edited by: O'Westy ]

Arlo · « **Reply #98 on:** December 06, 2001, 01:32:00 PM »

Too bad. You have a bad habit of doing that. *ShruG* Want me to repost or edit it without the part that (edit) offended you (edit)?

Here ya go ....

Now .... here's my opinion about DAR (both in AW and AH - from what I've managed to learn without yet experiencing the the main arena online in AH - go figure):

I've never been in favor of simulated WWII aircraft having any form of radar (unless the plane being simulated had it - and even then, it should work the same way it did in that plane). What was used in AW and is currently used in AH (from what I've managed to learn without yet experiencing the the main arena online in AH - go figure) is way too futuristic and simple for my tastes.

Granted, there are undoubtedly players who appreciate it, and that is the single best reason for its existance. That being the case, my opinion or desire, for that matter, won't have much of an impact on whether or not DAR continues to be a feature (even though what I've managed to learn came without yet experiencing the the main arena online in AH - go figure). I doubt it will ever go away.

I will advocate scenarios that have that particular feature disabled. Enemy positions and reports CAN be more accurately represented as they were in real life. The program CAN man the tower and broadcast positions from early radar and aircraft watchers (with a degree of error) - or not sometimes. And players (most of them) probably CAN be smart enough to figure things out without a global positioning satellite to guide the way.

Pardon me for being "futile".

Quote

Originally posted by O'Westy:
"So NOW you want to stick to nothing but an experienced AH pov! rofl! Maybe if you made a habit of that you wouldn't sound like you're bitter over your experience in AW or on BigWeek."

I didn't get any further in your post as I really think discussing much of anything about online gaming with you is an exercise in futility.

Westy

[ 12-06-2001: Message edited by: Arlo ]

K West · « **Reply #99 on:** December 06, 2001, 01:38:00 PM »

So now it's AH has it's own certifiable version of 'Avenger.' How ironic considering it's you filling the shoes Arlo.

Westy

Arlo · « **Reply #100 on:** December 06, 2001, 01:42:00 PM »

mmmmmmmhmmmmmmmm

Nifty · « **Reply #101 on:** December 06, 2001, 01:57:00 PM »

get a room guys.

Arlo · « **Reply #102 on:** December 06, 2001, 02:05:00 PM »

Hehe ...

J_A_B · « **Reply #103 on:** December 06, 2001, 08:25:00 PM »

"But the truth is AW will always forever now remain an example of what not to do with something that used to be good"

You said yourself that AW didn't signifigantly change in its last 10 years (although I will beg to differ with that point, it's easy to forget things like AW being the first MMP 3D game). So how did something go from being "good" to "bad" without changing?

Simple--something newer and nicer (AH) came along. You apparently jump ship the moment your game is no longer the top of the heap. I assume you will leave AH as soon as it gets passed by something else, too. And AH WILL get passed eventually, regardless of HTC's programming ability.

I, on the other hand, feel that if something is fundamentally sound, it doesn't NEED constant changes to keep me happy with it. Unlike many of the people on this BBS, I do not start to whine and complain if my game doesn't get an update every 3 months. I NEVER whine because I play on the same map for 3_whole_weeks (those last two don't apply to anyone in particular, you know who you are). I don't jump ship just because there's a new guy in town. AW makes me happy every bit as much now as it did when I first started it. It's a shame as clueless a company as EA had to buy it. C'est la vie.

Really though I can say the same about AH--I'm about as happy with it now as I was when it was in Beta. You think AW had some fundamental flaws; I think AH has some fundamental flaws. Nothing's perfect and you can't get everyone to agree all the time. Such is life.

J_A_B

K West · « **Reply #104 on:** December 06, 2001, 09:59:00 PM »

"So how did something go from being "good" to "bad" without changing?"

Easy answer. AW isn't just the software. AW itself remained essentially unchanged and it grew inceasingly stale but the biggest change was in it's marketing and pursuit of a new demographics to play it. The prior hourly rate was lowered dramaticly (WB's debut must have hurt A LOT) and to compensate they HAD to try and pull in more numbers than ever before. Kesmai/Gamestorm was in a difficult position in that they had an old product facing a superior but higher priced competition (WB's). IMO they had no choice but to do whatever was needed to bring in "quantity" to get revenue up. This attracted anyone who could afford the price of a large pizza and as a result more "gamers" rather than WWII aircombat afficiados came in the door. If a player could afford hourly then WB's was the place to go for features, fidelity and realism. As a result AW no longer was seriously considered a "sim" by any stretch of the imagination and it became touted as an easy, fun aircombat game for anyone from 9 to 99. And while AW at $10/mo was an acceptable product for a couple of years for a good many WWII aircombat fans (who couldn't afford or would not pay hourly) when a flat rate AH came on the scene and then WB's itself went flat rate the folks who wanted "more" but coulnd't afford it prior finally had superior alternatives for WWII aircombat. As a result over the last two years the AW "full realims" arenas simply dried up. It also hurt AW very much in that it's player base was strung along for almost two years with hideously bad "PR." First with AW:Vietnam, then AW:4 and the eventual cancellation of not only those two projects but AW itslef.

So while the actual software did not change by much the whole AW experience and package did. By quite a LOT.

Anyway, that's most of the answer as there are too many different facets as to why AW went "bad"

[edited to add this as I reread your post and I found this warranted a reply in the same tone as what you wrote was in]: As for jumping ship from AH for the next prettier thing that comes along? Found it a bit too hard not to get personal and show your bitternes there didn't you JAB? You know? Tough sh&t that AW's going away. Big deal. You'll get over it someday. Probably when you realise it's Kesmai/Newscorp/EA's fault and not the players that have left. Some of whome left quietly and others like me departed loudly and discusted. IF HTC follows the pathetic path AW did - I doubt they'd be so blind and foolish but just say they did - then I'd jump ship in a heart beat. I'm only a sucker for empty promises, lame excuses and bad customer relations roadkill once.

Westy

[ 12-06-2001: Message edited by: O'Westy ]