Actually its quite funny to skim through these boards here, Read all the complaints about all the inaccurate this and that, and gamplay issues/lake thereof, yet see people defend these things while playing.
I mention the fact that Aces High has simplified Ground handling and you guys go off.
hehe Whatever your lame, you obviously dont/cannot tell the differnence when it comes to one thing representing certain aspects of flight/Ground intervention more precisley.
In aces high, the Ground handling is a joke. The need to actively watch for ground loop is pretty much none existant. The only plane that even remotely gives clues to the need for specific rudder athority is the F4U.
IN Aces you cannot even rev the Engine and expect a nose over with/with-out breaks in planes that have such power/torgue to do so.
Ground Effect in aces?... hmm non-existant.
Moose said it best about the SPIN model in IL2 Being more realistic, I whole heartedly agree. ALong with that there are obvious other aspects of flight that IL2 Simulates in a more fluid manner. Sorry Aces, but even with a data table matching perfomance specs, the "Feel" of flight is not present.
As far as the X-plane Issue, Get over it, those who still linger on this are obviously the closeminded simpletants that cannot take the time/effort to download this piece of excellent airfoil simulation.
A few quotes on the topic
I read what you'll write and just thought that I would share some of my thoughts on IL2. I'm 51 and have been flying now for 35 years (yup, started when 16 and in high school). Flown a Breezy to a 747 (current job as Capt & Sim Instructor on 74 for a cargo airline). With a total of 23,000 hrs
with time in B747, DC-8, DC-9, DC-4, DC-3, BE-18, PA-ZT, PA-31, BE-58, BE-90, BE-100,
C-421, C-402, C-401, C-310, C-210, AA-5, etc.
I use to judge the flight sim by how well it looked like gun camera footage and EAW & MA I thought did a reel good job of that. Then along comes IL2 and blows them all away. Not only does it feel right but it looks right. When I fly thru the clouds it looks like cloulds to me. The mist in the valley is exactly the way I see it in real life. The flight model feels like it is as it should be allthough the only plane I could compare to would be some time I've flown in a T-28. I've thought that some of the older Mooney's
may also come close to a WWII fighter. I've been flying the flight sims now since BOB (the original Battle of Britain) was the hot sim. And when not working or flying sims I build and fly RC so you can see that once you get the flying bug you never get rid of it and I wouldn't trade a minute for any other job in the world.
Sorry for the ramble all.
74Capt
Yeah, I have about 30 hours in both a J-3, and a 152. One does have to "dance" on the rudder pedals.
23,000 hours, now that is something, and he says it's right!
All I can say is that I haven't even loaded up another flightsim since Il-2. And I haven't even scratched the surface.
Oh and for all the idiots that Keep claiming that Il2 Doesnt "LOOK" good and is nothing special compareable to aces, I think You need to start taking that medication, because IL2 is Generations/leaps and bounds beyond where Aces High is/Will be for a Long... LONG... Time..
It kinda makes you think Why Olegs team was Able to Implement DX 80 features and Aces hasn't
Oh and please tell me why With all the Graphical Extras that IL2 Has, I/others/everyone ..... Gets the Same if not better Frame rates than the Older use of The Aces High graphics DX display.
Another thing that is Funny, is the Fact that you keep complaining about the (Seemingly) Beach-Ball Sized Bullets, and the ablitly to UNREALISTCALLY HIT someone From D1.2k out, yet wind up comming back to defend it.
You Poor old saps... Maybe realisim is not what you want after all.
