(response in ()
Originally posted by Gadfly:
First let me say that it doesn't HAVE to suck, there are many very good things about it, some of them revolutionary. I also post this not because I do not like AH, but because I DO like it, and want to be able have fun in the skies of HTC. You can argue with the importance of my points, but you can not argue with my logic.
( actuallly I can becuase your logic would require players to either sit and monitor bases callign off boggies to late or require me to have a pentuim XI 9ghz machine with 256gb of mem and a 200mbps and HTC to have a $1,000,000.00 per hour programmer to make it all work, HTC has to keep the game playable for most players and have to keep the game within there own limitations. the only other option is to keep towards the trend of ripping air warrior off and never progressing the genre of mass multiplayer online WWII flight simms. I personally lean towards gameplay with accurate FLight models this keeps me out of CFS2, Air Warrior MV, Warbirds, and fighter ace. IF anything you seem to want AH to become warbirds and to me warbirds sucks in compairison. First game Air warrior witch lead to warbirds wich lead to AH time for Aces high to break new ground and do things right not keep basing the game off of another I know where HiTech and Pyro game from and this game is difrent even it's flight models are better but still need improving. People wll cry about uber planes and bombers and AAA and it's all based on opinion the only solution is spawn all players at 15k in the same plane and that would perty much put us in the same seat as a CFS2 player.)
What makes AH suck:
1. Inflight radar.
(I think it should be more complex see my above post)
2. toejamty clipboard map.
(needs to show more detail mabey even be bigger with a lower scale ratio such as 1 inch grid = 10k rather then 25 miles)
3. Super bomber fire control system.
(1 on 1 bomber vs a fighter a bomber should win and few people like to gun in the game. the option to this is to either have computer controlled guns like warbirds, gunner only like older Air warrior versions or just like AH has it, perosonally I like the AH's take on gunners)
There are other things I do not like, but they are personal preferences, whereas these are things that make this a game, not a simulation.
Here is my argument for the things above:
1. The best rebuttal of this that I have heard is that it simulates the rudimentary radar, sound and observer stations of the period. I say that the perfect transmittal medium of the radio buffer simulates those things; inflight radar has no basis in real life before AWACs took flight.
(I for one do not want to runn around the areana calling off boggies. see my above post. all Radar does is give you position in history you would here the call for Alt location Bearing and Type such as bobmer or fighter or small or large contact type this is way to hard to do in game)
2. In bombers, there is a person that does exactly what the (WB) F1 maps does. In fighters there are railroads, roads and identifiable features that allow a pilot to, more or less, pinpoint his position. The strip map he carries on his knee bears no resemblance to our clipboard map.
(Play Warbirds then I for one don't want Aces high to be warbirds or Air warrior there have been alot of good ideas stolen from air warior and there have been some stupid ideas stolen from air warrior as well I like the knee map I think ti should have more detail and have a position in the buff to show even more detail)
3. The idea is that we SIMULATE WWII air combat. The theory that AH's B-29 fire control simulates this better than a computer controlled otto is simply silly. I know, I know, airborne AI killing you sucks, but, well, how come it is OK for the field acks? Same damn thing, if you ask me, and not on point in either case. We accept many things in the name of immersion and this is one of those things that we simply have to accept: An AI otto simulates discrete gunners better than one guy aiming all of the weapons(at least till we get the B-29).
(again Play Warbirds I hated the warbirds AI and I hated Air warriors gunner only method. realistically a lone fighter doesn't stand a snowballs chance in hell against a medium or heavy buff. Bombers rarely took off without a full crew load AH gives you the best of both worlds. the B29 methods has a disadvantage as well namely it waste alot of ammo decreases accuracy for the other gunns and blows ammo in guns that can't possible hit the target not to metion you still have to have good gunnry skills)
In closing, please DO consider this a whine, but not a slam. I want to fly in AH, as well as drive the PT boat, but I also demand a little more simulation than it offers right now.
(I think it does the best job yet and would rather them put the effort into more accurate
plane models. Like put the torque into the n1k2 and the speed into the f4u that they really had. the f4u feels really slow and its acceleration seems to suck at times If anything I want accurately modeled aircraft and thats my opinion. But over all in reality AH has improved and will most likely continue to improve. It may even someday get ridd of the stupid 3 way war from Air warrior. either by going 2 way or 5 way war.)
Lizking
(Mayhem)
------------------
Mayhem 33rd S.G.
"Destination anywhere, so far gone, I'm already there!"
