Pad Lock

[DOW_Cleaner]

I'm sure this will bring flurry of threads, but why isnt there a padlock on ACES HIGH?

[indian]

HiTech said no.

------------------
Tommy (INDIAN) Toon

My Homepage

indians Homepage

Aces High Word6 and Wordpad Doc's available on my web site.

[Westy]

 Damn  

 And here I was hoping to have been able to rack up some multi kills flights by picking off the target fixated Pad lock users  

 -Westy

[Rojo]

The padlock (P/L) view in Falcon was one of my favorite features, but I've not found any other implementation that worked well, particularly in a prop-sim.  Your energy state requires much more carefull attention in a WWII fighter than in an F16.  The key to Falcon 3.0's padlock was that it actually had four displays in one: 1)75 percent of the screen was devoted to the actual padlock view; 2) the next largest portion was a stip of screen that represented a 360 window around your a/c, with a little red box that would float around. This little box indicated the direction relative to your a/c's nose that the main P/L window was looking; 3) a small window in the upper left corner give critical numeric flight info, such as altitude, airspeed, and distance to target; 4) the last window was essentially an artificial horizon, so you'd know if you were nose high/low, or banking.

The primary feature F3.0's P/L had was you could rapidly switch (with the touch of a button) between normal view and P/L view.  The P/L view would always return to which ever target was last selected.

If you think about it, most of us already use padlocking; we just do it manually. To maintain attitude awareness, we just take our thumb/finger off the view button where the target is currently visible. After a quick check of instruments/attitude/altitude, we go right back to that view to maintain sight of the target.  A P/L view just mimics this, by automatically taking us back to the correct view.  The problem is, both in AH and in real life, we often find the target isn't in that view anymore. To simulate this with an automatic P/L view, just put a timer on it.  If you look away from P/L for more than say five seconds, you have to re-acquire the target visually before "locking it up" again.

I have to wonder why HiTech said "No," Indian. While loosing a visual lock on the target certainly happened in real life, a P/L view such as I've described above sort of makes up for our lack of other forms of feedback in the cockpit.  It also makes up for that fact that in real life, your view is completely fluid, allowing you to keep an object centered in you view. All IMNSHO (in-my-not-so-humble-opinion), of course  .

Rojo (a.k.a. Sabre)

[Yeager]

EAW has a hell of a nice view system.  Incredibly similar to AcesHigh (or is that the other way around?).

The padlock system in EAW is very nice.

Yeager

[Tigger]

I have to wonder why people scream "Realism! Realism! then turn around and want a feature that is no way realistic.

Realistic is being able to sometimes maneuver out of an opponents sight (haven't been able to do that yet) not lock on to him visually even if he slips into the clouds, behind a hill, into a valley, etc etc etc.

------------------

//=^.^=\\
I'm surrounded by idgits and mooks!

[DOW_Cleaner]

I agree that padloc should not exceed the pilots vision to see the plane, but never the less it is nice to have while there is still visual, instead of flipping the hat around.

[Check_JV44]

I'm not necessarily for or against a padlock but here is something interesting to think about.  When a real pilot visually locks onto a bogie he pans with his head and follows the bogie until he either loses the ability to see the target (line of sight) or decides to focus on any other cockpit critical operation.  Imagine if a pilot had to click his hat switch to follow the bogie, completely unrealistic IMHO.

The problem with most padlocks is that it locks onto a bogie whether or not pilot has seen the bogie and can follow the bogie even when the pilot loses line of sight.  I suggest that if AH chooses to implement a padlock feature, that they implement it with the restrictions above and make it necessary for the pilot to manually locate the bogie (each time) before padlock is enabled.

BTW I do not think that target fixation is necessarily an argument against a padlock feature.  It is a pilot skill issue.  For example, I can crash just as well fixating on my instruments.  --Check

[ccasey]

Freinds dont let friends use Padlock  

Say NO to padlock!

------------------
Maj. CCasey
Red Raiders
109 Pilot
Dweebfire killer  

[This message has been edited by ccasey (edited 10-14-1999).]

[Rojo]

So long as it is implemented in the way described by Check_JV44 and I, it is WAAYYYY more realistic then being locked into descrete views. I can only assume those so vehemently opposed to a P/L view are speaking from a lack of first-hand experience with it, or never took the time to learn how to use it properly (my apologies for my bluntness, guys).  How can you claim it is unrealistic if it doesn't do any more then mimick what a person in the cockpit can actually see and do.  Also, no one is suggesting doing away with the fixed snap-views, so what exactly is the objection? I haven't heard anyone lambasting the "God's-eye" outside view in AH (I'm assuming that's not going to be a permanently enabled feature, of course). Anywho, this board is for thoughtful discussion, not knee-jerk reactions.  So if you've got an objection to an idea, give us legitimate, thoughtful points to ponder. Better yet, in stead of a flat "NO!" or a simple "it will never work," why not make suggestions on how it could work.

<stepping down off soap box, and right into a great big pile of sh*t>

------------------
Rojo (S-2, The Buccaneers)

[This message has been edited by Rojo (edited 10-14-1999).]

[weazel]

What part of NO do you not understand? IMO there are plenty of 2nd rate flight sims on the market without diluting this one too. If you have to have padlock go play one of them. BTW I have EAW,Janes WW2 Fighters,etc and guess what? I dont use padlock in them either. My vote is no!

------------------
}]

[SMERSH]

A resounding NO! from me too  

When I was really a newbie, I also wanted padlock, but now with more experience, I realize padlock is too cheesy and defeats the whole purpose of a vital part of ACM which is to hide from your foe (either in the clouds or behind a hill or blend in the terrain etc) padlock will defeat the whole point of ACM and we might as well abandon a realistic flight model if we get padlock.

So one more time, NO padlock! I bet 90 percent of the simmer crowd (who are serious enough to pay 30 bucks a month) do NOT want padlock!

[Vermillion]

Rojo & other Padlock Proponents.

Guys you are correct when you say that padlock is a realistic representation of what an experienced combat pilot can do in the cockpit. Namely swiveling his head to keep track of a con.

The key word here is an experienced combat pilot.  

While it may sound like an easy task, it takes alot of time and practice in real life to learn how to visually track that enemy while doing everything else a pilot has too do in combat.

It is a skill called SA, or situation awareness.

With a padlock feature, you have just given a quite large artifical SA boost to players, by allowing them to effortlessly track the enemy thru all the different maneuvers, in all conditions.  

And this doesn't even take into account the problems with most padlock features, not losing lock when obscured by aircraft components, sun, or terrain.

Trust me, once you fly for a while without it, you will learn to effortlessly track a enemy with the standard view sets, without the artifical "crutch" of a padlock.

"Lose Sight, Lose Fight"

------------------
Vermillion
WB's: (verm--), *MOL*, Men of Leisure, Goldlandia
AW's: (verm) ACCS, Aerial Crowd Control Services, Cland



[This message has been edited by Vermillion (edited 10-15-1999).]

[chester]

Reality? padloc? what about the big fat neon icons.you guys are right a padloc is kinda un-realistic.SO are icons.Lets get rid of both.

[Westy]

 I agree that it would be very nice to *not* have icons at all. Or they only activate at
under 1k in range.
 Hopefuly however such a thing wait till the planes are easier to ID other than from 500 yards or less.
 Icons *are* unrealistic. Padloc is even *more* so in that a padloc view puts 80% of a pilots SA skill (or lack thereof) in the hands of the computer.

  --Westy