I hate to make a post like this, but am bewildered...

[juzz]

eddiek; the K series was meant to be a standardisation of the late model G-10. Thus they are virtually the same aircraft in performance terms. The commonly tossed about speed for the G-10 is without MW 50, and if you look at the black curve on the AH chart you will see it matches that number.

Besides, aircraft designations can be somewhat arbitrary. A late model P-47C is virtually identical to an early D. Spitfire Mk VIII, IX and XVI, performance wise are practically the same a/c. Lancaster I and III are identical apart from their engines country of manufacture. The list goes on...

[Duckwing6]

Well Santa for your own sake i'd drop that Cessna argument right there .. it's just a bit too far from the real deal ..

i've flown dozens of different airplanes and don't even think of coming close to what a real warbird would feel whenyou fly it.

Now regarding the Scenarios:

As most of you guys said AH is relatively young, WB is maturer, has a bigger player base.

In AH we've just started with Scenarios and ifg you had a little flying in them you can see how far we got from the first starts till now..

A lot of folks in the CM Corps where new to the design and management of a scenario and we're all still learning, also the tools we have to make oit happen , but i can assure you that we ARE learning , also the attendance is gettng stronger and stronger with every frame we have.

For all who have a WB and AH account i can only suggest giving the AH Events (weekly and the Big ones) a spin to see how we are doing in that departement (Inputs are allways appreciated)

DW6
Aces High - Scenario Corps

[-lynx-]

 

Just like WWIIOL`s graphics. But WBIII is in an entirely different league, major leaps and bounds there in graphics. I wouldn`t say catching up, I would call it raising the bar big time and setting new standards.

Not sure where you got major leaps and bounds from - you still have no working clouds (I fly in RL and can attest that the clouds in AH look very much like their RL counterparts, those of SE England anyway). Planes look - and I repeat what I've said above - NO BETTER than current AH set especially the late ones Ju88, TBM, Hellkitty.

I'm sorry, I'm at work and can't do comparative screenshots but I'll do it when I get home.

And BTW when you call the stuff you have in WB "terrain" you obviously have't seen Luzon and others created by players with available to anyone to play with AH terrain editor...

 

"Change in tone when you look at planes from the ground is largely due to Doppler effect but sitting in a plane, you are the source of the sound so no changes in pitch."

That is not correct. See my explanation above. Prop sound gets MUCH louder as you increase with speed.

But of course it is - LOUDNESS (change in volume) has nothing to do with PITCH (change in frequency) Plus:

Pi(3.14159...)* D (prop diameter)* RPM (prop revs) / 60)+ V (plane speed) - this is the linear speed of a prop tip. (Not sure where you got squares/roots in your formula from)

From that point of view lets look at a fighter travelling at 300 kts with a 4 meter prop at 3000 rpm:

(3.14159*4*3000/60)+300*1852/3600=783m/s...

Speed of sound at sea level ~ 340m/s.

Your blade tips are already doing Mach 2+...

 

Check out the Nose Art page. WarBirds III allows squadrons to have their own insignia displayed.

Sorry - couldn't help it - from the horse's mouth, so to speak . You do know that it's a standard feature in AH, don't you?

 

"Nothing on the ground/water is player controlled. No tanks, trucks or anything like that."

Yep nothing changed there in the old code, but not for long.

I've looked and looked and looked through the zillions of now released screenshots... Unless you know something I and what looks like the developers themselves don't.... Do tell?

 

(See wing root of MC202 and 205 as example)

Macchi - that's exactly the point - see MC202 and MC205. Do you? In WB I mean?

I won't say much about the guncamera, or, rather, a flight recorder that makes movies of your flight where you can see what you were shooting at, who was shooting at you and what happened when you blacked out and found yourself in the tower upon regaining consciousness.

Sorry but it's deteriorating into something silly now I'm bailing. Pulling the cord just above ground... Uh-oh - forgot that in WB it still is not possible...



------------------
lynx
13 Sqn RAF

[Macchi]

Only for you, Lynx

   

   

That is the game model in a viewer, which is using the Winter Wolf graphic engine.


Lem



[This message has been edited by Macchi (edited 11-24-2000).]

[figaro]

StSanta inquired:

"What's so good about WB 2.76?"

figaro answers:

"It supports the Macintosh OS."

When are you all AH fliers going to realise that the lack of multi platform support might be hurting your player numbers significantly???  Dont you wish more people played AH???

You are all rightly suggesting and demanding more features to improve your AH sim experience and its attractivness.  New planes, vehicles, perks, scenarios, map tools, sounds, marketing efforts, etc...

Right on!  Now what about suggesting something that will IMMEDIATELY  bring in a significant number of players, like myself, who have flown AW since 1987 (handle parsifal), WB since 1996, and are now thorougly frustrated because they cannot move onto the current "King of the Hill" (as somebody called it) sim.

Thank you for your attention, and please dont mention the asinine MG character.  I suspect some of the answers this post will receive will show that there are plenty of those on both sides.

Cheers,

figaro


[This message has been edited by figaro (edited 11-23-2000).]

[gatt]

Leeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeem          

------------------
GATT
4° Stormo Caccia - Knights
Macchi C.202's sting (1,9MByte film)

[Lephturn]

figaro,

No dis-respect to the Mac fliers, but HTC has to look at return on investment.  I'd bet that after creating WB, the HTC crew has a really good idea how much effort it takes to create a Mac version and how much it will impact their game.  HTC will also have a good idea of how much more revenue they could bring in with a Mac version.  In short, I think HTC knows very well all the plusses and minuses of doing two versions.  If it was a good move for them, I'm sure they would have done it.  It obviously is not a good move at this time.

Yes, it's too bad that you Mac fliers don't have the option to fly AH, but I respect HTC's decisions and I realize that their company and the game is likely better off sticking with a single version.  There is no way that HTC could crank out the versions with the speed they do now if they had to run two versions.  Never mind the fact that they likely don't have the resources to create and maintain a Mac version anyway.

Sometimes you pay a price to choose Macs.  This is one of those times, sorry.

------------------
Lephturn - Chief Trainer
A member of The Flying Pigs  http://www.flyingpigs.com


"My P-47 is a pretty good ship, she took a round coming 'cross the Channel last trip.
Just thinking 'bout my baby and lettin' her rip, always got me through so far."
 - Steve Earl

[HABICHT]

PLAYING BOTH NOW, i have to say following:

gunnery is better in WB (ah better tracer graphic)
FM is better in WB
view system better in AH
loadout variants better in AH
planeset better in WB

AND I HAVE MY METRIC SYSTEM IN WB!!

-> Wb has better "feeling" of flight


------------------
-------------------
Habicht
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
   
 

"Die Ta 152 war meine Überlebensversicherung in den letzten Tagen des Krieges" OFw Willi Reschke, Ritterkreuzträger, 38 Abschüsse

[This message has been edited by HABICHT (edited 11-23-2000).]

[Macchi]

Hehe Habicht,
as a Warbirds player i would say the gunnery in AH is better (i only mean shooting).
In Warbirds good player have a accuracy between 35% and 15%. Far too high, i think nooby would disagree here.
In AH it is around 10% for the best. That looks much more realistic.

Lem

[sky_bax]

Average WB player is around 3% to 4%

Mine is between 8% and 10%

The 15% to 35% you speak of comes from a very small amount of people. Hardly the average or majority.

I would call them the elite.



------------------
Skybax
328th Fighter Squadron
 www.352ndFighterGroup.com
Blue Nosed Bastards of Bodney

[sky_bax]

"Not sure where you got major leaps and bounds from - you still have no working clouds (I fly in RL and can attest that the clouds in AH look very much like their RL counterparts, those of SE England anyway). Planes look - and I repeat what I've said above - NO BETTER than current AH set especially the late ones Ju88, TBM, Hellkitty."

Lynx,

Who said anything about clouds???

You said,

"I repeat what I've said above - NO BETTER than current AH set especially the late ones Ju88, TBM, Hellkitty."

Thought we were talking about aircraft models?

Besides, it`s closed beta and not a finished product. Water & clouds are yet to be seen. Looking forward to it.

Screenshot comparison not needed.

Everyone here knows what AH looks like.  

That`s why I have provided a link above if you want to compare aircfart and not muck up the AH board.

Terrian? Lets not go there.  

What turns a thread bad is stuff like this. I can stand here and say that AH has better graphics than the current WB and it should. I can say here that AH some some great features. I have no problem seeing the truth.

But the fact is WBIII is newer and graphicly superior to anything out there. To deny that is just not being honest IMO. That is when it`s time for me to leave the thread.

Just ask Rip from your community. He visits AGW often, and has made several comments to the designers on their models and terrian being the best he has ever seen.

I have to respect that, he can look at the another sim and say WOW unlike yourself. That says something.

You wouldn`t happen to be one fo those funky AH cheerleaders would you?  



------------------
Skybax
328th Fighter Squadron
 www.352ndFighterGroup.com
Blue Nosed Bastards of Bodney

[gatt]

WHOA! Looks like 4^Stormo rules in WarBirds as well! Keep up with the good work Lemsko!  

------------------
GATT
4° Stormo Caccia - Knights
Macchi C.202's sting (1,9MByte film)

[Torque]

WTF is Warbirds.        

[LJK Raubvogel]

Wow, they really come out of the woodwork, don't they?  



------------------
LJK_Raubvogel
LuftJägerKorps

[StSanta]

Duck, you know I wuv you but...

You can't tell me the 190 will have an instantaneous roll rate that is worse than Cessna and equal to the Spit and say that the fm is good.  

Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't the 190 have larger ailerons, and, due to higher speeds, more pressure on 'um?

Would make them heavier for sure, but let's say you have max deflection. How long does it take to overcome the initial inertia?

I figure Wb has some kind of lag for anti stick stirring in it, and that it's part of the problem.

------------------
StSanta
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
while(!bishRookQueue.isEmpty() && loggedOn()){
30mmDeathDIEDIEDIE(bishRookQueue.removeFront());
System.out.println("LW pilots are superior");
myPlane.performVictoryRoll();
}