HANGS RANT: Things I'd like to see worked in.. sooner; rather than later: (hang rolls up sleeves, shows intent to get down to cases) In no particular order of importance:
1. JABO. Maybe making forward fields at least do-able with current fighter ords loadouts. Certainly the current state of affairs is most unsatifactory. This one alone may be enuff to keep people's wallets in their pockets on 'pay to play' day.
2. Drop Tanks.. should have a damage value greater than one gun round. Dropping a pair of these on a contested runways re-spawn point occupied by a fighter should do more than surprise the guy.
3. Rockets. Underdone.. no collateral damage at all. By all accounts, the damn things should be as lethal as a tank shell. These things are feeble.
4. Scoring. This is very weird. Why should buff drivers be penalized for not flying and getting kills in a fighter? And vice-versa. Splitting the scoring for buff and fighter types would make quite a few folks happier IMHO.
4a. First bail dies.. bogus, IMHO. I understand this single aspect is 'written in stone'; so don't expect any change.
5. PUBLISH THE FLIGHT MODEL DATA! Who's the source; what are the numbers?? I suspect more than just me; myself and I are interested in THIS little piece of missing info! This sim is supposed to be 'the word' on flight model realism. SHOW ME! (HiTech indicates that some of this will be made available 'at some point'. I'm sure you know the answer to the 'when?' part of the question)
6. Un-hinder the .50's modeling in fighters.. the guns are (admittedly!!) undermodeled in rate of fire and/or bullet stream density. This is why most snapshots are useless. This aggravates me no end..
7. Buff gun effectiveness. Since we've all had the flight model thing debated to death (without data from the developer); why exempt the buff guns from the same realism standard? A .50 is a .50. Lethality and range should be the same across the platforms that use them. Don't give a damn if it's inna buff; an ack emplacement of arrayed in the leading edge of a fighters wing. Range and lethality should be modeled as it was.. not as it is here. Another source of aggravation.
8. A place to fly that's not the 'open arena'. Several times I've wanted to do fight model tests or 'duel' mode stuff with another player; cross platform.. only to have a third party show up and toss in his sack of lead. How about a 'practice' arena where we can work on these things without trashing one anothers scores (not that they matter) or work on squad tactics and such. At the least; get the H2H feature running. Soon as this gets turned on; I have a growing list of invitations to a BBQ to send out.
Muahahhahahaaaaaaa!
9. Squad icons. We can get ONE plane hi-lighted with a .wingman command. How about a .squad command to hi-light all yer squaddies. Surely this one can be done..
10. Prop drag modeling. Prop modeling; period. Hang remembers the 'word' from some time back.. the prop controls in this sim were gonna be special. Well; they sure ain't at this point. Hang still wonders why he can belly land his P51 on asphalt.. slide to a stop with no outer wings; no tail and the damn prop still turns. I can even 'skooch' the damn plane forward with the prop spinning in the dirt! (in a 'for pay' sim?? c'mon!) Hang wants to throttle back and see airspeed diminish. Hang wants the plane to feel like it has a prop in the front.. not an underpowered Jumo in the back. Hang wonders why it is this has not been done as of yet. Hang wonders WHEN.
10a. ..and the "We don't answer 'when' questions" bit can be trying too.. when the developer expects to get the price of a boxed sim per month; WHEN questions on promised features should be answered, if not by a specific time; then at least indicate the priorities established.
We know WHEN we're gonna have to pay.. (and I intend to; it's a great sim!) ..so I don't think its out of line to expect an answer to a major feature of the flight models aspect to be side-stepped. i.e.; 'When is prop drag gonna be implemented' An answer of "..it has highest priority, and will be implemented as soon as possible" is MUCH better than a condecending "we don't answer 'when' questions" response on-line.. or no answer at all on the BBS.
(Hang had a really bad day; and will probably come back later and erase this rant)
After a re-read of the above; I cringed at some comments.. but have decided to leave them as they stand. As beta testers, it IS our responsibility to point out to the developer those things that we feel need attention... and why. Meaning in the written word is often subjective. I was my intent to leave no doubt as to meaning and importance.
Though the tone in the above comments on the sims shortcommings is sometimes harsh; I think the points are valid. And these points have gone for the most part unanswered by the developers when bought up in other posts. Some feedback from THEM will help us do our jobs a beta testers better too.
Finally; as this beta draws to a close, allow me to say it has been a pleasure flying with ALL of you; developers and fellow beta testers (and even chute shooters)alike. AH is without doubt the best sim of it's type; and will continue to get better. I AM sold on it; I will be there; first in line with the money in my hand on pay fer play day. I do trust the developer to 'stand and deliver'; I just wonder about... WHEN.
Hang
------------------
PALE HORSES
"I looked, and behold; a Pale Horse, and it's riders name was Death, and Hell followed with him" Rev 6.8
