Alright, the CON's over..can we get some news?

[Grimm]

Muck,  

I put it too you like this,  I have mastered the present calibration system.   I know how to get bombs on target.     Now I have the option of a calibrate button to replace the cross hairs.   I still put bombs on target.    Game play hasnt changed.

Now,  My dad starts flying and does bombers,  His hand isnt steady anymore, he does all the steps,  has to keep alt, course and speed steady.   If he doesnt have the physical ability to hold the cross hairs exact,  He cant play with any accuracy.    Game play hasnt changed.

Now make the suggested change, and he can bomb accurately and he is able to fun.  Game play still hasnt changed.  

Changes you suggested (in jest) to Fighters would have HUGE gameplay implications.  

Im just looking at is as a way to make bombing more fun for the causal bomber pilot and those that may have physical problems or inferior hardware.  

The only game play issuse I can think of is that it might mean more bombers in the air.   I personal think this would be a gameplay plus.

can you explain how this change would be a negative to gameplay?

{edit addtion}  just to clarify,  Im not suggesting the old laser sight,  all conditions would be the same as the present system, just as change to the cross hair part of the calibration.

[ALF]

Bombing should NOT be a 'given'   I see no advantage in game terms to making a fighter pilot work for months to become little better than piss poor cannon fodder....but in a bomber...WHAAAAAA....I cant hit anything after 2 flights....geez

Anyone who takes their time, asks a few questions and or reads my (or the other) tutorial can bomb from 20k well enough to really tick off the enemy.  

The current bomb sight requires at least a LITTLE PRACTICE....ya know...that thing you do to get good at something....so you actually feel like you accomplished something when your a success.

[Nomak]

Originally posted by SlapShot


Most don't understand the undertaking that HTC just pulled off in the last year and a-half with the limited amount of physical resources that they have.  

Indeed that is true.  I do have no idea, but how can I when there is no news from HTC about what is really going on for months or years at a time?  I saw some changes with AH2 but nowhere near enough to justify the length of time it took to complete.  Just this lamen's opinion though.

Originally posted by SlapShot


We haven't even seen the surface scratched on the foundation that HT and crew just layed down over the last year and a-half. It's gonna take time to slowly roll this stuff out and when it does surface we will all probably think that HTC walks on water.  

Now that sounds good!  I very much hope it is true.

 

Originally posted by SlapShot


We got to see the working inside of the Ki-84 ... IL2 has nothing on these guys. HTC is only held back by their own imposed limitations (business and/or tech model) and not by technology.

Now that is a powerfull statement.  Just out of curiousity Slap.... have you seen/played IL2 latley?

I play IL2 FB AEP often.  I have in the past  (Usually in private squad forums)  bashed AH and praised IL2 FB AEP.  Perhaps I shouldnt have.  However,  to compare the current form of AH to FB IMHO there is no contest.

Im not trying to slam HTC or thier product here..... I am just saying what I belive to be true.  If thats outa line then I do appoligize.

[Karnak]

Grimm,

He doesn't have to hold it steady.  If he can time it so that his begin click and end click are over the same point it works just fine.  In between the start and end clicks the crosshairs can wander all over the place and it has no effect.


Nomak,

I don't see how you can reach that conclusion.  IL2:FB:AEP is complete garbage compared to AH in all ways other than graphics, and those are a mixed bag.

Heck, the cockpits in IL2 are friggin useless as none of the instruments are ledgible.

The view system is laughable in its limitations, like you're flying with a back brace and neck brace.

The flight models are a joke and the damage models worse.

[Grimm]

Originally posted by Karnak
Grimm,

He doesn't have to hold it steady.  If he can time it so that his begin click and end click are over the same point it works just fine.  In between the start and end clicks the crosshairs can wander all over the place and it has no effect.

 

Yes,  I understand that as I have stated already.  what if a person cant time that out so well?    Or Myself with a crapy stick cant seem to make it work well.  

As I have stated, I have no Problems.   Im looking at it as in More Fun for More people.    

Im finding it interesting the resistance from you guys about making it a more fun game.   With my plan, it would be exactly the same fun for you.   it would just open it up to more folks.  

Nobody seems to have any gameplay negatives.  
::Shrug::  

Its kinda like the combat trim I guess,   Use it if you want,  dont if you prefer not too.

Its kind of a dead horse now,  I just wondered if anyone had any gameplay reasons against it.

[Elfie]

Hold crosshaors over same point for 10 to 15 secdonds while holding down calibration key.(Start and end at same point)

Thats the part I cant do, I find it impossible to hold the stick steady for that long a time. Therefore my bombs always fall either short or long. Hence I dont fly bombers ever.

[SlapShot]

Now that is a powerfull statement. Just out of curiousity Slap.... have you seen/played IL2 latley?

I have IL2 .. I have seen it ... played around with it and have watched Icer play it. Absolutely gorgeous !!! IL2 gameplay does ziltch for me.

From what I saw ... the inside of the Ki-84 cockpit is just as pretty as any I have seen in IL2.

It all there Nomak ... HT and crew just need to turn it on. Problem is, if they turn up the volume, what does it do to their net code/playability. They play a very delicate balancing game between the Client and the Server ... turning up the eye candy ... what will it do to lag ?

You see, the real difference between AH and IL2 is that HT has the corner on the Client / Server comms ... think about it ... if the IL2 boys knew what HT knows about Client / Server, don't you think that they would provide arenas larger than 32 players with all their eye candy or would all their eye candy cause a huge clog in the pipe if they went larger than 32 ... even 64 ? What is stopping them from hosting 700 players ?!?!?

Just about anybody/artist can make spectacular looking objects (planes), but not everybody can make it all work with 700 people on simultaneously ... except HT.

You can have your IL2 spectacular looking planes/terrains/etc with 32 players ... I'll take HT's very good looking planes/terrains/etc with 700 players.

<> bud ... good to see ya around !!!

[jbnace12]

Im sure that onceeveryone settles in they will post more details and pics. Still need to get over the Hooters girls showing up at the con, and all the strippers at the party!!  ;} Or am I still in a mead induced halucination!!

[DREDIOCK]

Originally posted by Pyro
I don't think it's as obvious as it appears Drediock.  One of the things we were talking about was the relationship between the difficulty of a task and the effect that has on requiring players to adopt a swarming behavior to be successful at accomplishing that task.

I think the conventional line of thought as you point out above is that if a task is easier, it just makes it better for the horde.  But if you think about it, that's not really the case.  In fact, it's the opposite.  The more people you require to accomplish a task, the bigger the groups that form.

Look at this hypothetical situation with two different settings at the extreme ends.  Two teams of 100 players with 20 fields want to capture all the fields.  Team A is a horde with all players flying in one big group.  Team B is the extreme opposite and all players are evenly distributed across all airfields, 5 players to each field.  If a base capture were made extremely difficult and required 50 After further consideration people to achieve successs, obviously Team A would win as Team B would not be able to capture a field.  Now if capture were made extremely easy and it only took 2 people to achieve success, which team's strategy would work best?

I understand what your saying and even agree with you to a certain extent.
 This is assuming that all sides are or close to even. Thats the only sticking point.


  On one hand you have a base thats easier to capture making it possable for fewer people to take a base. Which is cool because smaller groups could have an effect on base capture.
  On the other hand with the base so far apart from the town a horde can devote limited resources to the feild while just storming in and quicksnatching the town.

 After further consideration I have to admit the idea has merit.
and Im all for smaller groups being able to make a difference, which at t the moment is a thing that has been neutered.

And I think if it works according to your plan you will see Smaller fights not bigger ones which in my opinion is a good thing as I am  am Tired of this big blob  vrs big blob furball which the game has evolved into
But I think the key to giving the defenders a chance with the airfeild so far away is going to be the VH's. and hardness thereof.

But Im willing to shut  up on the matter and give it a fair shot

[Nomak]

Originally posted by Karnak

I don't see how you can reach that conclusion.  IL2:FB:AEP is complete garbage compared to AH in all ways other than graphics, and those are a mixed bag.

Heck, the cockpits in IL2 are friggin useless as none of the instruments are ledgible.

The view system is laughable in its limitations, like you're flying with a back brace and neck brace.

The flight models are a joke and the damage models worse.

FB graphics are far superior.  Damage modeling in FB is far more detailed.  FB offers complex engine management systems i.e. variable prop pitch,  engine mixture contorls,  radaitor/cooling system venting controls.

FB offers dynamic campaigns for online or offline play.  Including career type scenarios.  Custom online and offline missions can be generated and played as co-op or head to head missions with as many as 32 players and hundreds of AI aircraft.  (Sounds alot like TOD to me)

FBs updates have come far more often and had more content than HTCs (as I said earler ... to my eyes anyway)

Pacific fighters is now available from UBI and has 128 player dogfight capability.  Along with hords of new aircraft and maps and dynamic missions.

I dont think you have any idea what you are speaking about.

Now that being said........ HTCs Aces High is still the most fun I have ever had online.  In my heart I want AH to be the best combat sim available.  I just dont believe that it is right now.  

SlapShot.....

From what you said they are working very hard to improve the game in everyway possible.   I have always held you in the higest respect and If you came away from the con believing that than I believe it also.

[Karnak]

Originally posted by Nomak
I dont think you have any idea what you are speaking about.

Actually I have a pretty good idea what I am speaking of.

What you said was pretty much what I said.  It has the graphics edge, and nothing else.

Gobs of aircraft are meaningless when they are so poorly modeled.


Oooo, 128 on at once.  Wow.

Oh wait....

[MOIL]

Originally posted by SlapShot
Now that is a powerfull statement. Just out of curiousity Slap.... have you seen/played IL2 latley?

I have IL2 .. I have seen it ... played around with it and have watched Icer play it. Absolutely gorgeous !!! IL2 gameplay does ziltch for me.

From what I saw ... the inside of the Ki-84 cockpit is just as pretty as any I have seen in IL2.

It all there Nomak ... HT and crew just need to turn it on. Problem is, if they turn up the volume, what does it do to their net code/playability. They play a very delicate balancing game between the Client and the Server ... turning up the eye candy ... what will it do to lag ?

You see, the real difference between AH and IL2 is that HT has the corner on the Client / Server comms ... think about it ... if the IL2 boys knew what HT knows about Client / Server, don't you think that they would provide arenas larger than 32 players with all their eye candy or would all their eye candy cause a huge clog in the pipe if they went larger than 32 ... even 64 ? What is stopping them from hosting 700 players ?!?!?

Just about anybody/artist can make spectacular looking objects (planes), but not everybody can make it all work with 700 people on simultaneously ... except HT.

You can have your IL2 spectacular looking planes/terrains/etc with 32 players ... I'll take HT's very good looking planes/terrains/etc with 700 players.

<> bud ... good to see ya around !!!

Yeah,  I'll be sure to let  O. Maddox know what a 3rd rate programmer he is...........


"Just about anybody/artist can make spectacular looking objects (planes), but not everybody can make it all work with 700 people on simultaneously ... except HT"

This ones my favorite:lol

[SlapShot]

Originally posted by MOIL
Yeah,  I'll be sure to let  O. Maddox know what a 3rd rate programmer he is...........


"Just about anybody/artist can make spectacular looking objects (planes), but not everybody can make it all work with 700 people on simultaneously ... except HT"

This ones my favorite:lol

Where did I say the O. Maddox is a 3rd rate programmer ? Whoever the hell he is.

BOIL ... errr ... I mean MOIL ... show me another sim like Aces High that can support 700 people online ? Tell me how and where I can sign up, cause I would love to see it.

[Muckmaw1]

There's something inherintly waek about limited players in an arena.

I always hated that about games like America's Army.

That being said, 128 in an arena is a nice size, but I still prefer the 400-500 we normally see here.

Now, from what I am reading, the competition is catching up on HTC here.

If I had the time or the patience to try another sim, I would right now.

I'm one of those morons that likes their sims as complex as possible, so the idea of engine managment sounds pretty good to me.

[Nomak]

How many players in AH are usually in any one sector at a time? more than 100?

hmmm