Its pretty remarkable...

[J_A_B]

"Similar infor on CV (if i remember class of cv is lexington) "


The CV in AH is Essex class


J_A_B

[Elfie]

Mugzee, a Capital ship is a large ship such as a Carrier, Battleship, Heavy/Light Cruiser.

[Midnight]

Originally posted by MoRphEuS
So what are you going to go with?

Midnight, you cant sit there and tell me that a 30mm round from a 110 should have or ever did have the capability of fully penetrating a Cruisers armor more so, to sink a cruiser with a single pass.

And cumulative damage is fine. But... That being said, there is no way a 110 should be able to do enough cumulative damage to sink a cruiser in a single pass.

Morph, I'm agreeing with you on assesment. What I am saying is that making things 'harder' in AH just means that the damage to kill number is increased.

If a change is to be made, then I agree that the 30mm HE round needs to be made ineffective on ship armor, no matter how many are fired at it.

[beet1e]

Morph/Phookat

I'm not saying it's right for a 110 to be able to destroy a CV. The point of my original post in this thread was to observe a certain double standard, viz. some folks like to play this *game* in the gamiest of ways (fields close together, P47 turnfights on the deck) ie. aerial quake, in which the only similarity to WW2 is the fact that the vehicles in use have WW2 names.  And yet - when they see something they think is wrong, they draw on RL WW2 parallels to justify an alteration to the game!

But hey, let's leave that aside for a moment. Morpheus, I saw the thread in which you described that racy car you are building - I am impressed! Where do you get your money?! I loved the engine picture. I didn't post, because I know little about hotrodding.

dedalos-  

Takes of gets shoot down, takes off gets shot down, takes off gets shot down. Three times and he did not even try to evade once. Finally, he takes of in a LA7 to get rid of me. He gets shot down even faster so he takes up a 38 again. Well, I am out of ammo. I bet you he made as many trips as he needed to sink that CV.

- sounds like Lazs trying to win an argument! :lol Awwww, I shouldn't say that. It's his birthday today.

[Elfie]

I'm not saying it's right for a 110 to be able to destroy a CV. The point of my original post in this thread was to observe a certain double standard, viz. some folks like to play this *game* in the gamiest of ways (fields close together, P47 turnfights on the deck) ie. aerial quake, in which the only similarity to WW2 is the fact that the vehicles in use have WW2 names. And yet - when they see something they think is wrong, they draw on RL WW2 parallels to justify an alteration to the game!

The distinction is in the modeling, I think almost everyone can agree that they want the modeling correct. How people play the game is another subject matter.

[phookat]

Originally posted by beet1e
The point of my original post in this thread was to observe a certain double standard, viz. some folks like to play this *game* in the gamiest of ways (fields close together, P47 turnfights on the deck) ie. aerial quake, in which the only similarity to WW2 is the fact that the vehicles in use have WW2 names.

This is where you are incorrect.  The real similarity to WW2 is that the planes fly and damage like their real life counterparts.  That is why this is not a double standard.

The gamey things you mention are all parts of the wargame, which necessarily has to be unrealistic.  For example, having bases close or far has nothing to do with realism either way--it is purely a gameplay issue.

[beet1e]

Originally posted by phookat
This is where you are incorrect.  The real similarity to WW2 is that the planes fly and damage like their real life counterparts.  That is why this is not a double standard.

The gamey things you mention are all parts of the wargame, which necessarily has to be unrealistic.  For example, having bases close or far has nothing to do with realism either way--it is purely a gameplay issue.

Like I said - Selective Realism.

Toodle-Pip
Beet.

[Stang]

How is flying a p47 on the deck being gamey?  Doing that you might as well be the fattest kid on the dodgeball court w/ a bunch of studs hurling 90mph melons at ya.   Sheesh.

[Kweassa]

In the simulation genre, the gameplay and the realism is like two sides of a coin. They may often contradict each other, but in essence they are inseparable.

 Aces High need not necessarily have to be this way. It could have always been something like Crimson Skies. Much more flashy, fast-paced, and acrade-fun  - it could have used all sorts of alternative techniques of the latest fad and be based on space age - except, Aces High won't be this successful if it had been any of those.

 Simulation is a recreation of reality.

 Aircombat simulations in particular, gets it very existence from the fact that we crave a chance to experience something close to a real life conflict which most of us have never had the chance, and probably will never have a chance, to experience. It's the thrills, hardships, and bravery of the World War 2 pilots which inspires us, and thanks to computer technology all the grief and tragedy, deaths are left out of that equation.

 Gameply aspects may defy, warp, or misrepresent  reality in some cases, but its ultimate purpose is to strengthen realism.

 Since there's no way to exactly replicate all of reality on our desktop computers, gameplay issues creates work-arounds and short cuts to let us experience realism more easily.

 Thus, gameplay that contradicts, and ultimately harms the reality in essence, kills the game. In the long run it does more harm than it does good - that's why simulation games constantly strive to better its basic system so it could better represent reality.

 
 When AH was small, none of the 'problems' surfaced in the manner as it does nowadays. HTC isn't God - they can't foresee all the results. Over time the basic system becomes outdated, flawed, and dysfunctional, because not all the inherent problems could be seen during the time of its implementation.

 Things have changed now. Some people wouldn't give shi* on what happens to the game as long as they have somebody to shoot down, but a lot of others are feeling discontent in the fact that some of the basic systems are exploited or ill-used. There are things happening around that which in real life, would have almost never happened, and at a frequency that is alarming. The "gameyness" of dive bombing buffs or planes strafing ships dead is becoming the norm.

 At this point, it becomes clear that more modificiations to the system are required to restore the tendency of air combat within acceptable levels of realism. Right now, the abnormalcy is off the charts.

[MOIL]

Nice write  Kw

[Kweassa]

Midnight is right.

 Just strengthening the CVs is the easy way out. It's a temporary solution at best, and if people find out one or two planes can't go strafe a Capital ship dead, they'll simply use five or six.

 If this tendency goes on, the point where people wil stop will be when the capital ships reach a status of practical invulnerability.

 Like described in above post, most certainly HTC did not foresee that AH would grow up to be such a large-scale game representing almost all major aspects of WW2 combat. Simple damage models were good enough then. However, it is outdated now, and showing signs of ill adaptation to the reailty.

 The only real solution is by bringing different types of ammunition and ordnance doing different types of damage, instead of the "cumulative(as Midnight describes it)" way, where all ammunition/ordnance has a certain set level of base damage number that applies to all objects equally.

 If this is introduced, many of the gameyness in the game can be easily solved:

* ammunition for guns mounted on planes doing almost no damage to hard or armoured targets such as concrete bunkers, town buildings, factory buildings and etc.

* General Purpose ordnance doing average/medium damage on most targets, available for almost all planes.

* Specialized ordnance for anti-shipping purposes doing maximum damage to ships, but limited upto only certain levels(ie. 500lbs) on most planes.. and only some plane carrying that type of ordnance have higher power(such as, only Naval planes or Ju87s or etc.. having anti-shipping bombs that go over 1000lbs)

* AP bombs specialized for killing GVs, which is limited only to a certain level(ie. 500lbs) for most planes, with the exception of few specialized planes carrying higher payload of the same type.

 This would stop the "110s strafing a capital ship dead in one pass" problem, not to mention differentiate the role between a fighter configuration and a real jabo configuration. Also, by limiting the highest payload of certain ordnace types to only certain planes, this could bring back the jabo role to the esteemed jabo planes - instead of the "one US fighter does it all" multipurposeness which renders most real jabo planes obsolete in the MA.

[phookat]

Originally posted by beet1e
Like I said - Selective Realism.

Yes.  But not a double standard.

Actually, Kweassa, the fundamental structure of the main arena indicates that the AH MA is not a war simulation.  It is a war game.  

OTOH, the fundamental structure of the physics model indicates that the goal is a physics simulation, not a "physics game" (whatever that might mean).

[MOIL]

Kw:
"* Specialized ordnance for anti-shipping purposes doing maximum damage to ships, but limited upto only certain levels(ie. 500lbs) on most planes.. and only some plane carrying that type of ordnance have higher power(such as, only Naval planes or Ju87s or etc.. having anti-shipping bombs that go over 1000lbs)

* AP bombs specialized for killing GVs, which is limited only to a certain level(ie. 500lbs) for most planes, with the exception of few specialized planes carrying higher payload of the same type.

This would stop the "110s strafing a capital ship dead in one pass" problem, not to mention differentiate the role between a fighter configuration and a real jabo configuration. Also, by limiting the highest payload of certain ordnace types to only certain planes, this could bring back the jabo role to the esteemed jabo planes - instead of the "one US fighter does it all" multipurposeness which renders most real jabo planes obsolete in the MA"

These are great ideas and suggestions?  But just as the correct "loadout" for armorment on these planes would be, it will also be necessary to address the issue's of armorment for ships and GV's. I would think

[beet1e]

Stang - P47s on the deck? Well, I've read Gabreski's autobiography, and most of the time he was at five figure alts. However, he was known to vulch! He told us this in his address at the 2000 WB con in NC. A little titter went round the auditorium when he told us how he would shoot a guy before he got his wheels up. I was half expecting some gamey wise arse to stand up and accuse him of gaming the war! He paid a price though, and one of his vulch attempts resulted in a prop strike, and he had to ditch and was captured 5 days later. But he never ever flew into unknown territory at deck level, "looking for fights". That would have been, and still is, stupid. I don't care if wise arses can make it work in AH, with their elite gaming skills, and specialised and finely tuned sticks and view settings.



Excellent posts, Kweassa. You summed up my feelings in these passages.

Originally posted by Kweassa
Thus, gameplay that contradicts, and ultimately harms the reality in essence, kills the game. In the long run it does more harm than it does good - that's why simulation games constantly strive to better its basic system so it could better represent reality.
.
.
.
Things have changed now. Some people wouldn't give shi* on what happens to the game as long as they have somebody to shoot down, but a lot of others are feeling discontent in the fact that some of the basic systems are exploited or ill-used. There are things happening around that which in real life, would have almost never happened, and at a frequency that is alarming. The "gameyness" of dive bombing buffs or planes strafing ships dead is becoming the norm.

 At this point, it becomes clear that more modificiations to the system are required to restore the tendency of air combat within acceptable levels of realism. Right now, the abnormalcy is off the charts.

[Mugzeee]

Originally posted by MoRphEuS
They'd rather be a bunch of smart tulips Phookat.

Id prefere to be called an intelligent butt hole. ty