Aces High vs Pacific Fighters?

[SKJohn]

How many people fly both games?  Is it just me, or does the flight model seem more difficult in PF?
Also, I'm using a Saitek x-45 setup.  There doesn't seem to be anything like we have in AH for setting the joystick controls - is it just me, or do you really have to click on each individual button that you want to set?
What do you think of the view system?  WHen I was trying to set up my view hat, I didn't know what to do with the "6" position, since in PF, there is no direct 6 view - you can either look back-left, or back-right.  Any suggestions on what to use the 6 view position for?
Does anybody have a good "~.dat" file for the x-45 that they use in Pf they could post here?
I've waited a long time to get a new computer to play this game (as well as turn up the detail and FPS in AH...), but trying to get the joystick to work like I have it in AH so far seems next to impossible.
Thanks,
SKjohn

[thrila]

My major gripes with the IL2 series is the way it handles trim and the too restrictive views.

Other than that i think it's ok- i play it when the MA doesn't look too appealing.

[Schaden]

I set up all my PF so that control buttons and views match those in AH - same button does the same thing.

Tracker does make PF easier to use but using yr stick buttons is for me easier to view in AH.

PF flight model seems to be more - don't know how to describe it - but the planes seem to be less solid in that you can't control momentum as easy as it is to do in AH.

Gunnery about the same for me - prefer the complex engine management of PF - wish we had that in AH.

[Mister Fork]

I own both.

While PF is very pretty and nice, it has the immersion and environment of a toilet roll.  Playability is pretty poor once you've completed all the canned-scripted-linear missions.  The interface is a little 'eye-watering' for boring design.

A decent dynamic campaign engine would of been nice.  But then again, if I want something that is interactive, dynamic, fun, social, I fly Aces High.

[SKJohn]

Another thing I've noticed is the graphics.  In AH, when you see planes in the distance, they look like little black dots.  In PF, when I saw distant planes, they were very fine, small black dots that rapidly tuned into very small recognizable a/c shapes.

Yes, the flight model does seem different - less "auto-piloty" than in AH.  I think that's because of the inclusion of "combat trim" in AH.  I don't think there is any thing like combat trim in PR - at least I haven't found it yet.

In doing some searching for .DAT files to use, I came across soem that people were talking about using "Hazard Script" to write the commands in.  I'm not really sure yet what that is,and if it bypasses Saitek's programming software yet or not.
Last night I tried to create  a .dat file using the Saitek software and the default command schedule for PF.  It wouldn't work correctly when I loaded it.  I had much better luck trying to assign each button its own function directly in the game.
I'd like to get it set up so the buttons are the same as in AH, but like i said earlier, some of the commands in AH don't exist in PF.

[Kweassa]

SKJohn, I've been playing multiplayer in IL2 and IL2/FB since it came out, and have all the addons.

 The graphics quality and attention to detail is very nice and immersive. The FM is probably one of the best for boxed games, but in all honesty I find Aces High more believable.

 The take-off/landing is much more difficult in IL2/FB/AEP/Pacific Fighters, and that's one part I like better than AH.

 However, all the planes feel somehow 'generic' when it comes to low speed handling and torque. In AH torque is a mighty factor - managing your plane to do a straight 90degrees vertical is always a challenge. Planes with high torque like the 109 keep want to slouch to one side.. and etc etc..  However, FB/AEP/PF feels very generic in this area.
 
 Also, the use of flaps is something I don't like, and FB/AEP/PF is virtually a flap fest. Add in the little disappointments like manual RPM control exploits and etc.. and the MP experience is fairly ruined.

 Unless one flies in organized scenarios with the online-war organization, the regular MP experience isn't bad, but AH beats it hands down.

 Besides, AH2 is taking shape nicely, and while it's not state-of-the-art like FB/AEP/PF and etc, the graphical quality of AH is slowly making progress and I like it.

 
 Both are excellent flight simulations, but I would favor AH over FB/AEP/PF.

[Furious]

Originally posted by SKJohn
What do you think of the view system?  WHen I was trying to set up my view hat, I didn't know what to do with the "6" position, since in PF, there is no direct 6 view - you can either look back-left, or back-right.  Any suggestions on what to use the 6 view position for?

There is no comparison between AH's and IL2's view system.  AH's is fantastic (though a bit liberal) and IL2's is the proverbial crappy-assed eyeball on a stick.

Do you know how to customize your views???

[Eagler]

Originally posted by SKJohn
How many people fly both games?  Is it just me, or does the flight model seem more difficult in PF?
Also, I'm using a Saitek x-45 setup.  There doesn't seem to be anything like we have in AH for setting the joystick controls - is it just me, or do you really have to click on each individual button that you want to set?
What do you think of the view system?  WHen I was trying to set up my view hat, I didn't know what to do with the "6" position, since in PF, there is no direct 6 view - you can either look back-left, or back-right.  Any suggestions on what to use the 6 view position for?
Does anybody have a good "~.dat" file for the x-45 that they use in Pf they could post here?
I've waited a long time to get a new computer to play this game (as well as turn up the detail and FPS in AH...), but trying to get the joystick to work like I have it in AH so far seems next to impossible.
Thanks,
SKjohn

x45 profile

[6GunUSMC]

I think they both have pros and cons... I usually flip a coin to see which i play... if i have a lot of squaddies here, i play here... if not i prefer the more realistic fm and damage model of pf

[Alky]

Originally posted by SKJohn
is it just me, or do you really have to click on each individual button that you want to set?

suggestions on what to use the 6 view position for?

When you set up the buttons are you choosing the function first and then clicking the button of choice on your stick?
When you do it that way it makes it easy and then just click assign.

Assigning the hat to the normal left, right and back views is fine, but I find that in addition if you set the forward postion on the hat to front-up and then assign the rear-left and rear-right positions you get a pretty good range of view while flying. That would give you seven views since straight front is default

[SKJohn]

Eagler,
Thanks for the profile!  If I remember correctly, it was your profile for the X-45 that got me started in here.  Obviously, you have both the x-45 and the x-52.  As an experienced x-45 user, what are your feelings re: the x-52?
I've really enjoyed the x45, and in spite of what some others have said, it fits my hand very well and I find it very comfortable to use.  That being said, what made you buy an x52?  What are the differences, and pluses and minuses of each as you see it?
The reason I'm asking is I know that somewhere down the road, these will probably start to wear out, and the x-45 probably won't be available for replacement then.  
Since you bought the x52 when you already had the x45, do you think it was worth it? Are there enough advantages to justify it?
Thanks again, you've beena big help!

[Eagler]

I like the X45 over the X52 hands down

I picked up the X52 after the X45 I got at compusa bit the dust and had to use my replacement plan and found they did not carry the X45 anymore. I was disappointed in the X52 feel, the jstick is so loose that it is hard to get a good feel of control for me. I tried it for about a month and then bought another X45 from Circuit City.

Last night, after about 6 months of use, the main hat on the X45 took a dump. I have a service plan with it also and am hoping CC still carries the X45. In the meantime I have to hook up the X52.
The X52 would be so much better if the jstick tension was closer to the X45 tension. They seem to be built for children with a 3 year old wrist strength. Programming is better, though the rotors are not the same and it messes with my manual trimming.
In a nutshell, stick with the X45 as long as you can

good luck with the profile

[Krusty]

I hate the IL2 gunnery engine. The damage model is good, but offline-only, for the most part. Try coding that for a MMO flight sim.

But the gunnery sucks. Can't hit anything unless you're .2 off its bellybutton dead 6 with no variation. Even the supposedly long range and stable 20mm cannon can't hit out farther.

[Ecliptik]

That's a bit of an exaggeration, but deflection shooting is definitely harder in Il-2/FB/PF.  I've attributed this mainly due to it being a lot tougher to see if your bullets/shells are striking unless they're explosive, as well as the recoil modelling in PF being a lot less merciful than in AH.  20mm and larger guns throw your nose off line way more than in AH, even centerline guns like the 109's spinner cannon.

[Edbert1]

PF wins the eye candy hands down. AH wins the MP aspect just as handilly. The planes seem too "floaty" to me in PF and the low speed handling is terrible. Gunnery is a biatch in PF too, at least for me. If only the campaigns were dynamic I'd play it in SP mode more than I do.