iEN in tRouBLE

[AKDejaVu]

Have to agree on Garn.  I've seen him jump into furballs with 5 aircraft.  I usually would get one that was trying to jump him before he got the other 4.  I usually got the feeling I was simply stealing his 5th kill as opposed to clearing his 6.

The guy was incredible.

AKDejaVu

[funked]

Garn is the only WB player I was ever afraid of.  There was a period where I would not attack him even if I had an altitude advantage.

[Dos Equis]

BTW, Garner does fly AH. I have seen him.

His English is much improved, he's quite fluent now.

In WB, I needed help as the CO of Fast Carriers as the Japanese side. I was getting outmanned, people didn't want to fly the IJN, since the Hellcat was so lethal and the A6M5 was no match as modelled in WB. So I was going up with maybe 40 people against 60-75 US flyers.

I wrote Garn an email. He showed up with many Japanese players, even though it was like 7am for him. In the period of the last 3 frames of 8, he was the high scorer in kills of the whole scenario.

I've flown against him, he's very very good. I used to know his name, I lost it. He still lives in Japan.

XX

[J_A_B]

Westy~

In AW right now, the FR numbers are about the same as they were when you left--

Roughly 120-140 up on a good night, maybe a dozen or so on in early morning.  In other news, they finally managed to get rid of the 870 arena map which was left over from DOS AW.

Mostly, I DO fly RR in AW, but only because AW's FR is hopelessly obsolete (not to mention more people fly there).  ACM should not be about trying to keep the G-meter pegged at 5.9999G's.  In AH I have no problem with full realism.  In fact, I love AH's blackout model.

Most the people I talk to online, even in RR, know about Aces High and Warbirds--and the general agreement is always the same--if either was cheaper people would go there.

J_A_B

[Vermillion]

Jedi, while I do tend to think you look at WB's with a unwarranted warm and rosy feeling while casting a very discriminating eye on AH. I agree with you on some points.

And I too am an "old timer" that started with AW, was in WB's since 0.99, and AH since the first day of beta. We have many things in common, but also many area's of disagreement. I simply think it comes down to preference in many cases.

I too dislike the majority of players that overly depend on the F4U-1C and the Ostwind. I also dislike the simplicity of the damage models and gameplay for the ground vehicles, but I do feel that aside from the PT boats, I think the Fleet in AH is about right (I'll withhold thoughts on the PT right now). But isn't there also (and always has been) a "plane of the week" in WB's as well? In order from my memory, the Fw190D9 (pre-800lbs), the P-38L, the Spit IX, and lately hasn't it been the 109F ? Both games in my opinon suffer from the same problem and always has. So is it fair for the pot to call the kettle black in this regards? Its the players not the game.

I too am a lover of historical events, and think that its the most fun you can have in this type of game. True, the WB's planeset is superior to the AH's one. No arguement there. But to criticize AH's and point out its mostly varients, lets go back to the same period in WB's developement and lets compare. Also isn't a large percentage of the "50 planes in WB's" also varients? And lets not forget cases where its a difference in semantics, for instance WB's counts the Me109G6 and the Me109G6/R6 as two seperate planes, and AH considers them a single plane with two different armament loadouts.

Personally I don't care that we don't have a planeset to do "Battle of Britain" or "Midway" in AH. How many times can you do the same old BOB scenario, and have it be fun? Both have been done to death, and you couldn't pay me to design, run, or play in another BOB scenario in a very long time. There's way too many "new" and fun scenarios out there. And they don't just have to be early war (as some elitists think in the WB's community). Midwar and Late war can be just as fun.

And being a Scenario person, I would think that you would herald AH for at least its one accomplishment that has been the single biggest advancement in scenario play since AW. The Terrain Editor. A custom terrain that covers the actual area where the battle was fought is too me, just as important and critical to immersion as the needed plane varients. How many times has a WB's event been played on a "generic" terrain, or been held up for months or years, waiting for a terrain to be built?

But I guess where I disagree with you the most is in the areas of the two following statements.

 

OTOH, they DID show themselves to be open to changing the way the game itself was played, (something the previous team would never consider) in their willingness to allow the World War II Arena, their continued support for the HA and "experimental" arenas like the (cough) "Expert Arena."

and

 

The GAMEPLAY is still no better, has made NO advancement over what you could do in Air Warrior 10 years ago, and, due to the limited focus of the plane set, can't even match the VARIETY of either Warbirds OR Air Warrior. After two years.

While I do applaud the willingness of the current iEN staffs to experiment with new and different arena concepts (to me their greatest strength), different doesn't necessarily equate to better for alot of people and its mostly a matter of preference.

I like the MA as AH (and AW before it) has implemented it.

I totally hated the RPS, and its attached constant squeaks and moans about introduction dates, "ebb and flow", "generations", and all the rest of that crap.

I also dislike the Axis vs. Allied concept. Its too decisive too the community, panders to the "I'll switch to the side with best planes" inequalities in numbers, and to me can be just as boring in matchups as you point to in AH. In each phase of the generations or RPS, the matchups are just as bland or boring than the current CV fights in AH. You mostly see the same 2-4 planes in the arena at the same time and it rarely changes.

Now I understand that you and others like these things, and I think thats fine in my opinon.

But those are differences in communities, and how each community likes to play the game. Not a difference in the two games.

Its just a matter of preference of "how to play the game" in most cases, that decides it for alot current players of both WB's and AH (especially among the vets and oldtimers).

If you look purely at the "Game" in a technical manner and compare the two, I think WB's has only a single factor that is better than AH, and thats the size of its planeset.

But AH has so many things that make it stick out in my mind as superior. User configureable views and 3D cockpits. Variable loadouts and armament options that effect the aircrafts CG, or for instance drop tanks, or the G6 vs G6/R6. A working GunCam. The mission planner/editor. The Terrain Editor. Clouds! (something that enhances fights beyond belief). User controled CV's (another big plus to future scenario play). Ground Vehicles and Naval units (again a debatable issue depending on POV). Sure WB3 may have some of these features, but lets wait until we see how it comes out in public before you hail its evolutionary features.

And these are just the major points, there are many minor ones I'm sure I'm missing.

But the games, and how we play the games, are two seperate issues, and is highly influenced by our personal and highly subjective preferences.

------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure

[This message has been edited by Vermillion (edited 01-10-2001).]

[Ripsnort]

Man,Verm, you a politician?  Damn fine post...and I read it objectivly (meaning I put down my pom poms for a bit)

[Pyro]

Jedi, do you ever get deja vu when you post about AH or are you just digging up old posts of yours and doing a search and replace of WB with AH and then AW with WB?



------------------
Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations

[Daff]

Pyro, I get deja-vu's when I see all these posts about the cannon-armed F4U <G,D,R>

Daff

------------------
CO, 56th Fighter Group
"This is Yardstick. Follow me"

[Yeager]

I came across garn one evening when he was crocked on saki (had to have been)...I shot him down several times in the space of a few minutes.

Mebbe it was his dog or something......

Eman was pretty damned good too!
Drex was the best fight for my money with scop being nearly as good and just as capable. almost.

Yeager

[jedi]

Hehe I thought this topic got squashed, it was only moved!  

As usual, you guys completely missed my point (my fault undoubtedly for not being clear)   and immediately shift into defensive mode.  Even Pyro didn't get it, although he came the closest.

OK, admittedly, I'm not "in awe" of the guys who build these games.  I never kissed BlueBaron and Moggy's butt in AW, I never kissed Pyro and HTs butt in WB, and I'm not gonna start now.  It's all just opinion, of course, and you can dispute me or discount me as you will.

Cards FULLY on the table, just this once: I felt somewhat "betrayed" when HT and Pyro picked up their toys and left WB.  Everyone basically blamed iEN for that, and we all know iEN is made up mostly of buffoons, but iEN didn't "quit" and they didn't leave.  While I can empathize to some extent with the decision, I can't "honor" it as being "well-treated."  The subsequent departure of the NEXT WB team was TOTALLY "unprofessional" IMO (remember I SAID this was all opinion) and those guys I will NEVER be particularly interested in supporting again.  As noted, Pyro and HT bailed out WB at that time, "redeeming" themselves in my mind.  That's why I didn't just fade away--I LIKE this sim, and I LIKE the guys who build it.  

Unfortunately, I also like the other sim, and the guys I fly with there, and at the moment I can't really justify the time or cost to fly both.  So that's where I'm coming from: iEN hasn't treated ME, personally, any "worse" than the guys who get so much "hero worship" around here, and I've never been the hero-worship type.  It's a game, made for profit, and I'm gonna give my opinions on what I do or don't like about it.  So sue me.  

So, there, more than you ever wanted to know about what makes me tick.  If you're waiting for me to grovel at the feet of the guys building these sims, you're gonna have a long wait.  If you think I do that at AGW, you better read a few more of my posts over there.  My personal opinion is that WB has at least as many areas where it falls short of "accurate simulation" as AH does, and I don't think I'm shy about telling them so.  If you think all I do is complain, well, that may be a fair assessment I guess, but OTOH, if you can't see that your OWN sim has some areas where "constructive criticism" may be helpful, then I feel sorry for you.  Would it really be "bad" to have early war planes?  Would it be "bad" to see fewer cannon-armed Corsairs in the arena?  Or is it just "bad" that a Warbirds player calls you on it?  You want ME to pay for a game, then it's MY standards that have to be met.  You can say that MY concerns aren't important to YOUR enjoyment of the sim, but that just means that no one else with MY concerns will be playing it either.

And, since we're apparently getting personal now, IMO Pyro and HT need to be better able to identify legitimate criticism and less prone to treat everything as a personal attack.  I challenge you to find even ONE post where I don't agree that AH is a great sim, or one post where I don't agree that the AH team is very talented indeed.

My opinion may be less "valued" than that of a paying customer, but that doesn't make it any less valid.  I outlined the things that help keep me from signing up full time.  Change them or don't, but don't assume there aren't other guys who are looking for similar things in a sim.  You may not care whether I ever become a customer, but you'd better be able to look past the personality and see the reasoning.

--jedi

[jedi]

And, just to be fair, here's how I rate the two sims.  10 points for "best," and then how the other one compares (in my warped mind)...

Graphics (airplanes):  AH 10, WB  7
(No contest at the moment, AH planes are sweet!)

Graphics (terrain):    AH  9, WB 10
(Can't explain it, just feelings)

Graphics (cockpit):    AH  8, WB 10
(Sorry, bring the earlier versions up to the same standard as the later ones)

Graphics (views):      AH 10, WB  7
(Clean kill, but AH views are TOO generous)

Flight model (cruise): AH 10, WB  9
(You win, more sophisticated, better feel, but not much more "realistic")

Flight model (TO/LDG): AH  7, WB  7
(Not pickin a best here, both too easy)

Flight model (spins):  AH  9, WB  9
(Too close to call, both good, neither great)

Flight model (drag,E): AH 10, WB  8
(You have to pay more attention in AH--good)

Gunnery:               AH  8, WB  8
(Sorry, not gonna give "best" to a system where you can kill at d10 OR a system where you can dump a whole ammo load into your opponent for nada)

Damage model:          AH  9, WB  8
(Both still need more "real" effects, but guns were dangerous, and in AH they really are--still no "best" tho, sorry)

Gameplay (plane set):  AH  6, WB 10
(Not just the emphasis, the specific planes in AH are poorly chosen)

Gameplay (arena):      AH  5, WB 10
(You say tomato, I say tomahto, but I didn't like the MA 5 years ago, I'm sure not gonna like it now)

Gameplay (scenarios):  AH  8, WB 10
(Haven't flown one in AH, so benefit of the doubt given, but planeset and terrain limit the potential scenarios at this time)

Gameplay (strat):      AH 10, WB  9
(Nothing really new, but at least more to do)

Ground vehicles:       AH  0, WB  0
(Ask someone who cares)  

Ships:                 AH 10, WB  9
(You can drive em, but that's a double-edged sword)  

That's about all the stuff I actually care about (price is close enough that I won't give WB any points for being cheaper).  So, what's the tally?  Looks like:

AH 129, WB 131.  Pretty darn close, until you add in...

Community:  AH 7, WB 10
(Sorry, you guys go for the throat a little too quickly, and of course the WB community has my squaddies in it)  

So, it's AH 136, WB 141.  Pretty close.  Consider it "marketing research."  

[Westy]

 Well. Now I'd much rather have a beer with you and talk about WWI aircombat and aircraft than spar about online games.

 <S> to you Jedi.  

 -Westy

[sky_bax]

Couldn`t have said it better myself he he.  

I want to expand on one thig you said Jedi:

Graphics (terrain): AH 9, WB 10
(Can't explain it, just feelings)

That "feeling" your talking about I think I can explain it. At least from my POV.

In WB, there is a very good depth perception, at 5k, 15k, 20k, 25k, 30k you can see the differences in very well. You also are immersed by the haze of dawn & dusk, ground flak is very nicely done as it rises to your plane at the higher alts. Playing around with 1.05 this was the biggest thing I noticed missing graphicly.

I wonder why their 2nd time around this wasn`t as good or even better? Guess some things you get right the first time and can`t improve on or re-create  



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

[Dinger]

Uhhh the criticism of the two gunnery models is, in actuality, a criticism of the damage models.
Any system that models half the rounds actually fired is much less satisfactory than one that models all of them.

Scenarios, well, the WB ones I've played which tried to do CAS were pretty miserable.  We've actually got that here.

The WB "altitude" feeling is IMHO largely a factor of their sky, which is definitely superior to AH.

Terrains and terrain textures are coming out of the woodwork at an alarming rate.

Outside of that, you've got most of it right.
(although how you can give WB arena play a 10-5 advantage over AH when they both are relatively dull surprises me.)

What alarms me is that the day I cancelled my iEN account was the day I realized how much AH had spoiled me.

[RAM]

   

Originally posted by Dos Equis:

So far since I've starting posting, I've called RAM on the carpet for bashing HT publically. I'm sick of whiners.

I challenge you to do two things.

1-To post a link to a message where I have bashed HTC, or HT.

2-To post a link to where you have called RAM for a carpet for that reason. (whatever that means)


If you cant do one of those two things ( and for sure #1 you wont be able), then I suggest you to erase that stupid affirmation, and let me in peace for once at all.

If you are sick of whiners, then I am sick of lier,name calling underdeveloped lowlife individuals like you. Scum.


[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 01-13-2001).]