Hi-Tech questions

[hubsonfire]

Lead, don't expect serious answers, or to be taken seriously, when you request, or discuss the perk costs of, a nook. No one's asking you to suck man-ass, and you can't really get aircraft added by sending him booze. Until CT is done, you can pretty much expect things to remain unchanged. Yeah, it's not ideal, but it's not like there's any real competition for those interested in this genre. This is what we get, and if we don't like it, there's always WoW, I guess.

[Mister Fork]

[Ack-Ack]

Originally posted by Chalenge
Its much harder just to get the thing off the ground and then its climb rate is terrible and its ceiling is low.

Flying at 40,000ft is low?  Just because LeMay had them flying low over Tokyo doesn't mean they couldn't fly any higher.  


ack-ack

[Wingnutt]

IMO..

as far as representing accurate flight dynamics, AH is #1 and by a HUGE margine..

the aircraft themselves are modeled graphically VERY VERY GOOD

the angular jotty terrain, and bomb and rockets effects.. are.. even in very generous eyes falling far short..    

a 100 pound bomb makes the same crater and has the same visual effect as a 4000 pound cookie:huh

rockets, same story...

effects of buildings/objects being destroyed, bomb, rocket explosions, implementation of any sort of weather lag far. FAR behind the rest of the game..  as do other fine points.. the way the sun gets chopped as it sets.. etc

people want new planes, new planes, new planes...  while other more evident GLARING discrepancies are straing you in the face every time you log in...    

My opinion would be to hold off on adding new rides, and instead polish the current product to a mirror finish..  then worry about filling about the already ample plane set,  I mean, dont get me wrong, I too have a wish list of rides I would absolutely LOVE to see added, but priorities dictate..

make the terrain more rolling.. not sharp angles

make different size bombs ...at the VERY least make different sized craters.. or preferably make different and more dynamic looking explosions.. I.E. a 100 pound egg would make a small fart puff, where as the cookie a huge crater, flash, shock wave.. etc you get the idea.

rockets, same as above..

get some dark clouds, thunderheads, .. some sort of ACTIVE weather would add an entire new layer of immersion and dare I say EXCITEMENT to the game..  Imagine having a digfight in the middle of a thunderstorm, with wild updrafts adding and then stealing shots from you, a visibility of .. next to nothing.. like fighting a ghost..   trying to bomb a target only to have it obscured by cloud cover.. do you dive below the clouds and risk interception, or hit a secondary?  decisions, choices, problems, solutions, FUN!!!



fix the sunset/rise so there isn't a half inch void where it intersects the terrain.

there is so much to this game ALREADY HERE.. staring us in the face.. that if just tweaked out a bit and shined up.. would make an astonishing improvement more so than adding any handful of aircraft/vehicles/boats/bears on bicycles.. etc

[SuperDud]

I dunno wing. I find plane selection, accurate modeling and fun factor the most important things in a game. Terrain and such to me, is just eye candy. I'd much rather them bring out a new aircraft, finish CT or remodel an aircraft to be more accurate than see pretty trees. I won't lie, IL2 series has amazing graphics compared to AH. But in almost every other aspect it falls way short. I don't think there's a right or wrong answer, just what an individual prefers.

[Guppy35]

Originally posted by Wingnutt


get some dark clouds, thunderheads, .. some sort of ACTIVE weather would add an entire new layer of immersion and dare I say EXCITEMENT to the game..  Imagine having a digfight in the middle of a thunderstorm, with wild updrafts adding and then stealing shots from you, a visibility of .. next to nothing.. like fighting a ghost..   trying to bomb a target only to have it obscured by cloud cover.. do you dive below the clouds and risk interception, or hit a secondary?  decisions, choices, problems, solutions, FUN!!!

 

You do understand that they didn't fight in thunderstorms.  Missions were scrubbed because of weather.  Folks with limited playing time are probably not going to be thrilled about having a thunderstorm screw up their fun.

Numerous examples of pilots being lost in storms but I doubt that's what folks want.  I can't believe you'd fly for an hour only to get killed by weather and enjoy it.

As for some of the other stuff.  In the last scenario there was wind and clouds.  There were targets obscured by solid undercast.  Again for a set mission in a scenario, it did add some serious immersion.  

I doubt the attention span of the average MA pilot is going to allow for much appreciation of taking thier buffs on thier lastest "mishun' and finding out they can't see the target.

I'd think it would make sense for CT but for the MA hamster wheel it doesn't make much sense in my opinion.

[Adonai]

No Nukes, this is not an arcade game but realistic simulator.

Granted if this game had nukes, I'd quit playing, no sense to seeing a lone con over a base and watch entire base disappear because buff drivers have 50k perks to spend.

[Wingnutt]

Originally posted by SuperDud
I dunno wing. I find plane selection, accurate modeling and fun factor the most important things in a game. Terrain and such to me, is just eye candy. I'd much rather them bring out a new aircraft, finish CT or remodel an aircraft to be more accurate than see pretty trees. I won't lie, IL2 series has amazing graphics compared to AH. But in almost every other aspect it falls way short. I don't think there's a right or wrong answer, just what an individual prefers.

I think IL2 got the visuals right, and little else.. thats just me however..

I think that despite how "purist", many people want to think of themselves.. proclaiming that the gameplay is what makes the game great, not the  "eye candy"..    the fact of the matter is.. the so called eye candy plays a HUGE part in how the game appeals to people, even the overstated, self proclaimed "purist" who believes they are only playing chess.. with guns and wings...

the visual representation is every bit as important as any other aspect of this game..  when we work so hard to plug the enemy fighter or level the city.. thats our reward.. seeing the con go down, or seeing the structures leveled.. thats what we worked for.. and as such it should be represented in such a way as to properly reward us for our efforts, not to say it doesent in some way now.. it does...  

but I would put money on the fact, that even the purest of the "purist" would derive more joy from  their goal of choice... if they got to lose themselves, if only for a second or two  in a somewhat realistic representation of what their e-self just e-did... watch the buildings burn and collapse and smoke, watch the enemy con flame and break up as it goes in, debris  falling off as it goes.. watching the ammo store of an enemy tank cook off and smolder after that perfect shot.

after all is said in done this is altered reality, that for $15 a month we get to lose ourselves in for.. god willing a couple hours a week.  might as well get as lost as we can.

[Wingnutt]

Originally posted by Guppy35
You do understand that they didn't fight in thunderstorms.  Missions were scrubbed because of weather.  Folks with limited playing time are probably not going to be thrilled about having a thunderstorm screw up their fun.

well it wont take long to learn to avoid them.. like I said, im not talking about an arena sized hell storm the size of the red spot on jupiter..  just.. SOMETHING..  other than the occasional stationary puffy cloud..  active weather doesent mean roving hurricanes of death.. just a little rain here and there.. some dark clouds to get lost in (should you choose to enter them)..  really nothing more.. maybe some snow at higher alt.. nothing at all that would defacto shut down an area of play, thats probably going too far in the MA...

[LEADPIG]

Originally posted by Adonai
No Nukes, this is not an arcade game but realistic simulator.

Granted if this game had nukes, I'd quit playing, no sense to seeing a lone con over a base and watch entire base disappear because buff drivers have 50k perks to spend.

Way more than 50 points man....... Waaaaaaaaay more than that for nukes. If you perked the system the way i was saying you wouldn't have people dropping nukes everyday, it would happen far less often.

If this game had nukes it would be more realistic as you say. They actually had those you know. And it if perked properly you might have someone drop a nuke once every 2 or 3 months if that. i'm talking some serious perks and restrictions. But when you earned it, it would be all the more fun. And if you added the restrictions i was mentioning, people would drop nukes at such an infrequent rate because one, they'd have to build up a ***** load of points again, and two, the time restriction required that i mentioned. If you had to wait 6 months before you were allowed to drop a nuke again, it would make people that much more afraid to use it. And it could be kept in check. It would add more danger to the game.

Imagine on the text buffer. So and so's rumored to have nukes on board, get him!..Suspense....if you don't get him, a few people would get an interesting little show. The base would be destroyed, taken, and go to that team. The same way someone sneaks in and takes your base while you're not looking, it would be about like that. End of story. After that the base is conquerable again. And the way i see it, nukes wouldn't happen often at all, and it could be tweaked to do so.

[LEADPIG]

Originally posted by hubsonfire
Lead, don't expect serious answers, or to be taken seriously, when you request, or discuss the perk costs of, a nook. No one's asking you to suck man-ass, and you can't really get aircraft added by sending him booze. Until CT is done, you can pretty much expect things to remain unchanged. Yeah, it's not ideal, but it's not like there's any real competition for those interested in this genre. This is what we get, and if we don't like it, there's always WoW, I guess.

Hubs i don't expect to be taunted and made fun of by the business that i support with my own money. That's disrespectful to your customers. Just take in the info and say, "Yes were're considering this, No were're not considering this" that's all i'm saying. I don't need the attitude.

Where i come from business owners don't talk to they're customers like that. They act more professional. And if you did you'd go out of business. And it's no excuse that because you are on the internet, that you can treat the people that ensure your livliehood anyway you want.

And i feel an honest business should not act in such ways to it's clientele. Plain and simple. It's questionable..

[moot]

Planes are updated on an individual basis.  Unless you've got something very minor like a graphics sorting issue where a prop shows up in front of the cockpit you're sitting in, or a leading edge slat that stays visible after the whole wing is ripped off, updates will only happen when they get around to the plane in question.

The 29 is just a personal wish, like you said.  Looking to please every personal wish out there is the only fair approach, but it's also unfeasible.

Are you asking them to give updates on CT, but not to give updates on CT if it isn't nearly done (two weeks' worth of work remaining, no pun)?
That can't work.

Weather would be great for sure.  It's probably the same as night, it turned off too many people to be worth having in the MAs.  A significant difference with night, though, is that weather only happens on a fraction of the whole map, so you couldn't get stuck with it like you could with night.  Back then it was possible for a player with limited time to play to find night time every time he logged on.
It would be really cool if there was turbulence and actual rain, but considering the way engine oil leaks were implemented, it's probably yet another thing that won't be done until it can be modeled well enough.
It does suck not having iconless clouds though, there's no doubt about that.

And there's nothing questionable about having a sense of humor.  HT isn't mocking or teasing you, there's nothing dishonest about his reply.. if anyone's got an attitude, it's you, waving around the 15$ a month like it means you own a share of HTC and have a chair on the design commitee...

[LEADPIG]

Originally posted by Guppy35
You do understand that they didn't fight in thunderstorms.  Missions were scrubbed because of weather.  Folks with limited playing time are probably not going to be thrilled about having a thunderstorm screw up their fun.

Numerous examples of pilots being lost in storms but I doubt that's what folks want.  I can't believe you'd fly for an hour only to get killed by weather and enjoy it.

As for some of the other stuff.  In the last scenario there was wind and clouds.  There were targets obscured by solid undercast.  Again for a set mission in a scenario, it did add some serious immersion.  

I doubt the attention span of the average MA pilot is going to allow for much appreciation of taking thier buffs on thier lastest "mishun' and finding out they can't see the target.

I'd think it would make sense for CT but for the MA hamster wheel it doesn't make much sense in my opinion.

That's why there could be seperate sectors on a map for weather. And it wouldn't have to be that many, for people who would like to do that. Others could fly as they do now.

And i've heard of pilots dispatched in weather in WW2 that would make you wonder sometime Guppy.

[Guppy35]

Originally posted by LEADPIG
That's why there could be seperate sectors on a map for weather. And it wouldn't have to be that many, for people who would like to do that. Others could fly as they do now.

And i've heard of pilots dispatched in weather in WW2 that would make you wonder sometime Guppy.

And lots died. April 16, 1944 was Black Sunday for the 5th AF when they got caught in bad weather 31 aircraft and 32 pilots and crew lost.  

June 1, 1945 when the escort Mustangs from Iwo got caught in a storm and 24 Mustang pilots were lost.  They called it Black Friday.

I'm all for weather in scenarios or snapshots even. I pushed for it in DSG as it was a factor in November 44, the time frame that scenario was based. I just don't see it as a priority in the MA.

[Mr No Name]

Originally posted by Ack-Ack
Flying at 40,000ft is low?  Just because LeMay had them flying low over Tokyo doesn't mean they couldn't fly any higher.  


ack-ack

ack ack, look at boeings website... the B17 actually had a 4K ceiling advantage over the B29  31K vs 35K for the 17

I have the data posted in one of the countless b29 threads