Author Topic: Wingless B26 (Read 1852 times)

Carlos · « **on:** March 30, 2001, 10:18:00 AM »

Is it bird? NO!
Is it a comet? NO!
Is it a man? NO!
Is it a plane? NOT ANYMORE!
Is it an AH bug? NO!, bugs here?, NEVER!!!
Is it a CHEATER?, NO NO NO!!! fundamentalist!!!.There is no such a thing in AH.
IT IS LAG ISSUE, THAT'S ALL FOLKS!!!.

No more comments.

Ripsnort · « **Reply #1 on:** March 30, 2001, 10:21:00 AM »

Its called poor graphic representation for what is actually both wings damaged. Someday, along with cockpits, I hope to see HTC better represent the graphic of damaged wings other than a default '1/2 wing gone' graphic such as you've displayed.

Carlos · « **Reply #2 on:** March 30, 2001, 10:31:00 AM »

Rip....pleeeeeeeease!!!!!.
That B26 took all my 20mm amm to its wings and engines.
No one trace of smoke.
No one trace of fuel leak.
It continues flying as steady as a 747.
Bad graphics Rip....Ho ho ho ho.
Christmast is long gone.

Mickey1992 · « **Reply #3 on:** March 30, 2001, 10:33:00 AM »

I think Carlos is just mad because he's outta fuel and outta ammo.

------------------
Mickey
3./JG2

Ripsnort · « **Reply #4 on:** March 30, 2001, 10:39:00 AM »

Carlos, I'll garantee you he didn't land.

Been there, lost that. Go back to Warbirds, your troll doesn't have any effect here anymore.

SOB · « **Reply #5 on:** March 30, 2001, 11:04:00 AM »

Is Carlos on crack? YES!
Did the B26 make it home safe? WHO CARES!
Are the missing wingtips just an indication of damage? YES!
Could the damage model be better? YES!
Is it really that important? NO!
What's the airspeed velocity of an unlaiden swallow? AFRICAN or EUROPEAN?!
Will Carlos stop with the crack? IT IS A MYSTERY!

Voss · « **Reply #6 on:** March 30, 2001, 11:08:00 AM »

Next time put some rounds in the canopy, but WTH are you doing on his six?

------------------
Voss
13th TAS

Ripsnort · « **Reply #7 on:** March 30, 2001, 11:13:00 AM »

Agreed Voss, these pics showed he 'sprayed and prayed', I prefer wing roots, but from a high angle of attack, and about 45 degrees...never from this position!

Carlos, as I stated before, what has happened is you shot the wingtips off and damaged the wings, graphic representation is a poor one.

J_A_B · « **Reply #8 on:** March 30, 2001, 11:33:00 AM »

I don't care what the reasoning for that is, it's abnormal and should be fixed.

If it really is a graphical anomoly, then add another graphic for "damaged but not destroyed" wings. If it is an issue with the damage model, fix the DM.

No matter how you rationalize that PIC (and the other many instances of wingless planes flying around), no matter what you say, the fact is it is WRONG. Ragging on the guy who posted it doesn't change the fact that it's WRONG.

J_A_B

Yeager · « **Reply #9 on:** March 30, 2001, 11:38:00 AM »

LOL, just consider them *placeholder* damage effects

Honetly would like to see HTC eventually upgrade/modify the graphics engine in a way that allows for better visuals along these lines.

Y

Ripsnort · « **Reply #10 on:** March 30, 2001, 11:43:00 AM »

JAB, think of it as a "Severity 3" :
"Ya, its not right, but the game plays just fine, and we know what they intended with the place holder"

I consider the lack of A/C more of an importance to help us fill the need for scenarios, historically matchups, etc. before the go back and fix the place holders and/or damage model display graphics. After all, they are only 6...they set the priority of developement and PTF's not us.

In regrds to slamming the guy, look at the content of the post, one slam deserves another.

Dead Man Flying · « **Reply #11 on:** March 30, 2001, 11:44:00 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by J_A_B:
I don't care what the reasoning for that is, it's abnormal and should be fixed.

Sure, it should be improved. I'm sure eventually it will be.

However, it's still better than the damage model in any other (non-vaporware) multiplayer online flight sim.

-- Todd/DMF

J_A_B · « **Reply #12 on:** March 30, 2001, 11:59:00 AM »

I know what you mean--AH has limited resources for development and some things take precedence--but how would you like to have "placeholder" flight models?

"Yeah, our F4U can climb at 7000 FPM because its FM is only a placeholder. Don't worry, we all know what it is supposed to climb like, and it'll eventually be changed"

THAT wouldn't be popular with anyone (except maybe F4U pilots), so why is a placeholder damage model acceptable?

IMO fixing this issue with the damage/graphics model is more important than adding new stuff. Fix what you have before you add more.

J_A_B

Fishu · « **Reply #13 on:** March 30, 2001, 12:01:00 PM »

B26 flies pretty well without wingtips... been there, but with engines running
gliding might be squeaky

Dead Man Flying · « **Reply #14 on:** March 30, 2001, 12:09:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by J_A_B:
I know what you mean--AH has limited resources for development and some things take precedence--but how would you like to have "placeholder" flight models?

Comparing a damage model to a flight model is definitely comparing apples and oranges. They are not equivalent. Many of us lived with AW's crapass damage model for years, but we would have left in a heartbeat if there were gross abberations of the flight model like you mentioned. The same goes with AH.

Also, keep in mind that AH has a very complex damage model -- you can cause variable amounts of damage to the wings, not just wing on/wing off/half wing. The main complaint here revolves around graphical representation of that damage.

First make the planes fly correctly. Then worry about eye candy.

-- Todd/DMF