Leaving

[Tac]

Guess this pertains to Issues/Gameplay forum.

I've cancelled my account for the following reasons (BS more likely):

1) Turbolasers
2) Bomber-Fighters (F26U and F17U's)
3) The only reason why I signed up, the P-38 is FUBAR beyond belief. Stalls wrong, accel is too low, plane breaks up easily (when it could take just as much damage as a P-47) and its guns do damage like if they were firing only 2 .50's. Also of note, whenever you get pinged by a TANK (not M-16 or M3), the very first ping is a pilot wound.
4) Terrain sucks. (hopefully to be fixed soon)
5) Vehicles take way to long to get up a hill (and there's always a friggin hill), and when you do get up the Spitfire and F4-C's make you waste all that driving time.
6) $30 a month is too expensive.
7) Spitfires handle like F-16's. If the brits really had such a great plane we would be speaking with an odd accent and driking proper tea today.

Once the first 3 are dealt with I'll return for sure. Heck, im even going to the Lockheed Martin to get real data on the 38L.

Until then, its been a pleasure flying with ya! *Salute*

[Trell]

I hope you can find a game more to your style.


trell

[RAM]

 

Originally posted by Tac:
Once the first 3 are dealt with I'll return for sure. Heck, im even going to the Lockheed Martin to get real data on the 38L.

Until then, its been a pleasure flying with ya! *Salute*

1 and 2 never will be fixed ,tac. Go and read all those threads about Buff guns being OK and those ones where people who critize dweeb fighterbuffs are called whiners.

I dont know about P38. The few times I have flied it I have done really well.

Hope to see you back ,tho.  

[jehu]

Later.

------------------
jehu
Airwolves

[715]

Originally posted by Tac:

1) Turbolasers

If you analyze the scoring the F4U1C and FW190A5, with their big guns, do indeed fare much better than any other planes: they both win two out of three encounters with any other fighter.  The guns are indeed the most significant correlating parameter in analysis of scoring.  Possibly the reason is that no one really dies here so HO's are more prevalent than in real life.  There isn't much a game can do about player attitudes.  There is no such thing as Darwinian selection in online games.
 
2) Bomber-Fighters (F26U and F17U's)

Same answer as 1), no one cares about dying in a buff.  If you don't want to be bothered by base defending buffs, take out the buff hanger.  It is amazing how many base attacks drag on for hours because the attackers do not take out all hangers immediately.

3) ... P-38 ... breaks up easily.
 
You mean g-loading? I suspect all planes break up too easily under g force.  I've ripped the wings off a Spit without even blacking out.  I suspect this is too enthusiastically modeled: bend yes, snap off, no.

4) Terrain sucks.
 
The terrain is the best of any online flight sim by far.  Most of those are flat with the occasional pyramid hill.  The only drawback of the terrain is that things important to tanks, like trees rocks etc, aren't real (everyone sees different tree positions and you can turn them off anyway) so you can't hide.  But its a flight sim.. not a tank sim.
 
5) Vehicles take way to long to get up a hill (and there's always a friggin hill)...

True, it does take the patience of Jobe to drive a tank.  Most targets take 15 to 20 minutes to get to. I think gameplay would improve if spawn points reduced that to 5 min.  And, if there wasn't always a 'friggin' hill, then the terrain would be flat and boring wouldn't it    I suspect gameplay design for tank simulation is challenging.  From the descriptions posted the life of a real tanker is terrible: hours of driving in the mud only to be fried instantly by some unseen hull down Tiger.  How do you make that 'fun'?

6) $30 a month is too expensive.

Try War Birds where you pay nearly $2/hr.  Some people (myself included, unfortunately)  have had monthly bills well into three figures under that plan.  $30 is MUCH better.
 
7) Spitfires handle like F-16's. If the brits really had such a great plane we would be speaking with an odd accent and driking proper tea today.

Eh? What Spit you been flying?  The Spit bleeds E like a stuck pig.  All T&B planes in AH perform poorly as indicated by analysis of the plane vs plane scoring.  The Spit IX will loose 2 out of 3 encounters with an F4U1C or FW190A5 and do nearly that badly against the P47.  The Spit V is much worse even than that.  If the real Spit was as bad as the AH Spit, then the Brits would be speaking German now and eating Schnitzel.  (well... OK... the Schnitzel would be an improvement over normal Brit food).  But consider that T&B planes have another disadvantage in most sims: that 200ft neon icon everyone drags.  Even if you manouver out of a B&Z attack there is no way to extend and hide.  The faster plane will always find you and can catch up.  Things might be different in a no-neon arena.

715A

[Tac]

Lol, you got it all wrong  

1)Turbolasers are the buff's guns. Its an freaking imperial star destroyer that kills 1 or 2 pings no matter from what angle you approach it. Read other buff guns threads for more on this.

2)You refer to ackstars. I refer to the unreal manoueverability of the buffs and the fact that people, me included, use them as fighters, not flying ack. The B-26 is THE best bomber interceptor so far.

3)No, the 38 is quite sturdy in that matter. What I mean is that the P-38 is very weak when it takes fire. I've flown ponys and other paper-crates that take a hell of a lot more punishment than the P-38, which was reputed to take a lot of damage to bring down.

4&5 are bound to be fixed, and I dont care much about them, but they were included because they annoy me.

6) With nearly all online games being $10 a month, what can you say? I do play other games, and I will never as hell pay $2 an hour for any game, no matter how good it is. The only thing $30 a month does is literally force me to quit my other games and dedicate myself to this one. Bad thing? Good thing? Depends, I am a big fan of WW2 sims, but I dont like my options cut short like that, besides, I do have other bills and I sure aint made out of money.

7) What spit have YOU been flying? I can fly that thing the same way I flew the F15 and F16 in other sims. Hell, it even flies like if it was taken smack out of Microsoft Combat Sim or Fighter Ace. Brrrr!!!!

And you're right about the Schnitzel improving British cuisine... come to think of it, I've never seen a British restaurant in any country i've traveled to. Makes you wonder eh?    

[RAM]

 

Originally posted by 715:
Eh? What Spit you been flying?  The Spit bleeds E like a stuck pig.  All T&B planes in AH perform poorly as indicated by analysis of the plane vs plane scoring[/b]

¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¡¡¡¡¡¡!!!!!!?????????????

The spit bleed E like WHAT!? LOL.

Excuse me,715. no. and read it: NO. Spitfire IX is a wonderful E-retainer, still better, it is a very good E-builder (good acceleration at all altitudes). Any of the experienced pilots in AH will agree with this.

 Where did you extract the idea that it bleeds E like a "stuck pig"? If you start turning it in 4G flat turns, for sure it does, like any plane in the surface of this planet!...but if flown in E-fighting (where, IMO, SpitIX really excells) instead TnB, the thing changes a lot.

In fact I use the better spit's E-retaining in turns to win angles and kill them  . of course after it you have to hear "cheater, cheater, UFO A5, UFO A5"...when I did it too with A8  

I wont say the maneouver, is a little secret of me  

On the Scoring argument...the planevsplane score doesnt tell half the story here. all T&B planes (and I mean ALL) are used for base defence, where they are vulched, banged, BnZmed and all you want. When you up at a capped field you wont take a P51 won't you?.

Plane vs plane scores are worth nothing, as they only say what one want those numbers to say. Keep it in mind before taking it as argument, 715.

[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 08-21-2000).]

[maximus13]

  I quit too, this game is not worth 30 a month.  I can buy a game once like Half Life and It costs 19$ for 1 time.  The most popular on line game is Counter-Strike, and it costs NOTHING and is updated frequently.  They update it just the same way as AH; Change models, correct bugs, and add new physics...  The lag is crap on AH, and 2 T1's just won't cut it.

[DrSoya]

You can't compare a first-person shooter game with a limit of 32 players to a flight simulator which allows 200 players at the same time. We're not talking the same thing at all.

To me, AH is worth every cent of its monthly $30. (I was playing Warbirds at $1.50 an hour until two months ago.)

And what's more: I have faith in HiTech, Pyro and the rest of the gang. I like their attitude. They really listen to the userbase. Updates are coming regularly. And it's obvious they do all this not only because it's a job, but because they love it.

If you compare to other games such as WarBirds, here in AH we're a pretty spoiled bunch.


------------------
DrSoya
308 (Polish) Squadron "City of Cracow" RAF [AH]
303 (Polish) Squadron "Kosciuszko" RAF [WB]
Part of the Northolt Wing (First Polish Fighter Wing)

[Kieren]

The only difference between AH and WB communities is we pay $30 and they pay $2 per hour. Other than that you have equivalent personalities in both places.

Spoiled? Jaded is more like it.  

What something is "worth" is subjective to the consumer, and you need to decide for yourself. Comparing it to a dissimilar product is pointless. Stay or go, your choice, but I don't think I care at all what Half-Life can or can't do.  

BTW, this is not directed at you, Dr. Soya.  

[This message has been edited by Kieren (edited 08-21-2000).]

[Dago]

I dont agree with anything you say, but I respect your right to your opinion.

To me, $30 is cheap, I was used to $150 a month for WB.  I know guys that pay $50 or more for one round of golf.  To each his own.

I cant judge what a 38 should fly like, I have never flown a real one.

Good luck finding what you seek, and best wishes.

Dago

[715]

 

Originally posted by RAM:
 

Plane vs plane scores are worth nothing, as they only say what one want those numbers to say. Keep it in mind before taking it as argument, 715.

Yes, you're right.. what was I thinking.  Why pay attention to hard data when you can have anecdotal responses like "The Spit is overmodeled because one shot me down when I didn't want it to."

[Tac]

In my OPINION, AH should just allow planes to behave at their best at any alt. As it is now, some fighters rule the deck, some the high alts... but the problem is that while this part of the modeling is "historically accurate", the players sure as heck arent flying as "historically" as they should be.

SO the problem gets to a point where 95% of the dogfights are at 20k or less (and most of them are below 15k), and any high alt fights are just flown by alt monkeys or strato buffs or by missions (which in a sense do recreate "historical" way of flying).

If every plane flew its best at any alt then we could see some change in the "fun factor"..call it a "gameplay tweak" just like those #$#@# turbolasers. Leave the altitude performance difference for the Historical Arena or Special Events Arena, where I believe it belongs.

But then again, I ain't a subscriber no more, so I got no say in the matter anymore.

[funked]

"AH should just allow planes to behave at their best at any alt."

Bye now

[Pyro]

Man if you guys would go for that, I'd love it from a work standpoint.  Top speed in CYAC wasn't affected by alt, but I enjoyed it just the same.  Sure would make my job easier if I could do that.  



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