Perfect navigation vs Perfect radar

[Nuku]

As a private pilot, I was on a cross-country over the weekend and realized that the one thing that scares me more than engine failure is *getting lost* (which subsequently leads to fuel exhaustion and THEN engine failure   )

In Aces High, both the radar and navigation are perfect.  You know exactly where the enemy is, and exactly where you are, and thus exactly which way to go to intercept.  Bombers can make beelines straight for their targets.

People have squeaked before about the perfect radar.  Now, what if we removed the perfect navigation?  How would you intercept a lone bomber showing up on radar if you were not quite sure of *your* position?  After a wild dogfight, how would you know which way to go home?  After climbing to 25k for the past 30 minutes, could you be absolutely sure you know which heading to take that would put your right over the enemy HQ?

Radar in WW2 was actually pretty damn accurate (it even gave altitude, which would *really* make people squeak if it were implemented in AH).  Navigation was not nearly so good.  

Does anyone think things would get more interesting (and challenging) if perfect navigation were removed in lieu of removing the perfect radar? There are definite challenges in navigating in by pilotage in AH's terrain, as it lacks useful things like rivers, roads, railways, cities, and lakes; but maybe it would be an incentive for HiTech to put them in?

[Maverick]

In answer to your question, no. Leave the fediddleing radar alone. If you don't want it, don't use it.

Second point, tis better to land before you exhaust all fuel in the plane. That way you have some choice as to a go around and to move to a different area.

Mav

[Citabria]

its a lost cause nuku.

people like you and me find that stuff fascinating cuz we experience it first hand by flying real planes.

the gamers that enjoy such nuances play fs2k and other civilian sims and most of those individuals are real pilots or aspire to be real pilots.


the people that play this game are an odd bunch.

they want realism but they dont care to be bothered by any concern a real ww2 fighter pilot faced other than getting hit by enemy bullets or being outmaneuvered by an enemy airplane and then getting hit by said bullets.

they cringe at the thought of actually having to look at their compass (which confusingly rotates backwards btw).
they demand Global Positioning System moving map directional navigation with TCAS and all the bells and whistles magically apearing on a clipboard.

Search and destroy?

 BAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAH LMAO!

they want destroy! and destroy now!
not in 5 minutes or 15 minutes!
they want to know the exact position of the bad guys within inches, how many friendly and enemies so they can find a lopsided battle and gangbang enemy planes.

there is no such thing as looking for the enemy. sectors are so small that it is guaranteed you will find an enemy in a sector 100% of the time even if they are out of radar range.

they dont like surprises.
they dont like hunting.
they want blood and they want it instantly.


navigation? smavigation. this is 2001 we have GPS now to hell with navigation they say.

aquisition? crapuisition. I dont wanna look for the bad guys. I want full knowledge of the movements of every enemy player at all times. the fog of war only delays the time between me incinerating dweebs with my f4u1c and taking off.

these people have no patience for even atempting such feats as navigation, hunting and aquiring the enemy or identifying the enemy (hence in flight awacs and icons) and then navigating home. it just does not interest them in the least bar a few fanatics who like you most likely fly for real or have insight into the factors that affected these ww2 pilots.

I hope that will change one day when there is enough players to have a decent recreation of a ww2 theatre but it remains quite doubtful.

[Nuku]

 

Originally posted by Maverick:
In answer to your question, no. Leave the fediddleing radar alone. If you don't want it, don't use it.
Mav

I didn't say take out the radar. "lieu" means "instead of".  I was curious if anyone felt it would be interesting to leave "the fediddleing radar alone", but take away "the fediddleing airplane icon" that shows you exactly where you are on the map.

Strato-field rapists typically hit autopilot, go watch a half-hour sitcom (or do some laundry), come back, and then navigate perfectly right to the target.  I figured *without* the plane icon showing your position accurately, these guys would have a harder time navigating to target (a typical problem for high altitude bombers).  They'd have to WORK constantly during that LONG climbout to keep track of position.

As for those who like sneaking about, and want radar downgraded, I disagree, and think that even WW2 era radar WILL see you accurately.  With the nav icon gone, however, the *intereceptors* will have a harder time finding the buff for the kill without GCI (Ground Control Intercept).  

With the introduction of carriers, I would think imprecise positioning would more accurately portray the half-blind groping done by Japanese and American carrier task forces in the wide open Pacific.  

Oooh... that's scary actually: trying to get back to your carrier by dead-reckoning, with nothing but the featureless ocean below.

[Jigster]

 http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/Forum8/HTML/001006.html

this might be a halfway point but again appears to be falling on deaf ears. The worst commentary is none at all  

[Pepino]

There is yet another side effect of Perfect Navigation / Perfect Radar: No way a country with 10-15% less numbers can achieve anything against any superior attacker. No surprise, no sneak attacks, no intelligence to counter the use brute force.

Without this (inflight) radar setup, a country with less people, but with a guy in the tower coordinating defense, and vectoring planes, could make the deal in defense task, and even in attack role.

I know the horse is dead, buried and not more than a skeleton right now, but I am all for suppressing inflight last generation avionics. This is not Falcon 4.0. I want reckon, I want spotting, I want navigation, I want land support, I want radar vectoring, I want...

Cheers,

Pepe

[Pepino]

And, in answer to your questino, yes, Nuku, I think yours is a very good point.

Cheers,

Pepe

[Jimdandy]

I think the system is fine. I'm not even sure I like removing the bar when someone is running on the deck. Your right about the radar in WWII. My grandfather was an electrician and installed radar on ships. He (and others) would even be flown out into the pacific in planes with blacked out windows to the location of a damaged ship so they wouldn't know where it was if they were captured. The reason I don't like removing the bar from low flying aircraft is this. Ships radar got very good after 1942. A ship was able to target it's guns on an other ship using only radar. This means that a relatively low target could be spotted with enough accuracy to bombard. That means a ships radar could spot low flying aircraft. I can't say exactly how low but The mast on a BB might stand approximately 100ft off the water. So I would think that at minimum anything flying at 75-100ft could be spotted on radar. Now land targets would be different. Hills and valleys would play a major part in that. Just a thought. I would like to add that I agree with a lot of what Citabria says. Like the commercial says "Instant, total, gratification." I don't think that the game is set up at the moment to handle navigation in that since right now. There just aren't enough land marks I think. LOL I'll just keep editing as I think of stuff. I do think you could navigate as the map stands actually. After thinking about it. I read Greg Bouyintons book. He had some very interesting navigational experiences in his career. Great book, nothing at all like the silly TV show (I loved that show as a kid. Looking at it now and after reading his book it's an "Oh no").

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

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

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

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

[Ghosth]

Good point nuku.

Not all are as bad as Citabria paints it. However I don't see it changeing any time soon. If for no other reason, how do you explain to someone on his first day in Aces High where he is?

Until we have a much larger customer base & more than one arena populated 24/7 I don't see it happening.

[popeye]

Despite Citabria's disparaging characterization of AH players, there are many who would be pleased with more realism and challenge.  However, the MA will probably always need "crutches" that make it possible for the new, or casual, player to enjoy the game.  Maybe we'll someday see scenarios or separate arenas that require more realistic navigation.

[Ripsnort]

50% of the training required in the real life VMF-323 squadron (and all other flight groups of the various branches) was navigation.  

However, Popeye hits the head of the nail.

[Dinger]

And a very small part of RL training for Italian WW2 fighter pilots was on navigation.
I say we leave it as is!
Dinger
4^ Stormo CT

(Actually, I'd love to see the AWACS disabled in flight, and the option of disabling the GPS at least for scenarios.  One strong argument against disabling GPS that I've seen is that AH's terrain just doesn't have that many landmarks.  Anyway, most AH pilots can't even find their compass)

[Westy]

Cause Popeye is wise.  

I too would like more realism. Icons, radar and navigation are all on my list. But I am aware that the MA needs to be a middle of the road environment because it is where the new people come in and flex thier muscles. If they can't, they leave before they can learn the ropes. And that doesn't do anyone any good.

 Westy

[maddog]

Old pilot here Cit.... now I only fly if theres a meal served.... like the idea of losing plane icon.... Once the gear goes up of corse... also collisions once gear goes up....
doc

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

[Paxil]

Losing your plane icon at take off is verrrrry interesting idea... if you don't navigate properly... the radar data won't mean anything to you. God forbid... you might actually have to chart a course! Interesting idea... or maybe... you lose plane icon on map outside a certain range from friendly airfields.

I disagree that you can't conduct surprise attacks though.

I kind of like hearing bandit calls. Wouldn't mind no radar in flight... but radar in a certain room where people could relay the bandit calls to air born pilots.

Who knows though... gotta rely on their judgment here and I can't say I'm not OK with the way things are now.