WW1

[BlauK]

Red Baron 2 and it's enhancement, Red baron 3D, were fun games.
I'd also take Albatros III. I'd characterize it as Bf109G-2 of WWI 

[Cajunn]

Spad 13 must of been the Pony then!

[Enker]

Spad 13 must of been the Pony then!

Naw, the Spads were the LAs, what with those crazy fast engines, you could get up to 180 in level flight on the deck. And the zoom climbs! Going from 1000 ft to 1750 ft in a few seconds was an experience like no other. The Nieuport 24 and 14 were wonderful planes to fly though; the 24 was easy to stall in a turn, so keep the rudder usage down to a minimum, but its 2 guns could mince almost anything up. The 17 had a weak engine, and the Sopwith Snipe was an EW version of the Camel (I think). SO comparing the two's usages would be like comparing the usages of the Spixteen and the Spit 9.

[Crash Orange]

There was a WWI arena in Air Warrior.  It was always almost empty.  I didn't like WWI.  The problem is that you have no forward-up view.  To get a taste for what it's like, map your forward-up view keys (or hat or whatever you use) to straight down (so you are looking at your cockpit floor -- i.e., no view).  Then go try some stallfights, where your most-used view is forward-up.  That's what it's like.

It's been a LONG time since I played AW and I don't always remember them days real horrorshow, but from what I remember the thing I disliked was that the available engine power left you with an pretty limited toolbox in most situations compared to WW2 fighters. But it just seemed like every fight that wasn't over in 15 seconds or less always degenerated pretty quickly into flat turns at stall speed because that's all the planes (or maybe any of the pilots I encountered including myself) were capable of doing at that point unless one of them had a very large e advantage.

Of course, the low number of players and lack of effective bombing or base capture meant the tactical situations one encountered were also extremely limited: co-alt 1-1 duels, or 1-1 fights where one plane started with a big alt advantage. But that isn't inherent in the era.

One thing's for sure: any decent WW1 arena would HAVE to have balloon busting! And preferably trench lines bristling with MGs dividing the map.

I think Korea would have been workable if more people had tried it. The planes there are plenty capable, you just have to adjust to a new style of fighting.

[Ack-Ack]

I doubt that AW would be the experience they would rely on since they have their own demographics from Dawn of Aces which Dale et al created to draw from.  Korea is another kettle of fish and suspect would be quite abit harder to put together.

AW wouldn't be the sole experience to rely on but to dismiss the lessons learned from it and other WW1 online sims would be foolish.  While there is a lot of vocal support for a WW1 online sim within the online flight sim community, that vocal interest does not necessarily mean that customers will pay for a WW1 online sim.  

Brooke and others have brought up the example of the WW1 arena in AW.  It was a fun arena to fly in but in most cases you'd only find 5-6 people in there but usually it was empty.  Flying Circus was released around '96-'97 and was probably the best WW1 online sim to hit the market.  Unfortunately, again, vocal support didn't translate into $$$ and the failure of Flying Circus helped lead to the demise of SimGuild.  

You bring up DoA, same problems as AW and Flying Circus.  Lot of vocal support, far more vocal supporters than players.

The fact is, the consumer has shown the gaming industry that while there is a lot of vocal support for a WW1 online sim, there is far less support for actually paying to play one.


ack-ack

[Mano]

The bottom line. Making a profit. Nothing more important to keep a WWI sim online.

I don't think anyone has had the resources or
the knowledge to date to keep a WWI online sim running.

Hi Tech definitely knows how to keep a WWII online sim running......and I think they know how to keep a WWI online sim running.

I hope they decide to build one. They'll pack 'em in.

<S>
Mano

[Lusche]

I doubt they build another WWI sim, simply for the lack of sustained general interest.
However could imagine a very simple new arena, nothing fancy, just a few bases to lauch from and a couple of planes. Nothing that ties up lot resources in the long run in form of developing any new gameplay or such.

[Dragon]

Kinda like another arena with only WW1 planes available.     Could use the existing maps with WW1 planes.  It would take many months to do all the modeling, but would be a fun option to see how the "old school" planes flew. 

[Lusche]

Kinda like another arena with only WW1 planes available.     Could use the existing maps with WW1 planes. 

I think we'd need a new map. 25-50 miles between bases can be pretty far apart when flying @ 100 mph

[Yeager]

The fact is, the consumer has shown the gaming industry that while there is a lot of vocal support for a WW1 online sim, there is far less support for actually paying to play one.

I can't speak for anyone else but I genuinely enjoyed DoA and it was about the only thing I did in my last year with Warbirds.  I had a tremendous amount of fun and the average numbers in DoA that last year were 15-20 online during the early evening hours.  The WBs community was (and Im purely guessing here) probably one fourth what the AH community is today.  I would expect that something along the lines of a single map on a single server with four or five choices for rides would probably bring in on average at least double what DoA had on at any given time.  That would mean 35-40 players under average circumstances (about what we get in MW on average).

Looking at it as simply an added choice for those interested is win/win for HTC and all of us players.  The only genuine concern the hardcore WW2 guys have is that it would draw resources away from those arenas.  Indeed it would, but only for a short period, and doing so would simply make AcesHigh a better game, imo.

[Cajunn]

OK, back the reason I posted this thread, why was the survey taken? Was it on request or just to see how many player's were interested.

[Ack-Ack]

I doubt they build another WWI sim, simply for the lack of sustained general interest.
However could imagine a very simple new arena, nothing fancy, just a few bases to lauch from and a couple of planes. Nothing that ties up lot resources in the long run in form of developing any new gameplay or such.

An arena would be the more sensible solution for the reasons you mentioned. 


ack-ack

[Ack-Ack]

OK, back the reason I posted this thread, why was the survey taken? Was it on request or just to see how many player's were interested.

It seemed to be more to gauge interest than anything else.



ack-ack

[Masherbrum]

Air Warrior had a Korean War arena as well.  It hardly ever had anyone in it.  The problem there was that it takes forever (by WWII standards) to do a 360 degree turn in an F-86 or Mig 15.  Dogfights end up being glacial by WWII standards, and most of your shooting is at 1000 yards.

HiTech and Pyro flew a lot in Air Warrior.  They might have the same opinion -- that WWI and Korean War arenas would have almost no players in them.  For the same effort of making those arenas, they could do more in the Main Arena, which is the most-imporant and most-popular part of Aces High.  Much more bang for the buck.

I not only disagree with you putting words in HT's and Pyro's mouth, but I disagree with most of your post.   

WWI = no sissified runners.   Noone's running from anyone, pure dogfights.    I'd never set foot in the WWII arenas again.   As would many others.    The current Arena players are laughable and more worried about "stats" than just fighting.   

Korean would be even worse than it is now, with even more runners.   

[Brooke]

I not only disagree with you putting words in HT's and Pyro's mouth

I'm not meaning to put words in anyone's mouth.  I do not mean to imply in any way that I speak for others or that I know others' thoughts.  I am just pointing out history and speculating.  "Might" always means that "might not" is possible, too.

WWI = no sissified runners.   Noone's running from anyone, pure dogfights.    I'd never set foot in the WWII arenas again.   As would many others.    The current Arena players are laughable and more worried about "stats" than just fighting.

Maybe, but the planes all have the same mix of stats as in WWII:  some are faster than others, some turn better than others, etc.  If a person in a faster plane is being chased by a slower one that turns better, he might still just disengage -- same dynamics apply.