Author Topic: Engines runing full blast  (Read 7121 times)

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23046
Re: Engines runing full blast
« Reply #210 on: September 07, 2009, 10:27:29 AM »
Quote
I just had about a week-long argument with those folks on their board about the subject of engine management... they're so stuck in their "gamer entitlement" mentality that they won't even admit that no, you couldn't roar around at 100% throttle without any ramifications.
Stiglr,

You realize that Widewing, who directly countered your claims, has thousands of real life hours on engines like these, and at least some hours on some of these engines?  We're not talking "gamer entitlement" here, we're talking about reality.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Stoney

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3482
Re: Engines runing full blast
« Reply #211 on: September 07, 2009, 10:33:26 AM »
Well, this excerpted comment from the TW forum speaks volumes:

Quote
The point isn't so much, "would I prefer to play AH?"...It's more like, "Why do THEY all play it?"..."they" consistently get "tantalizing numbers", with a clearly inferior product.

As long as he holds this opinion of TW versus AH2, there will be no reasoning with him.  Apparently their perception of us all as a part of the "Masses are asses" colloquialism will forever occlude their perception of Aces High and Targetware.  Its ultimately ironic, that in a thread within which they are discussing trying to increase the numbers of TW players, they malign Aces High for the quality of its "simulation" while noting that very large numbers of people are playing Aces High.  Pretty much every toothpaste commercial you see says something like "recommended by 8 out of 10 dentists..." or something like that.

Let's face it, if he can't put two and two together, how can we ever expect a reasonable response?

"Can we be incorrect at times, absolutely, but I do believe 15 years of experience does deserve a little more credence and respect than you have given from your very first post."

HiTech

Offline moot

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 16330
      • http://www.dasmuppets.com
Re: Engines runing full blast
« Reply #212 on: September 07, 2009, 10:36:11 AM »
Stiglr,

You realize that Widewing, who directly countered your claims, has thousands of real life hours on engines like these, and at least some hours on some of these engines?  We're not talking "gamer entitlement" here, we're talking about reality.
Hardcore entitlement: The entitlement which hardcore geeks feel to berate all other players who they feel are inferior to them if they'd rather play a game that, if you tilt your head and squint, looks less "realistic".

Well, this excerpted comment from the TW forum speaks volumes:

As long as he holds this opinion of TW versus AH2, there will be no reasoning with him.  Apparently their perception of us all as a part of the "Masses are asses" colloquialism will forever occlude their perception of Aces High and Targetware.  Its ultimately ironic, that in a thread within which they are discussing trying to increase the numbers of TW players, they malign Aces High for the quality of its "simulation" while noting that very large numbers of people are playing Aces High.  Pretty much every toothpaste commercial you see says something like "recommended by 8 out of 10 dentists..." or something like that.

Let's face it, if he can't put two and two together, how can we ever expect a reasonable response?


I reckon that he (they) privately know that's bogus.
Hello ant
running very fast
I squish you

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: Engines runing full blast
« Reply #213 on: September 07, 2009, 11:14:17 AM »
The thing is, and I mentioned this before, I'm sure that MANY of us here wouldn't mind an option for manual superchargers and being able to manually set mixture, etc, in aircraft that had it. IF HTC also provided some sort of "auto" function akin to Combat Trim: It manages enough to keep things about where they should be that you can fly the plane without too much work, but for those who can handle it allowing them to fine-tune their aircraft's performance in the same way as combat vs. manual trim.

Or maybe there should be a delay in each aircraft between hitting a keyboard or joystick button and the actual function occurring to represent the pilot having to reach for and move the appropriate switch or lever, especially when under high-G maneuvers.

In fact, I'm sure all of us have details that they'd like to see to tweak the realism, like the auto flaps on the N1K2-J. Hell, I'd still like to be able to "set and forget" the first two flap stages in my F4U as in the historical aircraft (the springs were weak enough that at sufficient speeds the first two notches would blow back up, then deployed again as airspeed decreased. The F6F did the same).
« Last Edit: September 07, 2009, 11:16:58 AM by Saxman »
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23046
Re: Engines runing full blast
« Reply #214 on: September 07, 2009, 11:18:29 AM »
Saxman,

Yes, I can point out much larger realism issues than the engine settings that Stiglr is obsessed with.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Stoney

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3482
Re: Engines runing full blast
« Reply #215 on: September 07, 2009, 11:20:40 AM »
The thing is, and I mentioned this before, I'm sure that MANY of us here wouldn't mind an option for manual superchargers and being able to manually set mixture, etc, in aircraft that had it. IF HTC also provided some sort of "auto" function akin to Combat Trim: It manages enough to keep things about where they should be that you can fly the plane without too much work, but for those who can handle it allowing them to fine-tune their aircraft's performance in the same way as combat vs. manual trim.

I support this 100%.  I suppose the actual question would be, as previously mentioned, what would the ROI be for the software development time?
"Can we be incorrect at times, absolutely, but I do believe 15 years of experience does deserve a little more credence and respect than you have given from your very first post."

HiTech

Offline Stiglr

  • Persona non grata
  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 112
Re: Engines runing full blast
« Reply #216 on: September 07, 2009, 02:41:33 PM »
Stoney wrote:

Quote
"Masses are asses" colloquialism


Oooooh, GOOD one!!! So true... Mind if I use that? Do I need to attribute that to you?

 :D

Offline Stiglr

  • Persona non grata
  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 112
Re: Engines runing full blast
« Reply #217 on: September 07, 2009, 02:42:58 PM »
Stiglr,

You realize that Widewing, who directly countered your claims, has thousands of real life hours on engines like these, and at least some hours on some of these engines?  We're not talking "gamer entitlement" here, we're talking about reality.

And you realize that Franz Stigler, who actually flew the types we're talking about in the actual war, says exactly the opposite?

Offline Stiglr

  • Persona non grata
  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 112
Re: Engines runing full blast
« Reply #218 on: September 07, 2009, 02:47:02 PM »
The thing is, and I mentioned this before, I'm sure that MANY of us here wouldn't mind an option for manual superchargers and being able to manually set mixture, etc, in aircraft that had it. IF HTC also provided some sort of "auto" function akin to Combat Trim: It manages enough to keep things about where they should be that you can fly the plane without too much work, but for those who can handle it allowing them to fine-tune their aircraft's performance in the same way as combat vs. manual trim.

You do realize, in part, that's exactly what I'm saying here. Not sure I agree with "EZ auto trim" so much, but for superchargers... certainly. So why is your assessment so different for engine heat and mixture management? Why the resistance for putting the responsibility for "fine-tuning performance" in the players' hands?

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: Engines runing full blast
« Reply #219 on: September 07, 2009, 02:47:36 PM »
And does anyone else notice that the only name he's willing to cite as a source is the same guy he gets his board handle from?

 :noid :noid :noid :noid :noid :noid
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: Engines runing full blast
« Reply #220 on: September 07, 2009, 02:56:07 PM »
You do realize, in part, that's exactly what I'm saying here. Not sure I agree with "EZ auto trim" so much, but for superchargers... certainly. So why is your assessment so different for engine heat and mixture management? Why the resistance for putting the responsibility for "fine-tuning performance" in the players' hands?

Because as you've been told again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again by pilots with hundreds of hours flight time and experience AND with access to records and accounts from hundreds of pilots who fought in all theaters of the war that ENGINE HEAT WOULD NOT AFFECT THE AIRCRAFT IN THE MANNER YOU INSIST and you want to USE that artificial means of enforcing how YOU think pilots should fly, rather than the ACTUAL considerations of fuel endurance  (which FYI, I do on my own anyway, even though my primary ride is the very long-legged F4U-1A). Get the wax out of your ears and knock off the hero worship. You've been using ONE pilot's account for your position in spite of the dozens of contrary reports from both contemporaries of Stiegler AND people who work with the same engines today.
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23046
Re: Engines runing full blast
« Reply #221 on: September 07, 2009, 03:16:41 PM »
And you realize that Franz Stigler, who actually flew the types we're talking about in the actual war, says exactly the opposite?
What makes Franz Stigler a more valid source than all of the other sources we have referenced?

Then again, I am not a Bf109 expert, perhaps the Bf109 had a special weakness with engine cooling?
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Stiglr

  • Persona non grata
  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 112
Re: Engines runing full blast
« Reply #222 on: September 07, 2009, 03:22:54 PM »
Stiglr,

Let's forget all about engines and the proof and evidence for a second.

You are bashing AH because the programmers decided to make a few compromises in realism (not huge ones mind you - reasonable ones which make a lot of sense given the context).

Guess what? Any simulation must have compromises simply because the simulation is NOT the real thing.

Now, you bash AH because compromises the designers have made are to make a better GAME while sacrificing some degree of realism, right? To you TargetWare is "better" because it makes less compromises as to realism.

Guess what? What is an "Engagement Circle" but a COMPROMISE designed to benefit GAMEPLAY while sacrificing realism? Maybe TargetWare is more realistic, but your whole point is that AH is bad because it makes compromises AT ALL.

I don't care whether you like your sim super realistic or not - it's your choice to fly whatever you want, I can see both sides. But at the end of the day, your preferred sim TargetWare is just as guilty of sacrificing realism for gameplay, making you no more than a hypocrite.

If you want to argue for something, at least be self consistent. Case closed.

This is a good observation. Let me explain.

1) We all know, no matter on what side of the realism fence we're on, that even a detailed sim can't be 100% right. Nor can it model ALL of the variables or be 100% accurate.

With that out of the way, it becomes a judgment call on how much effort to put into "getting right what you CAN" and creating a playable/enjoyable sim OR game.

If we can agree that far...?

Then, we look at the reasons why I say a more realistic approach is warranted, and the reasons you folks and Dale give for minimizing that realism... that's where you see the REAL schism.

Let's put aside for a moment IF you did or didn't have to manage your engine...

Even after that, we have the gauges... I think (actually, I know, as I've used and produced gauges for in-game aircraft) that you CAN make them accurate to type and nationality, and players WON'T get so confused they won't play  :rolleyes: Dale says otherwise. He's voting with his cash register, I'm voting with reality.

Now, there are other areas where the decisions become grayer. There are even times when I'll probably side with Dale on "gameplay" decisions.  :O

I don't feel it's necessary to "go to the nines", realism-wise when it comes to engine STARTING procedures. "E" is enough for both you and me. Why? Because faithfully recreating the "magneto + battery + fuel pump wobble + engage clutch or have ground crew turn the prop + hit start switch" sequence adds nothing to the raison d'etre for both AH and Targetware, that is "combat simulation". that's "detail for detail's sake" much like the MS Civilian Flight Simulator does, since their goal is to make the detail of flying and navigating interesting, because there is no combat in Cessnas. Two different sims, two different sets of gameplay decisions.

Now, going back to the engine management disagreement, I do think that managing cooling flaps, mixture, supercharger, prop pitch (when not automatic), even AWAY from combat and during flight to and from combat IS necessary, because what you DO or FAIL TO DO during the flight to combat affects what kind of performance you'll get out of your engine while you ARE in combat.

Now, I know we disagree to what extent this is true... but can you at least see the difference in simulation and its link to a "gameplay decision"?

We could try and simulate the relief tube... is it necessary? No. I notice that Targetware doesn't actually model hydraulic fluid or oil, at least not directly. The fuel pressure gauges and oil pressure gauges don't "work" in play as systems on their own. Actually, I wouldn't mind seeing that modeled... but, the other abstractions that create the engine operation/failure model, taken as a whole are, IMO, a good compromise between realism and gameplay. And, they place the responsibility/challenge in the hands of the players, where I think it belongs.

Getting back to the engagement circle idea: classic mix of gameplay vs. realism. If you're attempting to simulate the Battle for Guadalcanal, the Japanese have to fly to and from Rabaul.... 300 miles away :O to contest the airspace over Savo Island and Henderson Field. Do you really want players to have to lean out and fly over 2 hours to and from that part of the Slot? No: even I wouldn't sign up for that. But do you set it up so that Zeros appear over Guadalcanal with full fuel tanks, no need for drop tanks, or can they actually make it home if during combat they take a hit to a fuel tank? That wouldn't be very realistic. Fact was, if they took a fuel leak to a tank that was mostly full, provided they didn't catch fire from the hit, chances are they wouldn't make it back to Rabaul, because they needed quite a fuel reserve to get back.

Now: one way to create more realism, without needlessly saddling players with 4 hours of "commute time" in Zeros and Betties... is to give them an airstart NW of Savo Island... far enough away to change course or altitude... but no so far that they have to fly hours of eventless flight just to try and find a fight. With Targetware airstarts, fuel consumption to that point is calculated. So, when you "spawn" in the air, your drop tanks are near empty, and the wing and fuse tanks are full. And, when you hit the edge of the disengage circle on the way home, the calculation is made as to whether you have enough fuel to make it home. If not, you're adjudged to have lost the aircraft. If so, you're "gifted" a landing.... and yes, even if you have other battle damage that might make it a bit harder than if you had to do the landing yourself. *shrug* I can't think of a better way to do that other than "randomization" of the result or some teleport device where you "respawn" in mid air near Rabaul and have to make the landing yourself to get credit for the RTB. Now notice, this doesn't sacrifice much realism, even though it definitely IS a "gameplay" device. This rather UPHOLDS more realism while IMPROVING the gameplay and the player's ability to enjoy the sim.

Here's another example of bowing to gameplay and player considerations: auto level. Now, some planes actually had auto leveling (like Sperry autopilots, etc.)... but we allow players to level their wings automatically (actually it's a server setting which can be turned on or off at the server host's discretion). One reason is, during long missions, real players might have to go to the real bathroom.... or deal with REAL wives and kids and dogs and such for a couple minutes... so the autopilot allows them to "fly" for a minute or three, hands off, while they deal with real life and then come back. Or they can even set a course and leave for quite some time.... the risk being, they're pretty likely dead if enemy encounter them unexpectedly during their break.  I personally don't have a problem with this arrangement provided auto level can't be abused as a "get out of a spin free" device.

So, anyway, I hope you see I do realize that there are many, many gameplay vs. simulation decisions that have to be made.
« Last Edit: September 07, 2009, 03:24:59 PM by Stiglr »

Offline hitech

  • Administrator
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12339
      • http://www.hitechcreations.com
Re: Engines runing full blast
« Reply #223 on: September 07, 2009, 03:53:30 PM »
Allen Dickerson wrote,

Quote
Oooooh, GOOD one!!! So true... Mind if I use that? Do I need to attribute that to you?

Wow such a witty come back from a professional writer. Is that why you have never been able to hold a job longer than 1 year?
Why is it Allen that you can not hold a job, possibly because of the same attitude towards logic and discussion you display here?
HiTech

Offline hitech

  • Administrator
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12339
      • http://www.hitechcreations.com
Re: Engines runing full blast
« Reply #224 on: September 07, 2009, 04:00:26 PM »
Allen Dickerson Writes A wall of text to say 1 thing.

Allen's form of realism is correct  (as he admits all is a choice) and people should listen to him and him only.

Ill tell you what Allen take a few million of your own money and go create a Flight Sim as you see it should be made. Then come back and talk.

HiTech