Custom Attitude Indicator

[rough_wood]

I would think the fact that hitech even SAID no is reason enough. But then, that's just me.

He never said no, he said "real pilots don't use attitude indicators"

Plus just cause he owns this company doesn't make him a nazi leader like some people seem to think. He's a guy that owns a company whose revenue comes from people like you and me. He's not out to throw us in gulags or make us feel honored he set foot in our little simpleton thread, he's here to make a living (I assume).

You speak of him as if he is god. He's just another person like any of us, his word is final yes, when it comes to this place, but it isn't sacred. But saying "Real pilots do this" isn't a final word, it isn't an answer, it's a remark. Until I hear the final word with a simple reason why, I'm going to continue to seek it.

[Ghosth]

Keep diggin!

[The Fugitive]

He never said no, he said "real pilots don't use attitude indicators"

Plus just cause he owns this company doesn't make him a nazi leader like some people seem to think. He's a guy that owns a company whose revenue comes from people like you and me. He's not out to throw us in gulags or make us feel honored he set foot in our little simpleton thread, he's here to make a living (I assume).

You speak of him as if he is god. He's just another person like any of us, his word is final yes, when it comes to this place, but it isn't sacred. But saying "Real pilots do this" isn't a final word, it isn't an answer, it's a remark. Until I hear the final word with a simple reason why, I'm going to continue to seek it.

Once you have been here as long as most of the "nay sayers" that have been jumping on you you will realise that HT IS god, that this is his little world he has CREATED and he will, and DOES run it as he wants.

Gauges in the planes are just training wheels. As you get better, and practice you too will do away with the training wheels. To become a decent cartoon pilot you need to fly.... and I love this term.... "outside the plane". It's a quote from one of our favorite vets, it means you must be focused on everything outside your plane to stay on top of the situation. Your plane has to become almost instinctual. While I'm no super pilot, I almost never look at my gauges, and the best never do. Those guys can tell you how fast they are, what angle of climb and altitude as well as attitude without ever looking down. Not to mention the same info of at least 3 guys in the area as well.

And the final comment I have. HTC has given you his answer. You have made it sound as if this is a make or break type item for you. HTC has become the premier Air Combat game by building his game they way he knows it should be built. He does listen to his customers, but he does NOT bow down to every persons wants/request. He leaves that to the owners of Warbirds and IL2 neither of which comes any where close to what HTC pulls in for money..... which as YOU stated is what he should be worried about.

[boomerlu]

HiTech does have the final say, but that does not mean he is perfect nor does it mean he is giving the right type of answer.

It was plainly obvious to me that all RW wanted here was a GOOD REASON for his request to be turned down. No, "good pilots don't fly like that" is not a good reason. That violates the "you can do what you want" nature of this game. No, "it's not historical" is not a good reason either as this game does make ahistorical concessions for gameplay.

It's a basic principle of people skills that when you turn somebody down, you better have a reason. It can be as simple as "takes too long to code because of XYZ," and in this case that would have been good enough as I've plainly demonstrated.

And yet instead of just SAYING it, everybody in this thread (HiTech included) just kept on insisting that RW should learn to fly without his indicator. Instead of cutting to the heart of the matter, everybody kept on rerouting the topic towards what RW could be doing better. RW also REPEATEDLY complained about this type of thinking. After maybe the third post in that vein, I would have thought it'd be obvious.

YES I agree it's easy to just look out the window, but what if it were equally trivial (or even easier) to change the code? The difficulty of coding it is the key point here.

[RTHolmes]

what I see here is RW just ignoring all the arguments against his idea, perhaps its him that needs to work on "seeing through other peoples eyes" skills.

To summarize:

* the instrument is an artificial horizon, not an attitude indicator. primarily used for determining bank angle.

* not all fighters had grads on their artificial horizon. in fact we dont know how many did because no one has posted any evidence apart from one unnamed cockpit photo (looks a bit like a jug to me but thats just a wild guess.)

* its works using a gyro which is usually caged before maneuvering, so would be unavailable in the situations RW describes it being useful.

* its unecessay because you can look along your wing and see the horizon

* its always good weather and daylight in AH so we dont need to fly on instruments

* largely irrelevant for dive-bombing; sideslip indicator (so you're not slewing the sight) and g-meter (to confirm airframe is unloaded) are far more useful. practice is even more useful.

* for roping airspeed is far more crucial (ie for your E-state) and you should be out of the cockpit anyway (ie. for his E-state)


theres probably more but that all I got off the top of my head...

[boomerlu]

None of these things matter if it's easy enough to code. How are we to know he has experience with coding or knows the underlying software mechanics well enough to see that it'd be difficult?

Once I mentioned that it would be difficult and gave good reasons, there was no more need for argument. Yes the "it's easy because you can look out your window" is important to the explanation. However, we missed one thing - it's easy relative to WHAT (coding/modifying the skins in our case here)? This is the key part of the explanation that was missing. Instead of driving for it, everybody kept on repeating the same thing.

Edit: There's no reason to repeatedly post the same explanation. If he understood it (and I believe RW clearly did in this case), you're just wasting time reiterating a point he understands. If he doesn't, a few attempts at explanation are sufficient, but beyond that hopeless is hopeless.

[RTHolmes]

None of these things matter if it's easy enough to code. How are we to know he has experience with coding or knows the underlying software mechanics well enough to see that it'd be difficult?

doesnt make sense - laser beams are easy to code, you think we should we have them? I'm guessing not.

[boomerlu]

doesnt make sense - laser beams are easy to code, you think we should we have them? I'm guessing not.

Realism is a requirement, but our realism is such a grey area (Combat Trim, Custom Gunsights, Pony vs Pony, Standard units on indicators, indicators that are too effective, English writing on foreign aircraft, etc), that a custom attitude indicator isn't beyond reason. That's why "it's not realistic" is not a sufficient justification for refusing a custom attitude indicator.

Laser beams on the other hand are so unrealistic that rejecting them on the basis on the realism is perfectly justified. Not to mention the adverse gameplay implications.

To "win" the argument, you need to provide both an alternative (which everybody has), and a reason why the original idea is worse than the alternative (in this case, the difficulty of either completely changing the skin system or manually changing every skin).

Having one without the other is half-baked. If the idea is difficult to implement but necessary (and justified/realistic) for the game, the rejection should fail. If the idea is unnecessary (but within the bounds of reason - no laser cannons) for the game but easy to implement, the rejection should once again fail. That isn't to say that the idea should be implemented immediately (priorities come into play here), but it should not be rejected. It may be on the bottom of the list, but at least it makes the list.

Only if the idea is both difficult to implement and unnecessary (or beyond reasonable reality) should the proposal be outright rejected.

[Baumer]

Another reason it may be outright rejected is the simple notion of tasking the company's resources to projects that would give the greatest benefit to the most customers.

There are probably a couple hundred customer suggestions, all ready in the wishlist forum, that would benefit a larger percentage of the player base.

[boomerlu]

Another reason it may be outright rejected is the simple notion of tasking the company's resources to projects that would give the greatest benefit to the most customers.

Right, that's basically what I'm getting at. But if for example, an idea would benefit a small group without hurting anybody else, that idea could be put at the BOTTOM of the priority list (but still be on the list). There's no need to completely reject it, although there's great reason to delay implementing it.

[colmbo]

, but if it so useless and not required as the naysayers keep stating, can anyone explain why they put them in planes?

For those times when you can't fly visually, for instrument flight.

Gyro instruments of that era were "caged" (locked in position) before any extreme attitude flight to prevent them from tumbling which is bad for the instrument.

[The Fugitive]

the answer to the question was No, the reason was "because HT said so" which should be good enough. Thousands of people have learned to rope and dive bomb with out this suggested gauge modification. So if some one comes in here and suggests we have a pink wing tip so that it makes it easier to fight HTC should them drop everything to add pink wing tips?

[rough_wood]

Another reason it may be outright rejected is the simple notion of tasking the company's resources to projects that would give the greatest benefit to the most customers.

There are probably a couple hundred customer suggestions, all ready in the wishlist forum, that would benefit a larger percentage of the player base.

Exactly, if he just came out and said something like this the subject would have been over. But when someone says "I can't see at night, I need a flashlight" and the guy at the store that would sell flashlights says "just do it during the day", it becomes a situation where you are trying to debate/explain the situation with someone giving circus remarks. As long as he keeps giving refutable points, I will continue to refute. When he gives irrefutable points like the ones JG11 brings up, there is nothing to explain or debate.

@RTHolmes

I'll do this point by point, and this time I will take the liberty of using some of the rhetorical techniques that have been pointed at me

Why not remove it since we can look out the window

Not all fighters had ammo counters

Why is the attitude indicator not caged during maneuvering in the game then

Who needs windows when you can remember how long you held the stick in certain directions, you should just know your orientation

I bet frame rates would improve if ALL instruments were removed

Why use the sideslip indicator or g-meter when you can just look out the window

Why not just stop roping all together. If its a tactic for your favorite plane just get a new favorite plane.

I'm sure it is

[rough_wood]

Another reason it may be outright rejected is the simple notion of tasking the company's resources to projects that would give the greatest benefit to the most customers.

There are probably a couple hundred customer suggestions, all ready in the wishlist forum, that would benefit a larger percentage of the player base.

If HiTech said that there would have been nothing to say and this thread would be 5 pages back.

Instead he said "real people don't wear shoes" instead of "just double knot them so they stop untying" when asked about how to solve tripping on shoe laces. This leaves something to refute since it can be assumed he isn't helping based soley on his beleif that people don't wear shoes.

[rough_wood]

the answer to the question was No, the reason was "because HT said so" which should be good enough. Thousands of people have learned to rope and dive bomb with out this suggested gauge modification. So if some one comes in here and suggests we have a pink wing tip so that it makes it easier to fight HTC should them drop everything to add pink wing tips?

It would be clear to an 8 year old with average reading comprehension to know that all the people you are arguing against (me, JG11, etc) would want is either to have the pink wing tips, or a reason why they couldn't have them. A good, actual reason, not a goofy remark you say to your friends, it's not typical customer-company relationship.

It's self obviouse. You are trying to redirect the argument and compare my request to something completely ridiculus.

You are intentionally making yourself look stupid. You can't actually think what you're saying. This has to be a troll.