Author Topic: Changing the game to make it more "challenging"  (Read 1492 times)

Offline EDO43

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 271
Changing the game to make it more "challenging"
« on: December 20, 2009, 01:26:26 PM »
Before the tomatoes start flyin, let me put on my rain slicker first.  Ok, I've got it on....fire when ready gridley!

Ok, having been here for more years than I can count on at least one hand, I have a couple suggestions for gameplay that might make it a bit more, shall we say, challenging.  Since the real counterparts to the aircraft we fly around in the cartoon skies were more than just stick and throttle management, why not add some of these to the game?  I'm speaking primarily of mixture controls, cowl flaps, oil cooler shutters, etc.  I have no idea how difficult it would be to implement such things but it's something I thought of a few nights back, while sitting on a runway with the engine idling waiting for squadron mates to spawn for a fighter sweep over rookland.  Watching the cylinder head temperature gauge gave me an idea to have a cowl flap command to open or close the cowl flaps to keep CHT's in the green.  I also thought of this again while waiting for my 2800 to cool down after a protracted WEP climb.  I'm getting in my way back machine now to a time when in AWIII, there was a scenario or period in general gameplay that running an engine full power for too long resulted in overheating and damage to your engine.  Let's limit the WEP shall we?  Our prototypes had limited War Emergency Power that did not recharge after it was used up.  When the tanks empty, it's empty...an ADI gauge in the cockpit (if it's prototypically correct) would be a great addition.  Our fuel tanks don't refill when they're empty...why does the WEP return after the engine cools down? Somewhere I got the idea that 5 minutes is all the time that War Emergency Power could be used for in total.  I have no basis for this assumption and it might be wrong.  I have no data on how big an ADI tank (MW50 for you luftwobble heads) is or how long it would last.  Maybe gameplay now is accurate and I just don't know it.  I see keyboard commands as a limiting factor to those who do not use joysticks and for that, there might be an auto setting, kind of like auto takeoff or the stall limiter.  Some of us use it, some don't.  I know I don't.  There would have to be some sort of penalty for using the auto setting, just like the stall limiter...engines might not put out as much power or be as efficient with fuel as they otherwise would....just spitballing here. 

In short, let's make it a little more challenging than to fly 10 minutes, engage, kill/die and reup for another go.  Oh and let's not forget the obligatory smak talk on 200 for those that invariably feel they have been wronged when they die.  No, I'm not alluding to changing the game to a Microsoft Flight Simulator, it's a game, not a simulator.  Yes, it will bring it closer to the sim but it will make us think about condition monitoring and performance limitations.  Oh and while I'm at it, how about a command to cage the gyro's before entering combat or they get tumbling damage?  Hell I remember in Falcon 4.0 SP3 and 4, the aircraft had a nuclear consent switch just like the real one...and it worked IIRC, there was just no nuclear bomb option in the weapons loadout.
Mawey -a-  tsmukan

Offline AWwrgwy

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5478
Re: Changing the game to make it more "challenging"
« Reply #1 on: December 20, 2009, 01:39:19 PM »
To paraphrase Hitech, and I'll take the time to search for it if you like:

Because it's no fun and really doesn't add anything to the game.

If anything, it would drive away the customer base who don't want to micromanage their planes.  Pilots in real life didn't like to have to set and adjust everything.  If they didn't get it right things turned out catastrophic and they ended up deep over Germany in a P-38 with a blown up turbo.

Case in point, as aircraft design progressed, more engine adjustments that formerly had to be individually adjusted all happened together with one throttle adjustment.

Would it be more fun if you had to adjust the timing and mixture on your car as you drove?

It's not about "driving" the plane, it's about fighting the plane.



wrongway
71 (Eagle) Squadron
"THAT"S PAINT!!"

"If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through."
- General Sir Anthony Cecil Hogmanay

Offline Templar

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 189
Re: Changing the game to make it more "challenging"
« Reply #2 on: December 20, 2009, 01:49:00 PM »
-1 Good reply AW.  :salute
Muhahahahhaa

Offline Jayhawk

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3909
Re: Changing the game to make it more "challenging"
« Reply #3 on: December 20, 2009, 02:13:21 PM »
Yeah It's been discussed before, it could be fun, some would enjoy it.  I think I probably would, but AWwrgwy really did sum it why it's not in the game well.

Although I do have to agree with the WEP part, I've never understood why it recharges.
LOOK EVERYBODY!  I GOT MY NAME IN LIGHTS!

Folks, play nice.

Offline Motherland

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8110
Re: Changing the game to make it more "challenging"
« Reply #4 on: December 20, 2009, 02:14:12 PM »
I would love this, however HiTech does not. I wouldn't ever expect to see it in game...

Offline Dream Child

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 256
Re: Changing the game to make it more "challenging"
« Reply #5 on: December 20, 2009, 02:24:00 PM »
Yeah It's been discussed before, it could be fun, some would enjoy it.  I think I probably would, but AWwrgwy really did sum it why it's not in the game well.

Although I do have to agree with the WEP part, I've never understood why it recharges.

Well, WEP on an aircraft that doesn't have water injection just heats up the engine, so in theory it could cool back down, though probably not well, if at all, at full throttle. An aircraft that uses water injection really shouldn't be able to recharge WEP, though both of these does affect game playability. I think the real question is if it is affecting gameplay.

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: Changing the game to make it more "challenging"
« Reply #6 on: December 20, 2009, 02:29:50 PM »
You should do a bit of checking. 5 minutes is the heat limit, NOT the additive-is-gone limit. MW50 on some German planes would last for 30-35 minutes. Not all at once, mind you! That's longer than most planes can fly on full internal fuel!

The P-47 had a lot of water onboard as well, for water injection. It had to cool down after 5 minutes, but it had plenty more stock in the tank, once the heat allowed it.


In almost all cases, emergency power is limited due to HEAT, not running out of "go-juice"...

Offline Jayhawk

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3909
Re: Changing the game to make it more "challenging"
« Reply #7 on: December 20, 2009, 02:31:24 PM »
Well, WEP on an aircraft that doesn't have water injection just heats up the engine, so in theory it could cool back down, though probably not well, if at all, at full throttle. An aircraft that uses water injection really shouldn't be able to recharge WEP, though both of these does affect game playability. I think the real question is if it is affecting gameplay.

Yeah, I doubt it really has too big of an effect.  I'm certainly not going to get my panties in a bunch over it.  I suppose making it more realistic would just complicate it and then hurt gameplay in the end.  Thanks!  :aok
LOOK EVERYBODY!  I GOT MY NAME IN LIGHTS!

Folks, play nice.

Offline EDO43

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 271
Re: Changing the game to make it more "challenging"
« Reply #8 on: December 20, 2009, 02:42:14 PM »
Then why not just spawn at 15-20 or 25K and then fly full throttle toward your intended target?  If it's all about the fight, what's the point in taking off, retracting landing gear, changing prop pitch...any of that?  To use your terminology, to fight the plane, one has to drive it.  I fully understand the customer base viewpoint and micromanagement...that's why I mentioned the auto option.  But, like the stall limiter, there will be a slight performance downgrade.  Not everyone will like or use it...those that want to achieve maximum performance will.  Hell I'm not talking about every option, especially a supercharger option.  Nobody wants a blown cylinder because of overboost....and we're not WWII combat pilots.  Just a few relatively minor options that might be fun to use.   Maybe I have too much aviation experience for my own good as far as gameplay is concerned.    

They will probably never get implemented but i'd rather put it out on the board and let it be shot down, than not say anything and have a possible facet of gameplay go unappreciated.  It's just an idea and I believe that's what this forum is here for.  If HTC doesn't like it, then nothing will come of it as indicated.  But having been here for about 10 years, if another, comparable game were to be offered with these options at a comparable subscription price, my subscription to AH2 would end.  I disagree that it's no fun and doesn't add anything to the game.  I think it adds immensely to the historical aspect of the game and it challenges us to think and not rely on almost robotic ACM to get a kill or evade an adversary.  I do agree that pilots didn't like to adjust every aspect of their flight and that as the war progressed, more and more adjustments were made automatic but if you wanna fly, you do what you gotta do.  However with the exception of some German aircraft, namely the 190 that had only the throttle control (jets and rockets excepted), most had the obligatory throttle, mixture and propeller controls.  P-47M's, argueably an extremely late war aircraft, came with all of those and a supercharger control to boot...that was never made automatic.  The turbosupercharger control IIRC was automatic.  

I might be one of a very few that enjoys a more involved game but when AH started, the flight model was extremely tough to use.  We stuck with it and with some modifications from HTC and some experience, it worked very well and was challenging.  I like the idea of a total flight experience and if I'm one of a few then that's ok with me.
« Last Edit: December 20, 2009, 03:19:56 PM by EDO43 »
Mawey -a-  tsmukan

Offline EDO43

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 271
Re: Changing the game to make it more "challenging"
« Reply #9 on: December 20, 2009, 02:43:09 PM »
Well, WEP on an aircraft that doesn't have water injection just heats up the engine, so in theory it could cool back down, though probably not well, if at all, at full throttle. An aircraft that uses water injection really shouldn't be able to recharge WEP, though both of these does affect game playability. I think the real question is if it is affecting gameplay.

WEP, or War Emergency Power IS water injection.
Mawey -a-  tsmukan

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: Changing the game to make it more "challenging"
« Reply #10 on: December 20, 2009, 02:49:16 PM »
Wrong.

In many aircraft, WEP is simply settings higher than recommended. They are settings that increase manifold pressure and RPM to produce more power (for a limited time).

In SOME planes, the increase in manifold pressure cannot be reached without an additive that prevents premature detonation inside the cylinder as it compresses, and that is what the additive is.

However, many planes do not require an additive, they just "run hotter"

Offline EDO43

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 271
Re: Changing the game to make it more "challenging"
« Reply #11 on: December 20, 2009, 03:04:56 PM »
which engines are those?  I've never seen one but you are correct.  I generally don't like use this but from Wikipedia

"Some earlier engines simply allowed the throttle to open wider than normal, allowing more air to flow through the intake. All WEP methods result in greater-than-usual stresses on the engine, and correspond to a reduced engine lifetime. For some airplanes, such as the P-51, use of WEP required the plane to be grounded after landing and the engine torn down and inspected for damage before returning to the air."
When I think of WEP i always think of Water/Meth injection and the R-2800, a fault in my thinking I suppose.  I generally don't consider early war engines that might not be equipped with it
« Last Edit: December 20, 2009, 03:22:26 PM by EDO43 »
Mawey -a-  tsmukan

Offline AWwrgwy

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5478
Re: Changing the game to make it more "challenging"
« Reply #12 on: December 20, 2009, 05:28:41 PM »
Then why not just spawn at 15-20 or 25K and then fly full throttle toward your intended target?  If it's all about the fight, what's the point in taking off, retracting landing gear, changing prop pitch...any of that?  To use your terminology, to fight the plane, one has to drive it.  I fully understand the customer base viewpoint and micromanagement...that's why I mentioned the auto option.  But, like the stall limiter, there will be a slight performance downgrade.  Not everyone will like or use it...those that want to achieve maximum performance will.  Hell I'm not talking about every option, especially a supercharger option.  Nobody wants a blown cylinder because of overboost....and we're not WWII combat pilots.  Just a few relatively minor options that might be fun to use.   Maybe I have too much aviation experience for my own good as far as gameplay is concerned.    

They will probably never get implemented but i'd rather put it out on the board and let it be shot down, than not say anything and have a possible facet of gameplay go unappreciated.  It's just an idea and I believe that's what this forum is here for.  If HTC doesn't like it, then nothing will come of it as indicated.  But having been here for about 10 years, if another, comparable game were to be offered with these options at a comparable subscription price, my subscription to AH2 would end.  I disagree that it's no fun and doesn't add anything to the game.  I think it adds immensely to the historical aspect of the game and it challenges us to think and not rely on almost robotic ACM to get a kill or evade an adversary.  I do agree that pilots didn't like to adjust every aspect of their flight and that as the war progressed, more and more adjustments were made automatic but if you wanna fly, you do what you gotta do.  However with the exception of some German aircraft, namely the 190 that had only the throttle control (jets and rockets excepted), most had the obligatory throttle, mixture and propeller controls.  P-47M's, argueably an extremely late war aircraft, came with all of those and a supercharger control to boot...that was never made automatic.  The turbosupercharger control IIRC was automatic.  

I might be one of a very few that enjoys a more involved game but when AH started, the flight model was extremely tough to use.  We stuck with it and with some modifications from HTC and some experience, it worked very well and was challenging.  I like the idea of a total flight experience and if I'm one of a few then that's ok with me.

Staying on topic   :neener:

I don't retract my landing gear.  It's automagic.  I don't trim.  It's automagic.  Do you adjust your RPM and manifold pressure much while flying as it is now?

And now you want prop pitch, fuel control, but not the consequences of not adjusting them properly?  What's the point?  Immersion?  Pretend to map a key on your keyboard that adjusts prop pitch and there you go.

As I previously stated, aircraft controls were continually simplified as the war went on.  Real life pilots didn't have time, or sometimes the ability, to be micromanaging everything.  Just more work.

Would you really go to another game with true to life controls if few if anyone else was there?  Read the novel size operators manual?  Need to learn different controls and setting for each plane?  Where's F-16 online?

I just think the realism you are looking for would become tedious very quickly and add little if anything to the game.


wrongway
71 (Eagle) Squadron
"THAT"S PAINT!!"

"If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through."
- General Sir Anthony Cecil Hogmanay

Offline Motherland

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8110
Re: Changing the game to make it more "challenging"
« Reply #13 on: December 20, 2009, 05:36:16 PM »
Staying on topic   :neener:

I don't retract my landing gear.  It's automagic. TBH that's just weird I don't trim.  It's automagic. I do Do you adjust your RPM and manifold pressure much while flying as it is now? Yes all of the time

And now you want prop pitch, fuel control, but not the consequences of not adjusting them properly?  What's the point?  Immersion? Of course Pretend to map a key on your keyboard that adjusts prop pitch and there you go. Sit in a box and pretend to play a computer game... you can sell your computer and won't have to pay for an AH subscription

As I previously stated, aircraft controls were continually simplified as the war went on.  Real life pilots didn't have time, or sometimes the ability, to be micromanaging everything.  Just more work.

Would you really go to another game with true to life controls if few if anyone else was there?  Read the novel size operators manual?  Need to learn different controls and setting for each plane?  Where's F-16 online? LOMAC seems to have a pretty loyal following despite being old... Il-2... MSFS... those kinds of sims are popular.

I just think the realism you are looking for would become tedious very quickly and add little if anything to the game.
I think it would add a lot and be very beneficial to those who would like to do that if you add a combat trim like feature :aok

wrongway

Offline grizz441

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7000
Re: Changing the game to make it more "challenging"
« Reply #14 on: December 20, 2009, 05:47:03 PM »
Then why not just spawn at 15-20 or 25K and then fly full throttle toward your intended target?  If it's all about the fight, what's the point in taking off, retracting landing gear, changing prop pitch...any of that?

Fight/Gameplay[____________________________x_________________________]Realism/Immersion

It's a spectrum.  HTC has decided on the proper balances between the two.