How AHII has conditioned my understanding of history...

[PJ_Godzilla]

At 20+k the p47 is like a zero (compared to most other planes). It is the only plane with a turbo-supercharger, and the result is that its engine performance degrades much less than other planes. Now, once its at 10k, its like trying to quickly move a giant wine barrel with fins, but as you pointed out, 10k is out of its element, so to speak.

Yes, the super air pump, packaged ventrally and lending the notable shape...  Yet, in AH, so many are willing to fly them low. This is out of their design brief. My very first true rolling scissor fight was against a Jug on the deck. It ended abruptly when he smashed into the ground but it was kewl, nonetheless. I had gondos and he offered, so I said, what the heck? I realized what was going on when his position in my view (looking up) eerily refused to change despite the fact that I was in a continuous barrel roll. Of course, the axis of that helix bent inexorably downward.


Had I just had the 1x20 I'd've probably just flat-turned on him.

[PJ_Godzilla]

...am I reading you right that it would be 'tres kewl' to start a sortie, press the E button, and explode immediately costing you ~100 perks?

Wow our definitions of 'tres kewl' differ widely.  As neat as a reliability model sounds, it just doesn't transfer into good gameplay.  Dying because your ground crew didn't do its job is not fun gameplay, no matter how you dress it up.

Wiley.

I'll concede the point on gameplay, though, if you read our friend Rudy, he claims the real failure mode was a failure to operate. I'll also concede the point that the perk-paying client might be a little p-o'd. OTOH, if you had reliability built in and people knew it upfront, the ride might not need to be perked.

[Wiley]

I'll concede the point on gameplay, though, if you read our friend Rudy, he claims the real failure mode was a failure to operate. I'll also concede the point that the perk-paying client might be a little p-o'd. OTOH, if you had reliability built in and people knew it upfront, the ride might not need to be perked.

I wasn't speaking just in terms of perk planes, it was just a fairly strong example of why it's a bad idea.  Suppose 163s were unperked, and it was a failure to operate failure mode.  So I get on the runway, press E.  Hmp.  Got a dud.  .ef  Launch.  Press E.  Ok, off I go.  How did 'e', '.ef', and launching again add to the gameplay experience?

Now aside from that specific example, most of the Japanese stuff was allegedly unreliable.  Same with the Russian stuff.  I just don't see what it adds to the game other than frustration.  Look at how bent out of shape people get when auto ack oils you.  A reliability model would give the same result, except it wouldn't matter whether you've chosen to be over a CV or not.

It's the rough equivalent of having a crappy connection to the server.  Getting booted mid-flight is no fun, why would it be more fun if it was because the plane you've chosen to fly had an unreliable engine IRL?

Wiley.

Wiley.

[PJ_Godzilla]

why would it be more fun if it was because the plane you've chosen to fly had an unreliable engine IRL?

Wiley.

It's a value question. If you want a more realistic experience, you might be willing to endure. If it's purely about the combat at nominal, you might not be so willing. It's kind of like no-icon flying that way.

I'd propose that it be a feature that could be enabled or disabled. For scenario play, it might be really interesting and would provide an offsetting feature that might enable, certainly in the case of the Eastern Front, a stabilizing effect. In the Pac theatre, it'd probably just make things a landslide.

I think your analogy with the server a bad one, though, and I'll provide a counterexample. Consider the instance of 6x50 cal on the Pony D. Assuming you take off and are flying, you now face odds that not all guns are operational at any given instance. That's not a binary fly/no fly, it's a diminution of your firepower for the duration of the mission.

Recall the name of the thread. Such a feature would certainly provide a more historically accurate experience. I make no claims that people would like it better.

 

[Wiley]

It's a value question. If you want a more realistic experience, you might be willing to endure. If it's purely about the combat at nominal, you might not be so willing. It's kind of like no-icon flying that way.

Possibly.  Good for the masochists, anyways.

I think your analogy with the server a bad one, though, and I'll provide a counterexample. Consider the instance of 6x50 cal on the Pony D. Assuming you take off and are flying, you now face odds that not all guns are operational at any given instance. That's not a binary fly/no fly, it's a diminution of your firepower for the duration of the mission.

Yep.  It would be more realistic.  So would no autopilot, no autotrim, 40 lb springs on your joystick and rudders and a solid commitment not to leave your chair to go to the head until your sortie is complete. 

Back to the topic and away from the quasi-hijack, the game impresses on me how amazing it is that anybody survived aerial engagements in those fighters at all when you consider the number of aircraft involved in the fights.  Surviving your first few sorties IMO was probably largely a matter of being in the right place at the right time than skill.

Wiley.

[vafiii]

Interesting point on the P-51 and 190. It seems like these planes were highly touted by their pilots as superior fighters, however, it appears to me that once you lose your energy/speed they become very poor performing planes and an easy kill. The P-51 seems to be entirely overrated as a fighter which is probably why the P-51 pilots in AH are always at 15K or above and only engage an enemy in a dive. I'm not picking on the P-51 pilots just making an observation about the aircraft.

Overall it seems the American planes were built much like the muscle cars of the late 60's, big, heavy and fast in the straight away but overall poor performers which led to the bnz tactics the American pilots adopted. The British Spitfire is built like a sports car, it's fast and highly maneuverable. Seems to be good at everything. My pick for best overall fighter of WW2 followed by the Zero and 109.

[muzik]

1. In the P40 versus A6M matchup, the P40 is the energy fighter and the A6M the angles fighter. This is entirely coherent with all the stuff I'd read about Claire Chennault's tactical advice to the AVG.

The original Flying Tigers never engaged A6ms. They were fighting mostly Nates, Oscars, and Nicks. All were only barely on par with the P40.

I wasn't speaking just in terms of perk planes, it was just a fairly strong example of why it's a bad idea.  Suppose 163s were unperked, and it was a failure to operate failure mode.  So I get on the runway, press E.  Hmp.  Got a dud.  .ef  Launch.  Press E.  Ok, off I go.  How did 'e', '.ef', and launching again add to the gameplay experience?

Now aside from that specific example, most of the Japanese stuff was allegedly unreliable.  Same with the Russian stuff.  I just don't see what it adds to the game other than frustration.  Look at how bent out of shape people get when auto ack oils you.  A reliability model would give the same result, except it wouldn't matter whether you've chosen to be over a CV or not.

It's the rough equivalent of having a crappy connection to the server.  Getting booted mid-flight is no fun, why would it be more fun if it was because the plane you've chosen to fly had an unreliable engine IRL?

YEA  thats the ticket, it should be "all or nothing."  It's just a game and it should only be fun.

Nothing that happens in the game should be work or piss off players.

We should have automatic flap deployment, because pushing those extra buttons is too complicated and hurts my fingers.

We should have unlimited ammo because it's no fun running out. same for fuel.

Combat trim should fly the plane for us during our fights.

And nothing that ever challenges you to the extreme should ever again be mentioned in these forums.

  Have a happy unchallenging game.

[321BAR]

In very few cases do I recall seeing a Pony low and slow - for long. How do you manage to survive in such a situation?

a crapload of flap usage, rudder usage, E management, SA, and BALLS...

[Brooke]

P-51's are very good planes in a scenario setting.  190's are good in a scenario setting depending on the role and the model.  For example, the 190A-8 in scenarios is a monster at killing bombers.

In the BoB scenario, the 109E is a very good fighter vs. Spit I's and Hurri I's.

The P-47 has a turbocharger (as opposed to a geared supercharger) -- so does the P-38.  So both have excellent power at very high altitudes.

[pembquist]

I just wanted to put a plug in for the original subject.  I think re: the pony and the 190, they were much better real world fighter planes than they are cartoon fighter planes.  For the most part I don't think AH2 offers fidelity in aircombat, I'm not talking about the flight model I'm talking about the game play.  In the realworld diving 10,000 feet and zapping somebody before they know what hit them, or steaming in head on with all guns blazing would be considered great admirable techniques.  I think some of the scenarios give a better feel of being blindsided and only having one chance, anyway its all good

[muzik]

In the realworld diving 10,000 feet and zapping somebody before they know what hit them, or steaming in head on with all guns blazing would be considered great admirable techniques. 

So true. And it's amazing how many people in this game think that HOing was rare. I love the turn fight and hate getting HOed as much as anyone, but it would be a much happier world without weiners who want everyone to fly the way they they want you to all the time.

[Wiley]

YEA  thats the ticket, it should be "all or nothing."  It's just a game and it should only be fun.

And nothing that ever challenges you to the extreme should ever again be mentioned in these forums.

  Have a happy unchallenging game.

Yes, because random failures challenge you to the extreme.

Hey, if you want to roughly simulate this level of fun, purchase one of these:

http://www.thinkgeek.com/gadgets/electronic/8c52/

Turn it on at the beginning of every sortie.  Every time it beeps randomly stop using some function of your aircraft, such as the rudder, or hit the E button on your keyboard, or stop turning left, or stop using your MGs, only cannons.

Enjoy your extreme challenge!

Enough with the hijack... I'm done.

Wiley.

[Guppy35]

Yes, the super air pump, packaged ventrally and lending the notable shape...  Yet, in AH, so many are willing to fly them low. This is out of their design brief. My very first true rolling scissor fight was against a Jug on the deck. It ended abruptly when he smashed into the ground but it was kewl, nonetheless. I had gondos and he offered, so I said, what the heck? I realized what was going on when his position in my view (looking up) eerily refused to change despite the fact that I was in a continuous barrel roll. Of course, the axis of that helix bent inexorably downward.


Had I just had the 1x20 I'd've probably just flat-turned on him.

Don't forget all those MTO and ETO Jug Groups flying ground attack.  The Jug did a lot of fighting down low and did tangle with enemy birds down there too.  I've been reading the history of the 405th FG, 9th AF that flew Jugs in the ETO doing ground attack.  Down low was where they were

[PJ_Godzilla]

The original Flying Tigers never engaged A6ms. They were fighting mostly Nates, Oscars, and Nicks. All were only barely on par with the P40.

YEA  thats the ticket, it should be "all or nothing."  It's just a game and it should only be fun.

As for the first, yes, you are correct. My statement about the E-M matchup P-40 to A6M is too, but not in the context of Claire Chenault and the AVG. Therefore, I stand at least partially corrected. Kudos for correcting my sloppy misstatement.

As for the second, you sarcastically make my point well enough to at least mildly annoy Wiley, with whom I was having a civil discourse. I agree but you get a style deduction.

Overall, 9.4, expect less from the Russian judge, for he is humorless and afflicted with hemorrhoids. 

[Gary26]

Might I add two more....



2) Trees should be RED