Question for HTC: New Fighter Poll

[Brooke]

I will be voting for something with props.  Not sure if it will be the Beaufighter or Me410 though.

(. . . Beaufighter, Beaufighter, Beaufighter . . . !)

[Nutzoid]

It IS too much trouble... Once the plane is built it's not temporary, and it's not a trial. They're not going to REVOKE the plane.

The question is, with 1 team and limited man-hours, which do they work on first. That's the only question. It's not about testing it with different sub-arenas to see who likes it most in the AvA. I'm sorry but that's just a terrible idea.


EDIT: Also, you're against planes that fill holes in the planeset, but the AvA and the EWA and the MWA all are affected very much BY planes that fill holes in the planeset. Just food for thought.

Well how do you know it's too much trouble? Do you work at HTC, do you have special input the rest of us do not? And how is it that that you think I'm against filling out the plane set? When did that ever matter? Exp. B29. Are you going to set there and say that it "fills out  the plane set". Then perhaps you need to take a course in human behavior. The only reason we have the 29 in game now is because people wanted it because they thought it would be COOL, not because it filled out the plane set.

Nutz

[Karnak]

Well how do you know it's too much trouble? Do you work at HTC, do you have special input the rest of us do not? And how is it that that you think I'm against filling out the plane set? When did that ever matter? Exp. B29. Are you going to set there and say that it "fills out  the plane set". Then perhaps you need to take a course in human behavior. The only reason we have the 29 in game now is because people wanted it because they thought it would be COOL, not because it filled out the plane set.

Nutz

If common sense is not enough for you, HTC has made statements in the past as to the work needed to add a new airplane.

[Nutzoid]

If common sense is not enough for you, HTC has made statements in the past as to the work needed to add a new airplane.

Well thank you very much for your nearsighted input, Karnak. Go back and research how many planes and vehicles have been added in the last year. While I'm sure there's plenty of work in bringing bring a new anything to the game,
how can you comment one way or the other. Where are these so called HTC statements you speak of in regard to fielding a new cartoon peice.

Nutz

[Nutzoid]

Oh and BTW, if there WAS a way to try out a plane, in some way, shape, form or fashion, then perhaps we wouldn't have the hanger queens we are starting to get.


One more thing about filling out plane sets, if that is such a concern for.....well whomever, then where's the HE111 among others? 


Nutz

[Hajo]

I voted meteor thank you 

me410 and beaufighter should be in a bomber poll

Methinks someone best get some information on the Beau before calling it a bomber.

Beaufighter, Night fighter, Torpedo plane, and attack aircraft which performed in all theaters of the
war during its' duration.

[Karnak]

Well thank you very much for your nearsighted input, Karnak. Go back and research how many planes and vehicles have been added in the last year. While I'm sure there's plenty of work in bringing bring a new anything to the game,
how can you comment one way or the other. Where are these so called HTC statements you speak of in regard to fielding a new cartoon peice.

Nutz

They made the comments a long time ago.  It takes quite a bit of effort on their part to add a unit.  Common sense will tell you that even without seeing their old comments.  The idea that they would do the work to add it and then withdraw it after a trial is absurd.  There would be no fathomable reason to do so.  All the aircraft on this poll they are fine with adding to the game, so why make them and then withdraw them?

[Nutzoid]

They made the comments a long time ago.  It takes quite a bit of effort on their part to add a unit.  Common sense will tell you that even without seeing their old comments.  The idea that they would do the work to add it and then withdraw it after a trial is absurd.  There would be no fathomable reason to do so.  All the aircraft on this poll they are fine with adding to the game, so why make them and then withdraw them?

Do you know how to read? I stated that if there were a way.........never mind. You say it takes quite a bit to bring in a new plane and perhaps your right. (BTW, anyone could have "made comments a long time ago") But look at some we have in game now. Almost complete hanger queens. I'm all for getting new birds and such, but we get them and for whatever reason, after the initial enthusiasm wears off, then what? More often than not, they just sit around and only get used as quirky thing to up "for fun". While I'm not opposed to upping something for just the pure fun of it, I'm almost certain HT didn't intend for their hard work to just sit by and only get used once in a while. I could be wrong. But again it seems to me that group at HTC would rather see their stuff getting put to maximum use.

Nutz

[Krusty]

Dude... you have little common sense if you think it's possible to try something on the part of all the players of the game BEFORE it's actually added to the game....

Further.... Your comment "if they could test them all for popularity first, we'd have no hangar queens" is also seriously lacking in common sense.


EDIT: I think you're also super-imposing YOUR own idea of what is good and useful on the game as a whole. Who's to say the D3A isn't worth every second of effort they put into it? It sees no MA use but it's used widely in almost any PTO setup. In fact the ones that plug holes often get used outside their own scope because the holes are often too big for 1 plane to plug. They often sub for other planes as well. Your entire idea is based on the thought that you don't consider some planes worth being in the game (that are already) if they sit unused. That's just faulty thinking IMO.

[Karnak]

Do you know how to read? I stated that if there were a way.........never mind. You say it takes quite a bit to bring in a new plane and perhaps your right. (BTW, anyone could have "made comments a long time ago") But look at some we have in game now. Almost complete hanger queens. I'm all for getting new birds and such, but we get them and for whatever reason, after the initial enthusiasm wears off, then what? More often than not, they just sit around and only get used as quirky thing to up "for fun". While I'm not opposed to upping something for just the pure fun of it, I'm almost certain HT didn't intend for their hard work to just sit by and only get used once in a while. I could be wrong. But again it seems to me that group at HTC would rather see their stuff getting put to maximum use.

Nutz

I think you're pretty much wrong.  Nobody at HTC is naive enough to think the Spitfire Mk I is going to get lots of use in the MA, but they will include it because it is a core aircraft from WWII.  They know many aircraft have a primary use in scenarios and they are fine with that.  They know some people for varied reasons will find uses for "hangar queens" in the LWA as well.  Obviously they want the additions to be good for their bread and butter LWA, the additions they have made are certainly heavier in the late war time period, and yet they still added the D3A1 and SBD-5.

The people demanding that only things that will see massive use in the MA be added are the ones with the blinders on.  They are blind to the other aspects of the game and, mostly, they are blind to the fact that there is now a very limited number of aircraft left that even qualify under their demands.

[Nutzoid]

Dude... you have little common sense if you think it's possible to try something on the part of all the players of the game BEFORE it's actually added to the game....

Further.... Your comment "if they could test them all for popularity first, we'd have no hangar queens" is also seriously lacking in common sense.

DUDE.......need i remind you that it's been done before? Remember a foray into what what was going to be "Combat Tour"? While it didn't focus on new planes per se, it did offer some a chance to "try out" a whole new arena.
And again, how in the hell do you know? You need to reread what I said. No where did I say "if they could test them all for popularity first, we'd have no hanger queens". As far as common sense goes, I may not be the computer, Aces High experten that you seem to be, but I've been around the block a bit. I would like to think my 50+ years on this planet have accorded me some.  So if your talking "common sense" look in the mirror and and measure your own instead of trying to come accross as the know all to end all.



Nutz

[beau32]

Where are these so called HTC statements you speak of in regard to fielding a new cartoon peice.

Nutz

From a conversation I had with Hitech.

Flight model about 40 - 80 hours.

Artwork model 1 - 2 months.

Neither of these do I do.

And research of the model many times takes longer then to implement it.

HiTech

[Krusty]

Well, now... I suppose it is possible. Let's not be too harsh...

He just needs to build a matter transportation device that allows you to compress matter through a gap smaller than a quark to pass into a parallel universe where everything is the same except it's 6 months in the future, report on the success of the addition, and travel back to make the report and sway HTC from any mistakes they are planning.


Or, there's always time travel.... Travel ahead into a possible future and see the outcome, come back and report it.


Or HTC could perfect cloning and infinitely clone themselves until even the great Texas itself has no more room left, work on every model that ever existed in a single release, that way they hedge their bets so they always get the popular ones, no matter how many rotten eggs slip through.... Although the strain on the food supply of the world and the energy required would destroy the planet, pretty much.


or......


Well isn't that enough?











 

[Nutzoid]

I think you're pretty much wrong.  Nobody at HTC is naive enough to think the Spitfire Mk I is going to get lots of use in the MA, but they will include it because it is a core aircraft from WWII.  They know many aircraft have a primary use in scenarios and they are fine with that.  They know some people for varied reasons will find uses for "hangar queens" in the LWA as well.  Obviously they want the additions to be good for their bread and butter LWA, the additions they have made are certainly heavier in the late war time period, and yet they still added the D3A1 and SBD-5.

The people demanding that only things that will see massive use in the MA be added are the ones with the blinders on.  They are blind to the other aspects of the game and, mostly, they are blind to the fact that there is now a very limited number of aircraft left that even qualify under their demands.

Karnak, if this were true then again, where is the 111? It surely was a "core" aircraft. Please think about what your saying before posting.

Nutz

[Krusty]

DUDE.......need i remind you that it's been done before? Remember a foray into what what was going to be "Combat Tour"? While it didn't focus on new planes per se, it did offer some a chance to "try out" a whole new arena.
And again, how in the hell do you know? You need to reread what I said. No where did I say "if they could test them all for popularity first, we'd have no hanger queens". As far as common sense goes, I may not be the computer, Aces High experten that you seem to be, but I've been around the block a bit. I would like to think my 50+ years on this planet have accorded me some.  So if your talking "common sense" look in the mirror and and measure your own instead of trying to come accross as the know all to end all.

I'm afraid you are universally wrong on this subject. There is nothing else to say. Not one thing you have said is remotely correct in regards to how things work or even should work.



P.S. Nutzoid, Combat Tour? Are you confusing the old name of the AvA as an arena you could join? Because that was called Combat Tour for a while as well. The main differences were code based and many of the improvements have been integrated into your current Aces High game engine, not the least of which is the strat model, moving strats, offline AI, improved grapics and many other subtle differences. They put the effort it. They didn't rescind that effort and say "Nah... Let's go back to AH1 base code" when they cancelled it. They decided it was taking too long and keeping them from better work, but they never added something to the game as a trial then removed it if unpopular. Not actual content. Settings, sure... Things that took a line of code and that's it, sure (server limits, if you recall?) but not actual content.