I hope we'll never have an EZ mode here

[RAM]

 

Originally posted by Gadfly:

What I notice is the roar of the silence in answer to my query about the AH "EZMODE" features, except for Pyro, who not only doesn't deny them, but admits that there will probably BE an EZ mode in AH(As well there should).

Lizking

Lizking that is nothing near true. Or do you forget about my answers on AGW board? was that a silence?.

Of course I was dismissed from there with a "DONT SPAM THIS BOARD WITH YOUR OPINIONS", gently written by MG, alias "MACBOY" (the one who most spams in this world). I felt so insulted that I wont ever return there to say a word, as it seems that I'm not welcome.

returning to what concerns us...do you want me to bring up the thread here and paste my posts from AGW board? I answered you about all your "EZ" worries. And it was being a nice discussion until "someone" dumped it.

Please dont say we dont answer to your questions. I didnt remain silent. we may disagree but I dont hide my head, bud.



[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 05-26-2000).]

[Citabria]

man here I was hoping the old hands were getting more harder stuff like no Icon SEA and stuff like that but the almighty dollar must come first. the masses must be pleased and ez mode is the choice of the masses.

the current flight model isn't even hard to fly. which is realistic... no airplane is hard to fly. some are hard to takeoff, some are hard to land. HTC already solved the takeoff problems, and if you cant takeoff on your own you wont be doing much landing anyways so landing is no problem, since you can ditch onto the pillow of jello called the rolling terrain.


dang, I done got long winded again.

flame away  

[RAM]

HEre you have it,...directly from AGW board. I think these posts werent a silence.
-----------------------
FROM AGW BOARD
-----------------------

BTW the easy takeoff its quite like an autopilot. The stupid one that turns it on and still thinks he can fly has some serious mental problems.      

Anyway is a harmless measure to help newbies to take off. I' by myself came into AH first time in January. I had no previous experience on online simulators, and I didnt ever knew to take off.
That nearly persuaded me to never get into it. But a friend of mine told me how to take off, more or less ,and so I kept trying it until I did it fairly well.

I guess that for every one like me there are 3 or 4 that when testing it offline they get so scared as I did, and as noone tells them to try and how to try it, they simply quit it and forguet it.

So I find an autotake off way wiser than a full-envelope-Easy mode. At least you dont fly a Fly-by-wire-autotrimming plane.

Hope you get my point      


+---------------------------------
   

What about all those other EZmode type "helps" in AH.  Do you use full engine management?  Well, if I did and you didn't, wouldn't you be in EZmode?

I dont keel offended at all. I dont even feel included in that. you know why?. I fly Fw190A8, mainly. 90% my flying time, I can say. And Fw190A8 had a little funny thing called "kommandogėrat" that did all engine management for the pilot.      

And anyway in AH you have RPM control. None that I know in WB.

I input here my opinions on why EZ mode is lame, and why I find Autotakeoff on AH,if not needed, at least less lame.      
---------------------  
 

Originally posted by Lizking:
EZ Radar?

In WWII there was some nice thing called Radar, and another wonderful thing called "ground control". The "ground control" used to "vector" the aircraft in the air towards the bad guys, using "Radar".
So I regard the inflight radar as ground control vectors to near threats. Maybe a bit overmodelled (radar counters 5 sectors away from your nearest field)...but is not that EZ from that point of view isnt it?.In fact I think that if they tune radar a bit down it will be REALISTIC!. Damno if they even make low cons disappear from radar! (500 feet or so).

It also adds some strategical mind into the game. If you down the enemy's HQ you blind them for a while so you can attack unsuspecting fields.EZ? no, realistic IMHO. and Fun,too.


 

EZ 6 View?

In a WWII plane you could move and jink yourself into the cockpit. I had the luck to be into a Buchon's (Spanish Merlin-engined Me109)Cockpit some years ago when I was only a kid, 14 years old. It was an engineless plane but it was otherwise intact. They let me sit down into the cockpit, with all the stuff put on me (I mean atachments and so). I promise you that the view, even with those nasty bulges on the front of the plane, was quite good. It was a cramped cockpit, fer sure, but the rear view was quite good. Sure it seems much more as the view I use in AH than I see in Wb. And that in Me109, regarded as one of the worst planes regardign vision from cockpit...so I only can imagine the wonderful view available from bubble canopies and Malcom hoods!! (and Galland hood seemed to me that was quite an improvement,too).

   

EZ Zoom?

As far as I know, zoom was enabled on AH to make some far vision possible, as today's monitors (at least mine <G> ) have way less resolution than MarkI eyesight. I dont use it too much, and I doubt anyone does it, as the peripheral vision lost isnt worth the zoom view. So it fact that "EZ" is more a disadvantage than an advantage. At least IMHO.

--------------------------
   

Originally posted by Lizking:
The fact that you have to justify those items speaks for it self.


No worries, Ram.

Umm...well I give my personal view about those features that you previously mentioned. I'm not justifying them.In fact,as you see I keep being critic on some of those features (I.E. I find the radar quite more accurate than it should be and zoom is useless IMHO). I dont justify them because, forgetting the zoom, wich ,I repeat,I find of no use at all, I think that on-flight radar is realistic on its own way, and that the views system is quite adequate and realistic, too.

Of course that is only my opinion. It is clear that you have your own one and I fully respect it.You like more Wb and I find AH better. Well thats why you fly Wb and I Fly AH, isnt it?      
------------------------

Thats more or less all...Did I remain silent?. No. At least I believe I dindt.


[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 05-26-2000).]

[RAM]

And here you have MG's (alias MACBOY) nice and wonderful post regarding my opinions:

 

Originally posted by MG:
Ram

In your browser read the header title. Read all the way through to the end.

Get it.

Don't spam this board.

MG

nice isnt it?

...macboy calling me spammer...have eyes for this...

[Gadfly]

Actually, RAM, I was just keeping them seperate because they are, um, seperate boards.

The answers you gave didn't explain the dichotomy between ragging on WB's for having an admitted EZMode and ignoring the EZMode aspect's of AH.

That was, and still is my point.  The self-rightous posts on this thread, and the similar ones on AGW, make no sense in light of this.

It isn't personal, and it isn't anti-anything except pomposity.

<edit> Oops, forgot:

Lizking

[This message has been edited by Gadfly (edited 05-26-2000).]

[RAM]

   

Originally posted by Gadfly:
Actually, RAM, I was just keeping them seperate because they are, um, seperate boards.

You stated that people remained silent regarding your EZ questions. I did in AGW board, and I didnt here too because if we are discussing it in one board why carry it over to 2 boards at a time?.

Anyway, there wasn't such silence, as it can be clearly seen-
   

The answers you gave didn't explain the dichotomy between ragging on WB's for having an admitted EZMode and ignoring the EZMode aspect's of AH.

I must disagree here.Apart from the fact that some of your stated EZmodes in AH arent such from my point of view,  If you dont see the difference between having inflight radar and a Fly-by-wire autotrimming plane then I dont understand why. AH helps the pilot's SA...WB helps pilot's FLYING. wether you agree with me or not in my states about AH's "EZ"s, I think you should be able to see the difference between both things.

   

It isn't personal, and it isn't anti-anything except pomposity.

Never took as personal, Lizking  . as I said before we were having a nice and constructive discussion until "someone" made me think I could be doing something better than posting in that board (I.E. Going to see worm races,or the clouds pass by).    

But you can understand that I couldn't let you say here that noone answered your questions. I did it, not here, but I did it anyway.

And regarding pomposity...well there is a lot of that in AGW board too, bud...but that is to be said in another thread  


[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 05-26-2000).]

[Gadfly]

Ok, RAM, explain to this poor old country boy how it is okay for someone to post on the AGW and Here that they "hope they don't get an EZmode here"  or this:

LOL!
EASY MODE?!

ROFLOL!

Heh you dont have enuff with Sissyfires you need,too Sissy FM!

ROFLMAO...

Oh man...I cant stop laughing, at all...

60% Wb was flying in UFOs! LOL!

hehehehe well...time for my pills


------------------
RAM,out
JG2 "Richthofen"


and at the same time dismiss the EZmode features of AH!

Well, sir, I say that right now, 100% of AH players are flying in EZmode!

EZtakeoff, EZradar, etc, look up the thread for the partial list.

As for saying that EZmode SA enhancements are not as important as flight control enhancements, I would suggest you read some history and find out what percentage of WWII pilots were killed because of their poor SA(or their enemies superior SA).  Lot more "jumped" kills than "ACM" kills, I promise you.

<edit>  Oops! forgot again:

Lizking

[This message has been edited by Gadfly (edited 05-26-2000).]

[RAM]

Lizking that was a clear tongue-in-cheek post...ANYTHING That has "time for my pills   "in it is a clear joke. I thought that was clear from the start as noone said a word about that.
And look two posts down and you'll see another post from me. Which do you take as the serious one?. Come on...

   

As for saying that EZmode SA enhancements are not as important as flight control enhancements, I would suggest you read some history and find out what percentage of WWII pilots were killed because of their poor SA(or their enemies superior SA). Lot more "jumped" kills than "ACM" kills, I promise you.

Agree and disagree. I agree that SA is easier with inflight radar...and bouncing kills harder than in Wb because it, at least if you arent checking 6 continuously (thing I keep on doing with or without radar). But I have to disagree with you in the grounds of my "EZradar" statements posted up. Radar guided Ground control in WWII was a reality, and so I find the inflight radar needed. A bit tuned down, yes. maybe without individual dots, yes. But still there.

And anyway in WB there are icons,lke here isnt it?. THAT is the real problem when doing a bounce, not the radar. And I pray we dont get rid of them because I think a lot of fun would be gone (From my point of view). Is that an EZ feature?...yes. is it needed? yes (IMHO).
Is fly by wire an EZ Feature?...yes. Is it needed? NO! and it is a cheat, (Again IMHO).

The difference is abysmal, from my point of view.

[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 05-26-2000).]

[Gadfly]

I know it was RAM and had you posted it on this board, it may have even been funny.  But when that type of post is made on AGW, you have to expect it to cause some resentment.

Pretty much any snippet you take from an earlier post, much less another board is out of context.  That is one reason I try not to quote other posts/boards when I reply.


But to the issue;  Do you see my point about the kettle calling the pot black here?  There is nothing wrong with the features of either game, it is only when we try to correlate them or ridicule them that we get into pissing matches.


Peace.

Hey!  I remembered:

Lizking

[RAM]

   

Originally posted by Gadfly:
I know it was RAM and had you posted it on this board, it may have even been funny.  But when that type of post is made on AGW, you have to expect it to cause some resentment.

Maybe you are right, but I thought that AGW board was like this one, with people ready to laught more than flame. When I took a more wide view at it I saw it clearly wasnt the case. Was an error from my side but an unwanted one,too.

   

But to the issue;  Do you see my point about the kettle calling the pot black here?

I only say why do I think that I can stick with AH as it is and why wont I stick with AH if they introduce an EZ mode as that of Warbirds. I stated in AGW board that IMHO they have now a better simulator.
I dont mess with WB's characteristics. I dont like Wb but thats ok, I see many people does like it and I find it great. No problems here    

   

There is nothing wrong with the features of either game, it is only when we try to correlate them or ridicule them that we get into pissing matches.

never tried to ridiculize Wb, although I sure dont like some things of it. I respect it as it is, one of the better simulators out there in the market. I think 95% people here thinks just as I do. In fact many people here flew it for years...

   

Hey!  I remembered:

Lizking

lol!!!    
peace, Bro    


[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 05-26-2000).]

[SnakeEyes]

Citabria:

Let me premise this by stating I don't fly EZ mode in the WB MA.  Having said that, two or so years ago they had a thing called Fighter Ops.  Fighter Ops was fun, it was free, and it was EZ mode... so I know how EZ mode works... very well in fact.  And you cannot snap roll in EZ mode.  The fact that some people on AGW thought that EZ mode explained lots of things doesn't make their comments true.  

In my opinion, WB's EZ mode has at least one and quite possibly two big advantages:

1) Better ability to aim when at low speed and with your nose near the target, as long as you are over stall speed.  The lack of torque and autotrim made this possible (IMO).

2) Not having to worry about snapping-out/spinning.  Certain planes have a nice propensity for doing this.  EZ mode pilots don't have to worry about it.  This "advantage" has a nearly equal disadvantage -- EZ mode planes don't have nearly the same turning ability as Real mode aircraft.

3) I also think there was a drag problem... I found that P38s would float forever when coming in for a landing.  Obviously if there was something affecting drag, that could have a pretty substantial impact also.

Those are the biggies I can think of.  The first is the most significant, the second important but having a nearly equal disadvantage, and the third is merely speculation based on experience.

Here's an important thought... EZ mode is not all that advantageous... if it were, based on my knowledge of it (Fighter Ops ran for probably 6 months, and I played enough that I would have run up $150+ bills had it been a $2/hour game instead of free), don't you think I'd use it in the MA if gave that much of an advantage????  If you know how to fly in Real mode, play EZ mode for any period of time and you'll see that its disadvantages far outweigh its advantages.

Personally, I think most of the AGW freaking-out was done by people who didn't know much about EZ mode.  My only serious quibble with WB EZ mode is probably the low speed aiming.

So, before you freak out, make sure you know what you're freaking out about.  

------------------
SnakeEyes
o-o-o-
=4th Fighter Group=

[Kieren]

Gadfly-

I think your point about anyone taking a superior stance on the EZ mode issue is very valid. It apparently is a necessary evil from a business standpoint- though I personally wish it wasn't.

Still, I see nothing wrong with anyone stating their opinions on said EZ mode's implementation.   But you are right, there is no reason to push this into another "ours is better than yours" contest.

[Pyro]

I don't normally like to talk about WB, but since recent changes are bleeding over and having an affect on our future direction, I'd like to elaborate on a few things.

Having easy mode enabled in the main arena has been in WB since 1.11.  This idea was first suggested by Trips.  I recoiled from it at first but then it made sense.  Trips and I ran a lot of tests to see if this would confer an advantage to an experienced player and found that that was not the case.  While it would help the inexperienced player, it would actually handicap the experienced player.  A great idea, and it was implemented.  It's been that way for the past 3 years or so.  It didn't detriment WB, it didn't make people leave.

This idea came on the heels of our inability to successfully seed an easy arena.  While we could get plenty of players when we gave it away for free, we just couldn't compete at $2 per hour vs the $10 per month that the competition was offering.

We kept close tabs on numbers.  We watched things like how many users we had using PCs or Macs and how many were using easy mode vs regular.  We watched account growth and arena usage on a weekly basis.  It wasn't speculative on our part.

We're in this business for the same reason as any other business- to make money.  If that wasn't our goal, this would be a hobby not a business.  But this is a very tough business.  Some of our competitors are backed by multi-billion dollar corporations that don't need an immediate profit, some are depending on dot-com investors which are drying up quickly, and some have to become viable soon.  We are the latter.

IEN is in a difficult position.  They aren't cash rich and they're not in the black.  They cannot afford to take hits to their revenue stream but that is exactly what they did when they moved a bunch of paying customers off to non-paying areas.

Despite their "record" revenue claim from online games, their quarterly report shows a loss in this area from a year ago.  This is despite all the players playing Figher Ops on AOL that are allegedly adding to WB development.  Frankly, it befuddles me how a representative of a publicly traded company could make any claims to earnings, much less false ones.  Those things come out in press releases and quarterly reports.  If I were an investor in Ien, I'd be finding an attorney to file a class action lawsuit.

So in the 3 years or so that easy mode has been available in the WB main, it only now has become a real problem due to internal reasons which has just cost a cash starved company a lot of money.  

Where we stand is no different now than it was before.  We're not going to implement something that gives an experienced player an advantage.  If it gives an inexperienced player an added advantage due to his lack of experience, well that's the point.  But while the easy mode in WB was cited as being theoretically advatageous in certain situations, I knew of no decent pilot who wouldn't be at a disadvantage using it.  While it made some things easier, it handicapped an experienced player more.  This handicap really didn't make a difference to the new player because he didn't have the skill to utilize it anyway and that was the point.  

While I don't yet know what we will do, our viewpoint on this is no different than it was several years ago.  It comes down to what will work for us.



------------------
Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is.

[Nash]

See, it's these kinds of posts from the crew at HTC that make me feel alright with their direction. Kudos Pyro. Thanks for that.

[figaro]

Thank you Pyro, very interesting.

This board is DEFINETELY worth visiting, even though for technical reasons I cant fly your sim.

Cheers

figaro