Author Topic: Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable  (Read 31343 times)

Online RichardDarkwood

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1819
Re: Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable
« Reply #180 on: January 28, 2024, 09:06:58 PM »

>IMO< I think many who play strictly DCS or IL, would have a hard time competing against many AH players. They are put through extremes daily.

Really? not one aces high player has to do aircraft systems management. 98% of AH players inside the first week would seize the engine up almost every flight.
"Show me on the doll where the bad man touched you"---Betty


https://www.twitch.tv/hounds_darkwood
CO--The Bad Guys

Offline The Fugitive

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17644
      • Fugi's Aces Help
Re: Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable
« Reply #181 on: January 28, 2024, 09:56:17 PM »
Really? not one aces high player has to do aircraft systems management. 98% of AH players inside the first week would seize the engine up almost every flight.

LOL!! who really cares about engine management? Do you play a fighter game, or an engine management game?

I have always played AW, and Warbirds, and AH to FIGHT other players in the air. The war aspect is an added plus, but for all the time Ive played it was to pit my puny skills against other players.

If you want to flip switches, monitor gauges, temps, pressures INSTEAD of flying against live opponents..... well get yourself a box game and play with yourself.

At least here we still have players to fight.

Offline LCADolby

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7184
Re: Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable
« Reply #182 on: January 29, 2024, 03:18:43 AM »
Engine management has little bearing on the fight. Switching between AH and IL2 is pretty seamless. It's become more flavor, at least to me.
JG5 "Eismeer"
YouTube-20Dolby10
Twitch - Glendinho

Offline edge12674

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 422
Re: Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable
« Reply #183 on: January 29, 2024, 07:44:04 AM »
Eye candy being equal across AH, DCS, and IL-2, I would choose DCS.  The more accurate flight model, damage model, weather, and wake turbulence, really show the simplicity of AH and IL-2.  These items are real concerns in aerial combat and if you are going to ignore/simplify them then you might as well play a space combat game.  It is similar to comparing a console racing game to a PC racing sim. 

Many prefer this simplicity or are intimidated to learn the complexities of aerial combat.  These complexities were mastered by others 80 years ago, so they are certainly not insurmountable.  We all are here for entertainment, so to each their own.

Next question:  If the multi-player aspect was the same (fighters only) in AH, DCS, and IL-2, which would you choose?     

TShark
"If you are alone and meet a lone Zero, run like hell...You're outnumbered" - Joe Foss USMC 26 kills

Offline Eagler

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17656
Re: Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable
« Reply #184 on: January 29, 2024, 07:51:39 AM »
Really? not one aces high player has to do aircraft systems management. 98% of AH players inside the first week would seize the engine up almost every flight.

I have and I still do...

Somewhere in between the complexity of those games and the simplicity of AH...like wep in AH now, full blast/ 100 % all out should be limited to so many minutes with performance suffering somewhat after that time expires..

Eagler
"Masters of the Air" Scenario - JG27


Intel Core i7-13700KF | GIGABYTE Z790 AORUS Elite AX | 64GB G.Skill DDR5 | EVGA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti FTW3 | Vive Pro | Warthog stick | TM1600 throttle | VKB Mk.V Rudder Pedals

Offline AKIron

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12114
Re: Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable
« Reply #185 on: January 29, 2024, 09:14:14 AM »
It's really not a competition. You want a familiar and easy to access arena for a brief time or an evening you can find it in AH. I'm certainly not trying to pull anyone away from it. I'm as interested in the progression of technology as I am in using it. Wanting to share that with those I have a common history with is a natural thing.
Here we put salt on Margaritas, not sidewalks.

Offline edge12674

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 422
Re: Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable
« Reply #186 on: January 29, 2024, 09:24:01 AM »
It's really not a competition. You want a familiar and easy to access arena for a brief time or an evening you can find it in AH. I'm certainly not trying to pull anyone away from it. I'm as interested in the progression of technology as I am in using it. Wanting to share that with those I have a common history with is a natural thing.

Agreed! That is what this thread is about.  Comparison of different games within a genre we are all familiar with. 

TShark
"If you are alone and meet a lone Zero, run like hell...You're outnumbered" - Joe Foss USMC 26 kills

Offline AKIron

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12114
Re: Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable
« Reply #187 on: January 29, 2024, 09:37:49 AM »
As a kid I was fascinated by both WWI and WWII aircraft but WWI more. No radios or radio navigation then. You took off and went hunting, freedom. Today the skies are far more controlled. Even, maybe especially, over the battlefield. You'd better be where and when you're supposed to be the entire flight. That's challenging all by itself.
Here we put salt on Margaritas, not sidewalks.

Offline Animl-AW

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1951
      • Animl - YouTube
Re: Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable
« Reply #188 on: January 29, 2024, 10:10:26 AM »
Really? not one aces high player has to do aircraft systems management. 98% of AH players inside the first week would seize the engine up almost every flight.

1) Fugitive (and others) and I are on the same page on several issues, I’m not going to reinvent the wheel on what he posted. That said, personal preference cannot be challenged.

My personal preference is adrenaline flow. It fits with my job. If the hair on my arms isn’t standing up, I didn’t get there. And my response to the lighting people is, no one goes home humming the light show. If the sound isn’t right, the light show has no real effect. They work hand in hand to achieve one goal, adrenaline.

When I was in AW a GF bought me MS Flight sim 98. For the time it had all the bells and whistles AW didn’t have. Ya, I flew a 747, cool, But that was it, no combat, no adrenaline flow. It gathered dust.

You sir, are here to attempt to change personal preference without the whole subject. It is You can’t seem to extend on your comments past graphics and engine management. It’s a thin razor slice of a combat flight simulator. All you talk about is the light show, the word combat is avoided. No band, no sound. You seem to hum the light show.

2) Combat Flight Simulator, the first word in the term. I’m prolly the last one who should ask this,…How many kills have you gotten in DCS in the last year of another human pilot?

My personal preference, is the first word combat. No combat, no adrenaline flow. I see DCS as a Flight Simulator with Combat. DCS is a sim, AH is a sim played as a game, it has a direction. Combat was always the draw. I need the whole picture or I’m just eating cookies with no milk. If you had the whole picture, you would not be here with cute one-liners with no substance trying to skim players. You seem to be a one track train with no destination. My suggestion to you is, if the power of suggestion doesn’t work nothing will. Ya end up looking the pest who sells nothing. You’re like a uninvited party crasher who shows up drunk complaining about the music played.

You speak of engine management, but never about combat. You’re speaking to an audience who prefers combat. If that’s what you like cool, you should do that. But don’t come in here crapping in the yard thinking you’re crafty. These players mop the floor with those who only crave graphics and engine management. They couldn’t handle it. You know this is true or you wouldn’t be trying to recruit them. You’re trying to replace what it doesn’t seem to have. You’re trying to fill a hole. You’re like a used car salesman who won’t let the buyer look under the hood. You sell nothing. If all there is engine management, you’re eating dry cookies craving our milk.

While I totally get what Dolby said he’s getting his graphics fix in IL, but getting adrenaline flow here, plus he has friends here too.

I will set aside personal preferences and say this,… >IF< (massive word) HT were to update AH with something like Vulken your game is going take a hit. Because, once that is done, the FX can be duplicated of whats in other sims. And then it comes down to one thing, game play. AH will walk over them because it has the main element. Large arena multiplayer game play. Why do I say this? Because everywhere I read, this is what all those who left crave. Even you. HT is a monster coder who can do the work of 5. All he needs is the will. IF he did that, the elation would be deafening.
« Last Edit: January 29, 2024, 11:35:27 AM by Animl-AW »
Windows 11 Gaming Tweaks
https://imgur.com/oEtVMfP

Offline Animl-AW

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1951
      • Animl - YouTube
Re: Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable
« Reply #189 on: January 29, 2024, 10:24:15 AM »
Agreed! That is what this thread is about.  Comparison of different games within a genre we are all familiar with.

I get this. I’m not harassing you about it. Lets just keep it contained and not all over the bbs in every thread. Which you seem to be doing, a single thread.

I’m nobody, I just have my own opinions and preferences. I inly try to help bring numbers up, and we have had some success. I just ask that it doesn’t impede our own efforts. <S>
Windows 11 Gaming Tweaks
https://imgur.com/oEtVMfP

Offline oboe

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9787
Re: Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable
« Reply #190 on: January 29, 2024, 10:47:52 AM »
I don't feel the need to pick just one.  I like all three; each has appeal for different reasons.  AH for pure online play with 100s of different planes and vehicles, multiple skins for each, multi-engine bombers, easy access to combat and a great sense of community when in the game.  Plenty of adrenalin flows during combat in scenarios.

DCS for ultra-realism.  Kneeboard checklist just to start the engine, flipping the switches and knobs myself.   The server "Georgia at War" (?) featured air traffic controllers and you had to request taxi instructions and then check the airport layout map to know where the labelled taxiways were.  It was an absolute kick, and I got plenty of adrenalin jolt out just starting up, taxiing, and taking off.  The first time I played, in VR, it took me 30 minutes to start my F-5E's engines and taxi around the perimeter of the airport; afterward I was wiped and soaked with sweat.   It just felt so real, and I felt like many of the other players were actual military or RL pilots.

IL-2 is great balance between the two.  Many more aircraft to fly than DCS, but not not nearly as much as AH.   Good engine management required; you can't just hit 'E' and firewall the throttle the whole flight.  First rate graphics and sounds, the first time I climbed through the clouds and saw the condensation streamers form on my canopy I think I cried real tears.  And dead reckoning navigation by using landmarks like lakes, rivers, and towns - no in game scrolling map showing where you are, and where the threats are.   Between engine management, keeping track of your location, and keeping eyes open for bogeys with no icons in many (most?) servers its a big workload for a pilot to handle - much closer to what RL WWII pilots dealt with than AH.   The damage model of IL-2 also impressed me.  I got shot up in a P-38 one time, and I managed to make it back to a field where I crash-landed - and the nose gear collapsed, the tail went up and both booms crumpled - the crashed plane in external view looked exactly like some pictures of crumpled '38s I've seen.

I feel lucky I can play any of the three.

I used to feel AH doesn't get enough respect, but I think its really War Thunder that no one seems to respect.
« Last Edit: January 29, 2024, 01:09:12 PM by oboe »

Offline edge12674

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 422
Re: Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable
« Reply #191 on: January 29, 2024, 12:46:40 PM »
When I was in AW a GF bought me MS Flight sim 98. For the time it had all the bells and whistles AW didn’t have. Ya, I flew a 747, cool, But that was it, no combat, no adrenaline flow. It gathered dust.

Agreed.  That lack of adrenaline flow is why I started looking beyond AH.  I tried MSFS2020 and was bored.  IL-2 gave me some of the adrenaline, but the multiplayer aspect was not there for me.  For me flying with friends is a big part of the hobby, but if the fights become hit or miss (due to time of day, side imbalance, etc.) from one flying session to another, then the flying sessions become more of a chat room than anything else.  Squadmates from AH convinced me to try DCS and I fly regularly with them three to six times a week.  The adrenaline is back, because the fights are always there and the "state of the art" game engine adds to the sense of accomplishment.

I find it interesting that when AH came out with the more complex flight/damage/ballistics there were many players that did not want to make the switch from Warbirds.  In fact even today many AH players cite the increased fidelity as a reason they do not go to WarThunder or Warbirds.  I think they are right, but technology has moved on and now AH is looked at the same way by players of IL-2 and DCS. 

If HiTech updated the game engine, addressed player imbalance issues, and had a viable plan for continued updating, then I would definitely check it out again.  However, I would not give up DCS, if for no other reason than the historical match-ups and the fixed/rotary wing aircraft beyond WWII.


TShark
"If you are alone and meet a lone Zero, run like hell...You're outnumbered" - Joe Foss USMC 26 kills

Offline The Fugitive

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17644
      • Fugi's Aces Help
Re: Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable
« Reply #192 on: January 29, 2024, 01:17:54 PM »
Agreed.  That lack of adrenaline flow is why I started looking beyond AH.  I tried MSFS2020 and was bored.  IL-2 gave me some of the adrenaline, but the multiplayer aspect was not there for me.  For me flying with friends is a big part of the hobby, but if the fights become hit or miss (due to time of day, side imbalance, etc.) from one flying session to another, then the flying sessions become more of a chat room than anything else.  Squadmates from AH convinced me to try DCS and I fly regularly with them three to six times a week.  The adrenaline is back, because the fights are always there and the "state of the art" game engine adds to the sense of accomplishment.

I find it interesting that when AH came out with the more complex flight/damage/ballistics there were many players that did not want to make the switch from Warbirds.  In fact even today many AH players cite the increased fidelity as a reason they do not go to WarThunder or Warbirds.  I think they are right, but technology has moved on and now AH is looked at the same way by players of IL-2 and DCS. 

If HiTech updated the game engine, addressed player imbalance issues, and had a viable plan for continued updating, then I would definitely check it out again.  However, I would not give up DCS, if for no other reason than the historical match-ups and the fixed/rotary wing aircraft beyond WWII.

Do you broadcast your time in DCS, or make youtube videos? Id love to see what the
action" looks like there as I have never found it. Granted I havnt spent nearly as much time there as I do here, butt in the few hours I get these days I always can find a fight.

Offline GasTeddy

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1008
Re: Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable
« Reply #193 on: January 29, 2024, 01:46:21 PM »

IL-2 is great balance between the two.  Many more aircraft to fly than DCS, but not not nearly as much as AH.   Good engine management required; you can't just hit 'E' and firewall the throttle the whole flight.  First rate graphics and sounds, the first time I climbed through the clouds and saw the condensation streamers form on my canopy I think I cried real tears.  And dead reckoning navigation by using landmarks like lakes, rivers, and towns - no in game scrolling map showing where you are, and where the threats are.   Between engine management, keeping track of your location, and keeping eyes open for bogeys with no icons in many (most?) servers its a big workload for a pilot to handle - much closer to what RL WWII pilots dealt with than AH.   The damage model of IL-2 also impressed me.  I got shot up in a P-38 one time, and I managed to make it back to a field where I crash-landed - and the nose gear collapsed, the tail went up and both booms crumpled - the crashed plane in external view looked exactly like some pictures of crumpled '38s I've seen.

I used to feel AH doesn't get enough respect, but I think its really War Thunder that no one seems to respect.

This is the reason I've started spending some time in IL-2. Especially ultra realistic tanking lifts my pulse, as my piloting in there is very noobish still. And what comes to WT, my son tanks a lot in there and in Enlisted as well. I made myself a profile in WT. Too gamish for my taste, even there sim mode has no markers, icons or anything. It's those daily bonus tombolas etc which I don't like and controller settings are a mess for HOTAS guy. Haven't tried Enlistel.

If there's something which can be called super unrealistic games (cannot be called sims) with superb graphics, those World of Tanks, Planes and so on. Where tanks are jumping on each others, driving underwater etc. Makes me feel collective shame when watching videos of those bunglerings going on in there.
The Mad   CatMan!

Offline Brooke

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15466
      • http://www.electraforge.com/brooke/
Re: Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable
« Reply #194 on: January 29, 2024, 02:13:53 PM »
The more accurate flight model, damage model, weather, and wake turbulence, really show the simplicity of AH and IL-2.  These items are real concerns in aerial combat

My feeling, having flown air combats in SIAI-Marchetti SF.260's at Air Combat USA, is that it was highly similar to dogfights in AH.

When I flew my combats there, I did the full range of things we do in Aces High:  loops, split s'es, Immelmanns, vertical persuits, high and low yo yo's, scissors, rolling scissors, lag persuit, lead moves, energy moves, angles moves, with up to 6 g's.  There were some fights that ended just like in AH, where we fought to a stalemate-ish stallfight, chugging around on the hard deck with flaps out, seeing who could squeeze the last drop of turn performance out.

In terms of feel, it felt very much like P-51's in the dueling arena.  Similar handling feel (in terms of roll response, pitch response, etc.).  Similar way the fights went.

I didn't have to put much attention on engine control (other than pulling back some on throttle in prolonged vertical dives).  Wake turbulence was not a meaningful factor in any fights.

There was one aspect of aerodynamics that did matter in these Air Combat fights that might not in AH:  flow separation as you approach stall.  In real life, as you pull enough g's to get near stall, you start to get flow separation off the tops of the wings.  In AH, you do see this from the screen shake and buffeting noise.  In the Marchettis, you got that buffeting.  But in real life, drag goes up more during buffet than outside of buffet.  So in the fights, it was important to pull g's only up to but not into buffet (unless you want big drag, for causing an overshoot, or something like that).  In AH, we often pull right into that buffet closer to the edge of the stall.  I haven't noticed higher drag in buffet than out of buffet.  That doesn't mean it isn't in AH -- it would not be hugely noticeable.  But if there was a difference between Air Combat and AH, I would say it is where you choose to ride the edge of g's: at edge of buffet or at edge of stall.  It wouldn't change the characteristics of the fight either way.  Riding the edge of buffeting is exactly the same as riding the edge of stall -- you are just picking one or the other to ride the edge of.  So this one is just a very fine, picky detail.

I've read a huge number of first-person accounts of WWII air combat.  Sometimes, a pilot does tell you that things done with prop pitch, mixture, throttle setting, etc.  But often, those were things that a pilot did when first entering combat from a cruising configuration.  Then, once in fighting configuration, they aren't doing much other than manipulating throttle as desired for combat, usually keeping it on full, less commonly chopping it to slow down.  Cowl flaps were usually staying closed.  Oil-cooler flaps are usually on auto or in some state that don't require manipulation during a fight.  Mixture in auto rich.  Prop in max rpm.   Mixture and prop are fiddled with in cruise.  The other various flaps are usually fiddled with in landing and takeoff.

As a result, I'm suspecting that fiddling with engine knobs isn't adding accuracy of the air-combat portion of flight.