Author Topic: Subjective Armor model.......Just what is this? (Read 933 times)

Toad · « **Reply #30 on:** August 10, 2002, 10:06:52 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by SKurj
A phone call from one player ...

Would have given direct, correct answers to the questions he has repeatedly spread throughout several forums and threads. Given that he had just CALLED with his questions and gotten the answers he could have posted those ANSWERS (and possible planned changes) and then there could have been an informed discussion, if necessary.

As it is, nobody really knows whats going or or what's wrong, but by golly we're all upset!

Quote

Originally posted by SKurj
Toad.. why does a part of gameplay
SKurj

It's not the gameplay... it's the way people address a problem and address HTC; Like a bunch of spoiled children, without courtesy, without respect.

THAT, sir, is why I feel personal contact is important.

How about this. Everyone post as if you were asking someone you really respect some questions about something they were doing that you don't understand and would like to know more about.

You'd never hear much from me at all in that case.

SKurj · « **Reply #31 on:** August 10, 2002, 10:12:55 PM »

I Can't recall disrespecting HTC or any other person in this thread.

edited +)

SKurj

Toad · « **Reply #32 on:** August 10, 2002, 10:19:34 PM »

Read the other threads. Unless of course they've already been edited.

brady · « **Reply #33 on:** August 10, 2002, 10:54:52 PM »

I personaly have continued to reiterate my respect for HTC and despite showing a little frustration on certain subject's by the inclushion of "BS" in some of my thread titles, I think that after a couple years of posting on this issue a little emotional collor certainly did not hurt, I tryed to make it quiet clear repeadly that it was with great respect that held I HTC and their staff, I beleave their is even referance to that above.

Toad in trying to effect change it is important to garner the surport of other's, If for no other reasion to prove to myself that this was a just and true cause, that it is not just me alone who see's this, their are a great number of very intelegent and learned people who play this game and who's experance I have benifited from, experance we have all benifited from. A voce of one in a see of thousands even if spoken into god's ear could be dround out from the din, A collective and Impashioned voce speaking at once is hard to miss, espichaly when They are speaking the truth.

Toad · « **Reply #34 on:** August 10, 2002, 11:42:20 PM »

Sure, Brady. Justify the blizzard of simultaneous threads any way you like. It isn't me you have to convince.

john9001 · « **Reply #35 on:** August 11, 2002, 01:13:43 AM »

""""intelegent and learned people who play this game """"

duh , yup yup , dats me alright

SKurj · « **Reply #36 on:** August 11, 2002, 08:25:58 AM »

Now Toad... how come it took you almost as many posts as brady in these multiple threads to come to the real issue you were having?

SKurj

hazed- · « **Reply #37 on:** August 11, 2002, 11:20:14 AM »

I agree with brady on most issues here.

(also isnt m3 pintle a 30 cal? dunno)

303's and 7.9mm etc shouldnt be taking out tanks. Claims for air attack kills of tanks have been shown to be vastly overated.Others on these forums have shown evidence for this.
We never see a statement from HTC to say the damage model is flawed or may need work do we? like now all he has 'hinted' at is that brady doesnt know armour penetration or ranges and his questions are therfore irrelevant.Little dissapointed by that sort of reply myself.
Im inclined to agree wholeheartedly with YEAGER here.

AH is NOT the all perfect flight sim so many seem to claim over and over since beta days that it is.
everytime something is added or changed they re start their 'dont question HTC , they know best' campaign, insulting any who question game behaviour, demanding they show proof only a professional historian has time to dig up.

AH is as i have finally come to accept a flawed programme that isnt a perfect reflection of what happened in WW2 the same as any other game in the world.I happen to enjoy it and so i play it.

I dont listen to these roadkill artists who claim everything is how it should be or really was, or how they have fired real 50 caliber m2's and taken out tanks.Everytime we question stuff its the same.Yet changes have been made and mistakes found.Sometimes they are corrected(NIK2) and then do we hear 'it WAS wrong but now its right' from those same people? nope. we are told that 'whining' made them change it.
its like a schoolyard in here.one good example is the damage model for p38s.The new model is perfectly correct now right? well why was it wrong before if the damage model is unquestionable?
does this mean that all aircraft are behaving as their real life counterparts did when hit? somehow i doubt it. but beware those that would ever dare to question it! lol

I now play AH with this veiw.

AH is the best online sim for my money.
The connects have got worse since the numbers rose above the 350 mark but are acceptable (for now)
The flight model is difficult to master and that adds to overall enjoyment but its NOT how it really is flying aircraft(come on people!)
Most planes behave in similar ways to the real things (according to some but not all test data) but not all do.
HTC seem to like the idea that the 50 calibre can do anything (wink)
Some US planes seem to be made for the american market, there ive said it

SOme planes dont seem to match what you read about them (spit14 and 190d9 and b17 for some examples)
Its my personal opinion the 190 roll rate decrease without doing same for other planes is a bad decision.(because i like to fly them for 1 thing)
Vehicles are a bit gimmicky in AH but a very welcome addition.
and finally.......
I will never see these WW2 online games played the way i imagined they would be (APART form in certain scenarios) because not everyone plays for the same reasons and the MA is a shootem up/checkers type game more than a simulation of war.

it does get easier to play once you accept 95% of whats put on these boards is conjecture and or some fool enjoying winding people up to provoke a reaction.Personally i try to stick to what i want form AH myself or think is a fairer addition rather than what i dont want others to get.

I'll continue to play and pay.Its not perfect but it is the best youre gonna get for now.I hope this doesnt come accross too negative but this is how i feel about AH after over 2 years playing it.

Kweassa · « **Reply #38 on:** August 11, 2002, 11:25:33 AM »

My sentiments exactly, Hazed.

Toad · « **Reply #39 on:** August 11, 2002, 12:32:32 PM »

It's called "mirroring".

brady · « **Reply #40 on:** August 11, 2002, 07:30:59 PM »

Hazed sumed it up prety well, In fact prety much to a "T".

BenDover · « **Reply #41 on:** August 11, 2002, 08:15:19 PM »

who was it on this thread who was complaining that people would complain that the plane they're in can't take out a gv if the damage model was more 'real'?

but what about those who are complaining that their ground attack aircraft can't take out gvs as easy as a fighter?

Rude · « **Reply #42 on:** August 12, 2002, 08:53:43 AM »

Hey....anyone know how to spell "Anal"?

Vermillion · « **Reply #43 on:** August 12, 2002, 08:58:56 AM »

One point to make on the "rubbling" of buildings.

Most buildings to my experience are made of wood frame structures, brick, and Cinder blocks. Very very few are constructed of actual large pieces of stone mortared together to form a wall.

Light Machine Guns, which include .30 MG's and 7.92mm's, are definitely capable of knocking huge holes and collapsing walls made of wood, brick, and cinder blocks.

I've seen training films from the late 30's and 40's that illustrate this point using a Browning .30 MG. And I've done the same myself 7.62 NATO and 7.62 Soviet Rifles fired in semi-automatic mode.

Once the structual integrity of a building is compromised, they tend to come apart quite easily.

Hortlund · « **Reply #44 on:** August 12, 2002, 09:05:38 AM »

What about the big facotry buildings verm? you know the ones with 3-4 chimneys...wood too?

And you show me a building, wooden or stone, corresponding in size to the ones we have in AH that you can rubble with 200-300 rounds of .50cal and/or 7.92mm.