Author Topic: Hero's WW2 Online review (Read 1216 times)

Ripsnort · « **on:** August 29, 2002, 03:18:31 PM »

Read Hero's posts (long, but funny as hell!)

Who was that big cheerleader on our AH OT BBS here for a bit? Comment please.

http://agw.warbirdsiii.com/bbs/showthread.php?s=&postid=106060#post106060

Wlfgng · « **Reply #1 on:** August 29, 2002, 03:34:08 PM »

accurate

Staga · « **Reply #2 on:** August 29, 2002, 04:16:43 PM »

Only problem I have with that game is AI; in AT and in AA. I still remember AH ack in the beta; when we had hmm... was it two guns in different sides of the base and the accuracy and range was from star wars.

Version CRS did is twice as accurate, and funniest part is it's almost indestructable. Guess tankers/infantry did whine enough so CRS made it a fu____ng Phalanx.

That game sure isn't made for flight simmers.

Ripsnort · « **Reply #3 on:** August 30, 2002, 10:32:39 AM »

Ahh, Fscott was the WW2OL cheerleader on this BBS a while back, haven't seen him in ages, have we?

Nifty · « **Reply #4 on:** August 30, 2002, 11:22:14 AM »

I can't say it's totally accurate or not. I never really played infantry in the game. tho. You don't have to hold down the W key. There's an automove or something. I only played inf once in the last "welcome back" campaign, so I don't remember the key or setup.

I mainly flew. The FMs seem a little quirky. If you think trim in AH is important it's even moreso in WWIIOL. It can and does affect your turn performance. In a Hurri I, I can't stall out with the stick fully deflected back in a turn, until I start trimming up on the elevator. Incorrect answer. Full deflection is full deflection. Unless they are making the assumption my little virtual English pilot isn't buff enough to deflect the stick without trimming (yeah, forces on the stick at 160kts are too much for a pilot to fully deflect his elevators.) However, E retention and turn performance appears about the same. I could perform the same 3-4G turn in both WWIIOL and AH in the Hurri I and sustain it indefinitely. Difference was in WWIIOL I was fully deflected on the stick and in AH I was about 75% deflected. It felt like a stall limiter.

Gunnery was lame tho. didn't seem like any dispersion or much drop due to gravity. Damage done by 0.303s. About as comparable as AH. Difference is it's frickin' hard to tell when you've hit with the 303s in WWIIOL when in AH we get hitsprites. If you zoom in (actually reduce the FOV to get the actual aspect ratio for the distance, much like in AH) you can see your strikes on the target.

I never really saw the lag that he mentioned. What I saw was about the same as AH lag at times.

Anyways, not that I'm cheerleading for WWIIOL. I'm not, as I have never subscribed to the game and I doubt I ever will. I'm just saying my experiences weren't as bad as what he posted.

hardcase · « **Reply #5 on:** August 30, 2002, 01:39:37 PM »

Guess you guys mean me. I really wasnt cheer leading for ww2ol. Just posting stuff for the freebie time.

The lastest version is going have dx8.1 support including T&L. Should help the FPS limited folks. I suspect there will be a free time when it is released for anyone, not just old players. I havent read the review yet, off to do so.

hardcase · « **Reply #6 on:** August 30, 2002, 01:49:52 PM »

Either you enjoy it or you don't. Stuff needs fixing. Ground model is not complete but, I guess being able to drop and raise gears while on ground is very important to some. I have had engines shot up and dropping water, oil, gas..gas you prolly can fly a while..water I watch the temp guage climb and oil, once depleted you engine will sieze.

talking about gunnery, I flew AH for 2 weeks, lazer gunnery seems rampant. Each round in ww2ol is tracked, thru penetration, loss of energy, ricochete, another penetration untill the energy is depleted.

Did the reviewer ever have anything good to say about it, or was it just another rant on it.
That LAG he mentions is not LAG, it is the HD being hit when you run out of free ram. I guess he is just another one of those "reviewers" that do so with a lamed system. Flying with less than 512 megs and haveing nothing running in the background is needed to fly with some fun. When I see 'lag' mentioned as a problem I know the guy doesnt have the system to fly.

Bottom line, it is complex and there are lots of things to fix, but they will prolly get there.

hardcase

hardcase · « **Reply #7 on:** August 30, 2002, 02:02:05 PM »

Trainer for Warbirds doesn't qualify me as a flight simmer? Flying requires at least 512 megs but we have pply flying with 256, but they make sure nothing is running in background. You guys are speculating in the dark. I hope there is a freebie time again when the next version is released. This one cures the error crs made when they coded so those with lower end systems could still play.
Requires DX8.1, implements T&L.

Didn't understand the problem with the AAA. Bofurs is coming next version..40mm bad ass. I like usiing flack, watching the rounds explode as their time fuses ingnites at sunset, hearing them delayed and reduced in volumn as they 'splode. Jeez, much more to it than just flying.

hardcase

Staga · « **Reply #8 on:** August 30, 2002, 03:11:43 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by hardcase
That LAG he mentions is not LAG, it is the HD being hit when you run out of free ram.
hardcase

If thats the case then I gotta buy some more; looks like 768megs isn't enough.

System (mobo is changed to Soltek SL-75DRV5 and sound card to SB-Audigy

Kieran · « **Reply #9 on:** August 30, 2002, 03:21:20 PM »

Whether it is accurate or isn't, it isn't fun to me.

hardcase · « **Reply #10 on:** August 30, 2002, 05:20:38 PM »

768 megs should be the sweet spot, unless you are running XP, which takes more than 100+ megs to load and anything else that might need to run in the background. I use to run Cacheman before launching when I had 512. Got a gig now and it runs completely in ram. Each release takes few megs less to run than the previous. When T&L comes in I hope to see decent FPS for mid level machines. We are already benchmarking our FPS with the 1.65, to see what the improvement will be.

It has its warts but for 9.95 to splode stukas out of the sky with my lil' friend, it seems worth it;-)

hardcase

Fishu · « **Reply #11 on:** August 30, 2002, 06:19:24 PM »

With 512mb RAM WWIIOL is running fine for me.
I do find WWIIOL more fun than AH

Octavius · « **Reply #12 on:** August 31, 2002, 02:41:08 PM »

768 MB of ram JUST to fly? If its that bad, they should include extra RAM in the box!

hardcase · « **Reply #13 on:** August 31, 2002, 02:52:32 PM »

768 megs just to fly. It will fly with 256 but you will have HD hits which some call lag, but isn't net related at all. Running it completely in Ram is the best way to fly.

Thing about flying or doing anything else, there is a lot going on in the background. AH, when i flew it, seemed to have say at max 15 guys fighting in some area. WW2OL has much more going on in background. The new version with T&L may alter the ram needs soon.

hardcase

moose · « **Reply #14 on:** August 31, 2002, 03:19:18 PM »

Yah, that great new version will also require everyone to have a 64mb video card

so you're asking someone to pay $20-$40 for a game, $12 a month thereafter, and then to upgrade their video and ram settings to a spec most box games nowadays dont ask for?

Give me a break. I think CRS is too lazy to optimize their stuff. Their excuse is that people need to upgrade. Well, IL-2 ran perfect on my PIII800 with 256mb on a 32mb card, and it beats the pants off WWIIOL.