Rate AH on a scale of 1 to 10

[Pongo]

I dont really agree. I think the damage model mechanics are more important than either. For example the damage model on ships. All that is important is a hit. And then a certain number of hits. This is obviosly a very simplified model. Its not a physics thing. Its the model itself. The ships cannont degrade in any way due to damage.  No penetration model, No critical hits. No real damage system at all.
There is no real system there.
I dont know how Udet can give that part a 6...
The gvs are only marginally better. THere an attempt is made at penetration physics of some kind. But there is no way to tell as a player what it is.  
In Aircraft it feels quite right. But the number of systems modeled and how often they are impacted and from what angle and the effect of them the systems that are damaged on the game are still quite sparse and sometimes inconsistant. Aircraft are fantasticaly complex machines operating in very hostile enviroments. That complexity is really lost in the game right now. A "perfect" game would show more complexity and still keep it a fun game...I know..not a fair request..but thats whats needed for a 10 on that one.

[nopoop]

Givin what's out there, and being I fly fighters only, I give the "game" a 9.

Fun.

Coming from a game that I'd rate a 3.....with "issues" and "drama" and blah, blah..blah...

I play here and have fun.  That's all I ask, a little bit of fun.

But if they lost pizza....??

WHOOOT !!

That would be GREAT !!

[eskimo2]

Originally posted by Pongo
I dont really agree. I think the damage model mechanics are more important than either. For example the damage model on ships. All that is important is a hit. And then a certain number of hits. This is obviosly a very simplified model. Its not a physics thing. Its the model itself. The ships cannont degrade in any way due to damage.  No penetration model, No critical hits. No real damage system at all.
There is no real system there.
I dont know how Udet can give that part a 6...
The gvs are only marginally better. THere an attempt is made at penetration physics of some kind. But there is no way to tell as a player what it is.  
In Aircraft it feels quite right. But the number of systems modeled and how often they are impacted and from what angle and the effect of them the systems that are damaged on the game are still quite sparse and sometimes inconsistant. Aircraft are fantasticaly complex machines operating in very hostile enviroments. That complexity is really lost in the game right now. A "perfect" game would show more complexity and still keep it a fun game...I know..not a fair request..but thats whats needed for a 10 on that one.

Good point, it is primarily a flight sim after all.

eskimo

[Kweassa]

Flight models - 8.5
Damage Model Air - 8
Damage Model GV - 6
Damage Model Ships - 1
Gunnery Model Air to Air - 7
User Interface - 9
Game Play Fighters - 9
Game Play Attackers - 8
Game Play Bombers - 7
Game Play Ground Vehicles - 7
Game Play Ships - 5
VOX - 8
Squad system - 8
Game Controler System - 8
Score System - 3
View System - 9

[mjolnir]

I hope someone at HTC is taking note of the horrible scores being given to the ship damage model.  I don't even use the CVs that much, but it is one thing I've always thought could be done better.  Pongo hit the nail on the head.  All the system cares about is if there is a hit, and how many.  I would love to see parts of the CV disabled with increased damage, such as knocking out some fuel or ord available, or even being able to kill some of the gun emplacements like you can at any other field.

[MANDOBLE]

Flight models - 6
Damage Model Air - 5
Damage Model GV - 3
Damage Model Ships - 1
Gunnery Model Air to Air - 6
User Interface - 5
Game Play Fighters - 8
Game Play Attackers - 8
Game Play Bombers - 6
Game Play Ground Vehicles - 6
Game Play Ships - 4
VOX - 8
Squad system - 8
Game Controler System - 8
Score System - 6
View System - 10

[SELECTOR]

Flight models 7
Damage Model Air 5
Damage Model GV 1
Damage Model Ships ?
Gunnery Model Air to Air 7
User Interface 7
Game Play Fighters 5
Game Play Attackers 5
Game Play Bombers 5
Game Play Ground Vehicles 2
Game Play Ships ?
VOX 8
Squad system 10
Game Controler System 3
Score System 5
View System 3

[keyapaha]

Overall I give AH an 8.5

[Pongo]

I just wanted to get this thread in so we have something to compare against with AH2.

[acepilot2]

I give it a 9.  It is realistic, immersive, fun, and what not.

One thing, however, i would like to see improved is the damage model.  I would also like to see some realistic special effects (like fire and explosions).  Games like Il2 and CFS2 make AH's damage model look 7 years old.

[Beav]

You forgot one category.

Immersion

[Swoop]

Flight models                                9
Damage Model Air                         5
Damage Model GV                         2
Damage Model Ships                    2
Gunnery Model Air to Air                6
User Interface                               8
Game Play Fighters                       7
Game Play Attackers                     8
Game Play Bombers                      8
Game Play Ground Vehicles           5
Game Play Ships                           4
VOX                                               9
Squad system                               9 (would be 10 with no number limit)
Game Controler System                10
Score System                                 5
View System                                  9

[Staga]

Best things in AH are Keymapper, User interface, how the different text-channels are handled, VOX and adjustment of pilot's head position.

[MANDOBLE]

Originally posted by Beav
You forgot one category.

Immersion

Immersion: 1

[Pongo]

Originally posted by acepilot2
I give it a 9.  It is realistic, immersive, fun, and what not.

One thing, however, i would like to see improved is the damage model.  I would also like to see some realistic special effects (like fire and explosions).  Games like Il2 and CFS2 make AH's damage model look 7 years old.

so if 10 is perfect. you give it a 9?