Reality what a concept

[Jimdandy]

I have a suggestion. Make two arenas, a full realism and a relaxed realism. The relaxed arena would be basically like it is now, In the full realism arena we could star adding some of the things the more hard core of us want to see. Navigation, gun jamming, mixture and prop pitch, etc. We might have to live with a lot of patches but we could added and subtract ideas as we got them.

[Ripsnort]

"In the full realism arena we could star adding some of the things the more hard core
of us want to see. Navigation, gun jamming, mixture and prop pitch, etc."

...and bring back THE NIGHT!!!

[2Late4U]

Uhhhg what a terrible idea.

We have no need for 2 arenas, thats why AW is there...for the RR crowd.

Many of the "more realism" ideas you have are nothing more than added complexities (and moany of them quite silly IMHO).  This is a GAME, it is not a 100% accurate simulation of what it is like to fly a WW2 era plane.  We are here to have fun and test our piloting skills, not to see who can feather a prop and adjust mixture the best.

GUn jams are certainly something that may want to be considered if they were of STATISTICAL and game SIGNIFIGANCE.  I would see no point including this type of feature
if it occurs in only 1 in 25 flights where the guns are over heated by continuous firing.

Oh well...just one mans opinion!

[Wanker]

While I agree with you Jim, I don't think it would be a good idea to have separate arenas like that. I used to think the opposite, but after seeing how the difference in realism philosophy fragmented the Warbirds community, I'd rather that we just accept Pyro's decisions on which realism features get added, and which don't.

Leave the hard core realism stuff for the scenarios.

I will, however, continue to lobby for more realism in the Main Area.

[Tac]

I disagree. AH will be fun as long as it remains ONE arena.

Splitting the game into arenas will only result in one arena being largely empty and the other one being filled with people that want to be in the other arena but are forced to be in that arena because that's where most of the player (aka, action) is.

Want realism? Add gunjams, get rid of the icons (allow friendly icons ONLY) and you will see a significant change in how the game is played.

Complex engine management could be seen as "candy" for the sim, but I am no pilot in real life, I have no clue what this do-hickey does and what effect it has on the plane.. and I sure as heck dont want to be forced to do 12 steps to turn on my engine or whatever. Add complex engine stuff as a toggled option for those hard core pilots that want to use it.

[mrfish]

maybe a decent comprimise would be to make the realism arena very small - is that wacky?

[whels1]

i think fun to see everyone want something
that rarely happened like barrel wear and overheat. overheat is hard to have since these guns were air cooled, even ground bases mgs could fire sustained rate for a while, being in planes they got cooled down alot easier then ont he ground since
ur flying 200+mph at 10k+ which would mean
air temps below 0+ wind chill.

and not to wear, lol, barrel wear would only effect a player if they made several, hot rearms. cause wear would never come into
play with u .ef and take off everytime, cause realisticly the ground crew would inspect and replace the barrels as needed before each flight. AH gives u a 100% perfect plane on each new hop.

gun jams, were a factor, especially when firing under high G moves, or badly made ammo.

whels
 

Originally posted by 2Late4U:
Uhhhg what a terrible idea.

We have no need for 2 arenas, thats why AW is there...for the RR crowd.

Many of the "more realism" ideas you have are nothing more than added complexities (and moany of them quite silly IMHO).  This is a GAME, it is not a 100% accurate simulation of what it is like to fly a WW2 era plane.  We are here to have fun and test our piloting skills, not to see who can feather a prop and adjust mixture the best.

GUn jams are certainly something that may want to be considered if they were of STATISTICAL and game SIGNIFIGANCE.  I would see no point including this type of feature
if it occurs in only 1 in 25 flights where the guns are over heated by continuous firing.

Oh well...just one mans opinion!

[Gunthr]

 I agree Jimdandy, but I would emphasize the historical aspect. I would love to see a HISTORICAL ARENA with HISTORICAL TERRAIN, including nightime terrain, and HISTORICAL PLANESETS.

 "Historical" accuracy and "realism" would be the goal. The "realism" would have to be balanced with gameplay. Certainly, it wouldn't be for everybody, but you would want wide enough appeal to at least be able to find at least 20 or so players there at any given time, and hopefully many more during events. That would be so cool.  

Gunthr

[Jekyll]

 

We are here to have fun and test our piloting skills

Ever noticed how many people speak for the entire Aces High population when they respond to threads like these?

2Late4U .... who exactly is 'we'?  I noticed you said it was just one man's opinion in signing off, but who the heck does 'we' represent?

BTW, unless you're are being ironic I think you're missing the point of the original post.  AH doesn't need to 'create' a relaxed realism arena ... it already exists in the MA.  However, I firmly believe a 'full realism' arena might be nice  

You want a contrary 'one man's opinion'?  Aces High as a RR 'game' must compete with Warbirds, Air Warrior, CFS2, Fighter Ace 2 etc.  If it went the 'simulation' route it would be competing with itself.  I don't mean complex engine management.  I DO mean trying to increase the 'immersion' factor as much as possible, within the bounds of reason.

Heck, just 'one man's opinion'  

------------------
=357th Pony Express=
Aces High Training Corps

[This message has been edited by Jekyll (edited 01-16-2001).]

[Pepino]

MY opinion:    

No In-Flight Radar. And when this is hopefully gone, add a Radar Station in fields/boats.

No GPS

NO (Big NO) to sector counters for GV or <200ft. AGL flying aircrafts. (I think this is on the way, thks in advance Htc.).

Yes Full engine management.

Yes some difficulty added to Norden sight.

Yes player able to control only one TG.

Yes player able to control TG from bridge or gun stations only.

I think AH has gone down the gamey road some miles now. Although I'm having fun like a boy in a toyshop, IMHO some more real issues added to the sim/game will be just OK.

Btw, I DON'T QUITE QUIT!    

Cheers,

Pepe

[edit] With Radar Station I mean a manable Radar Station, where a player (or more than one) can see the Radar images, like the real thing (or close to, tho I'd love to see the scanning rotary beam in a green screen  ). Of course damage model as present.[/edit]

[This message has been edited by Pepino (edited 01-16-2001).]

[Jimdandy]

 

Originally posted by Tac:
I disagree. AH will be fun as long as it remains ONE arena.

Splitting the game into arenas will only result in one arena being largely empty and the other one being filled with people that want to be in the other arena but are forced to be in that arena because that's where most of the player (aka, action) is.

Want realism? Add gunjams, get rid of the icons (allow friendly icons ONLY) and you will see a significant change in how the game is played.

Complex engine management could be seen as "candy" for the sim, but I am no pilot in real life, I have no clue what this do-hickey does and what effect it has on the plane.. and I sure as heck dont want to be forced to do 12 steps to turn on my engine or whatever. Add complex engine stuff as a toggled option for those hard core pilots that want to use it.

You missed the point I think. I did say the RR arena would be the present arena. You could play in RR. I do agree that there would be far fewer people willing to go to all of that trouble. That's the point of make another arena. As mrfish pointed out it could be a smaller arena. It may have to wait tell we get a lot more people on the game itself to get enough people to even keep a 50 person arena alive. Hell I might get in there and find out I don't like all of the 'reality.' I'm just thinking it could be offered for those who are really dying to set and warm up there engines. Or take of with a cold misfiring engine because the enemy caught them by surprise. Or deal with gun jams, engine management, etc.

BTW I think night should be brought back to the MA.  

[lazs]

I don't see why not.  We had an HA (hope for action)arena in WB.  the "historical realism" guys could go in there and hide from each other.  All half dozen of em.   I don't think we have a big enough player base for both a main and a (cough)"historical" arena but sure go ahead... In WB it was/is deserted.  

I think the engine management thing is just playing with yourself and the gun jams etc. are phony plus the lack of radar is just a way to avoid fights...

If a person wanted "realism" they would fly in realistic formations and have realistic missions.   Maybe random ac problems so that those who didn't want to fight could claim "engine problem" and peel off.  Without those things you have no realism... they are what counts not the other stuff.  course.... I don't want that either.
lazs

[BigBen]

If we get a full-realism arena I want pre-flights to be modeled.  Random failures like oil-leaks, exhaust manifold corrosion, leaking fuel tanks, etc should all be modeled and shown graphically so you can catch them on the ground.  Vacuum system and electrical faiulures are a must.  Also this business of having a  brand spanking new airplane everytime you launch is ridiculous.  We should require everyone to join a squad in the full-realism arena, and each squad should have a maintenence chief who decides what gets fixed on your shot-up airplane and what doesn't.  Resupply should be limited.  Maybe HTC can simulate ferry flights from main fields to remote fields before new planes can be used.  Also, pilot availabilty should be limited.  If you get wounded, you should take a reasonable time to recover before you can fly again.  If you bail over enemey territroy, you should have to walk back to friendly lines before you can fly again.  Slow perhaps, but that's the way it was!  And if you die, you should be banned from the full-realism arena for 18 years to simulate the time it takes for you to be reborn, grow up, enlist, and go through flight training again. That will help keep the numbers up in the MA.

Sorry guys rough day at the office.    Just go out there, have fun, and lobby for EM!!!  My true opinion is that it should all be kept in the MA, just based on numbers.  On the other hand, if someday we have 300+ in the MA, perhaps this idea could work.  I really owould love to see some new "realistic" features simulated.

BB

[jedi]

Well, as long as you keep a "baseline" of having "real" flight model, damage model, and gunnery model, I don't see why you can't add as many other "realism" features as you want, but then make them "player-selectable."

For instance, say you added full engine/prop controls.  If I elect to USE full engine/prop controls, then I would get a SMALL performance advantage, be it slightly increased range (i.e. different fuel modifier) or maybe a couple of percent more horsepower IF I set my engine/prop "correcly."  If I DON'T use the full controls, then my engine/prop are set "permanently" at a "good" compromise setting, but I don't get quite as "optimum" performance as the guy who's doing all his own management.  OTOH, the guy who uses full controls "poorly" would get less out of his powerplant than the guy who just uses the default "good" system.  An "expert setting," which rewards you for learning it (but only a SMALL reward).

Other realism features could be toggled on or off, like the nav map, gun jams, etc.  Using them would give you a slight score modifier, which could also be tied into the perk point system.  Selecting the lower difficulty settings would be fine, but you'd have to get a FEW more kills to have the same score/points as someone on full difficulty.

And everyone stays in the same arena, so long as you don't compromise on the flight model baseline  

[CavemanJ]

Some times you guys crack me up

Give me a realistic as possible flight model
realistic as possible ballistics model/weapon firing characateristics/damage model
If atmospheric conditions can be realistically modeled w/o too much overhead give me those as well.


Ultra-super-realistic engine management is for FS98/2k so go fly those.

I'll fly around in the dark patroling for bandits in scenarios, in the MA I want to know where the fight is so I can fight

Give me an entire wing of B-17s in formation on my B-17 and then give me the norden's historical accuracy (and dinnae forget to give me all the training needed to use it as well).

You dinnae want to use the "GPS nav" system or the AWACS, print the clipboard map and keep the roster page up while you're in flight, then plot your course.  And you can go hire all the spotters to sit on the ground scattered across the map to make sighting reports.  You seem to forget that the "pinpoint" radar only has a range of 12.5miles from the tower at airbases/ports and from the flattops.
I do think no markers for aircraft flying below 200ft AGL is a good idea, but you've got to have some warning of ground vehicles or the map will be over run w/o any chance to stop it.

Dinnae force your "harder for the sake of being harder" on me, thanks.


This is a game folks.  It's not supposed to be harder just for the sake of being harder.  I'm here to fly and kill with realistically modeled weapons from 1939 to 1946.  The reason I play is to have fun and relax, and it's awfully hard to do that some nights with the constant gangbang/rubber bullets/whatever.

I always thought that relaxed realism in flight sims referred to the flight model, as in not being able to stall/spin the kite, and maybe having guns that throw beer kegs instead of bullets.
Since when does not having engine management controls that require a PPL to understand how to use them qualify as relaxed realism?

[This message has been edited by CavemanJ (edited 01-16-2001).]