Author Topic: Reality what a concept (Read 2448 times)

Vermillion · « **Reply #30 on:** January 17, 2001, 09:34:00 AM »

Call a priest, hell must indeed be freezing over !!

My Proof? Me and Lazs actually agreeing on something

------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure

pzvg · « **Reply #31 on:** January 17, 2001, 09:53:00 AM »

There are those who want the instant bogey dope and a laser rangefinder so they can use the heavy firepower of a limited production monster to make kills at ranges that would earn them a court IRL, Then there are those who have limited time, just want to log on and relax by blowing people up in twisty turny knifefights over the most congested airspace around,and then there are those who want to fly as close to real life as a computer will allow, to recreate the history behind the conflict.
Ya know what? They're all right, disagree on what elements are needed in the game, but don't claim the other guy's got it all wrong, or that you are the majority, ya speak for yourself, period, and you want what you want outta AH, period. I'd like a helluva lot more realism myself, But HTC has to go with what is more marketable, and what falls into accordance with their own philosophy about the game they create, and they're right too. In short, some things might change, some might not, but stop trying to beat each other up verbally, It took years for the WB community to devolve into this kinda bickering and disagreement based upon who posted the opinion, well,well, second time around, guess we just hadda do it faster huh? Quit picking at the scab, let it heal, go out and spend a tour flying the Zeke, or if you already fly the challenge-birds, go catch a ride in one of the certified deathmachines, step outside yourself a bit, and see if ya really need to get so hot about it.

------------------
pzvg- "5 years and I still can't shoot"

Nethawk · « **Reply #32 on:** January 17, 2001, 01:13:00 PM »

Way back in the days of Fighter Ace I gave up the RR arena and joined my friends, the Musketeers, in the full realism arena. In retrospect that arena is more akin to the main arena in Aces High, though it was very tough at the time. Most of us flew exclusively in the full realism arena, most of the time without tags, which we dubbed "flyin' nekkid". Because I let them shoot me down so often

they adopted me into the squad. That was more than two years ago, and we still miss those days. I think I could speak for The Musketeer Escadrille by saying YES! to the full realism arena.

mrfish · « **Reply #33 on:** January 17, 2001, 03:02:00 PM »

awww come on lazs ya ol' crank!

a realistic arena would be fun - the MA ought to stay the same and there would definitely need to be more players signed up so that an ultra real arena doesnt pull people out of the MA or sit dormant from too few people- i will concede that - but if there were enough players a small ultra-realistic arena would be fun

- in fact it would be a great value-added option for HTC because the ultra-real set would come just for that and besides the MA would remain the same so nothing would really change -

- if those parameters are agreed on then maybe something can be initiated in the future no? -

NUTTZ · « **Reply #34 on:** January 17, 2001, 04:59:00 PM »

Hey, I'm all for reality, But i don't think WWII fighter pilots had their wifes screaming in their ears to take out the garbage whilst trying to down some LW steel.

NUTTZ

lazs · « **Reply #35 on:** January 18, 2001, 02:42:00 PM »

mrfish... we are talking "reality" here right? The reality is not in busy work worthless features. Reality is in FM's and gunnery and damage model... fix all those best you can. Use scenarios or even a whole new arena to adjust settings. I Would not enjoy an arena that was too anal or boring.... No, being bored or just busy is not "fun" for me. Waiting in a tower to get organized or reading up on an event before hand is not fun for me either and I avoid those things...

I do realize that some do enjoy this and would like even more details all the way to engine warm up and pre flights. What I find amazing is.... The people who cry for "realism" don't fly finger fours or go on assigned missions or escort bombers or any of a number of things that seperate our "fantasy arena" from "realistic" WWII combat. The complications that have been asked for are either superflorous or unrealistic or both.

Reality? reality is an empty "historical" arena.
lazs

mrfish · « **Reply #36 on:** January 18, 2001, 02:50:00 PM »

sheesh lazs just razzin ya-

here read this:

"...the MA ought to stay the same and there would definitely need to be more players signed up so that an ultra real arena doesnt pull people out of the MA or sit dormant from too few people- i will concede that..."

i think it ought to be a seperate arena - sometimes after a few brews i would not be interested in fuel management and icing when its all i can do to stay aloft! lol anyway it would be nice as an option - in a seperate arena, when it makes sense to do so business-wise - no changes to the ma

Pepino · « **Reply #37 on:** January 19, 2001, 04:46:00 AM »

lazs,

Why engine management is not "reality" by your standards? Why is only in FM, gunnery and damage model? Why are you (or anyone else) entitled to draw there the "reality" line?

If we talk a bout reality, the issue is clear, and it is not what you say. Reality is REAL life.

If we talk about realistic models, I would say the closer to reality, the better a model is, since it reflects more accurately the real circumstances. You do not decide what is real or not.

If we talk about fun (and this is, IMO, what you are talking about) the line is blur. Here you can give your opinion on what is needed to improve your fun in the game, but not what is real or not. And what is not fun for you maybe is fun for me, and viceversa.

FYI, there is quite a bunch of people in this sim that do fly missions. And try to stick to formations. I myself fly the happy trigger guy sometimes, but I would not say that is the usual stuff for a majority here, and certainly it is not for me.

You find amazing that you do not see formation flying, or missions. Try to take a peek at the Map Room from time to time. I do fly missions on a regular basis (thks, Zigrat).

You say what amazes you. I will tell you what amazes me. People standing like theirs is the only valid opinion, stating black over white (sic)"The complications that have been asked for are eithere superflorous or unrealistic or both". Well, let me tell you, that is your particular opinion. May or may not be coincident with somebody else. When you say things like that it looks like you have some background that allow you to elevate your opinions to the fact category. Have you? If so, please enlighten me. If not, put the acronym IMO where we can read it, pls.

Sorry if that sounds a little harsh, but one thing that I learned in this forum is to distinguish facts from opinions. When you give your opinion, say so. And respect who have a different one.

Cheers,

Pepe.

And I don't cry.

Pepino · « **Reply #38 on:** January 19, 2001, 04:47:00 AM »

[oops, double post]

[This message has been edited by Pepino (edited 01-19-2001).]

lazs · « **Reply #39 on:** January 19, 2001, 08:55:00 AM »

pep... they are superflorous because in the time frame that out sorties live in they would be a non issue for most of the time... in order to confer and advantage/disadvantge based on em, you would have to have some kind of trumped up time modifier. They are busy work and development time poorly spen when instead we could have....

Realistic damage... No hollow no-flamable planes.... Oxy bottles, radios, electric and hydraulic systems to damage/destroy... Ammo varients, incenderaries etc. Now.... You tell me... what is more "realistic"? What is needed more? features that don't matter or ones that do?
lazs