Time To Do Away With AWACS Datalink?

[hblair]

Originally posted by Soviet:
The DAR is a good tool against gangbanging bastages I can't imagine what it would be like without it.]

Rofl!
The dar is a good tool *against* gangbangs?  

 

Originally posted by Soviet:
You want to play realistically? We got the CT for that, maybe if you people who want more realism go there we wouldn't have some of these threads.  Stop trying to force the masses to play your way.  We have the CT for extreme realism,  MA for fun.

See, that's where a lot of you guys are backwards. We're not trying for a historical angle. (at least I'm not) I'm coming from a gameplay angle. And it's not just some biased wannabe furballer, or strict field capture angle. I do it all. My squad does it all. We try organized captures using the mission planner and are torpedoed lately from the get-go.

Just ask the Dickweed Heavy Bomber group. Last night there was red dar bars out the wazoo on the western side of the map. Long before the baddies were anywhere near our fields. We look on the roster, about 20 Dickweeds online. Know what's going on. So, we just up fighters and meet them over the water. Killed just about all of them before they reached our shores. A big organized squad mission shot to crap cause you guys *kAn't FiNd uh FiiiTe!*. I hope HT is leaning towards toning down the dar we have. Sorry, but a total buffoon could find a fight in the main with the population that's in it now even without any in-plane radar.

[-ammo-]

Hblair and funky are lobbying hard again to lose the dot radar.  Can you say "lets beat a dead horse"?  I thought you could  One thing is for sure, it still seems to be a hot issue, the number of posts are building rapidly.

[hblair]

Originally posted by MJ:
Well, for the Big Week scenario I know they're screwing with the radar so you only get bars or dots in the tower and nothing inflight, so it's not impossible to do.  Still, I find it handy to be able to tell what fields I can lift a bomber from and which ones are covered in fleas from the hairball next door.

I do like Sabre's idea of only getting dot dar in the tower and bar dar in flight.  That way you'd know generally where to go, and once you're airborne, you'd be able to see where the fight is moving (if at all), but not every individual plane.

As for a 512x512 map....would it really do any good?  Sure, you'd extend the border between two countries a little (double it if all works out right), but that wouldn't stop furballs from happening.  All I see it doing is making the maps much harder to win, and as it is now, they're not changing much.  I could be wrong though; if anyone cares to explain how it would help the game, I'm all ears.

Furballs are gonna happen. They're fun, I furball too. Problem is the situation we have now is your whole frontline is a furball! There aren't any clean fields to launch a fresh attack on that aren't full of cons. The arena maps (at least mindanao) are full. I would think that toning down of radar and/or a larger map would be the ways to go.

As far as Bigweek. Your countries CO will be tower bound and vectoring the squadrons to the fight. (like in real life)

[Soviet]

It is easier to get away from gangbanging tards with the dar, you just view the clip board and if you see a wave of NME fighters coming at you run for the nearest ack/friendly.

Also I am strongly opposing any change to the DAR, if we do then buffs can sneak in and take out a whole base which they can already, I hate to say it but i'm a furball nut and so are many of the people in the arena not all.  And the DWHBG got their whole mission shot down, hmm let's see escorts did they have any escorts? i rest my case, bombers without escort are dead when they take off, some pilots are even suicidal with buffs, i saw some moron keep coming in 1k in a lanc and porking a fuel, talk about gamey, if it wasn't for DAR it would have made my job a little harder finding him.

Leave it the way it is, as I said you want realism goto the CT that's what it's for!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Leave the MA the way it is, it's just fine.

[hblair]

Originally posted by Soviet:
It is easier to get away from gangbanging tards with the dar, you just view the clip board and if you see a wave of NME fighters coming at you run for the nearest ack/friendly.

There's another piece to this equation, it's called *everybody else*. Doesn't it cross your mind that the average pilot uses the clipboard to congregate in small groups. It's called herd mentality. Look at the big picture for a minute. Take yourself out of your situation and put it in the average pilots situation.

 

Originally posted by Soviet:


Also I am strongly opposing any change to the DAR, if we do then buffs can sneak in and take out a whole base which they can already, I hate to say it but i'm a furball nut and so are many of the people in the arena not all. .

Were you here when 1.08 was released? After one of the patches, there was absolutely NO enemy radar at all for almost a week. Do you remember that whole arena getting captured? Do you remember having trouble finding a fight? These lame scare tactics carry no weight.


 

Originally posted by Soviet:

 And the DWHBG got their whole mission shot down, hmm let's see escorts did they have any escorts? i rest my case, bombers without escort are dead when they take off,...

Wooooah. Slow down slick. Yeah there were escorts, Many ponies and Doras as I recall. Of course it didn't matter much, because (I'm sure you already know this) escorting bombers in the main arena atmosphere is next to impossible.


 

Originally posted by Soviet:

Leave it the way it is, as I said you want realism goto the CT that's what it's for!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

As I said:

 

Originally posted by hblair earlier in this thread:
We're not trying for a historical angle. (at least I'm not) I'm coming from a gameplay angle.

[ 11-29-2001: Message edited by: hblair ]

[Am0n]

i have to agree with hblair.

When the DAR was gone for that time period i my self didnt see much of a change, or a negative change in the MA.

W/o dar it helps against being ganged up on for sure.

[K West]

I do not think anyone is advocating the complete removal of radar. All I've seen is the proposal to remove IFF equipped, 100% accruate, pinpoint radar in flight. As it is one can see on radar exactly which contact in a group of dots out of range is enemy and which is friendly and vector accordingly.  While the MA is not meant as a replication of WWII it designed to enable us to replicate combat ala WWII era equipment. Of which AWACS type radar is not.

 For gameplay purposes there has always been the colored bars indicating enemy or friendly contacts. THAT more replicates WWII radar ability than anything else we have right now.

All IMO, of course.

 Westy

[Seeker]

The Spitfire's first kills were due to IFF failure (they were Hurris....)

IFF is a fact of WWII life.

[K West]

Yes. And we have bar indicators that basically represent it's capabilities.
 There was the earlyu development of IFF in use during WWII. Starting with the British RDF's IFF. It was very basic and a crude electronic signature that allowed ground personnel to distinguish British fighters from inbound intruders. WWII IFF could not display on an o-scope image the specific friendly or enemy aircraft. WWII radar could only report to the ground station personel at that radar facility that a friendly IFF signiature was detected in the radar return signal period.
 It was not until the last 30 years that IFF helped pinpoint the status of any partucar plane on a radar scope.  AH radar replicates 1970's and upward technology, not 1940's by any means.

Westy

[lazs1]

well.... actually in the forties they could tell you within a few thousand feet, the altitude of cons.   That would be nice.
lazs

[Maverick]

I remember the time when there was no dar for a week. I didn't play for a week either. I'm sure I'm not the only one. Recent examples are when the dar could be dropped for extended periods of time the numbers in the arena dropped. It is something similar to the "night" times in the arena. Quite a few players don't like it and don't play during the darkness. An increase in the number of players in the TA is a usuall occurance while they wait for "dawn" to break.

This still comes down to a rather verbal faction in this game who do not like a feature in the game. They want to impose thier peferance on all in the MA by doing away with it. If they don't want this feature they do not have to use it. They can fly without opening their clipboard and not be bothered by the dar.

This option realy belongs in the CT. If you want to fly under particular conditions do it there. The fact that the numbers in CT never equal the numbers in the MA is a telling point. It seems that many do not WANT to have THEIR game play limited by conditions or restrictions. They vote with their presence in the MA rather than the special arenas.

Finally I agree with others who have stated that the MA is not the arena for modifications of this type. If you want to play with a set of conditions that restrict player options take it to the optional arena. Numbers increasing in the MA indicate there is not a wide spread problem.

I'd much rather HTC spend time increasing options and reliability on the game rather than catering to some who wish to restrict them. The disco situation is getting nasty.

 

[K West]

Definately.  I'd welcome multiple crt displays, in the tower, which showed approximate blips indicating azimuth, range and presence of friednly aircraft. And perhaps an indication of how many inbound planes there are depending on the size of the blip on the crt.

 I would also like HTC to remove the HQ radar facility. IMO there should never be a global radar outage.

 However I do honestly doubt HTC would ever implement any change to the current radar but as I did when I was in AW I'll always chime in on the side asking for "dot" radar removal.

  Westy

[ 11-29-2001: Message edited by: O'Westy ]

[hblair]

Originally posted by Maverick:
I remember the time when there was no dar for a week. I didn't play for a week either. I'm sure I'm not the only one.

The main arena numbers were not affected during that time. It was as popular as ever. I recall counting the roster and commenting to my squaddies about how the arena was unaffected. The fact that you logged for a week should probably tell you something about yourself.  

 

Originally posted by Maverick:
This still comes down to a rather verbal faction in this game who do not like a feature in the game. They want to impose thier peferance on all in the MA by doing away with it. If they don't want this feature they do not have to use it. They can fly without opening their clipboard and not be bothered by the dar.

Or you could not be bothered by our opinions on radar and not read or reply to this thread. If you don't like it, just don't look at it. Makes about as much sense as your reply.
 

 

Originally posted by Maverick:
This option realy belongs in the CT. If you want to fly under particular conditions do it there. The fact that the numbers in CT never equal the numbers in the MA is a telling point. It seems that many do not WANT to have THEIR game play limited by conditions or restrictions. They vote with their presence in the MA rather than the special arenas.

Yeah, that's it. The fact that field capture and the strategy element are non-existent, as well as no scoring at all have no bearing on the condition of the CT's popularity, right? The radar is the only factor.  
 

[Nifty]

The CT is not an argument in removal of inflight dot dar.  If the CT was exactly the same as the MA with the exception of radar, then yes, you have a valid argument with the CT on the issue of no inflight dot dar.  However, as the CT lacks strat, scoring, and also enforces a RPS with Axis v Allied (thereby severely limiting plane choice) I don't see how you can use the CT in saying no one wants to remove inflight dot dar because the CT is unpopulated.

Lazs hit something in terms of altitude.  It's not there, and it should be.  

Next, could WWII radar (yes, the historic one) tell the difference between a flight of B17s and a flight of fighters (meaning could it tell a significant difference in plane sizes?)

Maybe inflight dot dar could stay, but you couldn't tell friend from foe just by looking at the inflight dot dar.  The dots could be color coded based not on their country, but based on their general altitude.  If my question is answered yes, then some dots would be bigger if they were bigger than a certain plane (say bigger than a Jug).  

This, IMO, would enhance gameplay by giving you alt of a dot, and whether it was a possible buff or fighter.  It'd increase "pucker factor" because you wouldn't know if that dot that just popped in your visual range was a bandit or a friendly.

In the MA, I don't believe dot dar should be totally removed inflight.  It's the equivalent of asking for GCI via radio.  It also does help gameplay.  I think it can be improved, however.  

[Maverick]

hblair,

Nice to make things personal here with your post. Please notice I did not disparage you or the others who want to restrict a feature of the game I like.

As far as posting here about this. I do have a stake in the "controversy" as I happen to like the dar as is, like several others who posted. I find it would be counter productive to allow a, IMO, small faction dictate what I can have or not have in this game. Similar to the faction who continue to call for the perking of any plane that they don't like / want. If players did not post a counter point to your proposal it would make it a one sided discussion. Sorry you don't like opposing views. I guess in your opinion I should just back off and let you have your way, after all my opinion can't possibly have any merit since it doesn't agree with you.

The dar feature in this game is an option. By that I mean, all you have to do to ignore it is not open your clipboard. Don't like it? Don't use it just like combat trim. Please just don't advocate taking something away merely because you don't like it.