Py, those fighters in Wing Commander sort of seems way ahead of World War II technology curve, wouldn't you think?
It's
gameplay versus realism in this one.
In the case of icons, gameplay won because the resolutions of computer monitors still cannot give out as accurate and delicate information as human eyes do. It's a crutch.
In the case of HUDs, navigating one's way via map and keeping himself situationally aware at the same time is
just one of the things you have to learn as a fighter/bomber/vehicle/boat driver. The main agenda of realism wins over this one. Sure, it is more uncomfortable than modern planes equipped with HUD, and certainly not as comfortable as some WWII on-line sims which has HUD feature... but thinking back, the WWII pilots didn't have HUD. Why should we?
This is not a "progressive change", but a "parallel change" which would turn AH into something it is not
. WWII planes equipped with Head Up Displays showing map, speed, altitude info etc etc..
We already have a "compass" for the bearing, "clip board map" for general navigation, "dot dar" and "dar bar" to notify us of enemy presence, "speed indicator" to tell you the speed, and "altitude indicator" for alt.. and most importantly, we have our eyes. We must scan through these instruments, look around your plane, check the horizon, study ground details to see if it matches the map like the actual pilots did, and AH community nor HTC would never ever think of changing this. This sort of 'uncomfortable but realistic approach' is what gives AH it's charm.
As for the head-on shots, did you ever consider some of those merciless HO pilots you have encountered actually
DID have what you said were needed - perception and skill, and perhaps you did not?
Because, in my case, I'm a poor HO pilot no matter what sort of plane I fly. I generally hate HO and never try one, and try to avoid as much as possible.
Result: I can't hit jacksh*t when I go into a HO, even with a plane that has 8 x Colt/Browning .50s, firing 1/3rd of its 3400 rounds from distance 1200 yards and closing. If I spray my aim is always off, if I wait for the right moment it is always mutual damage between me and the enemy.
Going into a HO is risking damage. No matter what sort of protection, closure rate there is, a lucky shot is gonna land sooner or later. It's like the gambler's rule, sooner or later your luck runs out.
Perception and skill or not, expert and newbie alike: HO will result in damage, just a question of "will it be this time or not".
You go for HO you are commited.
Solution: you are threatened by HOs, then don't ever try one. What is the real point of your 'suggestion'? It only sounds like this(I admit I'm putting words into your mouth here, but this is the only thing I can come up with considering your suggestion on HOs):
'Make it easier for an experienced pilot like me to go HO, and don't let total newbies flying TnB around ever hit me on a HO. They are unskilled, and I know they never will hit me if this game was modelled correctly. These seemingly total newbies just turn to face me and they shoot, and I took damage. This is soooo unrealistic.' I have a pretty good feeling you'll still be complaining about HOs even when your suggestion comes true. Please try checking out the dot command '.target xxx'. Closure is fast, and bullets disperse more than you think it would.
...
The collision issues are well addressed. Try asking about it in gameplay/feedback forums without
adding your opinion on something you do not know about 
.
What you experienced was not a "bug".
- Saint K -
[ 12-02-2001: Message edited by: Kweassa ]
[ 12-02-2001: Message edited by: Kweassa ]
