Just a statement:

[rosco-]

  Inflight radar is my biggest gripe.

  IM not a big fan of the perk system either. I think a combination of a rps and perk system would be  bettter. All planes available all the time and as the rps progresses fewer and fewer planes perked and 1 day a month everything available to everyone for free.

 Three countries sucks wind as well.

[AKDejaVu]

The community over at Warbirds is entrenched with 7 years of history (not to mention DOS-AW history carry over).  They have quite a head start.  I do believe that AH can get there.. just not for a couple of years.

The one thing that AH does have going for it is HT and Pyro.  There is a difference between buying someone out and taking over... and actually creating the game yourselves.  I particularly like HT's philosophy on what HTC's job is... to continue developing the game.

Most other things between the two games is open for debate with no clear winner.

AKDejaVu

[lazs]

gotta agree.. RPS is at vastly superior to the idiotic perk system for fairness but... i'm not sure it is for income.   RPS rubs a lot of people wrong.   I like an "area" arena idea but perhaps some sort or modified RPS with very short early and late war periods and the bulk of the tour in the mid war years?   At least it would give early war a fighting chance even if it were only for a few days.

Field capture is far superior in WB for gameplay as is field layout.
lazs

[AG Sachsenberg]

 

Originally posted by lazs:
gotta agree.. RPS is at vastly superior to the idiotic perk system for fairness but... i'm not sure it is for income.   RPS rubs a lot of people wrong.   I like an "area" arena idea but perhaps some sort or modified RPS with very short early and late war periods and the bulk of the tour in the mid war years?   At least it would give early war a fighting chance even if it were only for a few days.

Field capture is far superior in WB for gameplay as is field layout.
lazs

I actually agree with you lazs on this one.  Good points

[danish]

The lack of inflight rader in WB + that a far away dot tends to blend into the sea/landscape + the *blinding* sun.
All this makes your flight uncertain.You just have to keep SA up.

Lately have been doing more and more flying over there.Refreshing.No more wondershots either.

IMO the WWII Arena with maps is great too.

WB also have %¤¤#" otto, generelly worse pingtimes (will change your ACM slightly), lousy grafics and viewsystem.And of course AH have a lot of nice features like the 6-calls, clouds ect..

Community?You dont wanna hear it heh.

All in all AH hasnt got that big a lead as some of you guys might think.Also because one of the biggest plusses here is the fast development that partly is going in the wrong direction.

danish

[Nifty]

AH is better than WB because I'm flying here, giving you all an easy kill when I'm in the air!  

Seriously, I downloaded both WB and AH and played each offline.  Took me almost no time to decide that I liked AH better.  It looked better, it felt better flying and it sounded better.  Those things are important in immersion (to me, anyways), and that's what I was looking for.  

WB has offline AI you can fly against, but that's not too much of a bonus except for newbies wanting gunnery/BFM practice before going into an arena.

[NHFoxtro]

Those little tiny Farm houses near the sheep  

[Gadfly]

Inflight Radar, Super-dupper b29 gun control and planeset.

But!  The truly amazing thing is how similar the games are, not how different.

[Yeager]

RIPSNORT!!!!!


GET OUT OF MY MIND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


ARGGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!

Y

[Skybax]

You asked,

Your not going to like it, and I`ll probablly get flamed for it.

But hey,

Scenarios (EMC, SL, S3, + Special Events)

Terrians

Historical Arena

24/7 Axis vs Allied Practice Arena with RPS

No in-flight radar

Plane set

Rich history with tons of player sites & support.

Bunch of "little" in-game stuff, like sensation of speed, feeling of altitude, and depth perception.

Last but not least, the development of Warbirds III. It is simply awesome. Those here who know..... know what I`m talking about. I just hope is survives one way or another, with or without iEN.

The slight edges AH has now in certain departments, WBIII already meets & exceeds.

But it really comes down to personal preference. To each his own.

AH has it`s strong points currently, and I like many of the features this sim has. I wish HT only the best with his product.


-------------------

328th Fighter Squadron
352nd Fighter Group.com
"Blue-Nosed Bastards of Bodney"


[This message has been edited by Skybax (edited 05-17-2001).]

[Staga]

I did try WB3 but it wasn't even near "Awesome" but hey, That's only my opinion  

[DB603]

S!

 Comparing AH/WB is hard..but anyway.IMO WB has more accurate looking cockpits than AH.The WB 109-cockpit(for example) beats the AH's without sweat.Also the OPTION to choose either Metric or Feet/whatever instruments gives credit to WB.
 Gunnery is harder in WB and there is less of this Hispano  1ping/1k/1kill-stuff.U actually need to get MUCH closer to score a hit than in AH.Better IMO.Buff guns are not uber.Otto gunners are accurate,but manageable.
 AH has nicer graphics(lighting,weather) and models(more detailed).WB has cooler airfields and their layout is nice(no 1 buff kills the field).Planeset is more complete and offers more diversity in WB.AH is improving in that all the time though  
 FM..that is a tough one.I liked more the small delay in WB when deflecting stick from side to side.represents the delay in movement of surfaces?A bit too instant/fly-by-wire in AH on some planes.E-management tougher in WB.Fuel burnrate seems to be 1:1 in WB.In AH we have 2:1?Can't really compare the FM of these 2,since they are quite close eachother.And it also depends what You personally think is better...
 DM...In WB U can take more(not too many) hits than in AH and still survive.Only 1 ping wonder is the 37mm P39's cannon.Engine damage results in engine failure faster than in AH.Small differences only in DM IMO.
 Setting up the sims are pretty the same and straightforward.Viewing system is better in AH.WB needs a better SA due to a tad more restricted views in it.This also due to the heavier cockpit frames on planes.
 But as said..AH is still a product under development and for sure will get numerous enhancements under time.
 




------------------
DB603
3.Lentue
Lentolaivue 34

[Seeker]

I miss AirWarrior's Fighter town, a duelling area in the middle of the map.

The fact is, both Laz _and_ the strat guys are right, both are boring when taken to degrees.

It used to be real fun to take part in a capture, then drift off over to FT, then drift back over to help out a capture, all in the same arena, with unbroken coms.

AH's DA is a fantastic terrain, but it's in a whole different arena. It's great for arranged duels, but it doesn't work for casual furballing.

And...1 on 1's. I have no trouble finding a fight in AH, but a 1 on 1 is a rare thing indeed, and given the differeing customs in AH, it's rarely respected. I've tried every thing to get rid of a "friendly" butting into one of my fights to "help" me, but you can't get rid of them! Makes me wish killshooter was disabled....

[oboe]

Warbirds has a more flexible pricing plan
(still not optimum, but better for casual flyers) and a cheaper flat monthly rate.

As others have said, WBs planeset beats AH's handily.  And the quality of cockpit art is significantly better.  Take a look at the detail in the B-24 cockpit - outstanding.
Sorry, but planes OTW don't mean diddily to me.  Where will WarBirds III be when AH finally has 55 planes?   Hard to tell.  

WarBirds also has strafable planes parked in rows near runways on some fields.  And NO Osties!

Finally, WarBirds has a Historical Arena and even an Expert Arena for those seeking more challenge and a more realistic air combat options.  (low or no icons, 2 sides, actual terrain maps).

WBs still has quite a number of significant advantages.

[Ripsnort]

Its nice to see we can openly discuss these things now with no flames.   Good discussion guys! <S>