Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Lusche on August 23, 2009, 09:00:46 AM

Title: Historical Accuracy
Post by: Lusche on August 23, 2009, 09:00:46 AM
From one of the ENY threads

Quote
But isn't this game supposed to be realistic and historically accurate?   Or is this game supposed to be a cartoon?

If squads switched sides in WWII for real, they would have been shot when they returned home.

--

OK... how would it be if AH would really try to be a historically accurate simulation?


Only two sides. And as most players are playing invariably in LW, it would be a late war setting on the western front.

First, every player would be automatically assigned to a side. Hey, you can't choose were you are born in real life either.

German player: A very few may  have access to a competitive uber ride, though propably of low production quality. Most pilots however, may be stuck with decidedly sub-par fighters.
Most of the time, you are sitting around watching the enemy fly overhead, because your unit hasn't got the fuel to engage him. If you actually takeoff, be prepared to get horded in a way you have never seen in AH2. Almost constantly flying against odds up to 10-1 and worse.
And yes, this time your squad is getting all the n00bs all the time, prepare to answer questions like "how do I drop tank?" while trying to evade all that BnZ Mustangs & Thunderbolts.

Allied player: You got the numbers, you got the equipment, you got no friggin ENY - but you got boredom. You side may produce a number of aces, but the vast majority of you will fly what basically amounts to flying toolshedding offline missions. Sortie after sortie all you will encounter are puffy and auto ack, which will take down a lot of you without even having experienced the fun of a real dogfight.
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: Bronk on August 23, 2009, 09:03:00 AM
Spot on as usual. :aok
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: CountD90 on August 23, 2009, 09:23:36 AM
I agree with bronk....

Snailman:<---owns people who complain about accuracy. :aok
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: Anaxogoras on August 23, 2009, 09:39:41 AM
FSO squads have to be ready to Allied or Axis regardless of their preference.  The main arena folks ain't got nothin' on us. ;)
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: A8HatTrick on August 23, 2009, 10:04:05 AM
You forgot to mention:

1. Carb Heat
2. Choke
3. Altitude Sickness
4. Cold
5. Visibility (No Icons)
6. No Radar
7. Cross Winds
8. Fuel Injection
9. Escort Missions
10. Get shot down once, and your GAME OVER
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: waystin2 on August 23, 2009, 10:10:20 AM
(http://www.inquisitr.com/wp-content/historical-accuracy.jpg)
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: gyrene81 on August 23, 2009, 10:11:39 AM
From one of the ENY threads

OK... how would it be if AH would really try to be a historically accurate simulation?


Only two sides. And as most players are playing invariably in LW, it would be a late war setting on the western front.

First, every player would be automatically assigned to a side. Hey, you can't choose were you are born in real life either.

German player: A very few may  have access to a competitive uber ride, though propably of low production quality. Most pilots however, may be stuck with decidedly sub-par fighters.
Most of the time, you are sitting around watching the enemy fly overhead, because your unit hasn't got the fuel to engage him. If you actually takeoff, be prepared to get horded in a way you have never seen in AH2. Almost constantly flying against odds up to 10-1 and worse.
And yes, this time your squad is getting all the n00bs all the time, prepare to answer questions like "how do I drop tank?" while trying to evade all that BnZ Mustangs & Thunderbolts.

Allied player: You got the numbers, you got the equipment, you got no friggin ENY - but you got boredom. You side may produce a number of aces, but the vast majority of you will fly what basically amounts to flying toolshedding offline missions. Sortie after sortie all you will encounter are puffy and auto ack, which will take down a lot of you without even having experienced the fun of a real dogfight.
Depends on what stage of the war you're talking about. And there was the potential for up to 5 factions...Britain, U.S., Russia, Italy, Japan...(not including the German conscript armies)
If it was 1939 to 1941 the LW would have air and ground superiority. The Brits would be the major foe as the U.S. didn't get into full gear until 1942 and the Ruskkies hadn't been able to mount an offensive. No one had long range strategic bombing capabilities but the Germans had the Ju88, HE111, Do215, and Bf110 that pounded London daily.
You also forget "field modifications" where mechanics stole (er, requisitioned) parts here and there to tweak the planes and make them perform better than production standards. In the Luftwaffe good chief mechanics were well rewarded by the pilots when they returned safely. The U.S. and Brits had the same practices.
Japan had military superiority in China and were gearing up to attack the U.S. Their planes were superior to anything else flying in the area at the time, and they had the numbers.


You're only thinking in 2 dimensions.


But I agree, there is a limit to the amount of realism people actually want and are prepared to deal with. If no one wanted any realism there wouldn't be so many whine posts about planes, GVs, ships or anything else not working "like it should"...there wouldn't be any reason for GVs or ships...and there wouldn't be any base taking or "winning the war". AH is by far the most realistic massive multiplayer flight sim available right now as far as the way the fm's on the planes work...after that it's toonville.
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: Lusche on August 23, 2009, 10:14:09 AM
Depends on what stage of the war you're talking about.

You're only thinking in 2 dimensions.



I have explicitly stated what stage of war I was talking about, and why.
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: Slade on August 23, 2009, 10:33:28 AM
Lusche nice post on your take of being historically accurate vs. fun.  :aok
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: Ciaphas on August 23, 2009, 10:38:51 AM
well said Lusche   :aok
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: SunBat on August 23, 2009, 11:23:04 AM
gyrene, go back and read his post.  He said that he was talking about late war.  You're being .25 dimensional.
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: Anaxogoras on August 23, 2009, 11:32:43 AM
You forgot to mention:
6. No Radar
7. Cross Winds
9. Escort Missions
10. Get shot down once, and your GAME OVER
We have 4 out of 10 in FSO.  We also have to fly the aircraft we are assigned, perform the mission we are assigned, and, above all, obey orders.

But you won't find any historical accuracy in the main arenas. 
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: gyrene81 on August 23, 2009, 11:55:50 AM
gyrene, go back and read his post.  He said that he was talking about late war.  You're being .25 dimensional.
Come on...gimme some credit I did agree about the level of realism part...I thought that would put me to at least .33 dimensional.
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: Krusty on August 23, 2009, 12:16:46 PM
This game does not re-create the war. It re-creates the tools of the war. Some more realistically than others.

I'm all for getting the TOOLS accurate. Then how folks use them in creating new battles/wars is the fun part.
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: RufusLeaking on August 23, 2009, 12:47:35 PM
Lusche nice post on your take of being historically accurate vs. fun.  :aok
The fun of this game is the challenge.  It is the suspense of not knowing the outcome.  The only consequence of losing is a hit to the ego.

The problem with a historical simulation is that in most wars, there is a severe imbalance in forces.  WWII is good for gaming in that there were several major combatants at rough equality in means, technologies and training. 

HTC has done a good job keeping balance in the game.
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: Rich46yo on August 23, 2009, 01:41:37 PM
Sure they "recreate the war". In snap shots and special events they do a grand job of it.

And I cant help but wonder how so many of these so called "purists" ever bother to participate or even throw a thanks to the guys who spend so much time putting them together.

For the most part they want "Historical purity" after something has shot them down that they dont deem to be "pure". :D

Honestly I dont think you can run the game any better then it is being ran.
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: cegull on August 23, 2009, 09:11:20 PM
Realism is ok by me.  However, it seems that here and in other online sims the ww2 arenas are not popular when main arenas are available.  I think maybe the newer generation of players is not interested in strategy and tactics applied to WW2 historical situations.  My nephews for example, don't even know where WW2 took place let alone strategies employed by the various forces.    The main arena looses the sense of adventure pretty fast for me-hence I'm not playing at the present.  Might be an interesting experiment to shut down the main for a while to see what would happen-hehe.  Strategy and tactics in gaining historical ground versus the kill ladder.  Looks like the kill ladder folks win the day.  Krusty makes a good point.  AH has the tools and I also would like to seem them simulated as accurately as possible-like realistic armor damage etc. but its up to the players to try different scenarios.
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: save on August 24, 2009, 02:44:42 AM
Axis vs allies is a nooption with pigs like the the 190A8.

IRL fw190A8's where close or better than  A5s in most aspects and  it was faster, and the pilots thought they where much better the the A5:s ( resource : jg26 war diaries volume 2)




Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: Bodhi on August 24, 2009, 08:20:07 AM
This game does not re-create the war. It re-creates the tools of the war. Some more realistically than others.

I'm all for getting the TOOLS accurate. Then how folks use them in creating new battles/wars is the fun part.

Ya know something Krusty, for a kid, you sure are an amazing wealth of knowledge.  I know of maybe three people worldwide that could likely tell you what it is like to fly 50% of the aircraft in this game.  You on the other hand are an expert at that and beyond. 

Absolutely amazing.
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: Plazus on August 24, 2009, 08:36:47 AM
Lusche,

Kudos to your thoughts!  :aok

My only speculation is that there are a good handful of people in AH that have ZERO patience of waiting around in the tower and runway. Secondly, after all that waiting, the idea of being outnumbered 10:1 would most likely scare away these guys; or motivate them to join the Allies. More than likely, the Axis would be picked off one by one without Axis having any fair advantage. Some people play just for fun and instant action, rather than immersing theirselves in the history.

My take on this is: Why not have just two sides? One Axis and one Allies. Make it LW settings, with all planes available to that specific side. This time around, you have all Axis fighting Allies and vice versa. I think this would be one step closer to "historical" accuracy.

Get rid of the AvA arena. Ive played in there but there are just too few people in that arena. That arena is not getting used like it should.
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: fudgums on August 24, 2009, 09:01:42 AM
LWO- Western Europe 1939-1945
LWB- Pacific Theater 1940-1945(Including Rangoon)
MW- Eastern Europe 1939-1945
EW- Tunisia Italy Malta Tobruk

Map and Plane set changes on the day.

Just thinking out loud
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: A8HatTrick on August 24, 2009, 09:33:42 AM
Heck, 4 Arenas:

1. Africa
2. Europe West
3. Europe East
4. Pacific

1st Week of the month: 1939-1940
2nd Week of the month: 1940-1941
3rd Week of the month: 1941-1942
4th Week of the month: 1943-1944
5th Week of the month: 1944-1945

Rolling Plane Sets

Toss ENY out the window

Slide in K/D Ratio and Bomber %'s for rank

Limit availability of aircraft and vehicles on a ratio basis based on rank.

Some people will simply be flying the old stuff till the end and will have to earn that right to fly the new machines


and HTC can ship a trunk monkey with every new sign up, who can come live at your house and hit you over the head with a baseball bat everytime you get shot down.

Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: hitech on August 24, 2009, 09:38:08 AM
Lusche,

Get rid of the AvA arena. Ive played in there but there are just too few people in that arena. That arena is not getting used like it should.

This sums it up all  in one sentence. But the poster does not see the cause and effect.

Hitech

Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: stodd on August 24, 2009, 09:47:13 AM
Limit availability of aircraft and vehicles on a ratio basis based on rank.
:lol :lol
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: Tilt on August 24, 2009, 09:47:41 AM
Actually i do not have sympathy with the basis of Lusches view.

It is a game. It cannot model the exatitude of war. It cannot recreate a history where one side lost and another won with an identical model of the historical forces in place. It cannot recreate the myriad of influences that were contributing in such a history.

As a game however it has a game model. These are checks and balances to even out the balance of play or even make such inbalances as may occure logical to the player. (if you are mobbed 20 v 1 chances are you should lose) The game model is targetted to lead to an entertaining experience but one that rewards skill, team play and tactically superior game play.

Its also a form of role play. It is based upon air combat (and now also ground combat) pilot/driver operated  interaction using WWII aircraft/vehicles and providing the player with ACM/GCM problems as may have been experienced but only focussing on the fun bits. Ie condensing it down to a contest of skill that carries reward with success but no great penalty with failure.

So my view would be that what was good ACM/GCM in WWII should be good in AH. What was poor or silly ACM/GCM in WWII should not gain  reward in AH.


Further if there are any factors of inbalance apparent in game play or the gaming model then we should look to such balancing factors that occurred in history before we manufacture arbitary control devices/rules that seem out of place in the role play environment. Provided of course that no solution becomes tedious or removes fun.

In essence my view is that in any game play correction the first consideration toward a solution would be to consider what was in place in WWII that could be used to adjust game play balance toward the desired outcome before setting up arbitary "work arounds".

The present war model is somewhat old but well proven from AW thru to AH2. It develops IMO at a pace which an organisation like HTC can provide whilst ensuring that no massively retrograde steps are taken. HTC will be well aware of how easy a small inappropriate change can wreak disaster.
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: A8HatTrick on August 24, 2009, 10:15:13 AM
:lol :lol

glad someone caught the tongue n cheek of my post
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: moot on August 24, 2009, 10:15:33 AM
So my view would be that what was good ACM/GCM in WWII should be good in AH. What was poor or silly ACM/GCM in WWII should not gain  reward in AH.
WWII was a war, not a game.  The objective was killing and winning uncompromisingly, not fun.  Reward in AH is fun.  ACM/GCM thus follow, and skill/teamwork/tactical superiority aren't discouraged at all... In fact they're begging to be used.  But aren't.  There's very little winging, a huge waste of resources that would never ever be allowed in a real war, etc.

As far as tickling the authentic historical senses, it can't happen in the MA.  And AH needs an arena like the MA.  CT was and is what AH needs.

My 2c after 10 years of playing.
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: Lusche on August 24, 2009, 10:15:56 AM
Actually i do not have sympathy with the basis of Lusches view.


 :confused:


Care to explain where my and your views differ on that matter?
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: Rich46yo on August 24, 2009, 10:17:35 AM
What I like about the current state of the game is that there is something for everyone. The arenas, the aircraft/GVs, the plane sets...ect. It seems that no matter what you want to do there is somewheres to do it.

I'd like to see more Historically correct missions, and more Historical correctness, but I just dont see how you can create a bunch of rules to enforce it while keeping everyone happy. Its not like I expect anyone else to have my wishes for the game. You cant enforce historical correctness with rules if the very rules turned off a large slice of the player base. And it would.

Cause a large slice of your player base wants to simply furball in whatever airplane they want at the moment. Start telling them what they have to fly, and what they have to do, and what year they have to do it in, and your going to have a whole bunch of people looking for another flight sim.
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: A8HatTrick on August 24, 2009, 10:26:53 AM
Rich, got a solution for those folks.

Instant Action Arena

Small, very small map, no points and no rank, just perk points.

All planes available, tank town and 2 GV bases and 2 Airfields each. Uncapturable fields. Wallah, furball heaven.

Heck, 4 Arenas:

1. Africa
2. Europe West
3. Europe East
4. Pacific

1st Week of the month: 1939-1940
2nd Week of the month: 1940-1941
3rd Week of the month: 1941-1942
4th Week of the month: 1943-1944
5th Week of the month: 1944-1945

Rolling Plane Sets

Toss ENY out the window

Slide in K/D Ratio and Bomber %'s for rank

Limit availability of aircraft and vehicles on a ratio basis based on rank.

Some people will simply be flying the old stuff till the end and will have to earn that right to fly the new machines


and HTC can ship a trunk monkey with every new sign up, who can come live at your house and hit you over the head with a baseball bat everytime you get shot down.



Now if we could only get it on Xbox for the kiddies
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: Tilt on August 24, 2009, 10:44:10 AM

Care to explain where my and your views differ on that matter?

The thrust of your argument was to point out all the areas where realism is inappropriate as a reference and thereby insinuate that realism is always inappropriate as a reference. My argument is that realism should be the first reference of resource and only rejected when found to be inappropriate.

I disagree with moot the MA can use and benefit from more game play devices that have historical origins and be more fun. But then he has only been playing 10 years :P
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: A8HatTrick on August 24, 2009, 10:49:37 AM
And we can go ahead and get rid of the Navy planes in the European theater too..........

Oh.. wait... CV Ranger Atlantic WWII (http://www.acepilots.com/ships/ranger.html)
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: Lusche on August 24, 2009, 10:50:33 AM
The thrust of your argument was to point out all the areas where realism is inappropriate as a reference and thereby insinuate that realism is always inappropriate as a reference.

No, it wasn't.
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: A8HatTrick on August 24, 2009, 10:51:26 AM
The thrust of your argument was to point out all the areas where realism is inappropriate as a reference and thereby insinuate that realism is always inappropriate as a reference. My argument is that realism should be the first reference of resource and only rejected when found to be inappropriate.

I disagree with moot the MA can use and benefit from more game play devices that have historical origins and be more fun. But then he has only been playing 10 years :P

Shouldn't you be teaching a literature or grammar class somewhere instead of posting on the boards. (meant as a compliment to your prose as well as a knock on your dedication to it even when posting on a gaming forum.)
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: A8HatTrick on August 24, 2009, 10:53:12 AM
Snail, HQ needs resupplying again on Pizza!

I hope someone wins that map today.
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: Lusche on August 24, 2009, 10:56:59 AM
Snail, HQ needs resupplying again on Pizza!

I hope someone wins that map today.

Already happened. Montis is on.
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: moot on August 24, 2009, 11:26:42 AM
Tilt I'm not against historically sourced gameplay devices.  I just don't see them as trumping bottom line gameplay and fun in the MA.

Tactical savvy from WWII definitely does apply to air combat in the MA.  Only, most players don't really dig into it.  Unfortunately.
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: hitech on August 24, 2009, 11:53:13 AM
Quote
So my view would be that what was good ACM/GCM in WWII should be good in AH. What was poor or silly ACM/GCM in WWII should not gain  reward in AH

Quote
My argument is that realism should be the first reference of resource and only rejected when found to be inappropriate.

And you do not see these 2 statements in conflict? Good real world ACM would make for no fun at all.

As a very simple example, if promoting real world ACM was the goal, then we should put a very very high emphasis on living vs dieing. The end result of this produces real world results, if people are at a disadvantage they do there best to run and try fight again later because living is much more important than getting a kill. So what happens is very few engagements with lots of chasing each other.

So using your logic your statement of trying to recreate real world acm is inappropriate and hence should be dropped.

In my view you have the order of things mixed up, you first have to think of what is FUN, then think how you can use realism to create that fun. Because FUN is the goal realism is simply one of many tools to create fun.

HiTech

Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: Slate on August 24, 2009, 11:59:38 AM
  The AH players are a Group of individuals. Aside from some organized squads most go off on thier own for a fight and the concept of wingman is rarely used. It's hard to find a 1 v 1 in the MA's and many are shot down while engaged with others. Every flight in WWII was a mission and not the joyride we get here.
  We get the Glory of War and not the Horror that it truly was.  :pray Honor the fallen and have pity on the Chutes.
  
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: gyrene81 on August 24, 2009, 12:19:22 PM
And you do not see these 2 statements in conflict? Good real world ACM would make for no fun at all.

As a very simple example, if promoting real world ACM was the goal, then we should put a very very high emphasis on living vs dieing. The end result of this produces real world results, if people are at a disadvantage they do there best to run and try fight again later because living is much more important than getting a kill. So what happens is very few engagements with lots of chasing each other.

HiTech


Very true...especially in the main arenas.

It's very obvious that there is very little emphasis on living to fight another time (even with a perk plane)...anyone who finds themselves at a disadvantage in a fight and makes a run back to friendly airspace gets to see stupidity in 200 directed toward them...runtard and runstang dweeb appear to be the most popular things to say.
Furballs are very popular in the LW MA's regardless of how many bases get taken over, because of the "thrill of the fight" yet those same furballers tend to poo poo at the idea of going into the furball area in the DA.




Here's a fix...just detune channel 200 and let everyone handle their own level of realism the way they want.   :D  :P
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: Tilt on August 24, 2009, 12:21:18 PM
And you do not see these 2 statements in conflict? ............................. ............................. ......



In my view you have the order of things mixed up, you first have to think of what is FUN, then think how you can use realism to create that fun. Because FUN is the goal realism is simply one of many tools to create fun.

HiTech

No I would agree the primary goal is an entertaining experience. Any change you make to game play will be to enhance FUN else no need to change would be required.

Given a need is found for change ...................

You would  have a primary test statement ...............

How can we enhance this element of the gameplay to increase its FUN using a WWII historical context?

You would then consider the alternatives.....

If you cant find an appropriate one (ie realistic in concept and FUN) then you must surmise that there is not one and revert to a work around.

I thought this is what you did anyway....................... .......it seems very much what you describe

Re Lusche.then your point of view and hopefully my opinion are now somewhat clearer.
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: A8HatTrick on August 24, 2009, 12:33:20 PM
What this game really needs.....

Is Sharks with Lazers!
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: mipoikel on August 24, 2009, 01:20:50 PM
What this game really needs.....

Is Sharks with Lazers!

I dont remember any player named Shark but we do have Lazer.  :P
Title: Re: Historical Accuracy
Post by: A8HatTrick on August 24, 2009, 02:25:27 PM
you must not have been on during the last convention