Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: TDeacon on August 22, 2004, 12:10:02 AM
-
I'm only a beginner at AH2, and have finally apparently accumulated enough points for perk planes. However, I am reluctant to use them because most have a distinctive "kill me" icon. It doesn't appear to be worth the small amount of extra performance.
Why not give perk planes the "type icon" only? For example, F4U, Spit, etc. Invent a combined icon for Typhoon/Tempest like "TyTemp". In the real world one could not distinguish these planes at long range, so why should we? Additionally, it would make perk points a more desirable motivator, which should have game balance benefits.
Comments?
-
Someone once had an idea of the icon changing at different ranges.
I.E.
6.0k-3.0k standard base model like A6 Zero, or Spitfire.
3.0k-1.0k Specific Model Like A6m or Spit 9.
1.0k-0.0k Any perk plane becomes obvious. Like a spit 14 will be a spit 9 up until it is under 1k. Then the tag turns to spit 14.
-
Hitech answered this in an old thread
Here's what he said
The different names are there so they can be hunted.
HiTech
http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=110894&highlight=icon
You still gonna beat this dead horse?
-
Who knows, what with the latest numbers balancing issue, maybe Hitech would reconsider.
I recall that one of the arguments against using perk points to achieve balance was that perk points weren't important enough to motivate people. One reason they aren't is the "kill me" icons.
Since the game changes over time, there is always the chance that he will change his mind on this.
-
I hope not and so do quite few people.
Perks are designed to be rare. Their value and icons aid to that. Planes aren’t perked on performance but because of a mix of issues. Impact on the main for one, see chog. Rarity, see the 152.
The perk cost variations didn’t work not because of the tags but because with the type of game play that the majority participate in, i.e. war winning. In this context all of the perk planes are useless except the chog and not worth the risk while doing jabo or base capture stuff. The chog doesn’t carry a tag.
Perk points aren’t of any value unless you use them. Hording them because you feel you aren't good enough, or new, or because you are afraid some one might actually try to shoot you down is rather ridiculous.
So what if you get shot down? What good are the perk points just sitting there? Even if you loose them so what? They are easy enough to get back. I would suggest that you grab one head to the nearest fur and have at it. After you see how fun it is dragging around and killing the guys chasing your icon you will get over any perk tag anxiety you have. I don’t know what see in the main but I was also ganged regardless of my icon. Folks were always trying to shoot me down.
-
Every plane should have a unique ICON
J_A_B
-
Originally posted by J_A_B
Every plane should have a unique ICON
J_A_B
I'd like to know Hitechs response to that. Sounds like a good idea,perks would still be hunted and variety would be added to the game like the new skins have brought.
-
That’s not a new suggestion. If after all these years he has yet to make that change why would he now? He changed the fuel porking and added a number balance fix because they were needed. Changing the plane type icon isn’t. There's nothing new to argue here.
Perk planes are a separate issue and with the exception of the la5fn and la7 (maybe he took a wait see on this plane in regards to perking it thus it La7 or he was already stuck with la5 icon) and the 202 / 205 the rest are generic. What do you call them MAC?
Perks are different. The icons were made intentionally so that they would be visible for the reason HT said above.
In rl telling the difference between specific types while in combat would have been difficult. Unless the ac had an obvious structural change you couldn't tell. However, based on intelligence and the performance the pilots saw they could guess a change was made. They didn’t necessarily fight against large numbers of mixed variants spawning the range of the war.
Simply accepting the idea that you are meant to be hunted while in your perk plane seems a whole helluva lot easier then any other suggestion.
-
The icon is there to punish you for flying a perk plane. The perk costs are there to allow you to earn the privlege of flying it.
:confused:
Wotan, What you do once you accept that the perk icon is there for you to be hunted, is stop flying the perk planes.
All model icons should be replaced by the airframe name. LAV for the la5/la7, SPIT for the spit14, etc. It makes no sense to have some models that you can spot easily(la7 vs la5) and other that you cannot.(190a5 vs 190d9)
-
Wotan, What you do once you accept that the perk icon is there for you to be hunted, is stop flying the perk planes.
No thats what you do :p. I still flew the 152 because it is fun, even with guys chasing my tag. The rest of the perk planes are of no interest to me me free, tagged or other wise.
But let's say that some folks don't fly perk planes because of the tag then that falls back to this point:
Perks are designed to be rare. Their value and icons add to that.
The same guy that complains of the tag complains of the cost.
My attitude has always been to say no to welfare perks and no to hiding behind your icon while in a perk plane. You and I have went round and round on this in the past.
As you can see by HT's reply I quoted above his intention was to have them hunted. Being hunted isn't a bad thing. If don't care to have folks chasing you then don't fly them. But as I said above no matter what plane I was in folks were always trying to shoot me down. No matter if I was in a 202 or G-6.
This discussion is as old as the first perk planes in AH. I dont think there's any thing new that would cause HT to revisit the issue. But I don't speak for him. I think the perk system has been relatively successful in making planes that would not be available under an RPS but 1 day a tour or might not have been modelled at all.
I think that there's room to expand the perk system once more planes are added to the plane list.
-
The perk icon is nothing more than an attept to make the lesser perk planes next to useless. The only value I have found for perk planes other than the 262 and 163 are to lure the enemy away from my goons planned flight path. Because they offer only marginal advantages over 'normal' planes, the perks are only really an advantage in a 1 on 1 enviroment.....and just how many stable 1 on 1 fights are there with no other enemy within range to come over and join on in.
It makes the game very gamey in that respect, and is the most enduring problem to date.
-
The temp; the spit 14; the F4u-4; and 152 are all decent planes and can handle any plane in the arena. If you have trouble in them that is completely different then saying that they are worthless. They are worthless in your hands maybe, I have no idea how or what you fly typically.
The temp, the f4U-4 and spit 14 have incredile climb rates for instance. This will allow you to rope many a perk tag chaser.
-
F4U-4? Incredible climb rate? Compared to what? A jug or the f4u-1? The P38, Dora, 109g10, 109g2 all outclimb it pretty easily. Up to about 6000 feet the 190A5 will outclimb it. Above about 3000 feet the spit9 will out-climb it.
Perk tags aren't a problem if you follow the rule of 'never be less than 10k above any group of enemies'. They require ultra-conservative flying that is boring for anything but a fairly hardcore score-potato. Like you said, the spit14, f4u4, and 152 can handle any one plane in the arena. The problem is that unless you enter a fight area at 25k, you're going to have to be able to handle several planes.
And what I see repeated quite often(and which I repeat myself) is, "The cost doesnt matter, it just needs to lose the tag.". The cost affects how often people _can_ fly an aircraft. The perk tags make people not want to. It seems silly to me for a game to have a reward system which ends up not being a reward of any kind.
The lesser perk planes don't need to be unperked. The perk tags just need to be removed. Even if that means tripling(or more) the cost of them, it's better to have an expensive plane that people want to fly, than a cheap one that only the most timid of pilots want to fly.
It's also worth noting that in my experience, the 152 tag seems to attract far less attention than the 'BIG' icons of the SPIT14 and F4U4.
-
We have been discusing make all tags unique.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hitech
We have been discusing make all tags unique.
HiTech
I just see that type of idea as very arcade. I can understand some of the lines of reasoning that lead to this type of idea, such as all La-7s are easily identified as La7s with all the knowlege you have about their performance, while the 109 or 190 has a very broad range of variations, thereby giving those pilots a little bit of a cloak of vaugness, and now with multiple skins, you can no longer tell variations just by coloration alone.
However on the converse, by applying variation specific tags you would be doing to the early war planes, exactly what has happened to the late war Perk Planes....making them targets. As it is now, we have a gangbang mentality on lesser planes like the P40 and other slower early war rides, this can be especially apparent with some of the light bombers/dive bombers (SBD, TBM, B5N2, Ju87). These planes are considered 'easy kills' and so are hunted down ruthlessly. However, while this may be a valid tactic becuase they are bombers going to kill strats etc.....the exact same mentality will prevail over the lesser fighters.
If you give a virtual pilot a choice of attacking a Bf109 E4 or a Bf109 G2, everyone in the know will attack the E4 because it is much slower and has much less punch in its ammo load. This will make the E4 a bad chioce not only because it has less ability, but because that lesser ability is broadcast to everyone within a few miles.
If such tags are decided to be implimented anyway, I would hope these specific plane icons would only apear under 1000 yards. I still find it silly we have things like an F4u that can have a perk specific tag at 3 miles away.
(http://www.combathanger.com/ahicons.gif)
-
I like Alf's suggestion!
Edit: I like the second (bottom) suggestion only. It would save alot on the, "What that a G10, or a G6?" on open channel.
-
Alf has some valid points. Unique icons for everything, at long range, would penalize some of the early war planes with "kill me" labels as well.
However, I would prefer the distinction between sub-types to be made by actually viewing the models/skins, as currently. For one thing, it puts all these nice models/skins to good use. Also, there is some historical justification for this. If I recall correctly from books, I don't think you could tell the difference between a Spit V and a Spit IX at 1000 yards. "...The Mk IX, was essentially a Mk V with revised bearers to take the new engine and modified radiators under the wings...".
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
Someone once had an idea of the icon changing at different ranges.
I.E.
6.0k-3.0k standard base model like A6 Zero, or Spitfire.
3.0k-1.0k Specific Model Like A6m or Spit 9.
1.0k-0.0k Any perk plane becomes obvious. Like a spit 14 will be a spit 9 up until it is under 1k. Then the tag turns to spit 14.
hey that was my idea!!! :mad:
i wish HTC try and do something like this...
-
FWIW I like Alfs suggestion
-
Innominate's right, make all the tags general.
-
Thats not what HT is looking at engine. He is considering making all tags unique. That doesn't help those with perk tag anxiety.
Innominate the F4U-4 with 100% fuel climbs at 3500 fpm above 3k. Reduce that fuel weight and then test it.
Who cares why folks don't fly perk planes more often. There is no "lack of perk planes in the main" problem. They are perked to be rare, if the tag contributes to that then great.
On the topic of making all tags unique it will have a much greater impact on early variants of certain plane types. The AH main is almost "all late war as is". Making all tags unique will mean those lesser performance planes will be the priority targets. Who's going to fly a Spit 1 or 109E now? Almost no one flies them now but what will happen when the 51s and la7s see the "Spit I" tag? They will be all over him like white on rice. You will have the "perk tag anxiety" spread to early planes as well.
The G-6 for instance gets confused between the rocket G10 and manuverable G2 etc...
It seems to me that would be the best way to make the main all P51D's and La7's. But what do I know.
-
Make them all general. I doubt very much if any one could tell if they were facing a 109 F or G from the cockpit; in the same way I doubt very much if someone could tell if they were facing a Spit V or IX from the cockpit.
If perks are to be hunted; then maybe a simple asterix in the icon could suffice.
But why include type at all? Why not just a red closure icon?
-
I would prefer them general to AC type Spit, Lav, 109 etc
However before the onset of multiple skins we could see (when close up) that a Spit V was brown/green and a Spit IX was grey/green. (even if the the spit V was not doing turns the IX just cant do)
Now the skins can confuse this.
Typically skins used to reveal the sub type at 400/600 so i guess that would be the range to switch the sub type icon on.
Re hunting
Gang banging (IMO) is one aspect of game play that is not an asset to AH.
I see little evidence of folk massing to counter a perked plane..... I see a lot of evidence of folk massing to chase the "easier kill".
When in a Spit V I like the idea that my opponent may cautiously treat me as a SpitIX which I can out turn.
When in an La5 I do not like that my opponent knows I am not an La7 and so knows he can out run me etc.
Icons are pretty "gamey" now IMO. Whilst I see their use it would be neat if the info they revealed was revealed much as one might discern it in RL.
-
Originally posted by Seeker
I doubt very much if any one could tell if they were facing a 109 F or G from the cockpit; in the same way I doubt very much if someone could tell if they were facing a Spit V or IX from the cockpit.
Regarding the 109s you are correct, the G2 was identifiable if you got close enough to see the FAF markings, the F4/G6 we nearly indistingushable to anyone but experten. Some of the new skins will make them easier over time, like the white F4 or the one with a brown wing and a green wing. But the new skins will also make the Spi9/Spit5 harder to tell apart. I used to have no trouble seeing the brown or the gray paint. Now there's a grey Spit5 you'll have to rely on FM to tell the diff, and if you guess wrong you could be in big trouble. Of course I expect folks will be B&Zing in the spit5 soon just to make people think they're a 9 and make an error in judgement.
All I'm trying to say is that the new skins will throw a new twist on the plane ID portion of a pilots SA. I am in favor of the idea of range effecting how much info you get as was mentioned earlier, maybe not exactly as posted here but the concept is sound.
-
I meant in real life; Edbert :-)
I've read some quotes that claim the LW were a bit jumpy after the intro of the Spit IX (at first, at least).
They went from complete confidence that the 190 was definately the Spits's master to being unsure if they were facing an inferior or an equal plane.
Imagine if the Icon merely said La? you'd never know if you were facing a 5 or a 7. What would it do to your flying? Because that's the advantage 109 and 190 drivers have at present in AH (if you can call it an advantage - I think I do.)
OTOH; one risk that's definately missing in AH is blue on blue mistakes. There were Jugs that were bounced because their wing profile wasn't recognised. There were p38's that were attacked because the RAF pilots didn't know what the hell they were (North Afrika); there were hurri's shot down simply for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
I can see a use for specific icons in events and the CT if ALL icons were the same colour (teaches you to know your sides plane set).
Other than that, why show plane type at all?
Icons are one area, perhaps; where WWIIOL is a little bit ahead.
-
I'd rather not see more stuff on the icons. The more red text there is the more eye catching the icon becomes and the more you watch and fight the icon and not the plane.
I would not be massively opposed to simply having the country icon and the range indicator. Baring that I'd like to see the ID data as small as possible. Use lowercase letters where possible and limited to three or fewer characters.
A20
A6M
234
B17
B26
B5N
109
110
C47
D3A
F4F
F4U
F6F
190
Hur
Il2
87
88
61
67
84
Lan
Lav
LVT
LVT
163
262
M3
M8
M16
Mos
N1K
Ost
38
40
47
51
Pan
PT
SBD
Spi
TBM
Tig
Typ
Yak
-
I'd actually be more in favor of completely generalizing the icons, like they are for the 109/190. I think singling out the perk planes kinda sucks- I really doubt someone would have known that they were facing a Spit 14, and not a Spit 9. An La5 looks identical to an La7 (to me anyway), F4U4 looks exactly the same as all the other F4Us... the Ta152 looks like a really ugly stretch limo version of a regular 190.
I think (like most other people seem to) that making the icons read "109F4" or "Spit5" would give away too much information. I'd rather not know exactly which one I'm fighting than have everyone know exactly which one I am flying in.
-
It sounds like most of us are in agreement on this subject. Some favor full disclosure icons and some prefer low disclosure icons. But one thing we all seem to agree upon is the double standard is a problem. I don't see why 109/190/F4U/51/spit get genericized icons when the La5/La7 don't. It is also 100% agreed (from numerous other threads) that it is the icon that keep the numbers down on the Spit14 usage, even though the Chog gets no special treatment.
-
I think it works both ways,IMO it dont matter if you know its a perk plane or not, what would matter is if you were able to tell who is flying that perk plane. In the right hands they are down right scary to fly against. whether you know its a perk plane from 6k to 200 feet is not gunna matter, someone is probley gunna see you and advise everyone your comming.
The icons of perk planes can disrupt the whole area they flying in, thats whats cool. funny to hear over the vox... oh my god! 262(spt 14, temp, etc...) over field, or the check 6 everybody 262 diving in hard and fast, believe me it livens up the whole area, the 262 or other perk planes dont really become the hunted 90% of the time, they are the hunters like that lion that scatters the whole herd. Dont even have to fire a shot, scream through at 600mph usually screws everybody up, after that, knowing everyone is gunna want a piece of your perk plane has its uses for sure.
It's the icon that does make it exciting to fly . when i see a perk plane I just hope its someone that dont know how to fly the perker plane, because if they do , it is not gunna matter if you know what plane it is, your probley gunna die. I'm no threat in a 262 or any plane for that matter, but they dont know that, all people know is its a perk plane and they hope its someone like me in it.
It's like, who buys a viper or bmw and removes the tags, you want people to know what ya got, (that bling bling thing) teehee. besides a good pilot is gunna kill ya in anything, unless he cant catch you. Good plane or bad plane , icon or not if the pilot can stick it , good luck living. No plane is a suprise to us, not like the 262 was when noone knew about it until it was shooting a plane down for the first time, after that happened we took precautions for the 262 in the areas they were likely to be encountered.
-
tactic,
Only the 262, 163 and Tempest match your description.
Every time I fly a Mk XIV I get hunted and the few times I flew an F4U-4 or Ta152H-1 I experienced the same thing. There are a lot of players out there than know their airplane outperforms your perk plane and they want your scalp.
-
Have to go with the generic icons. If you wanted to go with ALFs suggestion within 1k that'd work too. Never liked the specific tags or perk tags. Just my opinion.
-
I agree that Icons should be generic.
They have to give some detail becuase you can literally be going up against ANY of the aircraft at any time, but identifiying exact type at long range seems too easy.
Limiting icon info to stuff like 109 , 190, P51 , P47, etc. like we have now is great for planes with variants
However, it is unfair for planes without multiple variants.
-
Yeh , people do like to kill ya in your perk plane thats no doubt, but I fly my perk plane knowing that too. everyone has great points, lets just not mark them at all would be ok too. mark the country they from B K R
1k 1k 1k
thats cool
-
Originally posted by Midnight
I agree that Icons should be generic.
They have to give some detail becuase you can literally be going up against ANY of the aircraft at any time, but identifiying exact type at long range seems too easy.
Limiting icon info to stuff like 109 , 190, P51 , P47, etc. like we have now is great for planes with variants
However, it is unfair for planes without multiple variants.
Aint it a kick in the head....no matter what solution, one side or the other gets hosed:eek: Either we subjugate the early war planes, or we unfairly identify non varient planes while keeping planes like the 190 or 109 masked in secrecy.
The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of specific tags, but only at close range....not 6k Its decisions like this that make me glad Im not HT.
-
I agree with ALF and company... general tag until close enough to really be able to tell the diff..
I don't understand why HT would discourage the use of perks as a balancing system then decide that they where doing an inadequate job. Maybe a better implementation of a design would be better than another solution.
-
Alf pyro and I have disccused that idea long before this thread came out.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Alf pyro and I have disccused that idea long before this thread came out.
......and?
Inquiring minds want to know :D
-
Originally posted by hitech
Alf pyro and I have disccused that idea long before this thread came out.
I would like to thank HT for omiting the comma, and making it look like all three of us consulted in the games development:D
BTW....does this mean I dont get any residuals?
-
Generic icons give a little "surprise" to each con. Makes you respect the con as if it's the "best" model when you may not be facing that. Typically you can tell pretty quickly what you are facing just by watching the performance in relation to your own. That can also make people sloppy though and give breaks to some of the earlier rides (like watching a Spit turn to avoid what they think is a 190D9 only to hae the 190A5 turn right with them). Same with the C-Hog/D-Hog, you don't know and must respect 4 hispanos so you have to be more cautious around a D-Hog until you really identify it. Having both as F4U I think makes both Hog versions "better".
I think the perk icons make the not-clearly-dominant perk aircraft attention magnets (SpitXIV, F4U-4). There is simply no suprise in knowing you are facing a SpitXIV, if you thought it was a SpitV or IX most people would get caught off-guard.... that's what the perk value would buy you. The 262 and 163 are different, they are massively performance dominant and the perk tag doesn't really hurt them, they could both carry unique tags.
At least that's what I think.
-Soda
-
I like HiTech's explanation that different names are there so they can be hunted, and I like Alf's suggestion that variations of planes be identified at only closer ranges such as 800 and less.
Seems best way to enhance both gameplay and realism.
-
Why not make it some kind of option like choosing the color of the icons? Allow us to choose.
Sometimes I would like to turn off the enemy icons completely and leave only the friendly ones on. (I know you can make the text labes smaller but even at the smallest setting it still takes away from the immersion factor.)
I also really wish I could display the icons without the country symbol. For the most part I don't care which country the enemy is from because I have managed to figure out what color shoots at me. Country symbols make it hard to see the text anyway.
Just make more player options in the icon option screen. The default is all the way up now. Make it so if a player wants to turn down the information they can.
(I'm sure no one is interested but my personal preference would be to have no enemy icons during special events, generic labels in the MA, and no country symbols on the labels at any time.)
-Buzzz
-
Buzzz,
You can turn off enemy icons while leaving friendly icons on. Press CTRL-I (or maybe it was ALT-I).
You can also set icon colors to whatever you like. My enemies are red and my friendlies are blue.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Buzzz,
You can turn off enemy icons while leaving friendly icons on. Press CTRL-I (or maybe it was ALT-I).
You can also set icon colors to whatever you like. My enemies are red and my friendlies are blue.
THANKS Karnak! I did not know that. HeyOH! (I was only looking in the options menu.)
The colors I already have set custom. I was so used to red being friendly from AW that I set my colors that way and made the enemy green out of respect (and lingering hate) for that AW country.
-Buzzz
-
agree with ALF and soda
Originally posted by Soda
Generic icons give a little "surprise" to each con. Makes you respect the con as if it's the "best" model when you may not be facing that. Typically you can tell pretty quickly what you are facing just by watching the performance in relation to your own. That can also make people sloppy though and give breaks to some of the earlier rides (like watching a Spit turn to avoid what they think is a 190D9 only to hae the 190A5 turn right with them). Same with the C-Hog/D-Hog, you don't know and must respect 4 hispanos so you have to be more cautious around a D-Hog until you really identify it. Having both as F4U I think makes both Hog versions "better".
I think the perk icons make the not-clearly-dominant perk aircraft attention magnets (SpitXIV, F4U-4). There is simply no suprise in knowing you are facing a SpitXIV, if you thought it was a SpitV or IX most people would get caught off-guard.... that's what the perk value would buy you. The 262 and 163 are different, they are massively performance dominant and the perk tag doesn't really hurt them, they could both carry unique tags.
At least that's what I think.
-Soda
:aok :aok
-
"We have been discusing make all tags unique."
HiTech
Yay! I hope it becomes more than just a mere discussion :)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"Generic icons give a little "surprise" to each con. Makes you respect the con as if it's the "best" model when you may not be facing that."
You say that as though it's a good thing.
It isn't.
What it means in practice is the guy in the "surprise plane" is winning a fight because his opponent couldn't make the proper tactical decisions, not because the winner actually outflew or out-skilled his opponent in any way. How is that fun? Seems stupid if you ask me.
I feel every airplane should have a unique ICON. This means you know what you're up against and you fight the enemy PILOT.....not some "surprise" factor. Winning a fight with a 109F because your opponent thought you were in a G-10 is a hollow victory IMO.
Not to mention such a system is inherently unfair to aircraft which don't have variants, like the P-38 and F6F and the upcomming Ki-84. They don't HAVE some other differently-perfoming model to "hide" behind. Even as it is in AH, the Spit's, 190's and especially the 109's gain a silly advantage just because it's now completely impossible (due to skins) to tell the variants apart.
And....don't bring up "realism". To every "realism" person who says "well Spit 5's and 9's were hard to tell apart", I can just as easily ask how often Spit 1's flew on the front lines alongside Spit 14's. The MA is by definition not fully "realistic". "Realism" (itself such a subjective term) must always be given secondary consideration to gameplay. The upcomming "TOD" arena, if and when it is created, will likely better cater to the people who want more strict "realism".
------------------------------------------------------------------
While I think the ICONS need to be distinct for every plane, I ALSO have been an outspoken advocate for reducing ICON clutter. I believe that the now-useless 0's on the range part at less than 1K yards can be removed since they no longer serve any purpose. The "country" icon picture can also be removed and instead give each country a unique color.
In addition, make liberal use of upper/lower case lettering when possible--for exaple, with regards to the 109 varieties, you could have a "109E", "109F", "109g", "109G"and a basic "109" for the G-10. Doing this would involve using virtually no more space than current ICONS and would result in smaller overall ICONS if the earlier suggestions are also used.
I like the idea of ICONS displaying sub-type at less than max range; however this range still needs to be enough so that you can ID the type before comitting to a fight. Around 2.5K yards would work.
As a general indicator, I also like how WarBirds ICONS would lose any plane-type data at extreme range (I would do this for 5k-plus in AH). This too reduced clutter and lets face it....if a plane is 5K+ away it doesn't really matter much what model it is.
I liked AW's ICONS--which were off to the side so you couldn't just "follow the icon in battle"--best of all, but obviously AH is not going to utilize such a system.
J_A_B
-
JAB,
I disagree. If icons were unique I think you'd get a more "cookie-cutter" approach to fights. As it is, some aircraft in the MA benefit from the presence of more powerful brethern. It buys them some extra room to work effectively and giving them unique icons would damage them. Just think seeing a 190, 109, or F4U's, you don't know exactly what you have as compared to a C202/C205 where you can apply specific tactics based on icon (the C202 and C205 are very different). It's not the more powerful aircraft gaining benefit, it's typically the less powerful ones, which gives them a fighting chance. It would certainly change how you would have to approach combat knowing that you might have a "sleeper" aircraft mixed in or you might only be facing the least capable variant... the unique icon method would lead to "selecting targets in order of capability" vs. just having to deal with the one that's "there" and adapt your own fight to suit what you learn about your opponent (his aircraft, his skill in it, and his knowledge of ACM).
I know that when I fly the non-D9 190's (frequently) I use every asset I have and that includes making people think I'm a D9. It's MA nature to make that assumption and I use that to my advantage.
-Soda
-
i'm with Soda... it's more interesting and realistic to not be able to tell what type of bird it is until one can actually clearly see it.
-
I vote for individual icons for every type. Like it is now we can identify from far out a C202/C205, an F4F/F6F/FM2, but not a 109F4/109G10.
It 's difficult enough to handle the mixed bag in the MA. By the way: In the real world the opponents knew what type of aircraft the other side had at a given time (except short periods when new types were introduced).
mofa
PS: I fly LW.
-
Soda and rabbit, I agree with you that the vagueness adds to the game, but if the icons are going to be vague then why have some planes like the Lavochkins and Maachis give specific IDs? How do you feel about some perk rides violating the generic ID (like spit14 and F4U-4) when others do not (F4U1-C)?
I like the vaguenesses too, but also think that if you get within D500 or so they should give full disclosure. Once we get a bunch of skins into this game it will be nearly impossible to tell some rides apart, no matter how close you get.
-
Originally posted by Zwerg
It 's difficult enough to handle the mixed bag in the MA. By the way: In the real world the opponents knew what type of aircraft the other side had at a given time (except short periods when new types were introduced).
I do think it makes the MA more difficult, I don't agree that there were limited aircraft they had to deal with. I bet the LW in 44 faced numerous aircraft, plus many sub-variants, so had exactly the problems that generic icons would give (they had it worse).
A graduated icon system would be interesting though, that way you'd be able to plan your fight after you were close enough to identify the aircraft. I'm sure the pilots had training in that but our graphics levels don't really allow that yet. I'd hate to see a system where people would pick on the weaklings and immediately run from any top-rung aircraft. I think the generic icons do a pretty good job of leaving some "unknown" in the game.
-Soda
-
Originally posted by Edbert MOL
Soda and rabbit, I agree with you that the vagueness adds to the game, but if the icons are going to be vague then why have some planes like the Lavochkins and Maachis give specific IDs? How do you feel about some perk rides violating the generic ID (like spit14 and F4U-4) when others do not (F4U1-C)?
I like the vaguenesses too, but also think that if you get within D500 or so they should give full disclosure. Once we get a bunch of skins into this game it will be nearly impossible to tell some rides apart, no matter how close you get.
For what its worth.. I agree with you. Realistic ID ranges would make the more immersive and interesting.
-
Originally posted by Edbert MOL
Soda and rabbit, I agree with you that the vagueness adds to the game.....
I would make it as generic as possible and include the low-mid perks in there. I mean, the 190's, P51's don't give away which model, why does the La5/7? I'd include the Spit14, F4U-4 in generic icons too, that is part of the reason they have a price to them. Generally those rides don't have massive performance edges, it's the combination of abilities that's made them perked, and this would just be something else that you'd get when you paid the perk price. I bet you'd see a lot more perk use that way, as it is now most people just save up their perks until they get to a 262 which makes it worthwhile. If you take up a SpitXIV you are just asking to get chased down by every La7/P51/190D9 within a sector (and once one slows you down, the horde of SpitV/IX's jump on you). The Me163 and 262 don't really need generic icons (they don't look like anything else anyway) so leave them as is.
I'd have maybe made the "full disclosure" at D1.0 and remain until such time as the aircraft leaves icon range. If it came back it would remain un-identified again until close. That way people could extend but remain identified unless they actually exited an area.
-Soda
-
Originally posted by Soda
I'd have maybe made the "full disclosure" at D1.0 and remain until such time as the aircraft leaves icon range. If it came back it would remain un-identified again until close. That way people could extend but remain identified unless they actually exited an area.
No need to do that or make the programming more complicated. If it leaveas the specific icon range it loses the specific icon. In real life tracking a con didn't include a permanent marker on what type it was once it got too far away tp ID the specific version. Leave that aspect of SA to the player as well.
Think of it this way. You bounce some Ki-67s in your F4U-4, but zoom 1000 yards up before he finds you. He never saw what you were, why should an icon now tell him?
-
The "persistent" icon idea simply was an aid for people who struggled with views (it would help them re-acquire), would help differentiate aircraft (since we have limited schemes in AH), and would counter-balance some of the initial advantage perk-aircraft would get (once revealed they'd be trackable). It would make it tougher for guys to "hide" in furballs once they were discovered. I'm not really stuck that hard on the idea though.... it was a bit of a handicapping idea or compromise for the average player.
I mean, having the current 109 icon represent all 109's, is it a big issue in the MA? I know I have to respect each one I encounter as if it is the "best" though the basic characteristics/limitations of each 109 are much the same. Sure, some are faster, some hit harder, but overall I adapt my gameplan to whatever the enemy reacts to. That merge and first turn or two set the stage and tell me what I generally need to know about the aircraft I'm facing. I can get more specific and agressive in my maneuvering as I learn more about the opponent.
-Soda
-
Originally posted by Soda
I do think it makes the MA more difficult, I don't agree that there were limited aircraft they had to deal with. I bet the LW in 44 faced numerous aircraft, plus many sub-variants, so had exactly the problems that generic icons would give (they had it worse).
-Soda
Quite right Soda.
Real pilots mostly trained using black silhouettes drawn on cardboard to learn recognition of enemy planes. Add to that a 400mph+ closing speed and I don't see how anyone could distinguish between most varients of different aircraft. They might have had "intel" of what enemy pilots were "supposed" to be flying in a particular area. But in most cases all they knew for sure was what general type it was even when they were jousting with one.
Why not use this same silhouette criteria (real world information) to decide this issue... like the FW D9 is distinctive due to it's inline engine but all the FW A's look pretty much alike and so on. After all, this is supposed to be somewhat of simulation right?
So far as the skins go... don't you only see the skins that you select and everyone else just sees the ones that they select? If this is the case it seems easy to pick skins that are distinctive for each varient and memorize the ones you have selected. This would make it EASIER to tell everything apart at close range. The new skins in fact make it where you don't need specific labels because you can see which skin it is from 400 out. (Like in my current setup, if it has D-Day stripes then it's a Spit 9er.)
-Buzzz
-
"I bet the LW in 44 faced numerous aircraft, plus many sub-variants, so had exactly the problems that generic icons would give (they had it worse). "
Problem is--this isn't 1944.
1944 was 60 years ago. It's done. It's past. It's gone. It bears little/nothing in common with the MA. Are you trying to re-live the past? Are you tying to pretend to be a WW2 fighter pilot?
It's pretty obvious that the MA is not a re-creation of any real war, past or present. Therefore trying to justify an action in the MA based on what happened in some past war is illogical. I for one don't particularly care about WW2 when I log into the MA.....I care about the here and now. I like air combat between WW2-era fighters because it is the most balanced era for "fun" A2A combat. WW1 planes are just too slow and Post-WW2 jets are too fast. I have NO interest whatsoever in trying to perfectly re-create actual WW2 conditions. When I want a dose of WW2 I can read a book and get the stories from the people who were actually there....no need to play make-believe.
In short....I don't view "hiding" behind an overly generic ICON to make for good gameplay. Unless, of course, you feel that it's somehow rewarding to defeat people who can't even tell what you're flying (which is lame in my mind). I WANT people to know what I'm flying. I WANT to know what the other guy is flying. I WANT both myself and the other guy to know what tactics to use and how to fight. I want a contest between pilots, not a silly "surprise" game of "Well I look like I'm in unit X but I'm really in unit Y with different abilities". That just isn't good gameplay. That makes things random and annoying. I don't much like random and annoying.
Personal preference of course. The people who want to re-live the past will likely be happier once the "TOD" arena is available.....and maybe then such people will finally stop trying to pretend the MA is something it isn't.
J_A_B
-
Originally posted by J_A_B
"I bet the LW in 44 faced numerous aircraft, plus many sub-variants, so had exactly the problems that generic icons would give (they had it worse). "
Problem is--this isn't 1944.
1944 was 60 years ago. It's done. It's past. It's gone. It bears little/nothing in common with the MA. Are you trying to re-live the past? Are you tying to pretend to be a WW2 fighter pilot?
J_A_B
Well... if you look at the page http://www.hitechcreations.com it says right under the Aces High logo "Welcome to the Internet's Premier WW2 Combat Experience". That's how the people that created the game are choosing to describe and market it. It's intended to be recreation of a WW2 combat experience by design, form, and function and it's clearly labeled as such.
It's alright to look at it as strictly a "video game". It is that. But if others like to actually show some imagination and get something more out of it, then that should be alright too. We all pay the same price. Nothing wrong with a getting a little extra value for your money.
-Buzzz
-
Originally posted by J_A_B
In short....I don't view "hiding" behind an overly generic ICON to make for good gameplay. Unless, of course, you feel that it's somehow rewarding to defeat people who can't even tell what you're flying (which is lame in my mind). I WANT people to know what I'm flying. I WANT to know what the other guy is flying. I WANT both myself and the other guy to know what tactics to use and how to fight. I want a contest between pilots, not a silly "surprise" game of "Well I look like I'm in unit X but I'm really in unit Y with different abilities". That just isn't good gameplay. That makes things random and annoying. I don't much like random and annoying.
J_A_B
The issue there is that there are those who may want to be able to identify weaker targets. That happens most often with those who strive more for the best ranking or score, rather than fun. This is a game, but it tries to give the feeling of WWII combat, and a good part of the thrill of combat is the unknown. As real pilots had ideas of what their planes did better than particular enemy planes, they didnt have hard numbers, and certainly couldnt look up a chart and know "Im safe, my plane is 10 MPH faster than that model at 5k".
Its the reason two of your cards are face down in Texas Holdem.....it just isnt much fun to know everything.....till you commit...and are ALL IN.
-
I like random and annoying.............
I like not to know who my opponent is............. one challenge is that a noob can take you out because you have over estimated him and he did the dumb but in this case very effective thing.
I like it that he does not know who I am and that he has to get close before he knows exactly what I am flying.............
I dont want him to know how fuel heavy I am or how much ammo I have or how much non visual damage I may have taken.
I like to have to work that stuff out or guess by his tactics or risk based on a hunch.
Randomness brings variety
-
Originally posted by J_A_B
I don't view "hiding" behind an overly generic ICON to make for good gameplay. Unless, of course, you feel that it's somehow rewarding to defeat people who can't even tell what you're flying
I defeat people using every skill/method/trick I can and that includes my knowledge of the aircraft in AH. It's a dynamic decision process for how much of my hand to display, and how much I might want to hold back, to get the job done. If I beat you from an inferior position, be in energy or aircraft, then the victory is all that much the better because I used superior skill/methods.... utilizing your "assumptions" against you is part of that.
In your arguement, why not just include the pilot ID, ammunition counter, fuel remaining, speed, etc in the icon and agree to meet at X location at Y altitiude... they it can be all about beating the "pilot"? That would take away any remaining uncertainty... oh, I guess that's what the Dueling Arena is all about...
Originally posted by Tilt
I like random and annoying............. Randomness brings variety
Exactly. You don't quite know what you are facing and learn a little more about the situation the longer you remain in it. It's a progression of knowledge and dynamic adpation that makes for success. You need to make quick decisions and employee correct tactics while always planning for the potential worst. It's those surprises that get your heart racing from time to time.