Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Octavius on March 25, 2005, 04:07:22 PM
-
Go look! :D
-
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111111
!@!!$!@#%!!#$%^2346253
234
3wrp h epqwq
as
asd
a
sd
fs df hu sdfsdg
fsfsg
-
Keyboards are diswasher safe! Let it dry overnight.
-
ook im beetter noww...
,\
i Wuv you HTC people!
-
WTG Waffle BAS! it's great working with you!
-
That 190 is looking really nice.
Not meaning to be greedy, but I really like the look of the Fw190's cockpit. Would it be possible to get a look at the rudder pedals and throttle setup, e.g. the lower parts of the cockpit?
Thanks.
-
Yep, a look at the side consoles would be awesome.. Pleez..
-
Do i see dials in metric....
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Yep, a look at the side consoles would be awesome.. Pleez..
Yup. Fw190s have the best cockpit of any WWII fighters. The Me410 and Me262 are nice as well, but the Fw190 takes it by a good margin. Definately my favorite cockpit.
-
Originally posted by thrila
Do i see dials in metric....
You do not. The speed is in mph and climb is in feet, but the MP is in ata.. :)
-
look again thrilla
-
Mommy!
-
The body of Kurt Tank Compells you the Body of Kurt Tank compells you!
Yes Yes the Leather is strong in this one!
Friggin' Awesome Nate!
-
Looks really nice... I hope they redo the 109's soon. They were ugly in AH1 :D Nice to see you making use of the community... lord knows there are enough people willing to help.
-
WTG !
I guess it's a work in progress ?
Or the artificial horizon got a problem :)
-
Originally posted by wetrat
Looks really nice... I hope they redo the 109's soon. They were ugly in AH1 :D Nice to see you making use of the community... lord knows there are enough people willing to help.
109s (except the Bf109E-4), P-51D and Spitfires are probably lower on the list as they were all redone. The Bf109F-4, G-2, G-6 and G-10 were redone with the AH2 release, but they are done to late AH1 standards.
-
Originally posted by NATEDOG
WTG Waffle BAS! it's great working with you!
TOTALLY!!!
what real life plane is that modeled after?
-
lol SICK.
WTFG guys.
-
Nice work...
I think the cockpit bars are way too large, though. I hope we will still be able to move the view backwards a little bit... i sat in a 190F-8 at the Garber Facility (the plane is now at the Udvar Hazy Center outside DC) and the bars are really not this obstructive and distracting...
-
wow, that is pretty. i may hear a 190 calling my name "fly me, fly me":aok
-
Originally posted by NATEDOG
WTG Waffle BAS! it's great working with you!
Thanks Nate - really enjoyed skinning the 190, but I really enjoyed doing the ME 210, He 111 and the 323 more than the 190s...
As far as the 190A8 goes - here's the history behind the skin:
Plane was flown by Major Walther Dahl, while flying with Stab/JG300 out of Juteborg Germany December of '44.
You can find info on Walther Dahl if you google it.
-
Looks sweet, nice work dudes.
-
Outstanding work fellas THX:)
-
no one else notice the beefy rocket tubes?
-
Please, can we have even wider frames?
Just as reference:
190 frontal (http://www.terra.es/personal2/matias.s/framing.jpg)
-
joy
:D
-
Originally posted by MANDO
Please, can we have even wider frames?
Just as reference:
190 frontal (http://www.terra.es/personal2/matias.s/framing.jpg)
Yeah I agree with you Mand. It seems as if the new 190 cockpit has the same "perspective" problem that the old 109 cockpit did. Natedog will know what I'm referring to. The bars shouldn't come together so narrowly at the bottom.
-
A second reference from inside, note that the frontal bars are almost "flat".
fw 190A-8 frontal (http://www.terra.es/personal2/matias.s/fw190A8frontal.jpg)
-
I think you're right thrila..
The speedometer ranges upto "700", which just couldn't be in miles..!
And using the real 190 ammo counter position to place trim indicators and stuff, was a really ingenious move! WTG!
-
MANDO has a good point. Looking at it at home the bars are very, very thick.
-
Eye candy is nice, but for me the real questions are FM.
Especially the 190A8:
At what speeds can we now set flaps?
How fast on the deck?
Climb rate?
Turn rate?
Acceleration in the dive?
Speed at which it starts to compress?
Does it have a built in CD player?
-
Here's a side by side pic of 190 cockpit and new AH version.
(http://beatdownposse.com/images/Aces_High/190Cockpit2.jpg)
It looks like its almost taken from the same distance from the gunsight... notice how much "slimmer" the lines are.
-
Note Mandoble's pictures of an A-8 cockpit illustrates the addition of thicker glass armor infront of the windshield. This was installed specifically to enhance survivability against Allied bomber gunners. It was not on the -A5 series, nor or the -D9, to my knowledge. The picture I posted is of a 190A6 cockpit.
-
Actually - when you are inside of it and moving around it looks about right.
I think what might be throwing you guys off is the frame of the front armored glass.... (the light grey around the front armored glass)
-
Originally posted by Waffle BAS
but I really enjoyed doing the ME 210, He 111 and the 323 more than the 190s...
Lol.. i dont think you were supposted to let that out waffle ;)
Wtg !!
-
I would add that the gunsight is still minuscule.
-
Dang Waffle..
You're the Prometheus of Luftwobbledom!
-
Funny thing is - I like drawing em and researching them - but I don't fly em that much in the game.....
I did take a ju88 up the other day and was having fun dogfighting....
Just need some more guns in it - i think it was the ju88 H4 - that had the 20mms in it - think 6 total - 2 in front and 4 in pod. I would be all over something like that :)
-
... and come to think of it..
... it'd mean all of the 190A skins I've offered in the game with the Historic 190s Project would go null and void soon...
ARRRGHH! :D
-
I think Judas Priest put a song about all this didn't they, Hellbent for Leather? :D
-
Ooooooohhhhhh......Ahhhhhhhhh hhhh!
Aint that just fantabulous.
-
Puuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu uuuuuuurdy!!! Me want NOW!
I second Thrila and Kweasse. Looking at the numbers it has to be metric! JOY JOY!!! AH has broken the second last complaint I had about it!!!
I just checked reference again. It's the original metric speedometer... weee. Climb is still imperial though! I finally I don't have to calculate mph to kph in my head all the time... :D
-
Don't count your leather straps just yet HTC might change it to English system again! :D
-
Great Improvement!
-
Waffle, Nate, very nice work!
-
It looks just beautifle. But man those cockpit bars are heavy..did Oleg buy you guys some booz or something?
-
Awsome! a good balance seems to be struck between realism/performance/hat/track ir viewable layout.
-
Originally posted by Sp4de
Lol.. i dont think you were supposted to let that out waffle ;)
Wtg !!
He was fishing, Spade. :)
WTG on the 190, guys! :)
-
Originally posted by Sp4de
Lol.. i dont think you were supposted to let that out waffle ;)
Wtg !!
posted on behalf of waffle
(http://www.imagestash.com/uploads/32329.jpg)
-
I'd say the cockpit bars are abour 250% of their proper size.
-
Great looking cockpit, but I must agree that the bars a too thick.
http://www.clubhyper.com/reference/fw190cockpit/CockPitMap.html
Btw. you'll need java to see the page correctly.
-
Dora pit from FA as comparison.....
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/66_1111913649_dorapit_edited.jpg)
-
Oh My - What a completely lovely example of why I hate to see only photorealistic textures used...
No continuity there whatsover...draw it or use a blend of photos/drawings....
yuk....
BTW - those are the wrong bars, those are the canopy rails. Which were pretty wooden and thick :)
-
the intake horn looks so good amidst the 1990s copypasted stuff... almost as good as the knees.
-
lol - last time i saw colors like that - it was frogger or pitfall...lmao
-
Course you could go this route...
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/66_1079864118_pic007_edited.jpg)
-
:eek: :)
Now that my system has a decent RAM count, I should really look into buying IL-2. Wow.
-
I wonder why they can't put a pilot in the plane as well. I find it slightly unrealistic to look down into an empty seat and see the controls move all by themselves. Kinda ruins the immersion.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
I'd say the cockpit bars are abour 250% of their proper size.
You can say what you want, but its not the case. The exact way things look is a matter of field of view vs view angle, but the 190 had some beestudmuffine on the struts. AH has you pretty high up (as in RL) so the front view screen is rather short feeling, and from the pic, you are seeing the back and sides of the struts.
(http://www.combathanger.com/fwcock.jpg)
-
Can somebody help me, I fail to find one single picture of a 190 with thick cockpit framing.
(http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW/FW190-A3-4s.jpg)
(http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW/FW190-A1-2s.jpg)
(http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW/FW190-A3-7.jpg)
(http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW/FW190-A4-8.jpg)
(http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW/FW190-A3-10.jpg)
(http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW/FW190-A5-13s.jpg)
(http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW/FW190-V56-16.jpg)
-
(http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW/FW190-G3-19.jpg)
(http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW/FW190-D9-20.jpg)
(http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW3/fw190-004.jpg)
(http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW3/fw190-005.jpg)
(http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW4/FW190-A5-45.jpg)
-
Well, thanks for making my point.
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/natedog/a81.jpg) (http://www.combathanger.com/fwcock.jpg)
-
Originally posted by GScholz
(http://www.combathanger.com/fwcock.jpg)
Ummm....I'm no expert on the 190, but did they really put big slabs of PLYWOOD on the canopy frames? Look closely at that picture and I think that is something added later...
-
The plywood is real.
-
Is it? Like I said, I dont know much about LW aircraft...just didnt look right but I have no idea really.
-
Originally posted by TBolt A-10
:eek: :)
Now that my system has a decent RAM count, I should really look into buying IL-2. Wow.
It is good, only sim I replay every mission because it looks so damn nice!!
-
What was the 190 with the Mk103 gun pods?
-
Don't get all huffy about the struts just yet. You're looking at a zoomed in pic, 2D to boot. Let's wait til we get inside her.....inside her......snicker
-
Originally posted by Black Sheep
Don't get all huffy about the struts just yet. You're looking at a zoomed in pic, 2D to boot. Let's wait til we get inside her.....inside her......snicker
now we know why you look so busy in the cockpit all the time. :D
GREAT 190 pics, guys.
-
Originally posted by Black Sheep
Don't get all huffy about the struts just yet. You're looking at a zoomed in pic, 2D to boot. Let's wait til we get inside her.....inside her......snicker
UH Oh. Good point.
Can we have an unzoomed pic. I want to put an eyeball on them gauges. :D
-
Originally posted by Schaden
What was the 190 with the Mk103 gun pods?
Filename says 190A-5
-
Looks great. Good work!
The bars do look too thick and the gunsight does look small in comparison until I'm proven wrong :)
-
The time to whine is now befor it goes live. Once its in they will move on to other things.
-
Originally posted by Pongo
The time to whine is now befor it goes live. Once its in they will move on to other things.
Probably not fair to say that. They did adjust the armor glass on the 38G when it was pointed out after it's release, as the top bar was clearly too low.
Dan/CorkyJr
-
Yes, but it is probably a lot less work to do it now.
-
How about this?
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/232_1112054669_190cpbars.jpg)
-
Here's a side by side pic of 190 cockpit and new AH version.
(http://beatdownposse.com/images/Aces_High/190Cockpit2.jpg)
It looks like its almost taken from the same distance from the gunsight... notice how much "slimmer" the lines are.
Did HTC replace the real 190 ammo counter (left side of the upper dashboard with at least 4 bars for machine guns and cannons) with cheeeesy flap, and trim indicators???? THATS GHEY!
:(
ps HTC should fix the frame bars and the gunsites on 190 before it comes out.
-
Not only are you looking at this in a zoomed position but every photo you've produced shows it with the canopy open and at an off angle.
Here's some that show a bit more details. The canopy rail is infact fairly large and the forward view is fairly obstructed.
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/556_1112056606_canopy-4.jpg)
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/556_1112056590_canopy-3.jpg)
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/556_1112056522_canopy-2.jpg)
-
Very nice work guys, however, I have 2 requests:
1) Please make the canopy framing a bit less obstructive. Remember, in the game it is harder to move your head around than in real life (the "move" commands are very slow). Therefore, in compensation, it might be appropriate to make the canopy framing err on the light side rather than on the heavy side.
2) Please make the gauges a bit more readable. I like nice graphics, but if that's all I liked I would play IL2. The GAMEPLAY of AH is its strong point, and making the gauges hard to read doesn't help us older players. The level of readability of the gauges in the current planes would be fine, and maybe this could be achieved in these new gauges with slightly more noticeable needles and numbers. They would still look more realistic, but also be readable. Note this thread: http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=143499&highlight=chigger+gauges
Again, thanks for your efforts; nice work overall. :-)
-
Originally posted by Cobra412
Not only are you looking at this in a zoomed position but every photo you've produced shows it with the canopy open and at an off angle.
Here's some that show a bit more details. The canopy rail is infact fairly large and the forward view is fairly obstructed.
Your photos are even more at an off angle than mine. They are OUTSIDE friggin cockpit! Try posting some from INSIDE with the cockpit closed. From what I can see, the width of the sides (from port to starboard) doesn't look larger as they obscenely do in the new AH cockpit, rather the closed cockpit frame adds more towards the aft rather than towards the center of the cockpit. Yea?
Another thing, your shots of the front windshield panes aren't good for this discussion because they are show from the side! Hence it is impossible to see how THICK they are in proportion to the size of the glass. As in, a shot from directly above or from the front, or behind the gunsight would be more helpful.
-
Originally posted by Cobra412
Not only are you looking at this in a zoomed position but every photo you've produced shows it with the canopy open and at an off angle.
Here's some that show a bit more details. The canopy rail is infact fairly large and the forward view is fairly obstructed.
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/556_1112056606_canopy-4.jpg)
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/556_1112056590_canopy-3.jpg)
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/556_1112056522_canopy-2.jpg)
In all your pictures you can see how thin the bars are. The depth of the bars seems right, but they are too thick.
It is especially evident in your last picture.
-
Oh yah, and I'm almost 90% in agreement with Kweassa's rendition. That looks much better.
-
Originally posted by TDeacon
2) Please make the gauges a bit more readable. I like nice graphics, but if that's all I liked I would play IL2. The GAMEPLAY of AH is its strong point, and making the gauges hard to read doesn't help us older players. The level of readability of the gauges in the current planes would be fine, and maybe this could be achieved in these new gauges with slightly more noticeable needles and numbers. They would still look more realistic, but also be readable. Note this thread: http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=143499&highlight=chigger+gauges
You da man. You da man. :D
-
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/556_1112056606_canopy-4.jpg)
That canopy handle (left) would be visible (and blocked on the right side?). Is that a standard for all 190s or is that particular crate modified?
-
I can't see them in any of the other photos, but I think that is a Dora or Ta. Perhaps they had the handles there?
-
Originally posted by GScholz
photos, but I think that is a Dora or Ta.
The only Ta 152 that exists is in storage in Silver Hill, MD by the Smithsonian. It's currently awaiting restoration, and it's in pretty horrible shape. This is definately not a Ta-152.
-
The pics that Cobra posted are of the Fw 190D-9 at the USAF museum in Dayton. Note the missing Revi gunsight.
-
Some more pics I scanned from ISBN 4-499-20547-6
Fw190D9/D13
(http://beatdownposse.com/images/Aces_High/190D9cockpit1.jpg)
-
(http://beatdownposse.com/images/Aces_High/190D9cockpit2.jpg)
-
Excellent photos, thanks!
When you see the width of the canopy compared to the width of the bars, it is quite clear they are too thick.
-
What part of depth are you missing. Hell Naths pictures prove this even more that it's almost dead on. The forward bullet proof windscreen inner bars should be slightly smaller. Other than that the canopys forward lip needs to be tapered a bit at the top.
-
I'm assuming your saying this is what it should be correct?
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/556_1112068892_190d9centeredcockpit.jpg)
-
Are you dim?! It is not the depth that is missing, they should not be as wide.
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/556_1112056522_canopy-2.jpg)
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/556_1112056606_canopy-4.jpg)
(http://www.combathanger.com/fwcock.jpg)
Se how much thinner the bars are at the sides compare to the top and "depth"?
Now compare that to the 3d model:
(http://beatdownposse.com/images/Aces_High/190Cockpit2.jpg)
See? The thikness on the sides are the same as on top and "depth".
-
Originally posted by TDeacon
.
2) Please make the gauges a bit more readable. I like nice graphics, but if that's all I liked I would play IL2. The GAMEPLAY of AH is its strong point, and making the gauges hard to read doesn't help us older players. The level of readability of the gauges in the current planes would be fine, and maybe this could be achieved in these new gauges with slightly more noticeable needles and numbers. They would still look more realistic, but also be readable. Note this thread: http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=143499&highlight=chigger+gauges
I agree with TDeacon. For some reason the gauges seem to have a glare eminating out from the center. It doesn't make them very distinctive to read. They kind of "blend in" to the cockpit.
-
Have you ever in your life done a perspective view drawing?
-
Originally posted by Cobra412
Have you ever in your life done a perspective view drawing?
The idea of perspective in relation to these cockpits has been done over on this board already, in relation to the pre-redesigned 109 cockpit. The consensus was that the optical principles of perspective don't apply to such short distances, and what if you move closer to the gunsight? The bars don't magically move outward as distance decreases.
-
Actually, I'm a 3d artist. I do this for a living.
-
Nath even with the old cockpit everything was totally flat on the canopy and forward wind screen. There was no depth to it in the canopy rails at all. It was even missing a portion of the wind screen.
Unless someone can post a definitive photo that is centered and taken no more than 6 inches or so from the head rest arguing won't change much.
The rails should appear to move out if your expecting to give the illusion of depth. The problem is it's difficult to do so with 3D games hence why there is devices out there to give you the illusion of depth while playing them.
Here's an altered photo of the original cockpit before this modification. Is this what your expecting for a centered forward view?
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/556_1112074039_190cockpit.jpg)
-
I think the pic you rendered above has about simular dimensions as the one I did.
-
Hey Cobra I want those colours in my 190 !
-
Kweassa that's not including the canopys wooding area that curves down below the canopy frame. It shouldn't hinder the forward view so I didn't add it. The most it would have done is placed a curved line coming across the yellow and dark yellow areas. It might have also come down a bit more in the dark green area but not enough to go beyond the yellow wind screen framing.
-
Your drawing is much more like what I see in the photos than the new cockpit.
-
Well I still think that screen shot they did was a zoomed shot and obviously offset if it's lined up with the gun sight. I'm not saying it's going to make a huge difference but it might make a bit of difference. In the end a huge adjustment may not be needed.
The one I did is still taking up a bit more room compared to the old model and it's adding in a brace that didn't even exist in the original model. It also doesn't include a higher arced pad that exists around the console assembly. The old models pad was hardly arced at all which could very easily raise the overall heigth of the console itself taking up even more forward visibility if it's arc was corrected.
-
I don't think the screenie is zoomed in. You can see the whole instrument panel. You can't see the whole instrument panel on any AH plane while zoomed in.
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/556_1112068892_190d9centeredcockpit.jpg)
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/natedog/a81.jpg)
-
I hope the Dials are not this hard to read when the new 190 comes out...PLEASE!
-
I find the new dials easier to read than the old ones.
-
I seriously hope they have metric readings when they come out. Those "fake" metric dials are simply ludicrous.
Regarding window frames. I'f we want it to be realistic then they should appear as wide as they appear to a person with 2 healthy eyes sitting in the cockpit. 2D photograps are not how they should be modelled after. The older one is closer to the truth than the new one. The most realistic option would be something in between.
-
Mora I've been working on some authentic dials for the Mustang. Problem is I'm sure folks will complain because they may be hard to read with out putting a notch of zoom in. I've become very familiar with the planes I fly and know where my gauges are. I also know the rough layout of them so I don't have to do anything more than a quick glance to what direction the needle is pointing to know what it's indicating. I don't have to stare at it to know what it's saying.
Mora the older model was missing parts of the wind screen frame and it didn't model any bulk. It was totally flat as if someone put colored tape on a pure glass canopy to make it look like it had a frame. I'm sure it was done to keep down on the polys but it still didn't look right. They had to give the frames thickness to make them look right. Maybe they put a bit much into this one. One other thing that may give it some depth is to add the glass into the frame with some imperfections. Maybe a slight tint to it with some circular and random scratches. Very light but enough to know it's there. That would give the cockpit a little more depth to it.
The one thing that still bothers me is the fact that the canopies themselves have no life to them. I've sat in the F-15 enough times to know any canopy that has been on there for awhile has some type of wear. You'll also notice in certain lighting conditions that there are circular scratches on the canopies from polishing or lack there of. Now it's almost as if you can reach out of the canopy frame directly to the sky.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
I find the new dials easier to read than the old ones.
Beware , the pict look to have been cropped from an hight resolution.
-
I believe this is what you're refering to Cobra:
(http://www.lo-mac.com/ss/mustang02.jpg)
A subtle reflection map and bumpmap scratches on the canopy makes all the difference. Notice the subtle reflection lighting around the curved canopy frame.
Problem is I don't think the AH2 3d-engine even handles transparancy properly now.
-
(http://www.lo-mac.com/ss/mr_mudd_007.jpg)
-
GS yes something to that affect. Granted it is eyecandy and doesn't make the game unplayable as it is. I just think it would add to the game.
-
Indeed it would.
-
A pretty good reference from inside Fw190 cockpit:
Triplane.net (http://www.triplane.net/Lulu/LuluCockpit.htm)
Frontal view, sadly there is no gunsight but it is clear enough that our gunsight is too small and too low, and the default pilot head is also too low.
(http://www.triplane.net/Lulu/LThumbs/MyView.jpg)
-
I think it all depends on basically how thick the struts and bars would be modelled in the 3D model.
In case of IL2/FB's Fw190s, the biggest problem they had was that the cockpit wasn't really 3D. It was pseudo-3D/'bumpy 2D' - I'm sure GScholz would know what I'm talking about, since he says he is a 3D modeller.
The IL2/FB cockpits were using 2D photorealistic images for the backgroundm which was combined with a few '3D' surfaces that protrudes out to form a facade. None of the objects in the cockpit were real 3D - so they would be disastrous if somebody could move their head and see the various doohickeys from other angles. (and this, was why Oleg couldn't possibly allow customizable head positions in IL2/FB - they'd have to remodel all of the cockpits for all of the planes to full 3D)
To make matters worse, the cockpits weren't even 'inside the 3D model'. In other words, IL2/FB cockpits were separate piece of artwork that had nothing to do with the 3D modelling of the plane - so, if you switch from external to cockpit view, the 'camera' doesn't move from outside to the inside of the 3D model, but changes the computer screen to show a separately modelled cockpit screen.
However, AH cockpits are (while it did suffer from loss of visual quality due to simplification) true 3D 'virtual cockpits' from the beginning to the end.
If the 3D dimensions of the struts and stuff are modelled right, they'd look different in thickness from all angles, since the head positions are customizable.
I do think the 'perspective' is quite a bit exaggerated in Natedog's original cockpit pic.. but I think we'll just have to see for ourselves what the results would yield.
ps) maybe someone with 3D modelling skills/software could come up with a quick polygon mock-up to see what it would look like..??
-
Originally posted by mora
I seriously hope they have metric readings when they come out. Those "fake" metric dials are simply ludicrous.
Really? I used to hate how everything was those same boring looking fantasy gages and wanted realistic guages for immersion, metric it it fit, even if I would struggle reading them. Truth be told, AH is a game of winning by knowing exactly how fast you are going right down to the digit. But after seeing the compromise with the better looking more realistic guages, with the numbers/format I am used to reading, I think it's a terrific idea.
And the bars on the 190 don't look so bad to me. Close enough it's matter of opinion me thinks, not much advantage if you shave off alittle bit. One thing I did get out of the thread with all those cool pictures is I'm still amazed at how little fwd view there was. Just not much there in a cramped cockpit.
-
It's not about advantage. It's about it not looking right. It is the wrong shape, size and it looks like it is made from solid cast iron. It looks ok for a window frame I guess, but we're not modelling the bridge of the Bismarck here! ;)
-
Also you'll notice in the picture Mando posted that the front framing aren't square bars like in the 3d model, but rather a wedge construction of two plates.
-
I still don't understand how the new guages are unreadable. My eyesight isn't bad and they are very clear to me... My desktop is at 1024x1280 and I fly at that resolution. I assume those with poor vision use 1024x768 or some lesser resolution. That screenshot is 1181x773. Ingame, 1024x768 is plenty big enough.
What exactly is unreadable about them? Contrast? Size? Color!?
You don't need to know if it says Steigt, ATA, etc. Remember the gauge, remember the needle position, If you are unable to view the needle position
While in combat, you read the gauge to make sure it's the altimeter? Memorize the gauge, its position, memorize the needle position, the BIG numbers (only a point or two smaller than the ammo counters), and you're in business.
Maybe we've got a bunch of legally blind customers playing. Sorry, but it's beyond my comprehension.
***
Back to the subject: The basic structures of IL2/LOMAC and Aces High cockpits do not allow for a fair comparison.
-
:lol :lol :rofl :rofl :rofl
Oct and JB73, your avatars should NOT appear so close together. I's just too damned funny!
-
Originally posted by Octavius
What exactly is unreadable about them? Contrast? Size? Color!?
oct.. see my post in this thread:
http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=143499
now i have obviously not flow with the new 190's but that pic is basically what the "new" gauges look like on my system...
if i turn up the gamma / brightness any more i think i will be looking at a pure white desktop outside of the game.
notice the ammo counters and the like... i can not read any of the text natively, i have to move my head around and zoom. on the temp gauges, i dont know if there is a "red" area, but i does not show for me.
also, notice that pic is with the sun in the 4-5 oclock position, helping "illuminate" the gauges.
-
I think the main problem with the gauges is the glare from the glass covers, not realy the size. Also, if the needles where brighter that would eliminate 99% of the complaints.
-
When is the P-51B getting the Malcolm hood?
-
Originally posted by Octavius
While in combat, you read the gauge to make sure it's the altimeter? Memorize the gauge, its position, memorize the needle position, the BIG numbers (only a point or two smaller than the ammo counters), and you're in business.
Instead of memorizing the gauges it would make much more sense just not to size the gauges such as the new 38s and the 84. The actual gauge size itself is not the problem I don`t believe as much as the numbers, text, etc needs either resizing or highlighted in some way. We are not asking for mountains to be moved here or anyone to walk on water, just a touch, a smidgen of rework. What we are asking for could not possibly interfere with nor affect anyones game experience . If you can read the gauges in the new 38s and the 84, then more power to you. If you having to memorize each one , that is ridiculous.
Flying by braille is not what I think HT had in mind.
-
ditto jackal...
if i turn my moniter brightness up to 100% and contrast to 100% and gamma to 1.3 i can read the gauges like in the screen shots posted.
but i dont like that eye straining washed out look of a pale gray "black" on my moniter.
-
You can't memorize the location of the altimeter? I don't think we're on the same page Jackal.
In combat I quickly glance to the altimeter, speedometer, fuel gauge, etc... very quickly. Hell in my case I fly by feel half the time anyway.
Instead of memorizing the gauges it would make much more sense just not to size the gauges such as the new 38s and the 84.
Er, is that a typo? You're saying the gauges are fine on the 38s and Ki84? Then we're on the same side here.
-
you guys can move your head around in a 3d space... it's not stuck in one place:)
I zoom in sometimes to look at gauges....
I mean you already have to move your head postion up or down on some planes to find the compass, ect....
-
Originally posted by Waffle BAS
you guys can move your head around in a 3d space... it's not stuck in one place:)
I zoom in sometimes to look at gauges....
I mean you already have to move your head postion up or down on some planes to find the compass, ect....
a quick "page down and bump the hat" to see something is alot different than:
page down, move side, zoom, un-zoom, move head so it snaps back to default.
sorry not all of us can afford track IR to look where ever we want, and using the page down and arrow keys while in combat with a HOTAS setup is not really possible
-
You cant program a rocker / hat to be you're panel view?
I've got a zoom programed on hotas, and then also the pan/snap view on a button. If want to look at something - one button to tilt - one to zoom in / unzoom
-
don't wanna argue the topic with you waffle
but if the game is going to be designed that you need track IR to get a view of the gauges then they should come out and say that, and make it a requirement.
don't forget that in the new p38's the gigantic stick is in the way, so even "page down" doesn't help, you have to do some odd "look forward down" moving head, and zooming in.
in that other page i linked to with my screenshot, i had yanked back on the stick to get it out of the view.
-
oh im with the non argument thing,
But you just gotta adapt sometimes i guess :) I'm a non track IR user too - just ch pedals / stick and good ole keyboard.
-
I have a button on my stick just for the instrument panel and I still can't read the gauges on the P-38. I have very poor eyesight and that's the reason I'm playing this GAME instead of flying a REAL airplane. So a little consideration would be nice.
P.S. Hope that didn't sound to snotty.
-
Originally posted by Octavius
You can't memorize the location of the altimeter? I don't think we're on the same page Jackal.
In combat I quickly glance to the altimeter, speedometer, fuel gauge, etc... very quickly. Hell in my case I fly by feel half the time anyway.
Instead of memorizing the gauges it would make much more sense just not to size the gauges such as the new 38s and the 84.
Er, is that a typo? You're saying the gauges are fine on the 38s and Ki84? Then we're on the same side here.
LOl
I have no problem with the location of the gauges.
We may not be on the same page.
No, I said NOT to size the gauges like the new 38s and the 84. That`s not really correct either I don`t guess.
The overall actual size of the gauge itself I have no problem with. Maybe that`s where I`m not making myself clear. If just the numbers , text, etc was resiized just a tad or highlighted/emphasized in some way it would make all the difference in the world.
Not asking for gaudy , Big Ben sized gauges or anything . Just a touch of work to make them a little more readable than the new 38s and 84.
-
Here's an image I made using the sample pic Nate provided, Mando's pilot's POV pic, and Fester's 190 cockpit pic.
(http://org.fighters.co.kr:8000/upload/gallery/org/1112167990761.jpg)
At first, I didn't think it would be that much meaningful, since different perspective yields different looking surfaces... until I realized that the pic Mando posted is in almost exactly the same angle as the sample pic of the 190 cockpit Nate provided.
* The area outlined in white, is the real 190 cockpit. The rest of the areas, are the AH2 190 cockpit.
* No warping of the real 190 cockpit pic was done. Only the size has been altered to superimpose upon Nate's pic. The ratio of horizontal/vertical sizes remain the exactly the same.
* Notice how the real 190 cockpit guages almost exactly match the AH2 cockpit guages. (Big Kudos to Natedog)
* All of the areas highlighted in orange, can be considered as 'exaggerated'.
* The red lines indicate the continuity of the frontal 'bars'(swathed in leather?). The real 190 cockpit pic has the right part of the bars misaligned.
* I used Fester's cockpit shot and took the Revi12D gunsight and warped it a bit to fit the cockpit bars in proper scale. If we would be sitting in an AH2 Fw190A-5, the Revi12D gunsight should be that big.
Ofcourse, there could be some differences. Mando's cockpit picture, has a POV a bit higher than Nate's AH2 190 pit. So, the size of the frontal area of the windshield cannot be accurately compared.
However, the width of the canopy bars and struts, can be compared - and it is too dang thick!!
-
Perhaps I'll make a stupid remark but aren't you comparing an picture of an open canopy with a closed canopy one ?
-
Not a stupid remark straffo. I've thought about that.
If the cockpit was closed, the main canopy bars(upside down "U" shaped doohickey) would thicken a bit more, and come something close to the size of the bars in Nate's pic.
But the real problem is the frontal struts(two vertical bars left and right of the gunsight). Even if we take into account that the Fw190A-8 thicker armoured glass(IIRC), the frontal struts are way too thick.
Also, the area of the windshield (which is transparent, thus offering visibility) surrounded by outer cockpit bars(the big upside down "U" shaped doohickey) are too small.
Thus, the overall size of the main canopy bar(the upside down "U") is pretty good, but the visible areas surrounded by it are two small, and the frontal struts are also too thick.
-
Very nice work Kweassa! That's exactly what I would like to see! :)
Originally posted by Kweassa
* The red lines indicate the continuity of the frontal 'bars'(swathed in leather?). The real 190 cockpit pic has the right part of the bars misaligned.
Actually, I think it's the left part that's misaligned. The seam in the middle is teared and "the leather cushion" has come off from it's original mounting place from the left side.
-
Originally posted by Creamo
Really? I used to hate how everything was those same boring looking fantasy gages and wanted realistic guages for immersion, metric it it fit, even if I would struggle reading them. Truth be told, AH is a game of winning by knowing exactly how fast you are going right down to the digit. But after seeing the compromise with the better looking more realistic guages, with the numbers/format I am used to reading, I think it's a terrific idea.
Oh yes, I'm all for realistic gauges but those gauges are not all metric even if they appear at a first glance.
The variometer has a scale between 0-4. It must mean 0-4000 ft/min, as 0-4 m/s or 0-40 m/s would not make any sense. The altimeter doesn't look metric either as it reads 20 at the screenshot. I'm not sure about the airspeed, 700 mph seems like an overkill, but I also doubt any metric airspeed meter has a reading for 50 km/h in a fighter either, so I'm guessing it isn't metric.
-
Originally posted by mora
but I also doubt any metric airspeed meter has a reading for 50 km/h in a fighter either, so I'm guessing it isn't metric.
From memory in some plane there was 2 "badin" (anemometer) one for low speed one for high speed.
Perhaps there was some where a 50km/h readout was possible ... prolly for WWI not WWII ;) or with strong front wind
I've found one :D
(http://perso.wanadoo.fr/vincent.besancon/instruments/aera/aera3gr.jpg)
-
Okay, one more mock-up pic.
This is ALL I have to say about current 190 frontal view. I won't add/comment about this subject after this post.
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/232_1112174930_190again.jpg)
-
The one thing that still bothers me is the fact that the canopies themselves have no life to them. I've sat in the F-15 enough times to know any canopy that has been on there for awhile has some type of wear. You'll also notice in certain lighting conditions that there are circular scratches on the canopies from polishing or lack there of. Now it's almost as if you can reach out of the canopy frame directly to the sky.
i made a post about this a while back, i too would like some "life" to the glass. So far you cant really tell its there.
-
Nice work Kweassa. That is something I'd like too see.
-C+
-
Yeah, nice work Kweassa
-
No offense Natedog but Kweassa cockpit does look much more inline with the pics shown.
Great work both of you, now merge it. ;)
Tex
-
Like others have said, great work kweassa! I hope we'll see these changes in the game! :)
-
Kweassa, in your proposal, you should divide the "depth" of the frontal arc bars by two or three.
Also, the effect of thickness of the frontal vertical bars is wrong, these bars were no thick at all. Each of these bars was composed by two thin panels, one for frontal glass joint and the other for lateral glass joint.
-
the 3D simulated fov perspective's warping can't account for much difference between real and screenshots, right?
-
incredible work Kwaessa.
Besides Mandobles sidenote it looks almost perfect.
-
ok all you 190 gurus - check in here -
http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=147282
Thanks - Waffle
-
to keep this discussion going, here's a pic of the new 190 cockpit which HTC said was reduced from the original screenshot before release.
To add, though, it seems as if there are additional parts of the frame jutting out into the field of view. They are not part of the main structure of the bars, but rather seem to be emulating some kind of "attachment" for the glass to the frame? I don't know. I haven't seen this in any 190 cockpit... check it out.
(http://beatdownposse.com/images/Aces_High/fullview.jpg)
(http://beatdownposse.com/images/Aces_High/obstruct1.jpg)
(http://beatdownposse.com/images/Aces_High/obstruc2.jpg)
(http://beatdownposse.com/images/Aces_High/obstruct3.jpg)
(http://beatdownposse.com/images/Aces_High/obstruct4.jpg)
-
Those "borders" also exist on the back of the frames as well. Removal of them would achieve accurate cockpit reproduction.
-
Originally posted by Nath_____
Those "borders" also exist on the back of the frames as well. Removal of them would achieve accurate cockpit reproduction.
these borders seems those on the sturmbock 190s frontals for the extra armour glass.
-
Which, if true, shouldn't be on the A5 or D9 models.
-
Originally posted by Nath_____
Which, if true, shouldn't be on the A5 or D9 models.
Neither our A8. The sturmbocks did not only have the extra frontal glass, they also had extra lateral glasses at both sides, not present in fighter configuration. If any, a different frontal view would be required when you select de Mk108 gun pack (common for sturmbock units).
-
Precisely
-
You did not need Sturmbock conversions to mount outer wing 30mm in 190A8. So there should be no change in view when you use outer 30mm.
-
I would say these bars come from a R7 or R11, not from any standar fighter.
-
Originally posted by MANDO
I would say these bars come from a R7 or R11, not from any standar fighter.
It's not a sturmbock canopy. It was smply a modeling mistaske of the windscreen just like happened to Ki84 and P38G.
They have allready improved it somewhat, and there is still some more they can fix to make it more accurate as in kweassas and nath's composite images.
HTC has been cool in fixing these 3D graphics issies in AH2 and i see no reson why they wont be fully responsive in this case as well.