Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: GRUNHERZ on August 24, 2001, 09:37:00 PM
-
All this time I thought the Ar234 had no external view like the bombers with numerous gun positions, but it does.
I can see no reasonable cause for the Ar234 to have the full 3d external view. It was only a single seater with no rear view save the periscope which had an extremly narrow field of wiew at best.
So lets ask for HTC to remove external view from the Ar234 in the realese of 108.
As for the Mosquito its very similar to the Ar234. It had a 2 man crew who sat within inches of each other and had no view down under the bomber. There is absolutely no visibility difference compared to AH fighters.
So lets ask HTC to eliminate the 3D external view from the Mosquito before release in 108.
Now we know that HTC took out unrealistic outside 3D views for the GVs, many people on the BBS were intially fearful of this change but now it has nearly unanimous support.
Lets face it the only reason ever given to justify unrealistic bomber 3D external views was to simulate many viewpoints from numerous defensive gun positions. Well nither the Ar234 or Mosquito have any such postions or any other crew areas save a fighter like cockpit and they shouldnt have these 3D external views.
-
BTW Oh yes I have no HTC stement whether Mosquito has 3D outside view but Im sure it will because the Ar234 has it too. So lets just stick to the merits of the issue.
-
Agreed, GRUN.
But when do we get periscope guns in Ar234? :)
Regards,
Mitsu
-
The Mosquito shown is a Fighter/Bomber, it has no bomb sight, and I assume that HTC would not model it with an outside view.
As for the Ar234, it would be real neat to get the periscope working.
I agree that the Mosquito and Ar234 shouldn't have an outside view.
-
[ 08-25-2001: Message edited by: skernsk ]
-
Well thats what my 2nd post is about skernsk, basically HTC doesnt say there is or isnt 3D view in the Mosquito, but since, as I found out today and very much to my shock, the Ar234 has it it seems 100% certain the Mosquito will too.
Anyway its very unrealistic to the extreme and cant even bte justified by the standard AH buff 3D view reasoning of many gun positions.
-
Nah it wont have external view.
-
Nash where did you get your information? Was it from HTC?
-
Its primary rolewill be fighter/bomber more than likely, and will not have an external view. Why dont we just wait and see what HTC does, and when. :) it may not be with the next revision for that matter, however it it might. If I was a LW type like GH, I would be lobbying about the Fwd firing ordinance of this beast :)
-
Heh..sorry Grun had to delete post because of my sig there :)
I think that the plane will have an external view also. I don't know if it will and I don't know if it will be a problem. Case in point is the IL2. It has an external view, but that doesn't make it any better IMHO all that means is the IL2 pilot knows he's dead and can watch it happen.
I am very happy that the Mosquito is arriving in 1.08 as well as the Hurricane. I don't think either will unbalance the arena.
-
No - why would they tell me anything? I'm just hoping because I'm bored of all the excuses whenever guys get killed... and I don't wanna hear it when my Mossie wreaks havoc on yer sorry arse. :D Look at you, yer practically making excuses now before you even know. And who the hell has shot anything down in external view anyway? Pathetic. You fear Canadians... admit it. I am gonna make sure you get a nice taste of B.C. lumber just for this sorry display of preemptive sniveling.
Bite on my two by four.
Submit to the power of the Mossie. It is bigger than all of us. You will be owned. Eh!
-
Guys, the external view settings are set via the arena settings I think. I can't see them giving the Mozzy an external view.
-
So nobody here objects to the Ar234 and Mosquito not having an external 3D view when version 108 comes out?
What is HTC opinion on this matter?
-
The Mossie is a FB. Mk VI.
FB = Fighter-Bomber.
No fighter bomber capable aircraft in AH have external, I don't expect the mossie to either.
-
What about the TBM Avenger, and the B-26. Both of them drop bombs and they are not too bad for fighting, especially the TBM.
Les
SC-Bama
-
Guys.... it could well be hard coded that all "bomber" class aircraft have the external view. And the mossie with present code would be a "bomber".
The Il2, has the external view as well, which I think in its case is not really justified. I think for an aircraft like the IL2 the 6 view should actually be the gunner's perspective at the dead 6 position. anyways gettin offtopic.
Perhaps HT can code a separate class of aircraft, for the Mossie, Il2, 234, Stuka, Bf110, Val, Kate, Dauntless, Judy, B6N oops hey look ... a new class of aircraft which would have a new view system is justified.
Class: Attack Aircraft/Zerstorers
Any with a single gunner: Pilot's 6 view is thru the eyes of the gunner until the gunner is killed. No external view.
Any with no gunner, no external view
SKurj
-
I dont know. in the case of the mossie the pilot has an extra set of eyes not currently in any other 'fighter' in the game. That has to count for something.
-
Right now, it's just done by vehicle class. There's no specific flag to turn it on or off outside of that. We'll probably break it out to a separate setting at some point when we get a chance.
-
They sit within inches of each other and there is no way to see under the plane. So no the extra crewman who sits in the same cockpit only inches away doesnt meet the AH idia of gunner stations all around plane.
BTW the Mosquito canopy is some 3-4 feet wide thats only a bit bigger than most AH fighters.
-
Cool! Pyro do you mean that planes like Ar234 or Mosqito or a ppssible Me110 or Me410 wouldnt have external view?
Hmmm and just curious is there time to do this for Ar234 and Mosquito for v108 as trial run to see what impact it has?
-
I just have to put my 2 cents worth in here.
Yes, the Mossie crew sat side by side in a 3ft wide canopy, but the 'navigator' sat several inches back and a few inches lower on the pilots right side.
His sole job while not 'navigating' was to look for enemy a/c on their rear (4 to 8 o'clock0. This was many times accomplished by standing up (crouched) and scanning around.
Lets see if they get the front windscreen right ... oh yeah and the overall view from the cockpit too.
(Mk IV and Mk VI had different windscreen configuration.)
Cheers,
Rifle
-
My 2 cents, leave the 234 alone, it sucks enough as it is. If you take way external view then the pilot has no way of seeing behind him, which is not fair as a plane could easily sneak up on it, and plus it cost so much in perkies. Now if HTC gets the scope to work and adds the guns it is supposed to have then I might change my veiws. Now about the Mossie, I'm not sure. I can't judge it till I fly it.
-
I think for 60 perkies they can leave the external view for the Arado. It's only defence is SA and running. Besides, it's not like being sneaky pays of when chasing one down...the only thing that matters is getting in firing range.
SOB
-
The Me262 wiil be an expensive perk too, should that have a 3D view?
And the second Mossie crewman could not see anything the pilot coudnt, and certainly not under the pane. Plus there is actualluy cery little "rear" view from the mossie cockpit anyway.
So what if the 234 cost perkies, it couldnt see 3D external in RL anyway.
-
Grun: WRONG !
That's the same as saying the driver in a car has the same all-round field of view as his passenger beside him. The Fields of vision are totally different. Especially since the 'navigator' could and did unstrap himself to scan behind.
Cheers,
Rifle
-
Not really, what Im reffering to is the overal view. You see the current justification for AH bomber 3D external views is that the bomber has many gun postions and crew postions. For example B17 has top turret, waist guns, ball turret, tail guns, nose postions and the cockpit. What those people can see is substantialy different than what the pilots see. For example again A B17 ball gunner can see under the plane, the Pilot cannot.
The Mossie crewmember cannot see under the plane nor can the pilot. So they really do have the same view limitations considering they are both in a very cramped and cntralized space only inches apart from each other.
You see what I mean?
-
Strange, but for once I agree with Gruen. :p
Having external view on arado is not logical. Actually I think same about il-2 also, with its 2 man crew which you can easily switch between if you want to check your 6, and no bomb view to see under the plane.
When I am flying il-2 I try not to use external view -- using it makes me feel like in h2h or in early beta with external views allowed.
Fariz
-
Well if you guys read pyro's post, the mossie will have an external view until more aircraft classes are added. At present we have Bomber, Fighter. Bombers get external view all of them cuz the game is hardcoded as such.
Fighters don't. I don't know what other issues maybe hardcoded with the bombers.
Where do you guys think Mossie missions should be scored? as fighters/attack or as Bombers/attack?
We don't have the option of scoring as fighter/attack/bomber, so we would have to sacrifice something.
As far as where to score the Mossie, if you aren't gonna fly it more than occasionally don't reply to how it should be scored.
if scored as bomber/attack it becomes classed as bomber. if scored as fighter/attack, it gets classed as fighter.
SKurj
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ:
The Me262 wiil be an expensive perk too, should that have a 3D view?
Don't be a tard.
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ:
And the second Mossie crewman could not see anything the pilot coudnt, and certainly not under the pane. Plus there is actualluy cery little "rear" view from the mossie cockpit anyway.
So what if the 234 cost perkies, it couldnt see 3D external in RL anyway.
You can't deny the fact that having a second crewman will, at least, increase the overall SA in the cockpit. We don't have that here (unless you agree to join my plane every time I fly an Arado), and we don't have the 20mm guns out the back or the periscope. Whatever, I like it - realistic or not, and want it to stay...because:
1. It increases survivability in the Arado slightly.
2. It allows you to relax your SA a bit on those loooong boring rides to the target.
3. It allows you to look at your purty plane while it's flying.
4. It allows you to zoom down and look at your ground targets exploding.
SOB
-
GRUNHERZ,
From Pyro's post it sounds like you should be trying to get the Mosquito FB.VI to be listed in the Fighter category, not the Bomber category. With the FB.VI I can see it going into either category.
Pyro,
Can we get the Mosquito FB.VI listed in the Fighter and Attack categories?
Thanks
-
Mosquito is not quite a figter and not quite a bomber.
Personally I dont understand why we need to see the 3D outside view setup in terms of "hard categories", why just not model it individually and logically.
Take the dedicated bomber version of the Me262, this plane was clearly a bomber, issued to bomber units, and used as such. Should it have an external view just because its a "bomber"?
Once again I dont see why the 3D external view must be coded into categories, just do it individually and leave it to logic.
Look at it this way.
If the Me110 came into the game, would it have external view?
Historically it wasnt a bomber, so it would fall into the "fighter category" and then wouldnt get one. Yet by alll logical means it has the same view setup or better than the Mosquito, which is in the "bomber category" and gets a 3D view.
Just model it individualy and logically. Or if you want to have "categories" create a "sub category" in bombers for planes that cant logically have the 3D view of the B17s Lancs etc.
I can see the following "bomber" type planes or multi seaters not having the 3D external view.
Ar234
Mosqito
Il2
Me110
Me410
Hs129
Beufighter (maybe)
Ki45
Forget this illogical and rigid "category" nonsense just set it on/off in individual planes.
Now I admit I have no idea what this involves from a programing perspective, but if the HTC crew are still the same people who made AH run extremly well and be stable on my sputtering and dying old POS 333Mhz PII with ancient Voodoo card, then I honestly cant see this slight change posing any trouble whatsover for them.
-
You fear Canadians... admit it.
Ever see a squirrel kick a wolf's ass?
Me neither.
:D
-
Grun the hardcoding thing can still stand. Just need basically 1 more aircraft category.
Attack Aircraft: No external view, pilot's 6 view is through the rear gunner's eyes if the plane has one. Aircraft that fit this category:
Bf110
ME410
Beaufighter
Mossie
Arado 234
Dauntless
Kate
Val
and a ton of other Japanese AC
IL2
Stuka
etc etc
Grunherz? besides the occasional jaunt in an IL2, do you fly any bombers at all? Or is this once again an "Anti-buff" issue?
SKurj
-
Its not really ant-buff at all. Allow me to explain.
Prolly 99% of all my "whining" on the BBS has dealtwith things I consider to be dweeby unrealistic aspects of AH.
Things like:
Niki
CV wonder flak
ostivulchers
extended range bomber guns
fighter guns killing out to 1000+ yards
flying in external views
etc...
Most of this comes from my frustration with my old sim Janes WWII fighters. That game was a dweeb mecca of sorts.
You could kill a plane with with 5 rounds of 50cal on a consistent basis.
I once had 39 kills in WWIIF on a single load of 109 ammo.
Peple flew in the outside wiew. People flew with no cockpit graphics.
The 7.62mm browning guns were lethal out to 1300meters.
Bizzare no e-loss FMs.
etc...
So when I came to AH last year and saw some of the same things, I honestly got worried AH was heading on the same path as Janes.
We had chogs sniping out to 1K plus.
We had Nikis with Bizzare FM errors.
We had bizzare buff guns.
And so on.
But back to the specific point, I simply hate 3D Arcade outside views. I hated them in Janes, and I dont want to see them to the greatest extent possible in AH. And I will lobby for this becuse I see it as an important issue.
This is honestly no different than the restriction on 3D outside views placed on GVs. Many were very afraid and resistant to this adjustment intially. But now pretty much eveyone praises it for the enhanced immersion and realism. if you wanna see outside just pop the hatch and view from the commanders cupola.
It seems resonable that similar logical enhancements
should be given to the specific bomber/attack plane view systems.
I like the "gunner 6 view idea", this seems a reasonable and fair compromise to account for their realistic view without resorting to unneccesary Arcade 3D view modes.
[ 08-25-2001: Message edited by: GRUNHERZ ]
-
U make some valid points Grun, but I have to say... you have flown alot of IL2 sorties yet I don't see you lobbying for the removal of the external view in it +) Hehe I also notice you have very few problems dealing with the aircraft which do have external views. Your kill ratio against these class of aircraft is better than mine, by a long shot +)
I think most, if not all, agree that the external in the mossie and similar small crew aircraft really isn't neccessary, and as Pyro stated, more than likely the change will come soon. (1.09?)
The loss of external view in tanks has turned some of the best tankers away I've noticed. Some of the guys that spent a good deal of their time playin in the mud no longer do this. While it is more "realistic<g>" I am not so sure its a great idea, given the state of the ground war in Aces. bah nm
SKurj
-
GRUN,
Please don't take offense but I must say what I must. I agree that the full 3d view can be somewhat unrealistic, but look at what your asking. What differense will it make anyway? I am serious, I don't see what the big deal is. Just please explaine how it will affect game play. Also, if you get the 3d view taken from the ar234 and mossie then it better be taken from that dam IL2. I would really be ticked the IL2 held it while the others lost it. The same thing happened to my F4U-C, it got perked and the uber niki didn't what kind of crap is that anyway? Sorry, getting off topic. Anyway I really think that if they get rid of the 3d view then the only view any aircraft should get is what positions it has. That means no other view for the C-47, tail view of ar234, and all apporopriate gun positions of bombers, no external at all for any aircraft.
MHO,
Booky
-
Arrggh I think you are getting carried away Booky +)
I think an aircraft with a crew of 5 or more guys all looking for enemy aircraft would have a much better picture of the airspace surrounding it than say a Stuka with 2 guys.
Separate the bigguns(crews of 3 or more) from the littluns (2 or less), give bigguns external view, modify internal views for littluns to improve SA to represent the guy looking out the back.
Ideally!! it would be great to be able to limit the angles at which an external view could pan. For example.. the Lanc has a huge blindspot directly underneath.. hmm the more I think about this the less i see a need for it.. The lanc is really the only buff with such a limitation in the current planeset with of course the already mentioned exceptions of the littluns.
Bah, too much time on my hands, yet i can't fly cuz of distractions YECHH!!
SKurj
-
Hehe, just trying to get my little ol opinion accossed to these guys and gals. I personally don't think it needs to be changed at all, but if it does then lets be EXTREAM :eek:
-
NP Get rid of Il2 3D view too.
-
Booky the gameplay difference is very simple, people will have have a more realistic representation of the plane, and if as all the bomber drivers say they dont fly outside view then it shouldnt change anything.
-
well as for me i kinda like the way they have it in warbirds 3 where the gunner tells you when it sees something. it shows in the text.
now i am not sure if i like having the computer gun for me but i do like it to look for me whe mthere are spost to be more people in the bomber.
trell
-
Originally posted by SKurj:
Some of the guys that spent a good deal of their time playin in the mud no longer do this. While it is more "realistic<g>" I am not so sure its a great idea, given the state of the ground war in Aces. bah nm
SKurj
Main thing why I stopped using panzers is that terrible "one ping track lost" bug. It makes tanking extremely frustrating and almost unplayable (for me at least). Lack of external view is not a big problem, it is easily compensated by the top mg. With m16 armor clearly overmodeled I had a case when I lost a fight to m16. I was on an enemy territory, had an m16 driving toward me, pinged it 3-4 times with 75mm, then it pinged me from maximum distance and turned away. I lost track, bailed and was captured. After that I promised myself never use panzers at the enemy territory till that weird thing will be fixed.
You can start a thread asking people if any of them stopped using panzers due to lack of external view. I can bet you will find very few who will say that was a reason.
Fariz
-
Grunherz... I don't know what you mean by "and if as all the bomber drivers say they dont fly outside view then it shouldnt change anything."
Of course all buff drivers use the F3 view. They just don't fire guns or attack anything while in this view. Try it sometime and you will see why. The only advantage to the external view is better SA.
When I am on a bomb run, as I am getting close to the target I will move to F3 and make a quick scan. As I fly from base I will sit in F3 view often and just look around while on auto. When that bogey I have been tracking from the tailgun position has moved out of my field of view I will move to F3 to regain sight, and then to the appropriate gun position if neccessary.
I think my suggestion of the attack class is the best alternative so far for the view system. We can rest assured I think that the external view isn't going anywhere on the heavies.
I hear ya Fariz, the current damage model on the FP and Panzer sucks.. but didn't the external view dissappear prior to the new damage model? I believe it was rollo in the MA the other night who said it was the loss of the external view that turned him off the tanks. I could be wrong though.
SKurj
[ 08-26-2001: Message edited by: SKurj ]
-
Skurj the F3 view went away the same time the new armor model came in. I know I dont bother driving tanks now, not that I drove them much before tho, because the M16 and Ostwind can kill me before I can kill them with the new model. The M16 can resist 75mm AP/HE and the Osties 37mm is a better AT gun than the 75mm since its easier to score hits and can easlily score hits while both the Panzer and osti are moving, which is utter roadkill as well.
As for F3 view flying.
Every time I "dogfigte" a buff which turns or dives or loops perfectly to avoid my passes I ask the buff driver if he was flying the buff on outside view. To a man they all say they arent. Riiiiiight :rolleyes: .
Anyway since "none" of them manuver the buff on F3 3D outside view non should ovject to certain logical limitations on it.
For "regular" buffs like B17s, Lancs, B26s, and Ju88s I think engaging the F3 view should automaticallyt turn on "autopilot level" so the buff cant instantly manouver in an unrealistic manner from the unrealistic perfect 3D view.
Once again the buff guys always tell me they DONT fly the 3D outside view in evasives, so I should expect no opposition to this change. Right?
-
how about "Autopilot Climb" that way I can still use this SA advantage while getting alt ;) I wont lie, I use 3D view when flying against fighters almost always, but you never asked me in the sim. I guess if im out of ammo I need all the help I can, and if I'm not out of ammo then Ill be in gun, not 3D view. :p
-
Sure autopilot climb is cool too. All im against is buffs using the 3D outside view to manouver out of gun passes. Having the the perfect 3D view and full controls to immediatly take evasives is in no way like the tail gunner saying to the pilot there is a fighter on our 7OC.
But again since my buff friends never fly the outside 3D view they certainly wont object. :)
-
Grunherz I never do anything but turn when engaged. I sit in a gunner position and use rudder pedals to avoid the passes and shoot back.
If I lose sight and feel I have time, I will jump to F3, move to a better gun (which as soon as i do, i am no longer in F3 mode) and thats it.
I suppose if i had a gunner I could do more than just turn, but then if i am using external with a gunner whats the difference? If I had 8 other guys onboard all with RW sure, lose external, otherwise...
Trust me, it ain't goin anywhere +)
SKurj
-
Having somebody tell you turn right and climb, when you cant see the plane from the cockpit yourself is much different than having the instant 3D view and seeing the attacker yourself.
Anyway you just told me that you dont use F3 wiew in the vast majoirity of your evasives, so I would think you want object to its beinng a bit more limited, like getting set on level or climb autopilot.
-
No i guess not IF!!! there is no delay when hit pedals. As it is currently the rudder cannot deactivate autopilot. And also the delay when trying to get auto off could be catastrophic to a buff
btw F3 view in a gunner position already is auto pilot
SKurj
-
No its not, if you hit F3 view you can actually fly the plane and use that view to perfectly manuver out of gun passes.
What im asking for is that If you hit F3 youu still get the external view for its intended SA puropse, BUT that you cant control the plane and use it as unfair ARCADE mode. Basically hit F3, get 3D view but no ability to manuver and fly plane from the outside view, only level or climb autopilot!
-
But then how do you reconcile that with the fact that gunners could still see incoming bandits and call out their positions while the pilot was making any manuever?
-
Very simple actually.
You switch to F3 view to locate the bandint.
Then pop back into cockpit and make the evasive.
This slight half second lag time, I feel, nicely replicates several things:
The less than perfect info the pilot would likey get. Basicall its like if ur driving blinfolded (cant see con) and somvody is feedind u commsands, turn left brake etc.
And it simulates a slight lag time thats norman when the info is communicated from one person seeing it to him telling the pilot to the pilot finally making the evasive.
It really seems sensible, the lag time is barely half a second and nicely simulates the realistic liitations of even having all those eyes to see.
I think its fair and reasonable, no?
-
YES it is grun if u are the pilot and u move to gunner position the plane automatically goes into auto pilot, with the exception that the rudder can turn the plane, whether in F3 view or not. If you are in the pilot's position and F3 u can fly however u wish.
SKurj
[ 08-27-2001: Message edited by: SKurj ]
-
BTW... you need to drum up more support for your point of view Grunherz...
SKurj
-
I wish F3 was removed for all planes.
-
"I wish F3 was removed for all planes."
I'm on the fence in regard to this issue. I can see both sides PV and they are both valid.
It would certainly help however if a pilot could get as many gunners to join as there are positions on any given bomber instead of just himself or one other.
Westy
-
Skurj im not sure ill be able to garner support for this idea, quite simply its human nature for them to resist anything that seems to make it harder and less "comfortable" or old.
What im doing is pointing it out as an issue to HTC, in hope they act on it the sdame way as they removed the ARCADE 3D view on tanks.
Many resisted the change early but now its seen as very good realism step and good for gameplay and immersion.
Basically the buff guys wont support this till its forced on them, then I feel the real buff guys will begin to appreciate the challenge and re learn quickly.
-
Grunherz from your point of view losing the F3 view makes it easier (for fighters to shoot em down)
So lobby on the basis it makes it easier for the anti-buff crowd.
SKurj