Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Anaxogoras on February 06, 2008, 09:46:25 AM
-
In Aces High you can push your stick all the way forward, redout, and then recover within a second or two. Some of the maneuvers we do might permanently damage the eyesight of a real pilot, if not cause temporary blindness. I've done loops, spins and barrel rolls (among other maneuvers) in a Grob with a friend who's in the airforce, and it was very uncomfortable. This flight simulation is to G-forces what a Churchill martini is to vermouth.:rofl
-
It's because it is assumed that our blood will be seriously thinned with alcohol, so that the blood drains and returns much more quickly than your average mortal's.
Quite a few aircraft models initially had bottles of booze in them, and that's not coffee in the mug in the tower.
-
I've done airshows now for 3 years with my uncles display team (caledonian chipmunks found here (http://www.caledonianchipmunks.co.uk/) if you wan't the details ;) ) and I can tell you that I'm still getting used to the positive g's and negative g's that happen on even the most basic of maneuvers that I can pull off in Aces High without even a shake of the head.
-
hello
it's a game
-
Given the lack of any sort of device to control gravitational fields, how do you guys suggest that such effects be modeled?
-
Originally posted by Ghastly
Given the lack of any sort of device to control gravitational fields, how do you guys suggest that such effects be modeled?
nopoop had the answer a while back
http://forums.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=79301&highlight=baseball
there was more too it to, I think pouring gasoline on him when the plane is on fire was involved.
:aok
-
'Poop was awesome. I miss that guy.
-
Me too.
I tried to talk him into flying again when I started flying AH so we could wing up again, but he'd kind of had a lot of things flow under the bridge so to speak in between then and when we'd last flown together in WarBirds, and I couldn't talk him into it.
He's a character - but then again, there wasn't an EZTarget who wasn't!
-
Originally posted by Anaxogoras
In Aces High you can push your stick all the way forward, redout, and then recover within a second or two. Some of the maneuvers we do might permanently damage the eyesight of a real pilot, if not cause temporary blindness. I've done loops, spins and barrel rolls (among other maneuvers) in a Grob with a friend who's in the airforce, and it was very uncomfortable. This flight simulation is to G-forces what a Churchill martini is to vermouth.:rofl
So, do you want your "virutal" eyesight permanently damaged? Or, do you want to have to create a new "virtual" instance of yourself everytime you die in game? Or how about being prevented from flying until your virtual self heals from that pilot wound they got?
Seriously, certain allowances have to be made for the fact that this is a game. I think there would be a much smaller community here if you raised the level of realism on things like this to the level people keep suggesting.
I don't know. Maybe people want a smaller AH2 community?
-
So, do you want your "virutal" eyesight permanently damaged? Or, do you want to have to create a new "virtual" instance of yourself everytime you die in game? Or how about being prevented from flying until your virtual self heals from that pilot wound they got?
How about just rethinking how the blackouts or redouts are done, instead of being plain rude?
The guy has a point - AH G effects are a minor nuisance in the game as opposed to a major factor in determining pilot behavior. We can go up down up down up down... alternating between sudden 4Gs and -4Gs and the screen just flickers black/red in an on/off mode. But is visibility issues related G effects so simple?
Remember: we didn't used to have pilots passing out due to constant blackout exposures. At some point in the game, it made its way into the game. Despite the hordes of "its only a game" crowd, AH2 has been steadily making its way into more realism, be it visually or systematically.
Seriously, certain allowances have to be made for the fact that this is a game. I think there would be a much smaller community here if you raised the level of realism on things like this to the level people keep suggesting.
After many years, I've realized the "allowances for realism" most people talk about in your context, are actually nothing but selfish arbitrary opinions based on nothing. From the beginning of AH2 in its beta phases upto now, it has been a slow but constant journey towards more "realism", and AH2 community has all but shrunk.
When AH2 first came, people noticed the planes felt less "fly-by-wire" or "fly-on-rails" feeling, and some people didn't like it. Nobody complains about it now.
When HTC changed its own policy to maintain the fantasy cockpits for "better accessibility", and moved into a serious compromise for a "historic cockpit" feel, some people didn't like it. Some people still don't like it, but I don't see the AH2 community shrinking. Do you?
When HTC changed the loadout systems, changed the terrains, changed minor FMs, changed how the blackouts effected the pilot, changed so the auto-pilot couldn't pull you out of a highspeed dive, changed when you couldn't use auto-pilot at all while blacked out.. and on and on and on and on...
...people complained. But they all got used to it now.
It's HT and Pyro's call, and amusingly, over the years they've adapted and accepted many of the opinions and suggestions concerning "more realism", despite the initial negative responses. Most of the above changes I've listed, have been long suggested, but now realized.
So why don't we just debate what kind of changes can be viable, or how they may be adapted into the game, without too much seriously effecting gameplay towards cumbersome realities - ie. stuff like 14-step checklist for take-offs and such.... instead of stepping on other people's suggestions because you simply don't like the sound of it?
After all, you never know when HT or Pyro might change their opinions.
I don't know. Maybe people want a smaller AH2 community?
Would you rather let the game go the way of the dinosaur?
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
'Poop was awesome. I miss that guy.
what ever happened to him, and the stories on the BK site?
"wittle guys" was one of my favorites :lol
-
You already get a new virtual instance of yourself every sortie, and each is susceptible to pilot wounds, extended blackouts, and death. Why would redouts be any different?
-
Originally posted by JB73
what ever happened to him, and the stories on the BK site?
"wittle guys" was one of my favorites :lol
He still maintains his account, and pops in on the boards periodically, but I think he's focusing more on the real world and some of his other hobbies these days. I think he was the one maintaining the website, which is now defunct, AFAIK.
-
You already get a new virtual instance of yourself every sortie, and each is susceptible to pilot wounds, extended blackouts, and death. Why would redouts be any different?
It's the importance of the whole category of "G effect" as a factor impacting aerial combat on a larger scale that warrants attention, rather than just the individual event.
Pyro already elaborated the fact that certain pilot physical factors are to be introduced in Combat Tour, which is a clear indication that they acknowledge the human physical factor as an important part of aerial combat, which is yet to be introduced. I see know reason why the basic system handling the mechanism cannot be made generic and applied to the MA.
-
Kwe, I was responding to Blammo's comment, which seemed to ignore that we already had instances where a pilot might suffer G-LOC or wounding, then be fine the next sortie. I'm not opposed to this, and probably won't be until it is included in the game. ;)
-
I say if we get shot down we get a service, a tombstone and our subscription canceled.
-
Isn't the basic rule, "if ya blackout all the time, maybe one should not drink"?? That could never work here. Hub is right, the booze cancels out the real effects of pulling 20 g's, and haveing to be scraped off the floorboards with a putty knife.
-
I can't remember what it was, but years ago there was a box flight sim where the pilot would scream in pain if you pushed negative G's too hard. It was very entertaining, but also a little grotesque.:lol
Without a doubt negative G's punish the pilot worse than positive G's. I would see it as an improvement if the screen stayed Red longer (long enough to make it a real nuisance during combat), and faded back to normal vision much more slowly. Those of you who think this is unreasonable just want to do your opposite-aileron-rudder-noseovers ad infinitum as a way to compensate for poor SA when you let a bandit get on your six, despite the fact that not even modern technology can allow an F-16 pilot to do the same maneuver comfortably.:rolleyes:
-
The negative G's haven't permanently damaged Patty Wagstaff or any of her associates, so why should it permanently damage our AH pilots?
-
Kind of a funny thread. How about we put a monkey on top of your computer, so when you black out he hits you over the head with a hammer and you get knocked out, then if you red out, the moniter explodes in your face, blinding you, is that real enough? (for those uptight types, this is a retorical question and does not require an answer. This post is for entertainment purposes only)
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
It's the importance of the whole category of "G effect" as a factor impacting aerial combat on a larger scale that warrants attention, rather than just the individual event.
Concur. I've always felt the penalty for a black-out is much more significant than a red-out. When in full red-out the pilot remains totally in control of the plane which seems a bit unrealistic from a pilot endurance standpoint. Personally I think a simple solution such as full red-out means loss of ability to control the plane until it fades back to a certain level. Similar to a GLOC but shorter lived since there wouldn't be a simulated loss of consciousness.
I think that would go a long way to removing several of the prolonged (note the use of the word, prolonged) negative-G maneuvers that are commonly seen in the MA. Of course, there may have been real pilots that were just fine with flying around with their eyes buldging out of their sockets for long periods of time so I stand ready to be corrected.
-
Kind of a funny thread. How about we put a monkey on top of your computer, so when you black out he hits you over the head with a hammer and you get knocked out, then if you red out, the moniter explodes in your face, blinding you, is that real enough? (for those uptight types, this is a retorical question and does not require an answer. This post is for entertainment purposes only)
:lol :lol :lol :aok
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
How about just rethinking how the blackouts or redouts are done, instead of being plain rude?
I did not think that Blammo's post was rude. Maybe a little sarcastic, but not rude. I've seen rude post in these forums, and his did not hold a candle to the rude ones.
You're right, it is HT and Pyro's call. It's their money, their business, their call.
While I do enjoy the realism involved with flying in the game, i.e. I turn off my stall limiter and don't use combat trim, I don't think the game would be much fun if we had to fly the planes by the manual. Did you see that P47 manual someone had posted? If you had to do all that, very few would play. The game seeks to find the balance between realism and arcade that attracts the most paying customers. Or at least that would be the idea assuming HT and Pyro are capitalists.
-
ive still blacked out "forever" by doing too many high G stuff constantly....i woke up in the tower.... :cry