Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: JoeMud on February 05, 2000, 06:07:00 PM
-
LOSE IT! Need either 4 or 2 teams and as for the other two they just screw up the game and bring on the quakers!
-
http://www.irelax.com/shopping/cgi-bin/frame.pl (http://www.irelax.com/shopping/cgi-bin/frame.pl)
------------------
Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations
"If it's stupid but works, it's not stupid."
-
LMFAO Ok so I went at it a bit hard but still this stuff needs to be fixed.
-
Originally posted by Pyro:
http://www.irelax.com/shopping/cgi-bin/frame.pl (http://www.irelax.com/shopping/cgi-bin/frame.pl)
Okay, Pyro. I take it this means 3 countries whether we like it or not? Am still hoping this isn't another (albeit better) clone of AW1-2-3D and WB... Fight the Barnies and the Frogs AND the Cherries, while trying to get some quality flight/fight time in without being vulched for my $$. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
------------------
O.E. 'Tern' Dillon
"Live to Fly! Fly to Fight! Fight to Live!"
-
Well I agree with Joey, but Pyro's link made me laugh big!
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 02-06-2000).]
-
(from behind sandbags....)
Sorta on the fence concerning inflight radar. Kinda hokey, but it DOES make the game more "productive", since we don't have to waste a lot of time chasing friendly dots. Also, it does give buffs a very valuable strat target. I'd like to see tower-only radar, with inflight sector counters, and have the sector counters survive HQ destruction.
SuperAck definitely needs work, but it DOES prevent SuperVultchFest, and gives buffs a reason to live. For now, soften up the ack a bit, and add multiple spawn points to make vultching more difficult.
Keep the three countries. I've played AW, WB, and WB HA. For my money, three works better than two or four. When it get to be 2v1, defect to one of the 2, and start a new front between them. You only have to wait an hour to come home.
popeye
-
Popeye, you better duck! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
You seem to be saying we need the over-accurate ack to make the over-accurate BUFFs useful?
Plinking a 25 foot gun pit from 30,000 feet was NOT a viable tactic in WW2.
Isn't the goal to have a WW2 sim? Then how about we have WW2 bombsights and WW2 AAA capabilities, not the B-2 GPS bombs and Phalanx CIWS we have now?
As far as preventing vulching, that's the responsibility of the guys taking off. There are always other fields to launch from. If we really want to prevent vulching, limit how often the vulch-ees can respawn. If there's no roadkill there's no vultures. In any case, I'd much rather have an arena with too much vulching than one with too much ackhugging.
Ackhugging ruins the game. I go looking for the enemy and a good fight, but often I find some of the AH "top aces" racking them up by just sitting on the periphery of their ack and getting credited with ack kills or waiting for a pilot to lose energy evading ack, then killing him. This has zero to do with skill as a fighter pilot, and is not fun at all.
The strat model, acks, etc. should be designed to promote realistic fighting, not this Air-Quake baloney...
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 02-06-2000).]
-
Ack hugging wreck the game
Well i guess that HTC can add that to the long list of things that apperently reck the game.
It takes 1 b26 1 pass to suppress most fields....A person that is ack hugging cant stop the b26. How much coordination is that to ask? Of all the stupid insults that people routinely use in this game ack hugger has to be the lamest. The guys is out numbered out EEEd and you think that he should come out and fight like a man...
I am starting to get an idea of the challenges facing HTC.
Half the people complain about ack hugging
Half complain about vulching
Half think bombers are too vulnerable
Half think they are too tough
Half think that you can shoot too far
Half think that hitting is too hard.
Im allready at 2.5 times the poplulation of AH and nothing approaching conseses except that the game is wrong...But we all like it...New thread time...
------------------
Pongo
The Wrecking Crew
-
"Ack hugging wreck the game. Well i guess that HTC can add that to the long list of things that apperently reck the game."
And what is HTC supposed to do to people who hug ack?
Remember, aircraft don't hug ack. People hug ack. Learn to deal with it. If people are huggin the ack then you must be in a position to literally vulch. Get crafty.
As a matter of fact pilots in WWII did it. That's just an fyi.
-Westy
-
did you read my whole note.
------------------
Pongo
The Wrecking Crew
-
LOL!! Westy you know better than this (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
In WWII pilots didn't hug ack, but thats because in real life, the AAA gunners weren't very discriminate and had the bad habit of shooting first and asking questions later.
But then again, the real Ack weenies didn't have radar guide 30mm gatling guns, with integrated IFF, unlimited ammo, indestructible barrels, instant acquisition software, backup infrared and laser targeting systems, and unlimited fields of fire.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure,
Dicta Verm: "Never give the suckers an even break!" or translated "Never engage without an advantage"
-
Wow I cant beleave it,I didnt get flamed by a bunch of quakers! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
1.Get realistic ack.
2.Lose inflight radar if plane doesnt have onboard radar.
3.Teams....well only if ya really want to,no big deal realy.
Just my 29.99$
-
Originally posted by JoeMud:
1.Get realistic ack.
I submit that realistic AAA would be far more deadly than the rapid fire cannon that cover only the immediate vicinity of the base. If accurately modeled 88mm triple A were introduced, we'd hardly ever see a Buff at any altitude. Concentrated airburst flak on the single bombers we usually see in the AH arena would render them useless. There were probably a lot more than two or three sets of anti-aircraft guns at any given base. They were generally much better hidden or camoflaged than at the fields in AH.
The field ack we have is fairly easy to avoid and easy to take out. The ack "umbrellas" take up a very small percentage of airspace in the overall arena. Why add realistic AAA that would make far larger volumes of air unflyable for both fighters and bombers? Don't forget that realistic ack doesn't discriminate between friend and foe. Your own ack could take you out if your field is under attack. We only see the rounds going up as well; they never fall down and lay waste to the ground and airplanes below.
Be careful of what you ask for. You (we) just might get it!
MiG
[This message has been edited by MiG Eater (edited 02-06-2000).]
-
MiG Eater I couldn't disagree more. Flying an aircraft over an AH field straight and level at 7k is a death sentence. You will die every time. Period.
This was simply not the truth in real life. Not even close!
I guess it may have been possible with a huge concentration of guns. But at this altitude IFF would have been difficult. Certainly such an ack concentration would be almost as deadly to friendlies as to bandits.
Also I think you are off on the 88mm. These guns were only useful in huge concentrations. It's a bloody artillery piece. A single FlaK 88 would have zero chance of killing a maneuvering fighter.
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 02-06-2000).]
-
Originally posted by funked:
MiG Eater I couldn't disagree more. Flying an aircraft over an AH field straight and level at 7k is a death sentence. You will die every time. Period.
I didn't state that AH ack is innaccurate or not hard hitting, just that it is easy to avoid. Flying above and around it renders it innefective. I have to ask, why would anyone fly straight and level within range of any AAA in AH? A B-17 could climb above 7.5k in less than 10 minutes. If one is looking for easy kills on low and slow airplanes on and around enemy airfields, then I can see the frustration.
This was simply not the truth in real life. Not even close!
Not even in the Pacific where ships bristled with 40 mm AAA? I don't think the Japanese and American pilots shot down at cruise altitudes would agree with you. There is lots of film of V-1 bombs being shot down by anti-aircraft fire over England. They were high and fast and made very difficult targets, even more so than the big slow bombers in AH (or even small slow fighters). Yet the majority never made it intact to the target. Thats realistic. I don't think there will be much benefit of having all of the skies over the AH arena erupting in deadly flak burst whenever we enter enemy airspace.
I guess it may have been possible with a huge concentration of guns. But at this altitude IFF would have been difficult. Certainly such an ack concentration would be almost as deadly to friendlies as to bandits.[\QUOTE]
Exactly my points. Thats historically accurate but would it add the "realism" that some are asking for?
I think you are off on the 88mm. These guns were only useful in huge concentrations. It's a bloody artillery piece. A single FlaK 88 would have zero chance of killing a maneuvering fighter.
I didn't mention anything about 88's against fighters. Single 88's were not the norm however, often ringing industrial targets and airfields by the dozens. Add to that the multitude of other caliber weapons used on all sides. But the original poster wants realism and what I think they really want is less or fairly ineffective ack over fields. I wasn't there in WW2 but I talk regularly with people who were. The one thing they feared above all else? Anti Aircraft fire. If people here fear the ack then we already may have some measure of historical accuracy.
MiG
-
OK you are making sense now. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
"If one is looking for easy kills on low and slow airplanes on and around enemy airfields, then I can see the frustration."
That's not what I want. I just want Jabos to be able to do their thing. I find it very entertaining to fly attack missions in other sims. Right now in this sim it's a lot harder than it should be because we are facing ack that has unrealistic capabilities. Not just at the airfields, but at the other facilities as well.
So make the accuracy and rate of fire of the guns more reasonable. If this means we have more emplacements, that's fine with me. But don't forget to include realistic IFF. As you pointed out, if a target is going to be defended by a lot of ack, a friendly plane should be at only a slightly lower risk than a bandit. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 02-07-2000).]
-
Originally posted by funked:
I just want Jabos to be able to do their thing. I find it very entertaining to fly attack missions in other sims.
Me too and I think thats one of the few things missing so far from this great sim.
Great discussion. <S>
MiG
-
I'm Swager, the official "Ack Hugger"
Thank You, Thank You! Please don't applaud, just throw a few shells my way to make me turn!! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Damn Ghostrider! This bogey is all over me!!
[This message has been edited by Swager (edited 02-07-2000).]
-
I just don't see this ack as all that accurate. I vultch through it all of the time, unless you're getting below 4k, not really until 3k, you're not in trouble (unless you move as little as possible making yourself as perfect a target as possible).
Fatty
-
Fatty, that's great that you have learned how to work around the problems in the game. But the fact remains that the ack stations are as good or better than a modern automatic radar-guided gun emplacement. They have no place in a WW2 sim.
-
Lacking a multitude of implacements (which I understand we're getting eventually anyway), or any sort of deterrent other than slow rolling suckers attempting takeoff, I submit they serve their strategic purpose pretty well. Realism has to give way to practicality at some point, and I'd really rather development time be spent on new planes and vehicles before trying to implement a multitude of AA gun defenses.
Fatty
-
Inflight radar: good enough implementation.
3 teams: Disagree 100%, better 2 and with
limited aircraft types per side:
axis, allies. Even limiting aircraft
type/nationality by zones of the
same team: german zone, italian
zone, american zone, rusian zone,
etc.
AAA: i'm stunned. This is not AAA, this is
just the god's big finger pointing at
you. I think they launch IR guided
bullets with small nuclear warheads...
...and three pings of them are enough
to blow up a 190 wing!!! I was unnable
to hit those AAAs nor with gun neither
with rocket fire, only with bombers.
Even Falcon4 ZSU-23 guns are much less
precisse than those "artifacts".
-
A big ROFL Pyro, good one.
On the number of countries issue. I can't see that 2 countries or 4 countries would prevent imbalances anymore than 3 does. I kind of like the unusual situations that can be caused by fighters showing up from more than 2 sides. Once in a while you may see me up there participating in my favorite sport, BnZing a fight between the other two countries. Haven't figured out how to do it properly yet. Sure is fun though.
What would help with the imbalances is a bunch of players who were willing to switch to the smallest side when they logged on, or to switch any time the smallest country started taking a pounding. I would think the best pilots would like to do this because they would have more targets. This used to happen quite often in the early Beta days late at night when there weren't many people on.
On the subject of the ack and bomber accuracy, etc. Things are okay for now and there is no great hurry to change things if it means delaying the introduction of new aircraft, etc. That said, I am always in favor of historical accuracy, it makes me feel much more like I am doing something similar to what really happened and makes the game easier to relate to history. To the extent that things are not historically accurate I begin to feel like I'm just playing another designed game like XWing or something (definitely no slam of AH meant here, I love this game). It's always neat when situations develop in AH that are similar to what you have read about. And I would just love to see big puffs of black smoke appearing around my b17 as I gather my courage and fly straight and true so my bombadier can drop his payload on target (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif). I know there are some problems involving vulching and the number of bombers available, etc. but If these could be worked out I think it would add to everyone's experience to see realistic flak or to man a machine gun shooting down incoming fighters once in a while. Come to think of it what did they do when the fields were close to enemy fields? There must have been some sort of CAP up to protect fields.
If we had realistic ack, less accurate bombers, and perhaps bigger targets that still didn't require any more bombs than they do now, wouldn't these things all balance each other out and produce more realistic situations, such as bombers having to descend to drop their payloads and face fighter interception? I think it would also make bomber escorting much more of a high art and much more commonly practiced than it is now.
Keep up the great work HTC. I really curious to see how this game develops. Would be really neat if players could feel like they knew what the real thing was like. Hmm, wonder how we can set up the refrigerator peripheral to simulate high altitude (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/eek.gif).
------------------
It's a good day for flying!
General Chuck Yeager