Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: DeeZCamp on June 09, 2001, 07:38:00 PM
-
Get rid of it.. focus only on realism... why not make aces the most realistic sim.. if those want evening out of weapons.. or tradeoff for gameplay, nintendo is always an option. Make everything as real as possible, full flight/cockpit managment/weapons/flight physics lighting/ EVERYHTING.. graphics is a plus but not necessary for hi fedelity simulation. Make it Realistic so this stops the Quake aces high arena that it is so sadly becoming. :mad:
-
deez i hope you dont mean me in the 'evening out of weapons' :) I know i asked for adjustment in one post but i certainly want the characteristics and true behaviour of mg151s modeled i just would like to see the hits with the mineshells causing similar damage to an hispano round.
As the hispano rounds have a higher ROF they should be able to land more rounds in the same time so they will still be better than mg151s and the 151s poor trajectory should be as it is now.I dont want that changed.
1 shell from each gun should have a similar effect though.I think HTC should give us the numbers to stop all this questioning.It would settle sooooo many arguements.
As for the FULL blown realism of engine management with real start sequence,propeller pitch control, etc i think that would be too much.but overheating that causes damage is ok i think, most flight sims ive played model this.
I would love to see bullet hits destroying instruments though! :) and bullet holes in the canopy.
heres an example of a real spit startup sequence....
set fuel cock levers to on (2 of them)
throttle 1/2 inch open (20%)
airscrew pitch control fully forward...
prime the engine, number of strokes required being as follows:
air temp C /strokes...+20/3 +10/4 0/6 -10/8 -20/15
switch on ignition
press the starter push button(should be held on until engine firing evenly)
While warming exercise the airscrew pitch control a few times
make usual checks of tempretures,pressures and controls
after a few minutes move the airscrew pitch fully forwards
open the throttle to give maximum boost for cruising and check each magneto in turn
drop in r.p.m. should not exceed 150
open throttle fully momentarily and check static r.p.m. boost and oil pressure
Engine warming must not be prolonged because the radiator temp must not exceed 100 C .
you want to do all that every flight??? or while someone is shooting up the airfield??
i sure as hell dont hehe :)
I think if i remember right the 109 is even worse.
-
THAT WOULD BE AWESOME! haha.. :D That as well as the bad guys IN-Flight engine managment would make everyone really cautious and always set with a "i want to live mindset" rather than "hey i can push esc and click "N for the rwy" I see so many get killed and then immidiatly take off just to go ho someone then die, (multiply this process untill either the attacking cons run out of bullets or your base gets bombed by the onslaught. Now just think about it though.. i know it may seem allitle tedious at first but it would increase realism, and i belive it would take out alot of this Quake style gameplay that is so prevelent here. Thanx for replying with the spit info :D thats awesome stuff :)
PS we gotta do some more 51 Vs 109 Stuff again ;) a Big SALUTE TO YOU ! :)
-
Originally posted by DeeZCamp:
THAT WOULD BE AWESOME! haha.. :D That as well as the bad guys IN-Flight engine managment would make everyone really cautious and always set with a "i want to live mindset" rather than "hey i can push esc and click "N for the rwy" I see so many get killed and then immidiatly take off just to go ho someone then die, (multiply this process untill either the attacking cons run out of bullets or your base gets bombed by the onslaught. Now just think about it though.. i know it may seem allitle tedious at first but it would increase realism, and i belive it would take out alot of this Quake style gameplay that is so prevelent here. Thanx for replying with the spit info :D thats awesome stuff :)
PS we gotta do some more 51 Vs 109 Stuff again ;) a Big SALUTE TO YOU ! :)
Im here to play a fighter sim , not a damn flight sim, if u want engine management and such go play MS flight sim or some other junk like that, or go fly a real plane.
i dont want to spen 15 mins each flight just preflighting the damn plane. much less know ever procedure for ever plane AH has or will have in future. so take a long walk off a short pier Deez. :D
whels
-
Yeah, let's model in the 6-12 hour flight times too, and the fact you may not see a single person the entire flight.
Man wouldn't that be a blast.
-
Man.. its so sad to see such attitudes, I mean I guess you guys are not up for the challenge or realism.
Oh, well hey how about we have all the planes fly like n1ks and with auto aiming, hey we could even have a single key to start the engine (oh yeah thats already here).. :rolleyes: while we're at it lets have auto takeoff (oh yeah thats here too) i guess its not that realistic after all?
I mean it would really suck to hafve to actually fly the plane as it takes in RL, i guess it would be to much for "some" to handle. :rolleyes:
Well lets keep on Quakeing then :p :mad: :D
-
Originally posted by DeeZCamp:
Man.. its so sad to see such attitudes, I mean I guess you guys are not up for the challenge or realism.
Oh, well hey how about we have all the planes fly like n1ks and with auto aiming, hey we could even have a single key to start the engine (oh yeah thats already here).. :rolleyes: while we're at it lets have auto takeoff (oh yeah thats here too) i guess its not that realistic after all?
I mean it would really suck to hafve to actually fly the plane as it takes in RL, i guess it would be to much for "some" to handle. :rolleyes:
Well lets keep on Quakeing then :p :mad: :D
I own and fly a plane in RL. Frankly I find it to be fun. Not the preflighting or maintenence necessarily but the flying part and there really isn't that much to it.
Here I play a "game based on WW2 aircombat". (Quotes from HT.) I don't really care for the all consuming realism addicts, particularly those who don't fly for real and only read about it. Their version of nirvana would appeal to very very few. They really need to go out and make their OWN game and see how far the profit margin goes. I doubt it would be up very long.
Deez, you seem to like flying quite a bit. Get out and do some for real. You'll see there ain't no sim out there really modelling the real thing that well. It is beyond the normal home PC and software based units we have now. Someday it might get that way, but for now the best are in the real time training sims the airlines and military use. Having had several hours in the real F16 simulators used by the AirForce, they leave something to be desired as well. The "full" motion shuttle simulator that NASA has in Houston is neat but even it lacks a full "immersive feel" to it. It's not bad at all but you really don't get into it and feel like it's reality on the screens in front of the windows.
HTC has a pretty damn good product that can be played by a wide range of machines and on a modem for "real time" play around the world. Is it perfect? Nope but then I'm here to play a game not harp on perfection, whatever that might be.
As a buddy of mine says, wing up, get kills, be happy. :) If that isn't available for ya here, look elswhere. It might be out there somewhere. After all you were looking for a flight game when ya found AH. Maybe you will be rewarded in another area.
Mav
-
Hey just to enlighten you a bit :D , I have flown Quite a bit in REAL Aircraft, Naval trainers(full acro setup), and various forms of C152's, As well as the Mulitimillion$ B-2 Trainer that our pilots learn to fly before we let them go up in the real deal.
As far as you thinking that no sim around today models flight physics accurrately, I highly suggest you learn What X-plane is. To sum it up breifly would be to state that it is the eqivalent of those Million dollar Flight simulators. The funny thing is that it is less hardware intesive compared to Aces High, has better graphics, and allows the user to create aircraft through a cad/cam interface for its Blade element theory real-time flight calculation.
The only thing it doesnt have is full engine starting procedures, or the ability to shoot anything. It is an IFR/VFR type trainer.
Id say the only thing aces has over it is the shooting part as well as the view system, other wise X-plane.. is the better "everything"
-
mav i know we've had a differing opinion on the level of realistic features to be inplemented but i think even you would have to admit if we could make this game a little more like a military simulator whilst still allowing the casual flyer the ability to be able to just up and fight it would truelly be a great experience.
Tonight watching discovery channel there was a peice on the cobra military sims, they didnt 'look' that great for trees etc but they were proper simulators.so you got armies with trucks and tanks with realistic capabilities, it helps the pilot learn to adjust to a changing battlefeild but it doesnt need to 'look' pretty.
we want pretty and fun im sure but id also like a little more to think about.I dont want to be worrying about engine management either! But what id like to see is a war going on.
after seeing the sim on discovery i noticed one thing which made it look likegreat fun and that was when they straffed a base of trucks and planes!
Could this be the answer for fuel respawning etc?
think of this...
theres always a minimum of 25% at all fields and each field receives truck convoys from a central factory these convoys keep everything topped up so the more get through the greater the supplies.As supplies exceed 100% it starts to stockpile maybe(giving us extra targets at the field) or perhaps its convoys stop and all other convoys receive a bonus.We could even get a ju52 and make it and the C47 capable of choosing cargos and we could bolster bases in trouble with airdrops!!.a few trains that have a big capacity in arms and fuel that we would be foolish to leave undefended but it wouldnt kill a base if it doesnt get through.Bases could still spawn slowly in the normal fashion but for the strategically minded flyers we can 'make the difference' with jabos on trains and large supply dumps.It would be MORE for all of us.
this way attackers would have to keep the convoys back too to keep a field down.what these convoys would be like i dont know.simple undefended eye candy for the fun or defended platforms for AA guns we could use it doesnt matter to me.
When i ask for AH to get more complicated I dont want anal toejame like having to press a button for oxygen breatheing or a start up like i described earlier! :D
But wouldnt it be cool straffing convoys that are automated? or even spread a selection of fighters over an airfield that downed pilots can run to to take off in even when a hanger is down? it would be a laugh running accross the base jumping into 'the last hope planes that immediately pop up when all hangers are down.
It would give frustrated defenders a terrifying gamble, it would give the attackers something to shoot at and see explode! :) after all isnt that what we all want?
I just want to see more going on and have more choices in my targets and style of mission, but keep the ability to grab a plane and just roll.
what do you think Mav? everyone?
p.s. if we had some convoys rolling over bridges we have another fantasic target for the strat guys and a strange inanimate object for the loons among us to fly under :D
Destroying it will hinder respawn but even if we stop the factories altogether the bases would still recover as they do now only maybe minutes longer?
the more i think about it the better it sounds to me :)
infact tell me you'll put stuff like this in HTC and i'll resubscribe there and then ;)
[ 06-10-2001: Message edited by: hazed- ]
-
I'm gonna keep this one short..Gameplay=My hard earned $30p/m...Each patch brings better gameplay to this,perhaps not quickly enough though..<S!>
-
I'm gonna keep this one short..Gameplay=My hard earned $30p/m...Each patch brings better gameplay to this,perhaps not quickly enough though..<S!>
-
I can understand the desire for realism, but I fail to see how franticaly clicking mouse buttons or pounding the keyboard simulates it. So much of this type of immersion is "out side the monitor"; it's tactile, reaching down for the flaps lever, or it's positional, hunting for the prop pitch controls.....
The realism I'm after is a true understanding of 3D geometry, velocity vectors coupled with the energy egg, and FM's accurate enough to take advantage of the prior factors. If _that's_ right, the rest is eye candy, and if it's wrong, then you're playing Fighter Ace anyway......
Deezcamp, I've seen you online extolling the virtues of X-plane. I've never tried it my self, but if that's your opinion, what draws you back to AH? What's X-plane missing?
-
x-plane doesn't have guns and a hundred other real life pilots flying around on your screen. ;) x-plane seems like a nice general aviation sim. I'm not qualified to compare flight models of the two sims, but I'd have to say that Aces High's graphics are better than X-plane.
-
Deez does have a point about X-plane being a good simulator. It really has some cool features. I find it lacking in a couple of areas, but those are my opinion. I own X-plane as well as MSFlightsim 2000 Pro. I generaly prefer MSFS because of the visuals and, as Deez stated, the lack of engine start up procedures in X-plane.
Some of the really neat features about X-Plane I really do like are the manner in which they handle aircraft on the water, in the amphibs of course. You can also vary the water state, such as height of waves and so forth. The other thing is that you can fly in space with it. Also it has some very convincing flames from rockets and after burners and the contrails it produces at high altitude are really cool too. It has a nice low level altitude chart for plotting courses while flying. It also has some really cool thunderstorms :).
My gripes about it are mainly visual. It does have a cool plane building program that comes with it but you can't produce rounded wing tips and realistic tail sections with it. Some aircraft look pretty realistic because they have fairly squared off flying surfaces in real life, but others leave me a bit cold.
MS Flightsim is great on the visual aspects of it and some of the planes you can download have very good flight models that have been researched well. Others just plain suck :). It has some very realistic engine start up sequences in the planes that have been modeled with it and flight can be a great experience depending on the quality of the fm modeled and how you have the realism settings set.
Though MS flightsim doesn't come with a aircraft builder a very good one can be downloaded from Abacus that costs $39.
I fly both regularly as a means of getting away from AH for a bit. It is nice to fly around or to someplace without beeing shot down :). The distances are real and the navigation is pretty realistic too. You can fly both using sectional charts purchased at your local FBO.
I would enjoy a little more in the engine management side of AH too. I don't think I would want ultra realism necesarily, but more than we have, especially in the bombers. Would give you something to fiddle with on those long climbouts :).
As a matter of interest, you can download X-Plane at http://x-plane.com (http://x-plane.com) for free and try it. You only get 5 min flying time with a joystick each time you start it, but you can fly it with a mouse and keyboard when that time runs out. It is different and it is an interesting change of pace.
(http://home.att.net/~lmluper/markatsig.jpg) (http://www.jump.net/~cs3)
-
Hazed,
You and I are not that far apart here. Your idea about the strat additions and AI convoys sound like a neat feature. I don't have any objection to that kind of stuff.
My objection with the "realism" crowd is their selectivity of realism. They call for the minutia of flying without adding anything of real substance to the game.
If you want a truly realistic sim you have to give up many items that make the game viable in a mass market arena.
1. You log on for the first time and are assigned a country at random to be "born" in.
2. You start MANDATORY flight training and do not progress until you "graduate".
3. You go to advanced training and demonstrate your ability to handle an aircraft. Based on your skills after a predetermined time you are sent to a particular squadron that flies a specific plane. You may not get your prefered plane type such as a fighter.
4. You go to combat traiing at the front with your squad and try to develop SA that will allow you to survive which is very important for the next point.
5. You fly and live to fly again flying the missions you are ASSIGNED, not necessarily what you want to do.
6. If you die, you are done and at the very least (in a concession to GAME PLAY) have to be "reborn" and start all over again.
That takes in the minutia of the aircraft management, simulates real combat environments, ensures total immersion in the product. No half measures, just a realistic simulation of the real thing.
I won't get into the "flight modeling" thing here. It would drag this on way too much.
Now if this is what the "realist advocate" has in mind, then I agree it would be a SIM. If not, then all it is is a game based on the "rules" they want to satisfy themselves.
:p
Mav
-
Maverick,
Additionally to your points of realism.
1. Planes should occasionally suffer from mechanical failure while in flight.
2. Gun jams and misfires should be modeled.
3. Bomb mis fires and mis release should be modeled.
4. Damaged controls don't knock off entire controls at a time, instead, control cables jam, and control surfaces get stuck in deflected positions which cause loss of flight control.
5. Excessive damage to wing surfaces should affect lift and control forces.
6. No inflight look down radar - aka clipboard. Instead, a voice GCI controller will vector pilots to the target - then it's up to the pilots to establish visual contact.
7. Friendly fire should be on. Occasionally friendly ack should fire on friendly planes. This happened many times during WWII. An entire paratroop squadron was killed during the invasion of Sicily as a result of friendly fire.
8. The Brits had strict ROE concerning establishing visual ID before firing, that required getting close and sometimes loosing the advantage of surprise.
9. In the early part of the BoB, the Brits were employing the Vic, Welded wing, and Big Wing theory of aerial combat. The LW was employing the finger four formation, which was a far superior tactic. Therefore to be realistic, those flying Allies have to employ realistic tactics.
10. In the early war years, the Axis had superior numbers and with many seasoned vets. So most of the newbies should be flying as Allies.
11. 1 life per account.
12. Mission and squadrons are pre-assigned - players must fly the mission assigned and obey orders or their accounts are deleted (aka court martialed and shot)
13. Several planes suffered from fuel starvation while inverted - spitfire I believe is one of them - this should be modeled.
14. After the enigma machine was stolen, the allies knew of all German air raids - so all German attacks are given to the Allies.
15. When the purple code was broken, all Japanese attacks were known - again all Japanese attacks will be given to the Allies.
16. Fog, rain, snow, sleet, storms, lightening - all wheather should be modeled. These have an affect on flight performance.
17. Japanese plane performance should suffer from poorer fuel quality.
18. Get rid of auto climb, auto speed, and combat trim - no such animals in the real planes.
19. 4 Radios are out
20. Model variable pitch props for those planes which had them.
21. Make the instrumentation correct for each model. Get rid of the digital ammo counters.
22. Model barametric pressure, thermals, high and low pressure zones, jet stream, turbulance, down drafts, wind sheer, etc.
23. Turn on friendly mid-air collisions.
24. Model bird strikes too!
25. Model IAS not TGS
26. Model true and magnetic north - as well as magnetic lines. Through in sun spots on ocassions just to screw everything up.
27. No more mission editor, clibboard map, or waypoint plots... you have to know where you are by time in flight, speed, compass heading, stars, and dead reckoning.
28. No more Ctrl-D to check damage - if you can't see it from your cockpit - hmmm the landing gear may be down, or it may not be. Hopefully, you'll have a buddy near by who can do a belly check.
Ok let's go play realism.
Don't forget to set your altimeter and compass before take off!
Sounds like lots of fun.
Nexus
[ 06-11-2001: Message edited by: DmdNexus ]
-
DmdNexus,
#13 affected early Spits, MkIs, MkIIs, some MkVs and a few MkIXs, Hurricane MkIs and early A6M2 Zeroes.
#17 is modeled already.
#20, all aircraft currently in AH had constant speed propellers.
And you left out:
29. Due to the intensely rigorous training of pre-war Japanese pilots, 1 of every 2 top ranked pilots must fly for the Japanese during the early war.
30. The Japanese have no radios until late 1943 due to weight considerations and the fact (according to Saburo Sakai) that spoken words were not intelligible over the early radios.
;)
-
Hehe I'm sure there's a thousand details I did not mention..
ok here are more!
31. No more private, country, and squad radio channels. All channels are short wave radio and can be heard by all tuned to the same frequency.
32 Radio quality should be degrade to reflect throat and/or oxy mask mics, ionosphere bounce and solar magnetic interference.
33. Ground stations and ships can triangulate radio signals and figure out the speakers location, course, and speed. But no doubt many of you will just simply announce this information over the radio as you chatter with your squadies. If you do pass this info over radio - you will be court martialed. If you are in a buff, the senior officer (not commiting the offense) on board will no doubt shoot you immediately with his colt 45.
34. Breaking radio silence is a court martial offense - punishable by firing squad.
35. B17s and B26s must salvo their entire load (area bombing) when the lead bomber drops - no more surgical bombing! Surgical bombing was NOT a tactic used by the Allies in WWII. Except for certain British raids against Damns and power plants in Germany.
Nexus
[ 06-11-2001: Message edited by: DmdNexus ]
-
blimey once you get them going they go on and on dont they!
getting a little too realistic with no radios for japs etc.far too much to worry about if you ask me.
-
Originally posted by hazed-:
getting a little too realistic
"Selective Realism" rears its head again.
-
36. All non-secure radio communications from American ship and Marine units operating in the South Pacific will be spoken in Navejo.
37. Carrier Deck roll and pitch needs to modeled.
38. No bomber will sortie solo (except when the atomic bomb is dropped) - a full squadron must be mustered before any area bombing can be conducted.
39. A full crew is required to sortie a bomber - that includes a navigator.
Nexus
[ 06-11-2001: Message edited by: DmdNexus ]
-
its an opinion toad.I just want to see a more realistic/complicated war zone.I dont want the really fiddley stuff myself.
if this means im not a realism fan youd better tell every other sim ive played that they are far too easy.The career path thing mav mentions sounds great to me but when dmd got past no.9 i started to think hmmm i dont want to have to fly with no auto pilot for hours?,newbies all allied?forced to fly how they did not fly like it through choice? all got a bit too much but the first few ideas were ok by me.
I didnt mean i disagreed with all of it, just thought they were getting carried away ;) like many have said before its all about balance.I think if AH was new to me now this idea would appeal to me but ive played B172 the mighty eight and i realised then that im not really into the full blown stuff like real starts etc but i loved the inaccurate bombs (meant a hit was hard)and the damage to the plane etc.
im a gamer/realist hybrid :D
[ 06-11-2001: Message edited by: hazed- ]
[ 06-12-2001: Message edited by: hazed- ]
-
Sounds like allot of good ideas (except for the 1 life per account thing ) comeon now that would be dumb and you know it :p AS for effects of physical flight variable by weather factors, this is highly needed. The only question inturn to this would lie with,... How do you graphically represent this?... Now i can sense the sarcasim... but i truely think that many of the points (the great list :D ) are good valid ideas that can and should be implemented.
One of my major concerns about this realistic rant i have is due to the downfall of an overall realistic representation of war. Aces high is becoming the sort of Flying First person action shooter (quake like in short terms).. even with respect to the many Squads i see (and yes I salute those that are taking an organized effort to act in teams or play out the game in a realistic or more realistic fashion) I still see many un-historical/realistic setups occuring every night. It is very boring having no real goals other than to have 40 of your other country go and raid a base or even for that matter 10 of them to go and try to kill that 1 single con that happend to be trying to escape.
I think that The realistic adaptations that have been thought of would really change the way the shoot-em up types would learn to fight in a realistic way. I like the ideas of hi G loading and the way that it would affect your ability (speed) of viewing around your aircraft (mentioned in other posts).. I also like the Malfunctions that could be implmented as well.
Last but not certainly least... ICONS... ICONS need to be taken away.. from ENEMY TARGETS. IF anything,.. A logical,.. and from an ACM point of View ( icons should be OFF for ENEMY PLANES only when those PLANES are within A 3k RANGE).. THe purpose of this would be to allow for REALISTIC Situational awareness when you are within Aerial combat perimeters. AT this SMALL range the enemy con that you are fighting will actually be able to use the Camoflauge that is on the aircraft as well as aircraft plainform to mask thier position.. or AT LEAST make it harder to find. THIS would like i have said before, INCReASE the realistic SA required within a dogfight. (the ability to see a con as well as the range identification is absolutely fake) I feel that THE PILOT should be the determiner of when to shoot/ as well as angles/distance/ or the positional geometry of the enemy con.
AS for ALLIED fighters (anyone that is IN your same COUNTRY will be seen just as they are now (VISIBLE to 6k and in GREEN ICONS ). I dont see how their could be any logical argument here against this, It would represent the most realistic tradeoff between gameplay and ACM/SA requirements.
Anyway as always what do you all think? :)
-
Hazed,
My point exactly... where is the realism and gameplay line drawn.
Yes I went overboard with the details - to make a point.
Leave any detail out and it's selective realism.
Ergo...AH is simply a game and it will always be a game and never a true realistic simulator.
I agree totatly that adding more strats to the game will increase it's value and playability.
This horse done been whipped to death.
Nexus
-
"Anyway as always what do you all think?"
I think there are a lot of people posting on this subject that haven't spent much time looking at other aircraft in the air...and on the ground... at known distances. :p
-
Originally posted by Toad:
"Anyway as always what do you all think?"
I think there are a lot of people posting on this subject that haven't spent much time looking at other aircraft in the air...and on the ground... at known distances. :p
Toad,
Ain't it amazing how hard it is to see even an airliner in the air from another plane??? many times the controller has told me a vector and distance to a 727 / 737 and I couldn't see it until it was within 5 miles. Now that is a big bird on a straight approach where I KNEW where to look and I still couldn't see it until very close with a closure rate of over 350 knots. (Their speed plus mine) Smaller planes the size of F16's and piston fighters would be very tough.
The idea of ground controlers directing you to a con, ONLY worked in Defensive ops in WW2. There were no directors on the continent to help allied pilots find cons in deep raids.
At any rate the "selective realism" aspect of the many requests for minutia have been shown enough.
Mav
-
Isnt a computer simulation selective in its realism purely by BEING a computer simulation? if it was total realism id be sitting in the actual plane insead of nfront of my computer right? :D
the arguement that if we go the realism way we 'have' to go the whole way seems silly to me.
all first person shooters were good fun ,then 'hidden and dangerous,Rogue Spear and others made them more realistic and it caught on! Suddenly counterstrike and others appeared, slightly more realistic but exponentialy more fun.The way i see it we should be trying to make the game 'feel' as real as possible without losing sight of the fun factor, thats why i want more to do without going down the heavy, and dare i say it, dull total realism road.
-
Hazed-,
Like you I would like more strat effects and targets.
Like DmdNexus, I was posting "realism" requirements in an attempt to show how silly it would get.
Excessive realism would kill this sim/game. It is a business after all.
-
"[Game Play] Get rid of it.. focus only on realism... "
Back to topic....
The problem with this thread IT has no focus.
"Realism" is a general term here - apparently has different meanings depending upon who's talking.
What aspect of realism should this thread focus on...
Here are a few that come to mind...
FLIGHT MODEL REALISM:
Adding more flight parameters to control, i.e. alitmeter setting, prop pitch, carberator mixture, tracer selection (every 5 or 10 bullets), etc.
No auto climb
No auto speed
No radios in Japanese plans until 43.
DAMAGE MODEL REALISM:
mechanical failures, more damage characteristics (stuck control cables, broken canopies, gun miss fires, bomb dudes),
Model material hardness (nickle armor plating, steel, aluminum, cloth)
Model plane contruction and structural differences (aluminum honeycomb vs spar and stringer, hydrolic and control line placement, etc.
BATTEL FIELD REALISM:
add strategic targets: bridges, roads, factories, oil fields, damns, communications towers, dry docks, fortifications, power plants, storage depots, railroads, train stations, etc.
AI ground units (front lines)
Friendly fire from AI units.
Take away inflight radar or map showing GPS position
take away Icons
add Wheather effects
add Ship and truck convoys
take away private radios
limit Radar technology - it doesn't provide up to the second GPS information
(see my previous rants for more details)
Add roads that GV can travel on.
Add Trees that can hide in GVs.
Allow GVs to dig in and fortify.
Add fortifications around military bases with ground units stationed for defense.
STRATEGIC AI REALISM:
Bombing cities causes political unrest - possibily a coup or a call for surrender.
Destroying power plants lower factory production.
Destroying certain factories slows production of certain airplanes/tanks/ships, etc
Destroying convoys hinders resupply of bases.
Limit supplies at each bases: planes, ammo, fuel, etc. Each sortie takes from supply, if supply convoy is destroyed and supplies run out - there may be no planes left to fly, there may be no fuel for the planes, there may be no ammo, etc.
GAME PARADIGM:
Change from first person to role play (aka career path)
Limit the number of deaths per hour, day, week, account.
Change the "scoring" system.
Model a military rank structure and unit organization, a command and control of military operations.
Pick and choose what aspect of realism you want to talk about.
Nexus
[ 06-12-2001: Message edited by: DmdNexus ]
-
I'm glad you don't work for HTC! :rolleyes:
-
Nethawk,
tisk tisk,
Now you've taken a congenial debate on realism and gameplay and made it into a personal flame.
Hopefully, the adults can continue to keep the disscussion at a mature level.
Nexus
[ 06-12-2001: Message edited by: DmdNexus ]
-
LOL Nexus thats the funniest list I've seen in a long time..
Don't forget all players are required to wear oxygen masks with 10% rubbing alcohol to simulate the canned air.
During winter months, all pilots are required to set up their computers outside in the snow to simulate high alt cockpit conditions.
I had to add a couple :))))
10Bears
-
10Bear,
Heh! Wouldn't oxymasks rubbed with SPAM jelly make for a more "Realistic" smell?
Nexus :D
-
what say we all chip in a few dollars to help nexus truelly experience the thrills of war and send him to afghanistan in a US military uniform? :D
hehe we can pack some of that spam jelly for help with the afghan 'welcoming commitee'.I hear they like boys out there
:eek:
-
DeeZCamp,
1. Turn off auto-take off
2. Turn off Combat Trim
3. Turn off auto-fuel management
4. Turn off tracers (if you're really in for a challenge)
5. Turn off field movement animations, so you have to walk to planes, tower, etc.
There you go. Have fun.
OR, you can even take it a step further by...
i) Talking an enemy into blowing up your HQ so you don't have radar.
ii) When I shoot you down, and you bail out, make sure you WALK all the way back to a friendly airbase. :rolleyes: :p
[ 06-12-2001: Message edited by: Yoda ]
-
Hazed,
Been there, done that, got that ribbon. 8 years in the military - nearly all of it overseas.
Nexus
;)
-
DeeZ,
They ain't gonna listen. :(
-
Originally posted by Maverick:
Hazed,
You and I are not that far apart here. Your idea about the strat additions and AI convoys sound like a neat feature. I don't have any objection to that kind of stuff.
My objection with the "realism" crowd is their selectivity of realism. They call for the minutia of flying without adding anything of real substance to the game.
If you want a truly realistic sim you have to give up many items that make the game viable in a mass market arena...
Mav
Even your version of "realism" falls short. What about growing up first before starting flying training? i.e. coming out of the womb, learning to crawl, going to school, etc.
I play AH because overall it is presently the most realistic combat flight sim around. IMHO, "realism" has a very simple defintion in a flight sim, or even a "fighter sim" (which is a subset of flight sims, not a separate category).
Every control and indicator critical to flight should be implemented as realistically as possible given the monitors, keyboards, and joysticks available to the target market. Use of these controls should get as close a response as possible to the real controls they are modeling. AH does a better job of this than any other sim I have, but that doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement.
I personally want as much realism as possible for air combat in terms of graphics, controls, and sensory burdens from engine start to stop. If a real pilot couldn't fly a P-51 safely and effectively without knowing its flight manual inside and out, I expect to experience the same level of difficulty in anything that claims to be a sim (not more or less difficult because it would be more fun). I want to be as close as possible to being able to fly a real mission in a real fighter given the limitations of pc's, but I have no interest in modeling what pilots do when they are not flying a combat mission (since this is a computer, I can afford to lose planes learning to fly the hard way, instead of spending years being schooled on military flying skills). Though hearing the air raid siren, jumping out of your bunk, and running for your F4U while being strafed by Zeros would be fun once in awhile ;)
Any good sim can always be dumbed down for those that don't have the time to fool with all the details: i.e. things like "combat trim" which don't give anyone a real advantage, but ease the burden on those not interested in realism.
Correct controls, indications, start up, inflight management, and shutdown for engines would be great. It might not "add substance to the game" (I didn't know anything that was meant to be fun was supposed of have substance) but it would add a ton of immersion and substance to the sim. As with combat trim and auto-takeoff, I would have my "ez mode throttle" turned off. I personally would help buy the flight manuals and do research if HTC could and would incorporate all of the information in them to make their great game into a great sim.
"Realism" doesn't have to mean a reduction in fun for others. It can and should mean extra fun for those who crave it.
On a weeknight, I would do something like what we have now, but with as many "realism" options as possible given my time constraints, including random maintenance failures. On weekends, I would be more than willing to fly full escort missions from England to Berlin in real time. If no fighters showed up, I would strafe the hell out of anything I could find on the way home. That is realism: a long, uneventful flight. I would never say a "boring" flight, because I don't ever find any kind of flying boring. I once flew a Piper from 5am to 5pm on a simple cargo run hopping all the way around and back Tampa Bay. By the end of the day, I was tired, but never bored.
You can rag on people all you want for asking for more realism in areas you consider to have no substance, but what are you asking for? Are your wants and needs truly more important or more substantive than any other person who plays Aces High? I am quite sure HTC listens to everyone, but I am also sure they decide to do what they believe is in their best interest. Until the competition does a better job of fulfilling my needs, playing Aces High will continue to be in my interest.
Maybe someday I will finish school and be able to afford being a paying customer so my opinion will worth as much as all you rich guys ;)
-
nexx honestly that was just a joke and not meant as an insult or 'no' to your previous answers/suggestions :)
On the whole i could accept full realism down to every last sequence but I also appreciate this is a business and it has to attract all types of customer.Remember one of the main reasons i cancelled my account was that i was getting bored of the lack of things to do in terms of strategies and tactics.The air to air fighting is fantastic,no problem there but it seems i needed a bit more than just furballing.When more stuff is added I'll come back to test it all out.
streak eagle
I dont mean to 'RAG' on you but 5 am to 5pm on a CARGO FLIGHT??? Jeeeeeeeeeesus thats crazy!
one other thing...how many times have you done that same flight? :D
after all this game is 24/7 12 months a year.
the flight you described, whilst im sure good to do once in a blue moon or to just say 'ive done it',would you want to do it everyday in a full realism arena.Hours of flying for short fights, it just wouldnt attract enough people would it?
'therein lies the problem'
-
I'm all for accuracy but lack of realism is a concession that has to be made in order to have a workable computer game.
The point is: if I can't go grab a beer while I autoclimb off the runway then I'm not playing.
Oh, and if I wanted to do something that required constant undivded attention and suffer dire consequences for the smallest mistake, I'd shut down the computer and spend that time with the wife :D
-sequence
-
gotta say it hes right.Most just wont put up with it would they?
i like having a smoke and drinking coffee etc while climbing too lol :)
-
The realism I'm after is a true understanding of 3D geometry, velocity vectors coupled with the energy egg, and FM's accurate enough to take advantage of the prior factors. If _that's_ right, the rest is eye candy, and if it's wrong, then you're playing Fighter Ace anyway......
Uh Seeker, what da f_g did you say? <scratches head> :confused:
For me, I just wanna jump (virtually) in a plane (a virtual one) and seek (no pun intended) out the nme and kill or be killed.
Realism? Now thats a tough nut. I mean, how real can one get flying and fighting a virtual plane? Sure, make it tough and call it something that distinguishes it from something else but... realism? One of the folks said it best..."go fly a real plane then" or, wouldn't it be cool to have a Star Trek like Hologram room where one can get their ya ya's off flying against the Red Baron? :)
-
What whels said. I think most people here would get bored just doing the required pre-flight inspection before each flight. At that point, without enough people to play the game and pay HTC's bills, bye bye sim :(
gotta be a balance.
Hamish
-
Gotta agree with Deez about 70%. This 'adjusted for playability' stuff is just bs , I dont mean we need to have fuel trucks running around and 9 ground crew to maintain each aircraft or a 48 pt. check just to take off. Set all the guns to what they are supposed to be and at least get rid of the stupid icons under 1.5K so these asinine 1.499k kills arent so easy. Way I figure it after playing for just a month is that anyone that attacks a flak or m16 or buff from 6/12 is just stupid in this game, because unless its a total suprise on your prey you will get shot down. I know for one, if this continues for 'playablilty' reasons i'll just spend less money and get more options in ww2online even with its arcade style play, since 60% of AH is arcade anyways at this time. I know some are gonna read this and get upset becuase i'm knocking AH a bit but AH should do the relaxed realism arena and the realisitic arena if they want to maintain 'pilots' after they have played for 6months otherwise it just gets too frustrating dealing with the 'playabilty' aspects.
-
Maybe HT would be nice enough to include modifiers for the CM team so some balance can be achieved.
Say.. the ability to turn off enemy icons for everyone... or to reduce the effectiveness of combat trim (or the speed at which it adjusts itself).... to disable AI ack.
I would love to see AH have engine overheat (planes running at 100% power all the time ... no no no!), buffs tougher to shoot down but a SERIOUS toning down of their turbolaser (or at least remove the 21st century fire control on those guns..all of them shooting at exact same spot at any range.. ridiculous!), no enemy icons (makes AH REALLY shine, try it on H2H), less airfields but more strat targets that can be captured are amongst my wish list.
-
tac youre right if the option was there to up the realism and we had snapshots etc to use it in i think the complaints of the arcadey MA would cease or they would demand a seperate realism arena(historic?).
seems to me HTC have to cater for all types of flyers be they quake heads or sim anoraks to acheive the customer base they need.The only problem for them is trying to get it done fast enough.
i dont envy that task and i can certainly appreciate people like me, questioning certain aspects of the game, being quite annoying to them, but customers are who they are and however unfair it is its irrelevent.The customers will demand additions regardless of what that work entails and we are ignorent of how hard it is to acheive unless we are programmers and its up to HTC to do their best to give them what they want.Not necessarily because they want to but because thats the only way to keep the customers in AH.
they have to balance everything and have done superbly.Hell i may have quit for a while but i had NEVER played any other game for almost 2 years! to me that says it all.
A superb game! which is developing fast but unfortunatly not fast enough for my 5 year old type attention span :p.
I still <S> them for their efforts though and i will return to AH undoubtedly.Just not sure when.But what you suggest sounds like what id like to see.keep plugging away :)
[ 06-25-2001: Message edited by: hazed- ]
-
First, we have selected realism now. What's wrong with suggesting additions to this selective realism that might enhance the enjoyment of the game? Some ideas push the line between enjoyment and frustration. Everyone against adding more realism into the sim always brings up the "well, let's just go full blown realism, 1 life, 6 hr missions, blah blah blah!" Please, guys. People are only suggesting some things that might make the game more enjoyable. Then again, the suggestion might be too much. However, to accuse them of "selective realism" is nothing short of hypocritical. We ALL want selective realism in AH. You do want gravity in the game don't you? You do want the planes to not all have the exact same flight characteristics, right? The difference between the so called "realism" and "game play" groups is the level of selective realism, in other words, what should be in the game, and what "concessions" should be in the game to deal with the shortcomings of simulation on a personal computer with a flat 2D monitor. It's a personal preference as to where the level is, and no one is wrong. I don't think ANYONE wants the level set to 6 hour CAP flights where you might not see an enemy.
Instead of attacking the person suggesting a change that'll move the bar towards the "realism" side of things, just state that you think it would be a detriment to the fun of the game. I mean, that -is- what you're trying to say under all the "you must be born into a random country..." stuff, right? ;)