Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Krusty on December 24, 2008, 04:16:44 PM
-
I'm tired of all the stick stirring, flopping around, unrealistic, gamey angles that most of the ho-dweebs use, including the one I've seen so much lately which is to zoom inverted (pushing down on stick) upwards 7k while spraying thousands of rounds at you.
P51s had guns that would jam if fired in negative Gs. Other weapons had similar issues. The belts and feeds and mechanisms did not function while spiking from -5G to +8G, so why do they in this game?
Extreme case, knock those guns out in the damage screen. Easy case, make firing the trigger do NOTHING until positive Gs are restored.
There's a story of a P51 pilot that did something (I'm hazy on the exact manuver) and by the time he was ready to shoot at his target only one of his six guns was working because he jammed them all prior to lining up his shot.
While we're at it, all of the engines in the planes in this game relied on gravity to feed the oil pump to keep the engine functioning. Manuals on specific planes state the engines could be run no longer than x seconds inverted (F4u I believe is 15 seconds -- please correct me if I'm wrong), after which you ran the risk of siezing the engine up because it had no oil. Going hand-in-hand with the negative-G fish-flopping stick stirrers, let them try it with realistic engine limitations, and the engine dies, and you get a nice proxy kill.
Let's have a few more realistic G limitations. It would go a LONG way to limiting a lot of the gamey manuvers that the newbies (and some vets) use nonstop.
-
I understood that the .50 cal installation on the P-51 was particularly prone to G induced jamming.
Not saying that an Fw190 or Spitfire wouldn't suffer jams due to G forces, just that the P-51 isn't exactly the most representative example.
Sustained negative Gs would be an issue for WWII engines.
-
Naturally different guns would have different tolerances, but most of these are known somewhere, documented, limitations printed in operations manuals and so forth.
It would be possible to take a P-51D for example, and if the gun setup is almost identical in the F6F, the P47, and the F4u, to say the same limitations exist in those airframes as well (same guns, same layout, same feed, same ammo box positions, orientation, etc).
As for the oil, just take the operating limit and when you're inverted or in negative Gs run the temps up very quickly as if there's no oil, until the engine dies.
So the oil leak code can be used, only without the time delay for the leak itself, just toggle the "heat engine til it dies" code and it's already in-game.
-
Actually, I suspect that we know few of those tolerances. Maybe we have them for most US aircraft and some British or German aircraft, but I bet Russian, Italian and Japanese tolerances are probably completely unknown.
-
Let's not forget we have a resident weapons expert on the forums. Maybe Tony Williams might chime in on this subject?
-
Krusty, this was only a problem in the P-51B.
"In previous P-51s, the M2s were mounted at an extreme side angle to allow access to the feed chutes from the ammunition trays. This angled mounting had caused problems of congestion and jamming of the ammunition and spent casings and links, leading to frequent complaints of jamming during combat maneuvers.[24] The new arrangement allowed the M2s to be mounted upright, remedying most of the jamming problems."
In real life neg Gs are much more painful than positive Gs and in very extreme cases can result in eye damage. As an alternative to your suggestion I think we should perhaps consider making the screen blanking for red-out more severe, perhaps a lasting few seconds as is the case with black-outs. Guns refusing to fire under Neg Gs would make rapid oscillations in the pitch axis MORE effective as a defense, not less.
-
Not if it killed the gun for the duration of that sortie. It's one thing to stir madly if you know you can turn around and kill the guy if you are successful in shaking him, but it's another to do it knowing you will have to end your sortie to get a new plane with working guns.
As far as the P51, I had read the story about losing all but 1 gun from a P51D, not a B.
P.S. I agree about the redouts, almost never see those. Should kick in more.
-
Welp, you were mad about stick stirring...I'm just saying that fixing it to where you can't fire guns under neg Gs will make gamey usage of neg Gs more effective as a gun defense, not less.
And the chances of gun jamming from hard maneuvering while you were NOT attempting to fire them seems very unlikely.
So basically your suggestion would mean that someone attempting to follow a flopper in front of them through maneuvers would have THEIR guns pack up on them.
Not if it killed the gun for the duration of that sortie. It's one thing to stir madly if you know you can turn around and kill the guy if you are successful in shaking him, but it's another to do it knowing you will have to end your sortie to get a new plane with working guns.
As far as the P51, I had read the story about losing all but 1 gun from a P51D, not a B.
P.S. I agree about the redouts, almost never see those. Should kick in more.
-
By the time of WWII 99% of aero engines used
drysump lubrication... Separate oiltank, and scavanging
scrapers for the crank/rods, with a scavanging pump...
Radials didn't have a oil sump, just by the nature of
their design...
You are absolutely right about the guns tho...
RC
-
If this is historically accurate, I'd certainly like to see it in-game. +1
-
I completely agree, there were many cases in which both P51b's and P51d's would jam guns when popping -G's against 262's and in many cases it led to an shameful defeat. :(
They did fix the gun jams, right? The stories of gun jams ended at 1945 and i can't remember what month.
-FYB
-
Actually, I suspect that we know few of those tolerances. Maybe we have them for most US aircraft and some British or German aircraft, but I bet Russian, Italian and Japanese tolerances are probably completely unknown.
Breda's MGs were completely unreliable, they could jam very easily and without pulling -/+ G's .. they were built like s**t... I heard that Yak's 37mm couldn have been fired more than 2 / 3 rounds per time, the overheating could have led to a "gun barrel failure" (forgive my awful english).. And I'm not a chief in weapons, indeed I dont know anything about them.
But I would be more interested in engines' realism. Most of them used to overheat at 100% throttle and then experienced failures. WEP was very dangerous if engaged.. (oh and the wep engagement, isnt it too much arcade-style?). I would also add something about "our" engines reliabilty: they are perfect! I suggest some kind of randomized engine "failure" or "performance decrease" based on a statistic calculus about how much time you fly, not in a single plane (may be for long range bombers in mission tho) but for the whole time u're playing AH. We already have that!
I know most of the Gamers wouldnt like this, it's a provocation.
just some of my intricated thoughts. Throw me tomatoes but not rocks pls :P
<S>
chewi
-
Chewi I'm 100% for anything that will make this game more realistic but I think there there were engine failures people would whine like crazy..I can see it now:
"i was going to land my 10 pick/gang sortie when my engine died and I couldn't land hurting my score"
I'm 100% for it, but I think all the whining would cause HTC greif
-
We already have engine failures when the engine overheats when you run out of coolant or oil.
The game will not *allow* you to run WEP long enough to overheat the engine is the thing.
Breda's MGs were completely unreliable, they could jam very easily and without pulling -/+ G's .. they were built like s**t... I heard that Yak's 37mm couldn have been fired more than 2 / 3 rounds per time, the overheating could have led to a "gun barrel failure" (forgive my awful english).. And I'm not a chief in weapons, indeed I dont know anything about them.
But I would be more interested in engines' realism. Most of them used to overheat at 100% throttle and then experienced failures. WEP was very dangerous if engaged.. (oh and the wep engagement, isnt it too much arcade-style?). I would also add something about "our" engines reliabilty: they are perfect! I suggest some kind of randomized engine "failure" or "performance decrease" based on a statistic calculus about how much time you fly, not in a single plane (may be for long range bombers in mission tho) but for the whole time u're playing AH. We already have that!
I know most of the Gamers wouldnt like this, it's a provocation.
just some of my intricated thoughts. Throw me tomatoes but not rocks pls :P
<S>
chewi
-
The game will not *allow* you to run WEP long enough to overheat the engine is the thing.
gotcha :aok
-
Breda's MGs were completely unreliable, they could jam very easily and without pulling -/+ G's .. they were built like s**t... I heard that Yak's 37mm couldn have been fired more than 2 / 3 rounds per time, the overheating could have led to a "gun barrel failure" (forgive my awful english).. And I'm not a chief in weapons, indeed I dont know anything about them.
But I would be more interested in engines' realism. Most of them used to overheat at 100% throttle and then experienced failures. WEP was very dangerous if engaged.. (oh and the wep engagement, isnt it too much arcade-style?). I would also add something about "our" engines reliabilty: they are perfect! I suggest some kind of randomized engine "failure" or "performance decrease" based on a statistic calculus about how much time you fly, not in a single plane (may be for long range bombers in mission tho) but for the whole time u're playing AH. We already have that!
I know most of the Gamers wouldnt like this, it's a provocation.
just some of my intricated thoughts. Throw me tomatoes but not rocks pls :P
<S>
chewi
Yep, You are right.... There should be a random "reliability factor" in the game..
Some of the equipment used and loved in this game, wasn't so neat and tidy in reality..
Engines breakdown, get oil leaks, loose oil pressure.. Even NEW ones do... When life
and death are the stakes, the pilots would run them to the ragged edge for power...
And especially units that have seen many hours of use in combat, reliability suffers!!!
LOL, and a single engine fighter that shuts his engine down in combat, LOLOLOL!!!
Runnin with mixture leaned out, Mags at full advance, stuffer at max overdrive,
and he just shuts down his engine.... Over enemy territory, with the sky full
of badguys, tryin to kill him......Yeah RIGHT!!! Even if the plane was equipped
with a self starting feature.. With the engine running at the ragged edge for power,
the chances of a restart, would be EXTREMELY unlikely...
LOL, worse than that.. Many of the fighters in this game, had no electric starters
ANYWAY!!! Batteries and big honkin electric motors just weigh too much... So
they used a handcrank or blackpowder cartridge to spin the inertia starter...
I suppose they have a handy mechanic to stand on the wing and crank that
starter while pullin Neg G, right? LOL!!!
But this game has a MIRACLE START BUTTON... Works EVERY TIME!!! LOL..
Gotta be the GAMIEST thing in the game!!!
I know, I know, lighten up, its just a game.. LOL!!!
Whatever, doesn't matter... Just pointing out a pertinent fact...
RC
-
I agree that engine shutdown in dogfighting is highly "gamey", however, if it makes you feel any better, it has been demonstrated that shutting down the engine does not produce a significant increase in deceleration vs. simply closing the throttle in-game.
Yep, You are right.... There should be a random "reliability factor" in the game..
Some of the equipment used and loved in this game, wasn't so neat and tidy in reality..
Engines breakdown, get oil leaks, loose oil pressure.. Even NEW ones do... When life
and death are the stakes, the pilots would run them to the ragged edge for power...
And especially units that have seen many hours of use in combat, reliability suffers!!!
LOL, and a single engine fighter that shuts his engine down in combat, LOLOLOL!!!
Runnin with mixture leaned out, Mags at full advance, stuffer at max overdrive,
and he just shuts down his engine.... Over enemy territory, with the sky full
of badguys, tryin to kill him......Yeah RIGHT!!! Even if the plane was equipped
with a self starting feature.. With the engine running at the ragged edge for power,
the chances of a restart, would be EXTREMELY unlikely...
LOL, worse than that.. Many of the fighters in this game, had no electric starters
ANYWAY!!! Batteries and big honkin electric motors just weigh too much... So
they used a handcrank or blackpowder cartridge to spin the inertia starter...
I suppuse they have a handy mechanic to stand on the wing and crank that
starter while pullin Neg G, right? LOL!!!
But this game has a MIRACLE START BUTTON... Works EVERY TIME!!! LOL..
Gotta be the GAMIEST thing in the game!!!
I know, I know, lighten up, its just a game.. LOL!!!
Whatever, doesn't matter... Just pointing out a pertinent fact...
RC
-
As long as the prop is still spinning (wind force on blade pitch keeps it so) you can restart it in real life. Even Hitech himself commented on this. Forget to switch tanks, the engine sputters, you jump to switch them and start it back up again.
-
Just food for thought.
From"Twelve to One" the 5th AF fighter pilots bible.
Allen Hill, pilot of "Hills Angels" in the 80th FS
"In cases where you are really latched, it doesn't matter much what you do, but do something and do it violently"
Cy Homer of the 80th
"When caught just above the tree tops or water at slow speed, you can only hope to throw his aim off by jerking and skidding, at the same time striving for altitude. Drop full flaps if neccessary--anything to make him overshoot."
"If you find your tail is dirty, then it is time to get violent at the controls"
One man's stick stir....
As for gun jamming. Are we going to add icing to the game then? You hit a certain random alt where your guns ice up or your wings do? Ice forms on the air intake?
I think it's always dangerous ground when the 'realisim' bit gets thrown in. None of this is real. Can you imagine the whines from guys if their guns jam? Since we're not really dying and we get a new plane of choice every time... :)
The new guys will learn, or they'll move on. It's the nature of the beast. I'm hard pressed to find that HTC's set up a bad one right now. It seems to offer enough for us history/airplane nuts to enjoy ourselves while introducing that world to other folks for the first time.
I'd work harder at not letting it get to you. It's just not worth it.
-
I completely agree, there were many cases in which both P51b's and P51d's would jam guns when popping -G's against 262's and in many cases it led to an shameful defeat. :(
They did fix the gun jams, right? The stories of gun jams ended at 1945 and i can't remember what month.
-FYB
Bad info, scratch that.
-FYB
-
ok well here is an idea, admittedly it would have its issues and maybe its not the brightest thing ive ever thought of, but.......
what if they could open an ultra realistic arena?
i know every reason for not opening other types of special arenas would apply, so you dont need to list them here.
my point is that if they had an arena designed sort of like the old DA but with as close to reality flying as is possible. strictly obeying all of the rules of reality, physics and history that can be programed into this arena. the random equipment failure, the gun jamming foul weather fall out of the sky when not flying properly rip off wings flaps ect ect.
at the least it would make one hell of a new DA arena. then all the uber pilots who think they are really great will have a truer place to prove themselves in. going to DA will actually hold some value again.
you could increase the difficulty without risking losing any of the people who are here for the game as it is.
if AH was programmed as close to real flying as humanly possible, most players would take more than a month just learning how to get off the runway. people would get frustrated and quit, AH would never keep enough of a new customer base to stay in business.
but to set aside an arena specifically for it would add many new dimensions of game play difficulty for the players who have been here awhile. it would give then all the new challenges of learning a far more difficult and intensive game without having to go anywhere. if the player decided after trying it that they didn't like it then it is just a matter of quitting the arena and entering one of the traditional ones.
i think it would be fun to try out.
FLOTSOM
-
Gup, like I say, the gamey part to me is ability to use negative Gs defensively with no hesitation whatsoever (You don't get a permanent blackout and I've never seen an airframe overstressed from neg Gs) or the rapid oscillation between them. Actual control deflection speeds and the physical limits that would be inherent there are already taken care of. Full deflection takes a certain amount of time, and the "do not move controls so rapidly" message.
Just food for thought.
From"Twelve to One" the 5th AF fighter pilots bible.
Allen Hill, pilot of "Hills Angels" in the 80th FS
"In cases where you are really latched, it doesn't matter much what you do, but do something and do it violently"
Cy Homer of the 80th
"When caught just above the tree tops or water at slow speed, you can only hope to throw his aim off by jerking and skidding, at the same time striving for altitude. Drop full flaps if neccessary--anything to make him overshoot."
"If you find your tail is dirty, then it is time to get violent at the controls"
One man's stick stir....
As for gun jamming. Are we going to add icing to the game then? You hit a certain random alt where your guns ice up or your wings do? Ice forms on the air intake?
I think it's always dangerous ground when the 'realisim' bit gets thrown in. None of this is real. Can you imagine the whines from guys if their guns jam? Since we're not really dying and we get a new plane of choice every time... :)
The new guys will learn, or they'll move on. It's the nature of the beast. I'm hard pressed to find that HTC's set up a bad one right now. It seems to offer enough for us history/airplane nuts to enjoy ourselves while introducing that world to other folks for the first time.
I'd work harder at not letting it get to you. It's just not worth it.
-
ok well here is an idea, admittedly it would have its issues and maybe its not the brightest thing ive ever thought of, but.......
what if they could open an ultra realistic arena?
FLOTSOM
OK we'll wake you at 3AM for briefing :)
I'm all for the history etc, but I doubt folks are going to sit around going through briefing, pre-flight, form up and all the other rituals that would go with really flying it like it was, or as much as a computer game would allow.
I think the scenarios are the best chance for that. I can only point back to DGS and the long missions we flew escorting the bombers. Great immersion, and great fun, but also probably not something that would keep an arena full day after day.
-
OK we'll wake you at 3AM for briefing :)
I'm all for the history etc, but I doubt folks are going to sit around going through briefing, pre-flight, form up and all the other rituals that would go with really flying it like it was, or as much as a computer game would allow.
I think the scenarios are the best chance for that. I can only point back to DGS and the long missions we flew escorting the bombers. Great immersion, and great fun, but also probably not something that would keep an arena full day after day.
i understand the briefing and pre flight check ect would be a little bit too much realism.
i was talking more about the flying itself. trying to take the gaminess out of the game. putting into place the randomness of reality.
i understand it wouldn't keep a full arena, but it would be great for small duels between squads or groups who want harder game play.
FLOTSOM
-
How is an arbitrary loss due to a random number generated engine failure "harder"? There was no skill that could change the outcome.
-
Someone said it before me, but something along the lines of Discos = Engine Failure
-
I'm not advocating introducing random failures. I'm advocating failures based on pilot errors alone, negative G manuvers on engines and guns.
-
I'm not advocating introducing random failures. I'm advocating failures based on pilot errors alone, negative G manuvers on engines and guns.
You're not, but RipChord did. I was responding to that line of thought.
-
As long as the prop is still spinning (wind force on blade pitch keeps it so) you can restart it in real life. Even Hitech himself commented on this. Forget to switch tanks, the engine sputters, you jump to switch them and start it back up again.
Yep, just like dumping the clutch on any given manual transmission automobile actually. If you have the momentum to turn the motor, it should start.
Coogan
-
Great thread with some excellent reccomendations - I like the "ultra-realistic arena" idea for the seasoned vets.
-
Some great ideas here, thanks for posting. My Dad flew both P47’s and P51’s during WWII. I checked through his log books and he reported two different gun jams both times in P51’s due to pulling negative G’s . But never lost the entire gun package. His only problem with guns during his time in P47’s was from flack damage to a wing.
He flew D models of both aircraft based out of England and later France. He transitioned from the 47 to 51. He liked the 47 because it could take a beating and get you home. Not so with the 51.
Some great ideas here, thanks for posting. My Dad flew both P47’s and P51’s during WWII. I checked through his log books and he reported two different gun jams both times in P51’s due to pulling negative G’s . But never lost the entire gun package. His only problem with guns during his time in P47’s was from flack damage to a wing.
He flew D models of both aircraft based out of England and later France. He transitioned from the 47 to 51. He liked the 47 because it could take a beating and get you home. Not so with the 51.
In my youth I spent a few summers ferrying WWII era aircraft from airshow to airshow, I have actual time in P40, F4UA1, T6, B25. They are all prone to overheat if you push me. Operating temperature of the engines had to be watched at all times. Military power could be used, but was limited, unlike it is here in AHII.
-
Good info Traveler - very cool that he flew them in WWII - bet he has some stories to tell.
How'd you get that ferry gig? That's awesome!
-
Good info Traveler - very cool that he flew them in WWII - bet he has some stories to tell.
How'd you get that ferry gig? That's awesome!
He didn't talk much about it when I young, we talked more after my service in VietNam. I had a better understanding of the demons he faced following his war. My father passed away a few years ago in his sleep. We shared a common love of flying that got us past the rough times that any father / son relationship goes through.
-
He didn't talk much about it when I young, we talked more after my service in VietNam. I had a better understanding of the demons he faced following his war. My father passed away a few years ago in his sleep. We shared a common love of flying that got us past the rough times that any father / son relationship goes through.
:salute
-
We shared a common love of flying that got us past the rough times that any father / son relationship goes through.
That's great, my dad & I are the same way - both love to fly, have spent many hours together slipping the surly bonds.
-
He didn't talk much about it when I young, we talked more after my service in VietNam. I had a better understanding of the demons he faced following his war. My father passed away a few years ago in his sleep. We shared a common love of flying that got us past the rough times that any father / son relationship goes through.
May he Rest In Peace. :salute
For those who have died for not a man or soul but for the freedom and peace of those in this world.
-FYB
-
Everyone flies at full throttle most of the time - that's not realistic at all.
The problem is game play - the distances have to be relatively 'short' so that you can contact the enemy pretty quickly without getting bored. HTC have implemented a 2 x fuel burn anyway, but that still means there isn't an incentive for adopting realistic cruise settings (except in certain cases like flying top-cover, a long range patrol or long range bombing mission).
I don't see an easy answer to this.
There is a parallel with GVs - they always belt along at full speed which they rarely achieved in practice because of rough/soft ground.