Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Kazaa on January 24, 2009, 08:20:08 AM
-
I sure do, anyone else?
-
no, no challange shooting a missle at someone 100 miles away. A up close gun fight is where the real action is.
-
No, Not at all Air to Air missiles, Air to Ground, etc etc. Its pointless Some missiles can hit someone from 20 miles i think. Pointless I think.
-
My taking isn't on getting missiles shot at me from a target I can't even have seen.
-
no
-
We GVer's wouldn't last 5 minutes even with S.A.M's and other A.A missiles
-
Its fun for single player campaigns and such, but not for an PvP game.
-
no.
-
No missiles would take the DOG out of Dog fighting.
-
no point since Falcon 4.0 plus the various patches and Lock-on are allready in market for a long time now
-
no
-
I had a Nintendo game years ago. Forget the name but it was modern jet fighter game with various missions. You had all kinds of missiles to fire. Got boring real quick since you nearly always hit the target, often without it being even close to you.
-
I don't like modern anything. But I suppose the same thing may have been said back in the 30's and 40's by the fans of WW1 hardware.
-
The more I read these posts, the more I come to believe the vast majority
of folks get their missile data from Hollywood or the History channel. There is a
reason they called the Sparrow the Great White Hope in Vietnam ya know :lol
-
I don't like modern anything. But I suppose the same thing may have been said back in the 30's and 40's by the fans of WW1 hardware.
What about the modern computers that allow you to play games like Aces High?
-
Modern day air combat is not dogfighting. I like dogfighting. Seeing the enemy and trying to counter his every move. The sound of the Merlin and Rolls engines straining in the vertical and roaring in a dive.
Fighting a missile shot at me from 10 miles away by deploying flares and shooting back at a blip on my radar screen is not my cup of tea.
I love WW2 history and the planes of that era. That is the time when dogfighting was at its' finest. WW1 paved the way and Korea was the beginning of the end. :salute
-
Not at all
-
could be fun f done right, but would be alot of work on the developers IMO, just modeling the different radar system capabilities properly and how they interact with the terrain alone would be a PITA..
I think it could be fun though.
-
It would be great to remote controll a Predator while chasing down the Taliban. Osama Bin laden is perked. :aok
I would't play much after the two week trial. :D
-
What modern day air combat?
-
(http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-sick016.gif) (http://www.freesmileys.org)
-
no
-
kazzaa u chittstirrrrer! :furious :lol
-
The more I read these posts, the more I come to believe the vast majority
of folks get their missile data from Hollywood or the History channel. There is a
reason they called the Sparrow the Great White Hope in Vietnam ya know :lol
Well, my answer is "no" and I do have realistic understandings of missile capabilities. They are quite capable now (Vietnam isn't modern, FYI) as has been demonstrated the few times they have been used in the last 20 years.
My issue with modern air combat is that it is so computer based. It is almost more about computer systems management than it is about airmanship. Another issue is the comparative lack of competitive airframes and sheer dominance of others (F-22) that would make the P-51D, Spitfire Mk XVI, La-7 and N1K2-J dominance in AH look downright balanced. The long engagement ranges are just the final straw.
-
The more I read these posts, the more I come to believe the vast majority
of folks get their missile data from Hollywood or the History channel. There is a
reason they called the Sparrow the Great White Hope in Vietnam ya know :lol
You're showing your age in reference to a war fought with first generation air to air missiles, 30 years ago. Missiles these days, IE "Modern" are much more reliable. Sidewinder AIM- 9X is better at hitting the leading edge (wing) heat signature of today's jets than the Vietnam era AIM-9B/D/E was at hitting the EXHAUST of its' target. Albeit, the -9X is probably the single most capable IR missile in existence today, the others in this generation aren't that far behind.
Avoiding any missile threat, these days is difficult once lock-on is achieved. This is why so much time, effort and R&D money goes into ECM rather than avoidance techniques. Once today's missiles are inbound, your chances are already slim.
-
What about the modern computers that allow you to play games like Aces High?
:o You win this round :D
I suppose I should have said I like to have my cake and eat it too. I like to ala carte my technology. I think that when it comes things such as warfare, we should use rudimentary technology that exhibits more of the skills of the combatants.
-
Would you rather race a Nissan R35 GT-R, or a Ferrari F40? The question is "race", not reincarnate as.
Modern day air combat is more about the machine than the pilot, than WWII is, and that kills it. Pressing inputs into a computer on your computer screen so that virtual computer does the work for you before your eyes even see the enemy is nowhere as fun as directly, manualy moving the virtual plane yourself. If there was a mod that removed all remote weapons and strapped on guns, even ultra lethal modern gatling guns, it'd be a different story.
-
The more I read these posts, the more I come to believe the vast majority
of folks get their missile data from Hollywood or the History channel. There is a
reason they called the Sparrow the Great White Hope in Vietnam ya know :lol
That could be said of about all the ATA missiles of the era. The evolved Sparrow went on to give good service and has many kills on its record. In the Gulf-1 war alone it accounted for a couple dozen Iraqi aircraft. It was the Sparrow that gave Qadafi a bloody nose as well in one of the Gulf of Sidra incidents.
-
Ace Combat is a very popular modern air combat game... probably not a lick accurate, but I like it. :)
-
That is why Ace Combat is an Arcade type game. To easy to shoot missiles at people miles away. Though that series was one of the all time best series I have ever played ever!
-
I sure do, anyone else?
WW1 Yes Korean Maybe Modern No if i was i`d play lockon online
(http://oemgames.co.uk/catalog/images/lockon.jpg)
-
Yes modern warfare is fun.... I had a pvp game called USAF and it was a blast. I always went to the gun only arena though.
I think it'd be cool
-
I would love to see a Korean War game though.
-
all I have to say is...Ew Lock-On.... and EW modern air combat, can't recall ever playing a modern day combat sim that left a decent standing impression for me. And there is quite the selection out there, one thing I would say maybe to would be a modern helicopter sim, but even then some of those got old after the 3rd mission, ID, saftey off, target, release and watch boom..rinse and repeat. Im all about the up close and personal aspect of air combat.
Korea I probably wouldn't mind, atleast they had prop driven planes to dogfight in and guns only jets, then again same thing, have yet to play a korea online sim that i liked and left a good impression.
-
I sure do, anyone else?
Oh ya I like Modern Air combat :aok. F-15 Eagle RULEZ!!!! ;)
-
No...........
-
Never tried it. Can't afford the 11 billion for an F22.
-
Its fun for single player campaigns and such, but not for an PvP game.
well said. :aok
-
Yes to WWI, yes to Korea AND yes to Vietnam! Why didn't anyone ask for it yet?
-
I love it all from WWI to present day.
WWII just happens to be my favorite era.
-
I sure do, anyone else?
I hate to tell you this mate, but the Spitfire XVI is not a modern day fighter...close, probably easier to fly, but no.
and no.
-
Do you mean as a game?
-
No
-
Lock-on is a tough game..... and I feel twice as stressed in a bvr engagment than a guns fight.
There is so much electronic wiz bangery beeping at you, an then your trying to handle the radar AND see the incoming missles/bogey's outside of the cockpit. Its tough...mabey to tough for a 12 year old.....So yes, I say bring on the modern combat game!
-
I say not until we get
(can't believe that no one else got tp this yet)
HOT AIR BALLOONS
(http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z39/clerick44/dull.jpg)
Look my in game handle is in there
-
I say not until we get
(can't believe that no one else got tp this yet)
HOT AIR BALLOONS
(http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z39/clerick44/dull.jpg)
Look my in game handle is in there
Thats funny!
-
First of all, I fail to understand how you can consider Desert Storm era only modern air combat.
There were what, maybe 20-30 aircraft engaged? Off boresite IR and active radar homing are very
recent developments. Go ahead and limit yourselves, no skin off my nose.
I don't claim to be an expert, but at least I worked on fire control radar back during the Stone Age
and have some knowledge of how they function. Of course that doesn't stop the "experts" from their
usual drivel on virtually every topic discussed on these boards. :rolleyes:
-
First of all, I fail to understand how you can consider Desert Storm era only modern air combat.
There were what, maybe 20-30 aircraft engaged? Off boresite IR and active radar homing are very
recent developments. Go ahead and limit yourselves, no skin off my nose.
I don't claim to be an expert, but at least I worked on fire control radar back during the Stone Age
and have some knowledge of how they function. Of course that doesn't stop the "experts" from their
usual drivel on virtually every topic discussed on these boards. :rolleyes:
Im sure those f-15 eagle pilots were well trained at what they do. Poor fulcrums never saw it coming!
ps. would you ask those hornet boys to stop buzzin my house. My jeep is not a threat. :aok
-
Man, I am so glad that you guys filled me in that modern air combat is BVR only! I thought I had just dreamed all these engagements I had!
Whew!
(http://i263.photobucket.com/albums/ii123/toonces3/2008-12-01_214940.jpg)
(http://i263.photobucket.com/albums/ii123/toonces3/2008-11-29_205601.jpg)
(http://i263.photobucket.com/albums/ii123/toonces3/2008-11-29_230002.jpg)
(http://i263.photobucket.com/albums/ii123/toonces3/2008-10-19_211402.jpg)
(http://i263.photobucket.com/albums/ii123/toonces3/2008-10-11_224626-1.jpg)
(http://i263.photobucket.com/albums/ii123/toonces3/2008-08-07_205629.jpg)
(http://i263.photobucket.com/albums/ii123/toonces3/2008-06-11_222746-1.jpg)
-
I don't understand what you're saying with those images? Are you saying radar and IR guided missiles are dead weight and you have to get close and use your guns?? Why do those planes still have missiles onboard? I'm confused.
-
I'm saying that, to the contrary of those that feel that modern air combat is simply pushing a few buttons on your radar and shooting all the bad guys down BVR, within visual range fights (WVR) happen.
For pure dogfighting only, sure WW2 is a really good time. Aces High in particular because the disparity in flight models is so pronounced.
But, imo, from a full mission perspective, modern air combat is far more complex and fulfilling. There is so much mental energy that you need to expend to fly a mission chocks to chocks in, say Falcon 4, compared to Aces High (or IL-2 or pick your own WW2 sim), that it's just silly.
I probably have a couple thousand hours of virtual flight time in Falcon 4, and I can assure you that it isn't simply "pickle your missiles at 50 miles and RTB". The pictures are to illustrate that fact- just a snapshot of some of the engagement I've enjoyed in the last few months in an OPFOR mod for the Nevada theater. The missiles are "still on the wings" because, believe it or not, there are actually parameters you have to get your jet into in order to shoot and hit another plane with a missile. Shocking! ;)
:rock
-
I do play Lock On occasionally, but generally it's way too much work to me. Being a lazy bum, I prefer gun birds without dar and a million keys to memorize ;)
-
I'm saying that, to the contrary of those that feel that modern air combat is simply pushing a few buttons on your radar and shooting all the bad guys down BVR, within visual range fights (WVR) happen.
For pure dogfighting only, sure WW2 is a really good time. Aces High in particular because the disparity in flight models is so pronounced.
But, imo, from a full mission perspective, modern air combat is far more complex and fulfilling. There is so much mental energy that you need to expend to fly a mission chocks to chocks in, say Falcon 4, compared to Aces High (or IL-2 or pick your own WW2 sim), that it's just silly.
I probably have a couple thousand hours of virtual flight time in Falcon 4, and I can assure you that it isn't simply "pickle your missiles at 50 miles and RTB". The pictures are to illustrate that fact- just a snapshot of some of the engagement I've enjoyed in the last few months in an OPFOR mod for the Nevada theater. The missiles are "still on the wings" because, believe it or not, there are actually parameters you have to get your jet into in order to shoot and hit another plane with a missile. Shocking! ;)
:rock
Doesnt change the fact that you're that much more removed from the plane's dogfighting performance because of computerization.
-
Doesnt change the fact that you're that much more removed from the plane's dogfighting performance because of computerization.
That's complete nonsense. ACM is still ACM and modern air combat is far removed from the point and click war people seem to believe. An on-line air combat sim based on current capabilities would be very interesting but the problem would be the amount of training someone would need to play it. You'd have to learn everything you learn for AH and then easily triple that with the additional training needed to employ radar, radar missiles, and IR missiles not to mention SAMs and advanced AAA, ECM, comms, radar intercepts, fwd qtr tactics, ROE, etc., etc. Probably not practical without dumbing it down.
-
Sorry but the computers just get in the way of it for me. It's not that I don't like modern air combat.. I love it. If I find the time I'll finaly get around to really get into it, maybe this summer.. But radar, missiles, all that stuff detracts from ACM, for me. I guess this is just a purist pet peeve, like say WWI's "purity" vs WWII's cop-out of mano-e-mano fights by simply opting out of a TnB fight against a SpitXVI while flying a 152. So yes, you're that much more removed from a pure dogfight by all the contingencies.. That's not a dig, it's how I see it. I don't want some long range AI drone (missiles or whatever) interrupting a strictly ACM and manual gunnery-decided dogfight.
-
"Oh look, Steve! We have a bogey on our radar! Let's fire a missile, shall we?"
"Sure"
*Sips from a cup, hits a few buttons*
*Pashaaaw*
"Oh, It looks like we got him. I hope we can make it back to base in time for lunch."
Doesn't seem AS exciting, but modern air combat is still pretty entertaining.
-
That's complete nonsense. ACM is still ACM and modern air combat is far removed from the point and click war people seem to believe. An on-line air combat sim based on current capabilities would be very interesting but the problem would be the amount of training someone would need to play it. You'd have to learn everything you learn for AH and then easily triple that with the additional training needed to employ radar, radar missiles, and IR missiles not to mention SAMs and advanced AAA, ECM, comms, radar intercepts, fwd qtr tactics, ROE, etc., etc. Probably not practical without dumbing it down.
Ditto. Complexity is what kept me from Falcon 4.
-
I'm crap in a 262 so gods knows how bad i'd be in a modern fast jet :)
-
I believe reality is quite different from most assumptions given here. 'Our' modern fighters will most likely be engaged by overwhelming numbers which would limit 'BVR' engagements to a time/weapons ratio of use and then it would become a guns engagement thereafter. Every time in history that the dogfight has been announced to be a thing of the past reality comes back on the experts and proves them wrong.
-
yes i do
-
1. Modeling the physics of the equipment CORRECTLY is about as complicated as the aerodynamics of the plane itself (or even more). Because of this reason, modern era sims either compromise on all aspects, or concentrate on the equipment since, lets face it, this is what wins these fights. Even then, the performance of radars, missiles and sensors is greatly over estimated. The enormous modeling complexity would mean that you will have a very small available plane selection - if HTC would like to maintain its modeling superiority (at least in most aspects) over other games that is.
2. ACM does exist because real weapons systems fail very often in real life. Radars still loose contact, missiles still get confused and electronic warfare is a great big unknown (closely guarded secrets). If those are modeled right, it may happen in the game too. However, the speeds which are typically more than double those of WWII and quadruple those of WWI mean that you are fighting an enemy which appears as a single pixel on the screen most of the time, except occasionally when he streaks by. In this respect, WWII and WWI flight sims are MUCH more attractive to a computer gamer.
-
id like a 1948 sort of game. Jets, but still with guns, not with missiles
-
id like a 1948 sort of game. Jets, but still with guns, not with missiles
Korea is what you want. ;)
-
Korea is what you want. ;)
or WWII continued. kinda like IL2 1946 although ive never played it.
-
Yeah... well, it's not that different from the normal IL2...
Why wanting something fictional when you can have a real war that basically meets all of your parameters? ;)
-
Korea is what you want. ;)
mig-15 *drool*
-
I enjoy the planes of modern aviation in the flying role as they are sexy and can make some wicked moves. I don't care for them in the fighting role, though.
-
Live well is full Kazaa...return to port :D
-
One thing I've noticed about modern a-a combat (imo) is that the engagement is far more dependent on the first move off the merge compared to WW2 combat in Aces High.
Like I said earlier, I've been dogfighting jets in Falcon 4 for about 10 years now. Rarely do I get into a fight that can go the distance like an AH2 fight can. You hit the merge, make your move (provided the engagement got to a merge) and then the fight becomes exceptionally lethal very quickly.
One other thing that is a huge paradigm shift, something I've been reading alot on lately, is the concept of being thrust limited. Flying a jet like the F-16/F-15, it is possible to crank in a hard turn and still be accelerating. One of the things I had to unlearn converting from a year of hard flying in AH2 back to modern jets is that there is no reason in an F-16 to go booming through the merge with excessive energy. I want to come in there at or near my corner velocity and then power through the turn using careful throttle management.
The differences are striking. I can certainly understand why modern air combat wouldn't appeal to everyone though.
I don't think a sim like Falcon 4 is suited to an online game like AH2. Korea, though, would be a very nice addition!
-
Korean war would be awesome. Would love to take up an F86 against a mig lol.
-
Limited missles. high speeds and altitude. Having to fire off flares and chaff while breaking im all for that. vietnam era would be a great addition
-
well IMHO you dont want to dogfight in modern warfare. why put a 20 million dollar plane in jepordy. thats the whole premise with missiles to start with
-
No
-
I've always liked to dogfight in Falcon 4.0 with guns only - realistic? not much, fun? yes!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SwcaZ1kxwps (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SwcaZ1kxwps)
-
I would like a veitnam era, huey-gunship game, or perhaps a desert storm scenario with a-10's vs. tanks and anti aircraft.. Someone mentioned the sabres vs. mig's, that also would be good.. I used to have a game on playstation 1, think it was called Desert Storm. One level had a bradely with anti-tank capabilities, was a cool ride through the desert, blowing things up.. Those are my interests, i like aces high, havent had a playsation in years.... Tuk151 :aok
-
Well, just for an FYI, there's a nice Desert Storm mod that we're working on for Falcon 4 right now. Sorry, no shots of me in the A-10 (which is flyable with a 3d pit in FreeFalcon 5), but here's some different planes in ODS:
(http://i263.photobucket.com/albums/ii123/toonces3/2008-07-12_205908.jpg)
(http://i263.photobucket.com/albums/ii123/toonces3/2008-07-13_162422.jpg)
(http://i263.photobucket.com/albums/ii123/toonces3/2008-07-13_172035.jpg)
(http://i263.photobucket.com/albums/ii123/toonces3/2008-07-13_210048.jpg)
(http://i263.photobucket.com/albums/ii123/toonces3/2008-07-26_111021.jpg)
-
No.
-
For me no, I'm waiting on the Oscar or hawk75 so I'm going the wrong way already. All that being said I think there are major major misconceptions of what modern air combat entails. Now my exposure is limited as well but when you look at all the clips of the red flag and similar exercises you get 3 components that stand out...
1) attack/defense force configuration and control.
Modern air war seems to be fought from the command center, the fighter pilot is a pawn in a larger game and not in control of his/her destiny. While the training and skills may determine success/survival an awful lot is being decided by some guy sipping coffee and looking at telemetry from an AWAC.
2) EM/ECM and weapons delivery platforms
To a large degree competing and overlapping technologies drive the battle. Some planes are "state of the art", however many are actually refurbished and combine state of the art electronics and weapons with older airframes. Add the emerging concepts of weapons platforms (bombers with large numbers of BVR weapons) and also the capabilities for low grade airframes to mount BVR weapons in a passive mode with control handled by the electronic "net" after firing. One of the check trainers has 7 hardpoints and can carry 6 AARAM's and an electronics pod for example.
3) ACM
So before you get to our definition of air combat you have to survive the above, even if you do then you are subject to the realities of #2. That an enemy "flight of 4" low tech/low hour trainers is cruising in at 200 ft with 24 AARAM's. As soon as the guy on the other side has you locked in with his "1st line" fighters he can launch 24 (or 48,72 etc) at the entire furball.
The reality is that the entire focus is shifting to detection and the ability to deploy BVR weapons en masse. You can buy an awful lot of BVR for the price of an F-22.
-
Not really.
60s and 70s are still ok but from 80s its too much electronics.
Basicly as long as it was just jets with rear aspect heatseekers it was ok.
I like WWI much better.
-
Another reason to dislike modern aircombat is AAA and SAMs.....
If there is something I hate then its ack.... and if you think ack is bad..... modern surface to air technology is even worse...