Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Anaxogoras on March 08, 2009, 11:34:35 AM
-
Aces High is primarily an air-combat game and not a flight simulation. For all of the complaints about poor gameplay, part of the blame has to placed on the kind of customer base that shoot-em-up games attract versus true flight sims.
Let me list some of the easy-mode concessions that we have in AH:
- Combat trim
- Aileron trim for aircraft that did not have it, e.g. a lot of Spitfire marks, 109, etc.
- Ammunition counters
- No mixture controls
- No supercharger controls
- No radiator/cowl flap controls for engine cooling
- No engine overheats
- Weak engine torque
- 360 degree head swivel
- Flaps auto retract when airspeed increases
- No weather
- Automatic bombsight calibration
- GPS clipboard map
I'm sure all of you could expand on the list. The thing is, AH would have been a flight sim if it had been introduced 20 years ago. In fact, when I first tried Warbirds offline in 1996 it wasn't just an air-combat game; compared to the standard of the day it was a high fidelity air-combat flight simulation. But AH is pretty much the same thing in a different sand-box, and 13 years have gone by...
We have all of these concessions so that it's not too hard for a new player to get in the air and enjoy the action, and so that more experienced players can also focus on the action and not on tinkering with their radiator flaps. At least, that's the usual explanation for it. But these concessions play right into the hands of the instant-gratification, never-read-the-manual crowd.
I have asked for high-fidelity engine controls in the wishlist and around 90% of you rejected it. That's fine, but don't complain about the quake-style main arena gameplay in the next thread; since 90% of you complain about gameplay, I'm sure there's a big overlap. ;)
A lot would change if some of these easy-mode concessions were done away with (the GPS map would probably stay). Learning to manage engine temperature would be the easy part, but combat tactics would have to change. For instance, prolonged furballing on the deck at 180mph with WEP would require the full opening of radiator flaps, which would degrade performance. Level bombing accuracy would decrease. I don't think these changes would spell the end of air combat in AH, but they would require you to RTFM and put a little effort into learning to fly in order to succeed, and that would be better for gameplay. :aok
-
Implementing the changes you desire would go against "90%" of the players' wishes, wouldn't it? It seems pretty obvious that HTC doesn't have a large profit margin on this game. Losing hundreds of paying customers to satisfy someone that finds the game too easy is bad business. All the "lame game play" whines seem to go back for years. Now there are many more players so the whining is compounded. I think you are jaded. Maybe you should try a flight sim. Let us know how much fun it is adjusting your fuel mixture. :salute
-
I'm sure all of you could expand on the list.
nah... You pointed out the chEASYness quite well, but you can't expect them to make it hard and chase all them 15 dollar bills away either. An arena with easy mode turned off might get me interested again though.
-
I prefer to not have to worry about caging gyros, switching on gun heaters and gunsight heaters, setting cowl flaps, mixture and blowers before a dogfight because I prefer that HTC thrives and stays in business so we can continue to enjoy this game.
-
I seem to remember in AW and AWIII there was an arena for "realistic" flight simulation where u had to adjust trim, flaps, and if you stalled you would fall out of the sky. Well short version is NOBODY flew in that arena because the reality of the matter is most people don't "really" know how to fly a cessna much less a super high performance WWII fighter plane. Hell half that crap you mentioned I didnt even know existed on these planes :O But I guess that was what flight school was for. Unfortunately in this high speed world we live in everything is now instant gratification and the marketing folks at HTC have determined that easy mode makes more fiscal sense. Perhaps they can implement a mandatory "flight school" at the end of which you earn your pilots license and are allowed to play in the MA. :D I see it now, the next plane introduced will be the A6 Texan
LTARogue
-
WB and Fighter Ace is basically the same as AHII regarding keeping up with things. So why change AHII and then, not get a SINGLE new player? Because they get frustrated with the flight modeling.
-
I agree with all the above.
Just wanted to say lovely use of bullet points.
-
nevermind
-
Do we get to do preflight checks and 20 min warm ups also? Because that is just what I've been waiting for.
-
WHAT'S THE FASTEST PLANE?
-
WHAT'S THE FASTEST PLANE?
Isn't it the Russian Altonov Alt-F4 ?
-
Do we get to do preflight checks and 20 min warm ups also? Because that is just what I've been waiting for.
No straw-men bronk! <shakes finger>
-
No straw-men bronk! <shakes finger>
Hey you asked for less easy mode, no?
-
personally, i never fly with combat trim on. it feels to me like it interferes more than it helps me. same with the stall limiter.
it's not really that hard to adjust it, and the plane performs much better.
as for all of the other controls? i wouldn't mind havikng the option to try it, but don't think i'd like it. i like the fight. i like getting into a 1-1 or a 1-2 or furballs.
the main fun in this sim is the fight..for whatever reason, be it attacking a base, defending a base, or just because there's other planes there to shoot at...
the bombing model....i've heard it used to be a different, harder calibration model. i sometimes wonder if we should go to that again, and if we should add some wind drift component. that would make it much more challenging.as it is now, a blind person not having a clue could hit just about anything from 25k alt.
as for the really hi fliers.....let em. i popped into lw last night for a couple flights. at 10k, i was way to low. at 15k same. at 25k i was coalt.....i hate taking the couple minutes to getto that alt, unless i'm bomber hunting.
-
. . . Perhaps they can implement a mandatory "flight school" at the end of which you earn your pilots license and are allowed to play in the MA. :D I see it now, the next plane introduced will be the A6 Texan
LTARogue
IIRC, didn't student pilots in WWII start off in PT-17 Stearmans or BT-13's? I think the A6 was the last step before actually going to fighters. It would be kind of fun to have the training a/c to just put-put around in - similair to the RV-8.
-
First off, a lot of those concessions were made to make it possible for new people to get into the game and actually get up flying. My job as a trainer is complicated enough, no need to make it worse please.
Also, Targetware has a lot of advanced engine management and realism.
Go log into a server there and see how many are online. Then log back into AH.
Seems pretty obvious that people are voting with their feet.
If HTC wanted to add a few touches that would reward players for advanced engine managment without penalizing those who don't, well yes I'd be interested. But thats a tough can of worms to open, and adds a whole lot of coad for not much playability.
There are a lot of things I'd love to see added to AH, most of those mentioned are pretty low on the list.
Better damage modeling, better gunnery ballistics modeling, Seaplanes and floatplanes and cockpits that open are just a few on the top of my list.
-
Also, Targetware has a lot of advanced engine management and realism.
Go log into a server there and see how many are online. Then log back into AH.
Seems pretty obvious that people are voting with their feet.
Nice try. I can log into hyperlobby right now and see more than 700 people playing IL-2 FB. Not all of them are playing with complex engine management...maybe around 50%.
-
So by making thing more difficult, and adding more realism, you believe that this will bring about better game play? :huh
I think what it would do would be to empty the arenas and HTC's coffers. I want to fly and fight. I want people who will fight back. I don't want to have to spend half my time trying to keep my plane in the air only to see the first enemy I FINALLY find to seize his engine and go down with out firering a shot.
No the game is too difficult for many already, hence the problems of people looking for short cuts.
-
anytime someone brings up the game having too many crutches which makes it absurdly easy and gamy, the other side trhows in the MAXIMUM OPPOSITE possability "I dont want to spend 20 min doing preflight" "my gun heater ans sight heaters!" etc etc.. give me a break..
nobody is suggesting THAT level of involvement in the game.. that would be retarded (almost as much so as you insinuating that wanting that is what this thread is about)
simple stuff like SOMEWHAT realistic engine overheating.. some wind for gods sake..
auto-combat trim??? leave it.. but CHANGE it so it is about 75% as effective as what you can get from manually trimming.. if you want to use the crutch and keep it on, fine.. but learning to manually trim pays big dividends.,. currently auto combat trim will get about as much out of any plane as you could get by doing it yourself.. no reward for learning it manually, no penalty for having to use the crutch.. granted in SOME situations you can get a little extra out of a plane by manually trimming.. but not nearly enough to always use it for the most part.
fuel management.. same think.. leave the auto option available, but at reduced performance.. allow manual mixing for people to either get maximum performance.. or blow up their plane..
-
anytime someone brings up the game having too many crutches which makes it absurdly easy and gamy, the other side trhows in the MAXIMUM OPPOSITE possability "I dont want to spend 20 min doing preflight" "my gun heater ans sight heaters!" etc etc.. give me a break..
nobody is suggesting THAT level of involvement in the game.. that would be retarded (almost as much so as you insinuating that wanting that is what this thread is about)
simple stuff like SOMEWHAT realistic engine overheating.. some wind for gods sake..
auto-combat trim??? leave it.. but CHANGE it so it is about 75% as effective as what you can get from manually trimming.. if you want to use the crutch and keep it on, fine.. but learning to manually trim pays big dividends.,. currently auto combat trim will get about as much out of any plane as you could get by doing it yourself.. no reward for learning it manually, no penalty for having to use the crutch.. granted in SOME situations you can get a little extra out of a plane by manually trimming.. but not nearly enough to always use it for the most part.
fuel management.. same think.. leave the auto option available, but at reduced performance.. allow manual mixing for people to either get maximum performance.. or blow up their plane..
YES please... just like stall limiter...
-
anytime someone brings up the game having too many crutches which makes it absurdly easy and gamy, the other side trhows in the MAXIMUM OPPOSITE possability "I dont want to spend 20 min doing preflight" "my gun heater ans sight heaters!" etc etc.. give me a break..
nobody is suggesting THAT level of involvement in the game.. that would be retarded (almost as much so as you insinuating that wanting that is what this thread is about)
simple stuff like SOMEWHAT realistic engine overheating.. some wind for gods sake..
auto-combat trim??? leave it.. but CHANGE it so it is about 75% as effective as what you can get from manually trimming.. if you want to use the crutch and keep it on, fine.. but learning to manually trim pays big dividends.,. currently auto combat trim will get about as much out of any plane as you could get by doing it yourself.. no reward for learning it manually, no penalty for having to use the crutch.. granted in SOME situations you can get a little extra out of a plane by manually trimming.. but not nearly enough to always use it for the most part.
fuel management.. same think.. leave the auto option available, but at reduced performance.. allow manual mixing for people to either get maximum performance.. or blow up their plane..
actually, in low speed stall fights, i've always felt that the auto trim fights against me....especially in the p38.
-
actually, in low speed stall fights, i've always felt that the auto trim fights against me....especially in the p38.
granted in SOME situations you can get a little extra out of a plane by manually trimming.. but not nearly enough to always use it for the most part.
:aok
-
Just wanted to say lovely use of bullet points.
:lol
+1
-
I don't want to have to spend half my time trying to keep my plane in the air only to see the first enemy I FINALLY find to seize his engine and go down with out firering a shot.
anytime someone brings up the game having too many crutches which makes it absurdly easy and gamy, the other side trhows in the MAXIMUM OPPOSITE possability "I dont want to spend 20 min doing preflight" "my gun heater ans sight heaters!" etc etc.. give me a break..
nobody is suggesting THAT level of involvement in the game.. that would be retarded (almost as much so as you insinuating that wanting that is what this thread is about)
Thank you wingnutt. :) Fwiw, I'm yet to seize an engine in Il-2, but it is certainly advantageous not to fly around at 100% throttle because it keeps your engine cool for when you need to use it. If only they had something like FSO...
-
My problem with it is it will only add complexity to those without gear.
On my set up with one button push I can do a string of commands. Click... AC is now set for combat.
Now think about the poor guy with a 4 button 2 axis stick.
-
The game dose have its ups and downs. There are times i have a tought time of hitting anything and others that i am on fire. Yes, i do hate it when these young, dumb kids "game the game" and have no understanding of the historic part of the plans.
The other day in AvA, a player asked if he was axis or allies. I asked him what he is flying, "109" he responds. I then ask, "And what coutry dose 109 represent during WWII"? He replyed, "Germany". Here is your sing kid.
-
My problem with it is it will only add complexity to those without gear.
On my set up with one button push I can do a string of commands. Click... AC is now set for combat.
Now think about the poor guy with a 4 button 2 axis stick.
:rolleyes:
boohoo
nobody will penalized due to lack of buttons..
besides, im sure the majority of folks who will have the will to learn and use the manual functions will be into the game enough to also have the gear needed to do so..
if nothing else, map it to the keyboard.. plenty of buttons.
-
If I could learn all of the controls for Falcon 3.0 at age 14 with only a two button joystick, it can be done here.
-
My problem with it is it will only add complexity to those without gear.
On my set up with one button push I can do a string of commands. Click... AC is now set for combat.
Now think about the poor guy with a 4 button 2 axis stick.
My keyboard has almost 90 non-Windows related buttons.
-
I seem to remember in AW and AWIII there was an arena for "realistic" flight simulation where u had to adjust trim, flaps, and if you stalled you would fall out of the sky. Well short version is NOBODY flew in that arena because the reality of the matter is most people don't "really" know how to fly a cessna much less a super high performance WWII fighter plane. Hell half that crap you mentioned I didnt even know existed on these planes :O But I guess that was what flight school was for. Unfortunately in this high speed world we live in everything is now instant gratification and the marketing folks at HTC have determined that easy mode makes more fiscal sense. Perhaps they can implement a mandatory "flight school" at the end of which you earn your pilots license and are allowed to play in the MA. :D I see it now, the next plane introduced will be the A6 Texan
LTARogue
It was called "full realism" and lots of people flew there ...me included. There was no trim controls.
Helm ...out
-
Nice try. I can log into hyperlobby right now and see more than 700 people playing IL-2 FB. Not all of them are playing with complex engine management...maybe around 50%.
I dont find Il-2's overall flight model believable. Most of the planes fly the same except for the speeds they achieve Certainly Il-2's engine management is more complex then Aces high, but the overall "feel" of the planes is very very similar. Now if we could combine ace's flight models with Il-2's engine management we might have something.
Helm ...out
-
I dont find Il-2's overall flight model believable. Most of the planes fly the same except for the speeds they achieve Certainly Il-2's engine management is more complex then Aces high, but the overall "feel" of the planes is very very similar. Now if we could combine ace's flight models with Il-2's engine management we might have something.
Helm ...out
Indeed. If HTC implemented more realistic engine controls, they would compete better with games such as Il-2, potentially drawing away from some of their more realism-oriented player base with AH's more realistic flight model and MMO community.
I think that with a stall-limiter like crutch, more realistic engine controls would probably be a good business decision for HTC.
-
I'm sure all of you could expand on the list. The thing is, AH would have been a flight sim if it had been introduced 20 years ago. In fact, when I first tried Warbirds offline in 1996 it wasn't just an air-combat game; compared to the standard of the day it was a high fidelity air-combat flight simulation. But AH is pretty much the same thing in a different sand-box, and 13 years have gone by...
I have not heard such and utter load of BS in a long time.
It never ceases to amaze me how people wish to pick and choose the items they wish to see, but them try use the argument of realism to justify there arguments. The simple fact is , there are many things about flying a plane that are not fun. Such is the fact of life. Simple things like flying for 250 hours and never seeing an enemy plane is very close to realistic. But I do not hear you saying it should be modeled.
Spending 2 hours planing before each flight is realistic, I do not hear you wanting it.
The simple fact of the mater is, You play a game, the game is Air combat. The terms simulation vs game are not in any way in conflict with each other, you wish to try separate the 2 terms, but you really can not.
Some simulators are made for real life training. These simulators are designed for a specific purpose in mind. AH is no different , it is a simulator with a specific purpose in mind, and one of those purposes is fun.
Some here wish to say IL2 is more realistic because it has you push a button to open cowl flaps? I say BS again. They just makes different choices at what it wishes to accomplish. They want you to believe it is realistic, but start looking into real details of how things work and you will see , they just are making you push a button.
Ah is designed to learn air combat. It strives to model planes perfectly in their flight envelopes so that the air combat is real. Please do a side by side of AH against any game on the market when it comes to flight dynamics.
HiTech
-
Word.
-
I have not heard such and utter load of BS in a long time.
85 Krusties? :D
-
I love that reply Hitech. :aok
-
Ah is designed to learn air combat. It strives to model planes perfectly in their flight envelopes so that the air combat is real. Please do a side by side of AH against any game on the market when it comes to flight dynamics.
HiTech
Engine performance plays a large part in the flight envelope, does it not? It would seem to me that in aerial combat milking everything you can to get the performance out of your engine should be important, just as milking everything out of the rest of your airframe is, instead of having a non-penalizing 'stall limiter' of sorts.
-
You got told off, haha! :lol
-
Simple things like flying for 250 hours and never seeing an enemy plane is very close to realistic. But I do not hear you saying it should be modeled.
Spending 2 hours planing before each flight is realistic, I do not hear you wanting it.
HiTech
correct, nobody wants either of those things, just a little extra fiddlability such as having the option of manual fuel management, and some minor engine management requirements.. again, both of these being optional.. the automatic settings could still be there for new players or those who just dont want to fiddle with it, but there would be potential rewards in performance for those who take the time and learn how to use them effectively. It wouldn't be a "game ender" for anyone, just an extra layer of immersion and enjoyment for those who choose to make use of it.
-
I'm smelling IL-2 almost infinite wep 109 wishing..... I could be wrong. :noid
-
Engine performance plays a large part in the flight envelope, does it not? It would seem to me that in aerial combat milking everything you can to get the performance out of your engine should be important, just as milking everything out of the rest of your airframe is, instead of having a non-penalizing 'stall limiter' of sorts.
I can't improve on this reply, except to say that the cooling systems that AH lacks have an impact on the flight envelope as well.
Il-2 engine management combined with AH's flight model would be fantastic. :)
Some here wish to say IL2 is more realistic because it has you push a button to open cowl flaps? I say BS again. They just makes different choices at what it wishes to accomplish. They want you to believe it is realistic, but start looking into real details of how things work and you will see , they just are making you push a button.
Would you be happy if there were a lever to pull instead of a button to push? :devil Also, they're not making anyone do anything. You don't have to fly Il-2 with complex engine management; they give you a choice. :aok
-
Shouldn't you be in the other thread asking for the P38J to be perked?
-
Who asked for the 38J to be perked? :huh :lol
-
I have not heard such and utter load of BS in a long time.
85 Krusties? :D
Naw, he is in the other thread claiming that buffs are over modeled since he can't BnZ them at 35k.
-
If I could learn all of the controls for Falcon 3.0 at age 14 with only a two button joystick, it can be done here.
aHA! Knew it!....human beings reach their maximum level of IQ as a teen, then oddly lose it as life progresses.... ;)
-
Last time I checked I was sitting at Home in front of my computer....... Looks Around and the chair is still on the ground. I have never flown a WW2 airplane so I don't have much to go on. Been playing this game for a few years now and I know one thing ........ Its Fun or I would go find something else to do. Could you imagine you have to even Wait 5 min. untill you upped again :lol Its a game have fun with it.
Crims
-
Last time I checked I was sitting at Home in front of my computer....... Looks Around and the chair is still on the ground. I have never flown a WW2 airplane so I don't have much to go on. Been playing this game for a few years now and I know one thing ........ Its Fun or I would go find something else to do. Could you imagine you have to even Wait 5 min. untill you upped again :lol Its a game have fun with it.
Crims
see you could be one of the "automatic settings guys" your playing a game having fun, you know its not real.. not high fidelity flight simulator.. but fun none the less..
then there are us folks who fall out of our chairs and make simulated bullet holes in the drywall behind the monitor every time we get shot down.. we want.. more :rock
-
I am in posession of some vintage WWII hardware. For a small fee, I could drop by your house and put a couple hundred real holes in it. ;)
-
I am in posession of some vintage WWII hardware. For a small fee, I could drop by your house and put a couple hundred real holes in it. ;)
and I ll run out in the street and call you a HO picker, then you can post the film and let the community chime in, then the thread will be locked...
in the end all that will be effected is my heating/cooling bill.
so i must respectfully decline your WW2 era drive by shooting offer.
-
aHA! Knew it!....human beings reach their maximum level of IQ as a teen, then oddly lose it as life progresses.... ;)
Its funny you would post this because i had a revelation the other night....
When I started AW I was early 20's, had no money, limited bills, no kids (or very young) and pretty much when i got off work/school my freetime was unlimited.....except for keeping the Mrs. happy :cool:
Now I have a job, management responsibilities, investment responsibilities, 4 kids including teenagers, travel sports, coaching responsibilities, rides, groups of friends we have to go out with, emails to respond too and my freetime is about nil except after 9:30 pm.
So the reason I probably couldn't/wouldn't want a more complicated game is that I would lack the time to learn it all over again. Specifically the motivation. At least I can afford the better stick now...I just don't want it :D
BTW that doesn't mean a "full realism" arena with different modeling would be a bad thing....
-
so i must respectfully decline your WW2 era drive by shooting offer.
:rofl
All right, I'll do it for free. When your wife comes home, you can tell her it was a horde of termites passing through on their way back to Chernobyl.
-
Aces High is primarily an air-combat game and not a flight simulation. For all of the complaints about poor gameplay, part of the blame has to placed on the kind of customer base that shoot-em-up games attract versus true flight sims.
Let me list some of the easy-mode concessions that we have in AH:
- Combat trim
- Aileron trim for aircraft that did not have it, e.g. a lot of Spitfire marks, 109, etc.
- Ammunition counters
- No mixture controls
- No supercharger controls
- No radiator/cowl flap controls for engine cooling
- No engine overheats
- Weak engine torque
- 360 degree head swivel
- Flaps auto retract when airspeed increases
- No weather
- Automatic bombsight calibration
- GPS clipboard map
I'm sure all of you could expand on the list. The thing is, AH would have been a flight sim if it had been introduced 20 years ago. In fact, when I first tried Warbirds offline in 1996 it wasn't just an air-combat game; compared to the standard of the day it was a high fidelity air-combat flight simulation. But AH is pretty much the same thing in a different sand-box, and 13 years have gone by...
We have all of these concessions so that it's not too hard for a new player to get in the air and enjoy the action, and so that more experienced players can also focus on the action and not on tinkering with their radiator flaps. At least, that's the usual explanation for it. But these concessions play right into the hands of the instant-gratification, never-read-the-manual crowd.
I have asked for high-fidelity engine controls in the wishlist and around 90% of you rejected it. That's fine, but don't complain about the quake-style main arena gameplay in the next thread; since 90% of you complain about gameplay, I'm sure there's a big overlap. ;)
A lot would change if some of these easy-mode concessions were done away with (the GPS map would probably stay). Learning to manage engine temperature would be the easy part, but combat tactics would have to change. For instance, prolonged furballing on the deck at 180mph with WEP would require the full opening of radiator flaps, which would degrade performance. Level bombing accuracy would decrease. I don't think these changes would spell the end of air combat in AH, but they would require you to RTFM and put a little effort into learning to fly in order to succeed, and that would be better for gameplay. :aok
<----door
-
Indeed. If HTC implemented more realistic engine controls, they would compete better with games such as Il-2, potentially drawing away from some of their more realism-oriented player base with AH's more realistic flight model and MMO community.
I think that with a stall-limiter like crutch, more realistic engine controls would probably be a good business decision for HTC.
Wouldn't it be possible that HTC would lose more potential customers than they would gain in this niche market because the fun and action factor would be offset by the drudgery of doing mundane chores?
Engine performance plays a large part in the flight envelope, does it not? It would seem to me that in aerial combat milking everything you can to get the performance out of your engine should be important, just as milking everything out of the rest of your airframe is, instead of having a non-penalizing 'stall limiter' of sorts.
Why doesn't anyone ever ask pilots what they did different every flight to maximise their performance cowl flaps wise? Because nobody cares. As far as I know, which isn't necessarily saying much, cowl flaps were opened on the ground to keep the engine from overheating. Get moving and they were closed, and stayed that way. Changes to fuel mixtures and manifold or throttle settings were to save fuel. Fight's on and no one was adjusting fuel mixture anymore. Throttle, sure, but that's obvious.
Mechanical failures, from what I've read, just happened. It doesn't read, "We were pushing extra hard, wide open and we lost a cylinder on number 3". It is simply, "we lost a cylinder on number 3 engine while egressing from the bomb point."
The only instances I've read of mechanical failure during stressful combat situations are on P-38's with engines and turbochargers. More a teething problem than something that would regularly happen to all aircraft, all the time under a certain set of circumstances. As a matter of fact, one occasion of a 38 losing an engine in the middle of a dogfight was due to it having only half the amount of oil in it that it was supposed to have.
Sure, there are 16 steps necessary to start a planes engine. Do we care? Will it make game play better?
wrongway
-
Nice try. I can log into hyperlobby right now and see more than 700 people playing IL-2 FB. Not all of them are playing with complex engine management...maybe around 50%.
I grasp your point that a more complicated game might sort out some of the less complicated people, and thus improve game play. I understand that IL2 is a more complicated game (I've never played it, but it's what I hear), so probably we can glean an answer from there. Do those of you who have played the two games find that there is less HOing, ganging and vulching in IL2, or that people there avoid fights less than they do in the AH MAs?
This is a real question, not a criticism of either side of the issue.
- oldman
-
Quote from: The Fugitive on Today at 02:31:24 PM
I don't want to have to spend half my time trying to keep my plane in the air only to see the first enemy I FINALLY find to seize his engine and go down with out firering a shot.
Quote from: Wingnutt on Today at 02:33:12 PM
anytime someone brings up the game having too many crutches which makes it absurdly easy and gamy, the other side trhows in the MAXIMUM OPPOSITE possability "I dont want to spend 20 min doing preflight" "my gun heater ans sight heaters!" etc etc.. give me a break..
nobody is suggesting THAT level of involvement in the game.. that would be retarded (almost as much so as you insinuating that wanting that is what this thread is about)
Thank you wingnutt. Smiley Fwiw, I'm yet to seize an engine in Il-2, but it is certainly advantageous not to fly around at 100% throttle because it keeps your engine cool for when you need to use it. If only they had something like FSO...
So what your saying is that I'm going overboard thinking you mean the "maximum opposite".... hmm lets see
no combat trim
- Aileron trim for aircraft that did not have it, e.g. a lot of Spitfire marks, 109, etc.
no aileron trim
no counters
mixture controls
supercharger controls
- No radiator/cowl flap controls for engine cooling
radiator and cowl flap controls
overheating engines
stronger engine torque
no head swivel
- Flaps auto retract when airspeed increases
no auto retract on flaps
weather
- Automatic bombsight calibration
tougher bombsite calibration
no GPS clipboard map
[/list]
The red replies are what you believe there should be in the game right? It sounds like a bit overboard and much closer to the maximum than adding a few changes. Again, there is nothing wrong with the game, its the way it's played that is screwed up.
and just one little question....
Nice try. I can log into hyperlobby right now and see more than 700 people playing IL-2 FB. Not all of them are playing with complex engine management...maybe around 50%.
Why aren't you at hyperlobby now if they have it so "right"?
-
I can't improve on this reply, except to say that the cooling systems that AH lacks have an impact on the flight envelope as well.
Il-2 engine management combined with AH's flight model would be fantastic. :)
Would you be happy if there were a lever to pull instead of a button to push? :devil Also, they're not making anyone do anything. You don't have to fly Il-2 with complex engine management; they give you a choice. :aok
I have 800 hours as a flight engineer in C-118s and C-131s, as well as about 100 hours in the right seat of a C-1A (and about 1,200 as crew chief). Believe me when I tell you that you do not want absolute realism. It's not fun. It's work. I don't fly Aces High because I want more work.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Aces High is primarily an air-combat game and not a flight simulation. For all of the complaints about poor gameplay, part of the blame has to placed on the kind of customer base that shoot-em-up games attract versus true flight sims.
Let me list some of the easy-mode concessions that we have in AH:
- Combat trim
- Aileron trim for aircraft that did not have it, e.g. a lot of Spitfire marks, 109, etc.
- Ammunition counters
- No mixture controls
- No supercharger controls
- No radiator/cowl flap controls for engine cooling
- No engine overheats
- Weak engine torque
- 360 degree head swivel
- Flaps auto retract when airspeed increases
- No weather
- Automatic bombsight calibration
- GPS clipboard map
I'm sure all of you could expand on the list. The thing is, AH would have been a flight sim if it had been introduced 20 years ago. In fact, when I first tried Warbirds offline in 1996 it wasn't just an air-combat game; compared to the standard of the day it was a high fidelity air-combat flight simulation. But AH is pretty much the same thing in a different sand-box, and 13 years have gone by...
We have all of these concessions so that it's not too hard for a new player to get in the air and enjoy the action, and so that more experienced players can also focus on the action and not on tinkering with their radiator flaps. At least, that's the usual explanation for it. But these concessions play right into the hands of the instant-gratification, never-read-the-manual crowd.
I have asked for high-fidelity engine controls in the wishlist and around 90% of you rejected it. That's fine, but don't complain about the quake-style main arena gameplay in the next thread; since 90% of you complain about gameplay, I'm sure there's a big overlap. ;)
A lot would change if some of these easy-mode concessions were done away with (the GPS map would probably stay). Learning to manage engine temperature would be the easy part, but combat tactics would have to change. For instance, prolonged furballing on the deck at 180mph with WEP would require the full opening of radiator flaps, which would degrade performance. Level bombing accuracy would decrease. I don't think these changes would spell the end of air combat in AH, but they would require you to RTFM and put a little effort into learning to fly in order to succeed, and that would be better for gameplay. :aok
A FR arena has been suggested, and filed under G.
<shrug>
ANimL
-
Last time I checked I was sitting at Home in front of my computer....... Looks Around and the chair is still on the ground. I have never flown a WW2 airplane so I don't have much to go on. Been playing this game for a few years now and I know one thing ........ Its Fun or I would go find something else to do. Could you imagine you have to even Wait 5 min. untill you upped again :lol Its a game have fun with it.
Crims
that would be the last day of my subscription
-
I would suspect from these replies that there are not enough full realism people to adequately populate a separate arena. I know AW had engine overheats and random gun jams. There was no WEP key, you just firewalled the throttle and had to monitor your temps- if you overheated the engine could seize. It wasn't really a terrible burden, but it was quickly removed because most people disliked it. The random gun jams (not bullet caused gun damage, just random jamming of a gun) was extremely unpopular because it introduced a random unfairness and was also quickly removed.
You can't make full realism optional in the MA to "not disadvantage" those that choose auto mode and still give a performance advantage to those who choose realism. If realism is slightly advantaged then the non-realism is, by definition, slightly disadvantaged. And I don't understand how optional realism would improve MA game play if almost everyone was choosing "auto" mode? Almost everyone would just keep doing what they are doing now wouldn't they? To make it really work wouldn't you have to force realism on everyone and wouldn't that be quite unpopular?
-
Wouldn't it be possible that HTC would lose more potential customers than they would gain in this niche market because the fun and action factor would be offset by the drudgery of doing mundane chores?
no loss, game could be played as it currently is, have the extra fidelity as OPTIONS.. no manditory.. you can still run everything with automatic everything, you just wont be able to extract maximum performance from the aircraft compared to doing it yourself.
Why doesn't anyone ever ask pilots what they did different every flight to maximise their performance cowl flaps wise? Because nobody cares. As far as I know, which isn't necessarily saying much, cowl flaps were opened on the ground to keep the engine from overheating.
you wouldn't be flying at 100% throttle from wheels up till wheels down, especially at low level.. well you could at your own peril.. the prolonged stall fighting on the deck at full wep even more so.
what about cowl flaps?? well if you get her nice and cooking hot during a hard fight, how about the option to open the cowl flaps to cool the engine a little quicker, of course this would come at the price of some speed.. but you could regain your we quicker.. none of that is totally realistic.. but it would add to the game to be able to manage engine heat in some way.
Changes to fuel mixtures and manifold or throttle settings were to save fuel. Fight's on and no one was adjusting fuel mixture anymore. Throttle, sure, but that's obvious.
mixture changes are made with altitude aswell, more importantly, in combat pilots could.. at their own risk.. purposefully run the engine slightly lean to gain more power.. this came at the risk of early detonation and engine damage but it was done.. in fact i remember reading a spitfire pilots comments regarding a talking to he go from a mechanic after he came to him with a handful of spark plugs with melted ends..
Sure, there are 16 steps necessary to start a planes engine. Do we care? Will it make game play better?
reading comprehension fail.. in regards to engine managment, nobody is asking for totally realistic systems or even anything close.. just slightly more in depth managment.
Believe me when I tell you that you do not want absolute realism. It's not fun. It's work. I don't fly Aces High because I want more work.
not one single person has suggested 100% realism... nobody.. just something somewhere between that and arcade style.
-
not one single person has suggested 100% realism... nobody..
Yes, but that is what all the nay-sayers are arguing against because it's a lot easier than arguing against the reasonable position that we stand for. ;)
-
I grasp your point that a more complicated game might sort out some of the less complicated people, and thus improve game play. I understand that IL2 is a more complicated game (I've never played it, but it's what I hear), so probably we can glean an answer from there. Do those of you who have played the two games find that there is less HOing, ganging and vulching in IL2, or that people there avoid fights less than they do in the AH MAs?
This is a real question, not a criticism of either side of the issue.
- oldman
Good question. My experience is limited, but here are a few forum quotes of Il-2 players opinions:
P.S. If you think Vukching here is bad..try out Aces High. I have never seen vulching like that until I tried that game. Folks circle like buzzards and swoop down over the spawns. People there don't whine about it..its part of life..you just wait for them to leave or you go up and fight them off. Simple isn't it.
If you think vulching is bad here..try taking off from a base under seige in Aces High.. LOL
Some you guys should go do a free trial at aces high or one of the other mmog that incorporates real-estate acquisition. IL2 players tend to have little experience with combined tactics involving large scale operations (most il2 just furball)
The Head-On (funny whine)
In aces high, the spitfire VIII seems completely sloppy in turning, handling and feels uber heavy in the vertical when compared to the spitIX, but i dont think the Spitfire VIII's extra 180 lbs of weigt should do that much damage to maneuverability. And DONT EVEN GET ME STARTED about the tempest in that horrid game ><
can't turn, roll and everyone only flies it as a running-HO (Head On)attack platform.
-
correct, nobody wants either of those things, just a little extra fiddlability such as having the option of manual fuel management, and some minor engine management requirements.. again, both of these being optional.. the automatic settings could still be there for new players or those who just dont want to fiddle with it, but there would be potential rewards in performance for those who take the time and learn how to use them effectively. It wouldn't be a "game ender" for anyone, just an extra layer of immersion and enjoyment for those who choose to make use of it.
How about the option of "fiddlability" for those that want it...........without the potential rewards in performance. Just the "fiddlability" you get to push more buttons if you want to.
Might want to get rid of that auto takeoff thing too. It would make it more interesting to watch people trying lift from a field in a hurry.
-
HT pointed out one thing that counters your whole argument. In Il2 you are just pushing buttons, and the flight model is noticeably crappier. It's got some nice things like the departures at e.g. hammerheads' top, landing, hitting the brakes too hard on the ground can flip the plane onto its nose, etc. But those don't say anything for what's inside the box, just that the box has lots of switches on the outside. It would be nice to have more realistic engine mechanics, e.g. be able to overheat the engine and cause permanent damage because of it, or trade cowl flaps for speed/drag, or a more detailed damage model, or cannon shells able to cause shallow damage (merely burn the paint if they impact at shallow enough angle) etc, but those things aren't guarantees that the actual modeling is good. Which it isn't in Il2.
Look at it this way.. Imagine Il2 as it is, but with AH's graphics and the instrument micromanagement removed as in AH. It's a really crappy game. You can't lump all the extra detail depth of il2 in with the argument that it's got better physics. It just has a lot of gizmos and bootstrap FM fixes and eye candy that draw attention away from the actual physics. The planes do all fly the same, just with different performance figures.
-
I for one would welcome more realism in AH2.
-
Moot.... no one said anything that disagrees with what you said... other than the people making strawman arguments. We all know that Aces High's flight modeling and general gameplay is better than Il-2's, but we would like some more fidelity in the engine department for Aces High. Hopefully in a way that is better than Il-2's (which, looking at the comparison between the two games currently, I would assume would happen), as Il-2's as I understand is unrealistically finnicky.
-
The OP never attempted to compare Il-2 to AH2 as though Il-2 was 'better'. He uses the engine management and 'realism' options it offers (however well implemented as HTC points out) to illustrate his point.
FWIW, I totally agree with Anaxagoras.
You make a sim that is so simply a caveman can fly it, you get what you have.
I don't think Anaxagoras is suggesting HTC make a wide sweeping change to AH2 that causes him to lose subscriptions.
I do think he is suggesting that by increasing the complexity of the sim, you will attract a more mature, more enthusiastic player. Whether this is true is debatable I suppose.
However, as long as AH2 remains Quake With Wings (QWW), that is the type of gameplay it will attract. And, if you don't think the MA's are QWW, then you're deluding yourself.
FSO and Axis and Allies would be wonderful arenas to test these ideas out.
-
^^^^
what he said..do it the same way the big vs small map was done.. try it in one arena only for starters if need be..
It cant seem to be pressed home enough that the consensus (of those FOR more fidelity) is that it would be OPTIONAL.. and thus no threat of running anyone off.. folks unwilling or unable to make use of the more complex tasks would not be obligated to do so, they could leave everything on AUTO and fly their merry butts off.. but they would not be able to extract the maximum performance out of their aircraft.. fully knowing this they would be encouraged to learn.. (OH MY GOD THERE IS THAT WORD) a little more about how every thing works and would thus become better pilots.. this would enhance their own experience, as well those who fight against them.. Better opponents = better play. Its much more enjoyable to fight someone who has some degree of understanding as to what is actually going on, vs someone who has blundered themselves into the air and knows nothing but 1 pass haul bellybutton and HOing all day long...
-
Ok do not mind me, my credentials are only limited.
I only have about 20 hours total of real ACM.
I only have 1bout 600 total hours flying time.
I only have about 200 hours aerobatic.
The only planes I have done dog fights in, are T-6, P51ds, La7s, Marchietties, and RV8's.
Ok and never mind my credentials of very close to 20 years flight sim design.
So lets talk about your so called realism, that you are completely clueless about.
* Combat trim
You seem to believe combat trim some how is unrealistic, but obviously since you have spent so little time flying real planes, you are clueless how trim actually is used by a pilot. You seem to believe that flying a perfectly trimed plane gives some sort of advantage in a fight.l It is not, when flying hard manuvers the only time trim comes into play at all is when doing very large changes in air speed. When going from 160 to 360 the forces will become heavy in pitch, and with out ever thinking about it a pilot roll's in a little trim. Now the deal is, in most planes it is done with out ever moving your head out of the cockpit. Tell me how many players in a fight could find the correct key on a key board with out looking to roll in some trim?
2nd Tell me how they can feel the trim on the stick like you do in a real plane, Computer joy sticks work nothing like the real thing. You have zero feel for the forces acting on the stick, and it is much much harder to fly a sim as precesisly as a real plane. Combat trim is a compromise between how the real planes handle and the hardware that is available. It is an attempt at providing a much more realistic flying experience than what you believe it is.
* Aileron trim for aircraft that did not have it, e.g. a lot of Spitfire marks, 109, etc.
Aileron trim that exists on real planes is only there so that a pilot can trim his planes hands off for long flights. In my RV8 I do this by balancing fuel between the wing tanks, as I am fairly sure most pilots do who can control fuel from each tank. There is no advantage what so ever to have Aileron trim in a dog fight, it is only there to lower the work load for long cruises. Why do you think the P51 had it when other planes did not? SO can I assume because you wish to change aileron trim, you wish to also want to fly 6 - 8 hours missions. And if you do not have this time available you are not permited to take a sortie?
* Ammunition counters
We have a game where it is best for people to be able to fly many planes. In the real world pilots put in many hours learning the speciefices of each plane. They knew before they flew how man secs of ammo there plane had. In the world of AH we do not require pilots to have 10 hours of instructions before put into combat in a new plane. Do you really wish the same amout of instructions before you are allowed to fly any given plane type? Or are you once again only taughting makeing somthing more difficult than it was in the real world in the name of BS realism.
* No mixture controls
Mixture control has one purpose in life, to conserve fuel. When it is time to engage it is not even thought about to shove 3 levers ahead at the same time. Exactly how many people have 3 levers all beside each other like most real planes have? How easy is it to tak your right hand and push all head to max performance like most fighters were capable of?
* No supercharger controls
This one could be debated, but the real fact is do you really want to have to learn each planes critical altitudes just so you can do nothing more complicated than pushing one button? Because that is all you are asking for. Push 1 key when your altitude reaches one point. This sounds great fun to me, I tell you what since you believe it is so necessary to a good flight sim, I will write it, and you can come to my office and do nothing but watch the altitidude and press that so important button at the correct time.
* No radiator/cowl flap controls for engine cooling
Once again, these really have very little to do with dog fights, they have much more to do with engine life.
* No engine overheats
See above, exactly how high can you run your engine? Or would you wrather just have a randomize control your destiny.
* Weak engine torque
Engine torque is 100% accurate. We do take one liberty with how the tail wheel operates, but with out those liberties very very very few people including you could get in the air. Do you know a gentleman name Bob Shaw? You know the guy who wrote books, flew fantoms, did carrier landings and such? Well he was tail wheel endorced. The scariest moment I have had in a plane was the first time he flew mine, and on take off he proceeded to bend my airplane enough that it required 3 months of repair.
* 360 degree head swivel
In reality you have better than 360 deg field of view do to head and eye movement. Tracking an airplane in real life requires no thought as with a joy stick hat. Even with the 360 degree turning, tracking a plane in a sime is many many times more difficult than real life. So it is an atempt to bring things closer to reality. Not less as you seem to state.
* Flaps auto retract when airspeed increases
Once again choices on how to implement realism, Putting the book spec with auto retract flaps puts more not less realism into the game. It simply forces you to fly as real pilots did. Show me data where the real flaps broke, how they were bent, what happen to all the different type. This data does not exist in any form I have seen.
So the options are make flaps break at the speed the book sais, or make them retract. If we made them work like landing gear and break, we would just put a loud noise before the would break, once again all you are asking for is another key press that is more difficult than real life.
* No weather
Tell you what, Ill suspend your account 3 out of 7 days a week, because the simple matter is, with bad weather the planes did not fly.
* Automatic bomb sight calibration
This is now the way it is simply because of the lack of precision of joy sticks. The point is that a pilot must be in the bomb sight, and must be maintaining constant speed and headings before the drop, just as in real life.
* GPS clipboard map
Once again you are clueless about real life flying. 40 mile vis is not all that uncommon and 20 mile vis is very common. The detail of maps and compture screen do not even approach what real life is like. The volume of land marks you have in real life vs the sim do not compare. Before any long flight I spend a good 30 mins planing my flight path. Now if you wish to be forced to be on the ground for 30 mins before every flight, we could implement what you want, but I have a feeling you once again only what what YOUR brand of realism is, which really is nothing to do with reality.
The simple fact is in real life, people would not be in any of the planes we fly with out at least 100 hours of training. So tell you what, you send me 6 months of money in advance, and in 6 months I let you fly any of the planes we have. And in another 100 hours I will let you fly your first real sortie.
Because what you believe is realism, is nothing of the sort, you just wish to inflate your own ego on flying something that you perceive is more real when in fact it is much less realistic.
The fact is , AH is meant to simulate air combat.Learning this task alone is a never ending task. It is not meant to simulate all the boring pieces of flying that any one who has spent 20 hours of real life flying wishes they did not have to deal with.
HiTech
-
The OP never attempted to compare Il-2 to AH2 as though Il-2 was 'better'. He uses the engine management and 'realism' options it offers (however well implemented as HTC points out) to illustrate his point.
FWIW, I totally agree with Anaxagoras.
You make a sim that is so simply a caveman can fly it, you get what you have.
I don't think Anaxagoras is suggesting HTC make a wide sweeping change to AH2 that causes him to lose subscriptions.
I do think he is suggesting that by increasing the complexity of the sim, you will attract a more mature, more enthusiastic player. Whether this is true is debatable I suppose.
However, as long as AH2 remains Quake With Wings (QWW), that is the type of gameplay it will attract. And, if you don't think the MA's are QWW, then you're deluding yourself.
FSO and Axis and Allies would be wonderful arenas to test these ideas out.
But that's what I'm saying. Just complexity for complexity's sake isn't going to make the game better. More extensive damage model is good, but following a lot of engine startup procedures that end up taking just 1 second once you've learned them isn't. You don't gain anything from that, it doesn't add to the depth of possible air combat tactics. It just increases the workload and so substracts from how much actual air combat you get to do.
edit - see above...
* No weather
Tell you what, Ill suspend your account 3 out of 7 days a week, because the simple matter is, with bad weather the planes did not fly.
I'd disagree.. We do lots of things real pilots didn't do because they weren't immortal like we are in the game. Just the same way I'd argue we ought to have some weather (just one or two storm fronts like we had a while back) for the sake of variety. Did WWII missions never run into unexpected weather? I think night time is the same, but probably a lot more difficult to implement.
-
I remember either Christmas Eve or New Year's eve a couple years ago...was this darkISH sky..low clouds..damned impressive looking...havent seen it since....always either dawn or dusk
-
But that's what I'm saying. Just complexity for complexity's sake isn't going to make the game better. More extensive damage model is good, but following a lot of engine startup procedures that end up taking just 1 second once you've learned them isn't. You don't gain anything from that, it doesn't add to the depth of possible air combat tactics. It just increases the workload and so substracts from how much actual air combat you get to do.
edit - see above...
Agree totally. Always ask yourself how you or the game would benefit from what you want implemented. Is it really worth it?
I'd disagree.. We do lots of things real pilots didn't do because they weren't immortal like we are in the game. Just the same way I'd argue we ought to have some weather (just one or two storm fronts like we had a while back) for the sake of variety. Did WWII missions never run into unexpected weather? I think night time is the same, but probably a lot more difficult to implement.
March 3, 1944. 8th AF targets Berlin. 55th FG climbs through clouds until they are at 30k feet over Germany. End up alone with only 1/3 of the fighters they took off with over Berlin. Everyone else RTB'd due to weather.
Ok do not mind me, my credentials are only limited.
So lets talk about your so called realism, that you are completely clueless about.
* No weather
Tell you what, Ill suspend your account 3 out of 7 days a week, because the simple matter is, with bad weather the planes did not fly.
HiTech
wrongway
-
I would like a few clouds and maybe a little wind in the main
thats all the weather I would ask for
-
Last night I was on late night and it was one of those nights that reminds me of what AH provides for me. I'm not a 22 year old P38 pilot of WW2. I'm a 48 year old P38 pilot wannabe who has a vivid imagination and a passion for the history.
So there I was in my old cartoon 38G in 80th Headhunter markings, with CorkyJr on the nose, and there were all kinds of Japanese birds to fight. It was the PTO in 1943 early 44 for me as I did my best to make my cartoon pilot turn my cartoon 38 so as not to get cartoon clobbered too soon.
And it was a blast. As has happened often in the last dozen years of cartoon flying, I was 'in the cockpit'. That's all I ask. It let me and my imagination pretend that I was that 22 year old P38 pilot for an hour or so. Even better my life wasn't really on the line and I knew the sun would come up in the morning whether my cartoon 38 died or not.
I don't want to get up at 2AM for breifing. I don't want someone deciding what plane I fly, and what my mission is. I don't want to 'fly' for 3 hours only to have my mission recalled for weather. I don't want my engine to sieze up because the plugs fouled 4 hours into my flight because I've leaned the mixture too fine to extend the range. I don't want my oxygen to fail at 25K and have me pass out. My real life is busy enough that if I can get an hour of turning and burning every couple nights, I can appease my cartoon 38 pilot.
So nah, lets not get carried away. I think HTC has found a nice balance.
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/KIPair.jpg)
-
Just want to thank you HT for putting in your response, very informative. It's always refreshing to hear what the developers think, and all too often we don't hear anything from that perspective (can't remember the last time there was that much information in a developer's post). I hope, HT, that you can find time to contribute more often on these forums, because in my opinion it really is good for the community to learn more about the game we enjoy <S>.
-
But that's what I'm saying. Just complexity for complexity's sake isn't going to make the game better. More extensive damage model is good, but following a lot of engine startup procedures that end up taking just 1 second once you've learned them isn't. You don't gain anything from that, it doesn't add to the depth of possible air combat tactics. It just increases the workload and so substracts from how much actual air combat you get to do.
edit - see above...
I'd disagree.. We do lots of things real pilots didn't do because they weren't immortal like we are in the game. Just the same way I'd argue we ought to have some weather (just one or two storm fronts like we had a while back) for the sake of variety. Did WWII missions never run into unexpected weather? I think night time is the same, but probably a lot more difficult to implement.
We had weather in DGS, and I remember one frame a Bomb Division had to divert to a secondary only to find that could covered too. For scenarios I think it's a great idea. I don't know that it would benefit the MA much.
-
Just want to thank you HT for putting in your response, very informative. It's always refreshing to hear what the developers think, and all too often we don't hear anything from that perspective (can't remember the last time there was that much information in a developer's post). I hope, HT, that you can find time to contribute more often on these forums, because in my opinion it really is good for the community to learn more about the game we enjoy <S>.
Well said trotter. I'd also like to thank HT for the exhaustive reply. Some of us seem to want all the buttons regardless, but I think it's good to know what HT thinks.
-
I can't improve on this reply, except to say that the cooling systems that AH lacks have an impact on the flight envelope as well.
Il-2 engine management combined with AH's flight model would be fantastic. :)
I don't think a lot of people got this, but what HiTech was saying is that Il-2's engine management is completely fake. It bears no resemblance to reality. They make you think it is realistic by having you do things, but those things are completely made up. The engine management in Aces High is just as good as in Il-2 and they both serve the same purpose, to stop the player from abusing the fact that it is a computer game and they don't have to worry about their crew chief maintainance schedule being screwed by using WEP constantly.
There are many documented cases of these engines being run at emergency power for much longer than the limits say are allow with no ill affects. And I mean in the aircraft, in flight, not test beds like was claimed in another recent thread. A Spitfire ran at WEP for 30 minutes because the pilot got scared or distracted and the mechanics could find nothing wrong with the engine afterwards. His engine didn't overheat, let alone seize.
-
A few things that I just cannot agree on.
* Ammunition counters
We have a game where it is best for people to be able to fly many planes. In the real world pilots put in many hours learning the speciefices of each plane. They knew before they flew how man secs of ammo there plane had. In the world of AH we do not require pilots to have 10 hours of instructions before put into combat in a new plane. Do you really wish the same amout of instructions before you are allowed to fly any given plane type? Or are you once again only taughting makeing somthing more difficult than it was in the real world in the name of BS realism.
In the real world pilots had only a limited amount of time to train and stay in service to fly, HT. However, in AH even the lowest grade of players would probably have obtained more than 10 times the amount of flight time than a real world pilot, in every single possible aircraft/vehicle that can be accessed in the game.
"Learning the specifics" is hardly such a difficult matter and obviously you grossly underestimate the resilience and adaptability of the average player. I am loathe to mention "that other game", but such experiences do tell us that players absolutely have no problems at all in adjusting to planes without ammunition counters. As a matter of fact, in "that other game" roughly 3/4ths of the entire plane set are devoid of ammunition counters, and yet everyone filling up the hundreds of multiplayer session rooms seem to be fine. Not to mention the old classic we've all enjoyed - European Air War (Microprose, 1998) - also had no ammunition counters for the US planes. Did that in any way trouble the player?
Certainly you wouldn't think of implementing an artificial crutch to a Bf109 because it has twitchy handling at stall speeds and massive torque. These individual characteristics can only be learned from extended experience in flying the particular plane, and none of us are trained for hours and hours in flying 109s for that matter. So why should ammunition counters be any different?
What you're missing out, is the fact that people grow on to accept the absence of ammunition counters as yet another individual characteristic of each of the planes. I don't know what percentage each types of players make up in the MA, nor do I know if there's some sort of a trend in the "old vets" (including yourself, HT) of aircombat simulation games that makes them flinch at the idea of having to guesswork how much ammunition they have left in their guns. Maybe the ACM/duel oriented folks think that running out on ammunition during a fight is something akin to a random malfunction that only hinders his game experience. I don't know.
But what I do know is that there are a lot of players out there who have no trouble at all without ammunition counters, and running out of ammunition during combat is nothing but another factor in an aerial combat simulation game they learn to embrace as a given situation - just as being hit by enemy fire, or running out of fuel.
* No mixture controls
Mixture control has one purpose in life, to conserve fuel. When it is time to engage it is not even thought about to shove 3 levers ahead at the same time. Exactly how many people have 3 levers all beside each other like most real planes have? How easy is it to tak your right hand and push all head to max performance like most fighters were capable of?
* No supercharger controls
This one could be debated, but the real fact is do you really want to have to learn each planes critical altitudes just so you can do nothing more complicated than pushing one button? Because that is all you are asking for. Push 1 key when your altitude reaches one point. This sounds great fun to me, I tell you what since you believe it is so necessary to a good flight sim, I will write it, and you can come to my office and do nothing but watch the altitidude and press that so important button at the correct time.
* No radiator/cowl flap controls for engine cooling
Once again, these really have very little to do with dog fights, they have much more to do with engine life.
Frankly, I myself do not view the so-called "CEM" as an absolute necessity for AH. Nor do I consider that CEM is really "complex" in anyway, as the name 'Complex Engine Management' might suggest. CEM is basically a clever mock-up which briefly mimics the in-flight management duties a pilot must undertake. Thus, in this sense I agree with your basic assessment.
However, once again you underestimate the so the very little things that make up realism and dismiss it as 'having nothing to do with dogfights'.
You're right - they have nothing to do with dogfights. At least, not directly.
In functionality, it's nothing but pushing 2~3 more buttons to do something which you can do in AH with only one button. But what's the whole point of 'dogfighting' in the first place anyway? You could always have given these fighters some other name, and make it look like a fantasy/SF plane and called it "Fantasy Planes High", but you didn't. It's the aura of WW2 vintage planes which attracts us, and anything that can enhance the realistic feel to it can only make the game feel more fun. Someone may come up with a game that is exactly identical to AH, but just change the theme and give it a SF feel - and would anyone play it? Heck, they might even have cheaper prices than AH, and people still wouldn't play it. People play AH not because they like "aerial combat", but because they like "WW2 themed aerial combat". Enhancing the immersion through introducing such tedious, small, meaningless stuff, can still strengthen what AH has to offer.
But like said, I do not view CEM as an absolute necessity, unlike the ammo counter issue, so it'd be safe to say people would settle for an option like combat trim. They can use it, or just turn it off.
The fact is , AH is meant to simulate air combat.Learning this task alone is a never ending task. It is not meant to simulate all the boring pieces of flying that any one who has spent 20 hours of real life flying wishes they did not have to deal with.
Nobody's asking for 'all' of the boring pieces. Nobody wants a 15-stage button flicking just to start up an engine.
However, people are just asking for 'some' of the boring pieces which might enhance the air combat experience as a whole - since the thrill of combat is much more than using just the throttle, stick, and the trigger to point and shoot.
..
ps) Did I mention people around 15~20 years than us thrive on the thought of 'realism'? Many of these younger folks actually do enjoy 15 stage button clicks just to start up the engine... and while not everyone may be that extreme, it seems quite undeniable that as a whole, they seem to be a lot more patient than us old sticks in having to push more buttons to micro manage the planes.
So nobody would want to see AH turning into MS Flight Simulator, but some of the features such as ammunition counters, do deserve a second look.
[edit] Frickin' phonetic English.. the curse of the non-native tongue..
-
Kweassa gadgets that do nothing for the tactical unfolding of a fight are just distractions. Finite WEP fluids, engine damage, etc, are worth having. Gradual damage too, it sucks putting a 30mm or a ton of .50/.303's on a plane and watching it fly on because the fuselage or wing is only 99.9% damaged. But clicking a bunch of stuff like magnetos and whatnot isn't worth having unless they have some tactical value. Anything else detracts from the actual air combat. In scenarios it might be interesting, but even then, it mostly deminishes the real substance of the fight.
-
Kweassa gadgets that do nothing for the tactical unfolding of a fight are just distractions. Finite WEP fluids, engine damage, etc, are worth having. Gradual damage too, it sucks putting a 30mm or a ton of .50/.303's on a plane and watching it fly on because the fuselage or wing is only 99.9% damaged. But clicking a bunch of stuff like magnetos and whatnot isn't worth having unless they have some tactical value. Anything else detracts from the actual air combat. In scenarios it might be interesting, but even then, it mostly deminishes the real substance of the fight.
You're right, moot. They serve no real purpose at all.
But technically, having a MK108 round display a nice, pretty HE detonation burst doesn't have any real function in game either. At best, it's a sequence of animated sprites which we didn't have much trouble living without, when in the old days 30mm bursts were also depicted by the bland, 'white glob' hit sprite. It's "eye-candy". In that sense, consider some of the tedious little tid-bits as "finger-candy", and it'd start making sense.
Like, having an early-war plane which could open the cockpit in flight.. so you can press a key and open the canopy, and peer over the side of the plane as you taxi it. What functionality does this serve in actual 'dogfight' - nothing. But the very fact that you can do this meaningless thing, in fact holds some meaning in that you are replicating some of the little, tedious, obscure, maybe even redundant task a real pilot might have done during his day.. and this produces the feel of immersion. It adds to the feel of the game, just as the MK108 HE burst adds to the feel of the game.
The CEM thingy is exactly that. Like HT and Karnak mentioned, it's neither realistic nor even 'complex' for that matter. Just as many pilots of AH simply remember which altitudes their plane performs best at, or if their 109 climbs better than a La7, or how their Spitfire turns better than a 190 but worse than a Zero, people just memorize at which altitude they press one extra button and shift the supercharger stages. Functionally, it offers nothing more than the current auto-shifting in AH. It's just one more tedious key stroke. But the very fact that you have to do this, just as the real pilots have done, makes many people feel like they're really doing something with their planes, even outside of combat.
It's somewhat akin to people opening the E6B and setting their engines to the listed cruise settings. Does one really have to set it that way? Do people really feel the listed cruise settings for the engines are optimal? Probably not, but they do it anyway. Why? Because the listed WW2 engine setting data says so - many people enjoy those little moments. :)
So while I do not view CEM as really necessary in AH, if it is implanted as an option which can be turned ON/OFF as preference, then I'm willing to bet it will make a lot of people respect AH more. Many players will be voluntarily leaving it on, even if it means having to remember more stuff. This little stuff is what many sucky pilots like me enjoy, since they don't get to enjoy the thrill of victory so often they might as well find joy in pretending that they're in a real WW2 plane. :D
-
No... Of course a fat hit sprite is good for the game. It doesn't substract from time spent playing tactical combat against the other guy in another plane. It's actually adding to it, it's the equivalent of gibbing the other guy across the map with a railgun. The fight's over and you get a nice reward in the shape of a mess of flame and plane guts. So it is a useful function in the game.
Opening a canopy is too, it's not just buttons pushed for no effect. You can put your head out the cockpit and look, you get the wind noise and maybe some extra drag the same way gears are used (it's gamey crutch but it does have a tactical value). On the other hand you get nothing for keeping track of mixture and magnetos and the like. The same way you get no usefulness from fiddling with historical radio gizmos.
if it is implanted as an option which can be turned ON/OFF as preference, then I'm willing to bet it will make a lot of people respect AH more.
I wouldn't expect that. People would see it as a fake superfluity. The only way it will make it in the MA is if it's of tactical use.
And I'm ready to bet that the E6B settings are in fact optimal in the game as in reality.
Now, for scenarios it's another story. I'll take all the bizarre radio gizmodronics and rube goldberg controls the planes had. But that'd take forever to implement, since the depth of details' authenticity would have to be standard across the planeset. That's a pretty huge demand in research.... When the game is about air combat first and foremost. I don't know if you've played any racing sims, but if you've tried Live for Speed, you'd see what I mean. The game is AH's analog in racing. It has nothing but the pure substance of realistic racing. Everything else is pruned off.. It's all about the pure mechanics and physics of racing machines, no eye candy or big licensed brands. It doesn't matter that there's a Porsche replica; what matters is that an RR sports car has a specific character that's inarguably a staple of motorsports and as such an essential part of the car set.
It's just the machines and the pilots and the tracks. Just like AH, IMO, is just the planes and the pilots and the terrain. That's what's so damn great about it. Even with the teeming masses of unapreciative players.
-
it sucks putting a 30mm or a ton of .50/.303's on a plane and watching it fly on because the fuselage or wing is only 99.9% damaged.
IIRC, in Air Warrior/AW3 there was no specific damage model. It would take X amount of hits on a plane to destroy the plane. If the plane was 90% dead, it still flew like it had no damage. Sort of like a nintendo video game where your hero only has a couple hit points left yet is still battling away at full strength.
I like the damage model how it is now. You could get more specific with it, but the new micro elements of the damage model would have the same type of hit points that the bigger elements (like sections of wing) have now. I guess I'm spoiled with how specific the damage model is in Aces High when I grew up on Air Warrior.
-
I'm thinking of something like Il2's damage model. That's probably canned too, the game probably doesn't actually calculate anything to make the wings behave like they do when they're peppered with holes. But you do have one more increment in damage, so that fights would be pretty different. The first glancing hits on a plane would reduce its chances to fight successfully a lot more than now. Hell.. Maybe it's not that great for AH. It could make people even more timid.
-
IIRC, in Air Warrior/AW3 there was no specific damage model. It would take X amount of hits on a plane to destroy the plane. If the plane was 90% dead, it still flew like it had no damage. Sort of like a nintendo video game where your hero only has a couple hit points left yet is still battling away at full strength.
I like the damage model how it is now. You could get more specific with it, but the new micro elements of the damage model would have the same type of hit points that the bigger elements (like sections of wing) have now. I guess I'm spoiled with how specific the damage model is in Aces High when I grew up on Air Warrior.
It wasn't all or nothing, you could receive damage to vital components like elevators, ailerons, hydraulic/oil system, fuel but I think those were due to the randomizer and not really the damage model. There were a few times that I had to land my plane without elevators or ailerons and quite a few times with a messed up engine because the maintenance hangers were damaged.
ack-ack
-
see you could be one of the "automatic settings guys" your playing a game having fun, you know its not real.. not high fidelity flight simulator.. but fun none the less..
then there are us folks who fall out of our chairs and make simulated bullet holes in the drywall behind the monitor every time we get shot down.. we want.. more :rock
See you could be " Wrong " My Guess is you don't fly 38's to much. :rofl How many Joysticks and Keyboards do you think you would need to get your REAL PLANE FLIGHT. My guess would be you would be one of the people complaining that there where to many controls to use and couldn't get a shot. :rock
Crims
-
I wouldn't expect that. People would see it as a fake superfluity. The only way it will make it in the MA is if it's of tactical use.
That's where the "that other game" experience comes in handy.
I don't believe people who enjoy "TOG" are fundamentally different from people who enjoy AH. As a matter of fact a lot of people play both - including myself (at least, when I used to have enough time to fly). Once getting used to (which took about one or two sessions and a quick read through the manuals or tip posts) fiddling with the CEM wasn't any more difficult than the regular AH flight. Frankly, fiddling with the flaps during combat is probably 100 times more difficult to use correctly - which, the "TOG" and/or AH player doesn't seem to mind at all.
However, despite being almost non-issue in the 'difficulty' sense, many TOG players up to date still maintain the illusion that TOG with its CEM, offers a realistic interpretation of internal management of warplanes. Ofcourse, they are wrong. It's just a clever illusion. But the point is, it doesn't really matter if they are correct or incorrect - the only thing important is that as long as they are under that illusion, they believe in it. It gives them of feeling of reality. I'd wager that about 80% of the average TOG player probably does not know how to handle it to its most optimum level, and in one way or another it would actually make their plane perform slightly worse in most cases - but still, people are happy to be in the illusion/aura of the "WW2 feel".
Some things just can't be measured in the performance sense.
And I'm ready to bet that the E6B settings are in fact optimal in the game as in reality.
To clarify, I don't doubt the E6B listings are optimal - if, the average player flies that long enough to notice its effects in the first place. However, a large majority of the player base never exceeds a 1.0 K/D. In usual cases, not being shot down and surviving long enough for the fuel consumption rate to matter is a very rare thing to happen for them. Again, in this sense, the amount of meaning such action holds in terms of real 'performance' is almost non-existant in the practical sense. They might as well just be flying with maximum combat power all the time - and yet, many of them still faithfully gain some alt, pull out the E6B, and set to cruise. They like doing it, because it feels "WW2-ish". The immersion is the drive.
Now, for scenarios it's another story. I'll take all the bizarre radio gizmodronics and rube goldberg controls the planes had. But that'd take forever to implement, since the depth of details' authenticity would have to be standard across the planeset. That's a pretty huge demand in research.... When the game is about air combat first and foremost. I don't know if you've played any racing sims, but if you've tried Live for Speed, you'd see what I mean. The game is AH's analog in racing. It has nothing but the pure substance of realistic racing. Everything else is pruned off.. It's all about the pure mechanics and physics of racing machines, no eye candy or big licensed brands. It doesn't matter that there's a Porsche replica; what matters is that an RR sports car has a specific character that's inarguably a staple of motorsports and as such an essential part of the car set.
Again, nobody is asking for all of the obscure and dinky little tid-bit to be modelled into the game. Concerning the CEM, at most I'd figure it'd be perhaps the supercharger function and radiator controls, since I view the mixture control to be redundant. Since AH doesn't have the finicky I'm willing to overheat and break engines whenever I want aspect of TOG, it simply be a matter of 1) switch supercharger gears around the alt it should be, and 2) set maybe 3 stages of radiator/cowl flaps with a single, toggle key mappd - full open (a bit of hit on max speed, but quicker engine cooling), normal (current AH levels), full closed (a bit higher max speed, but rapid engine heating).
A grand total of two more keys to press... and with this small tidbit, the realism folk can be made happy. Like I said, they love it whether or not it may simply be an illusion :) .
Frankly, my interest is actually not with the CEM - I wouldn't exactly lose any kind of sleep if CEM never made it to AH... but rather, my beef is with the ammo counter, since I hold the theory that it significantly effects the gunnery aspect of AH.
-
I guess we'll agree to disagree. That said, here's how and why:
I just don't see the point in adding something that serves no tactical purpose. It's simply not going to get into the game as envisioned by HTC (from everything they've said, off the top of my head). Yourself you admit you don't really care about mixture since it's redundant. So you're just a degree removed from my pov. I think mixture fails the "tactical value", but cowl flaps don't: you trade between drag and engine longevity, the same kind of tradeoff someone in e.g. a P47N would manage during a dogfight, weighing options for the right moments when using those few minutes of WEP is most worth it. And to be specific, I think cowl flaps should be standardized the same way flaps are: not just three generic positions but whatever the plane historically had.
The supercharger gears also fail the criteria, the same way non-retracting flaps do as HT explained. Dummy switches that just fool the players into thinking what they do has some effect on what's going on in the game is just wrong. :) No matter how immersive they're misled to believe it is. Genuine air combat trumps immersive illusions.
The E6B I more or less agree with, except that it's probably not that useless: if someone flies short legged planes he's not going to dick around, he'll see that the engine settings he wants is the answer to both his pragmatic needs as well as his want for WWII authentism.
Now the ammo counters, I completely agree with. That's the sort of utilitarian genuine stuff I think we need yesterday. Everything that the pilots at the time would ask for and have authority over. Tracer distribution in the ammo belts, ammo loadouts (HE/AP/etc), fuel tanks when possible, removal of useless weight (e.g. the rear gunner and corresponding equipment incl rear guns in the Me410, GM1 and its plumbing in the Ta152), etc. Now that's what I think is really immersive. It's not about mimicking what the pilots did, it's about what you would have done yourself, if you'd been in the pilots' shoes with what they had at their disposal.
-
I just don't see the point in adding something that serves no tactical purpose.
Gavagai's hypothesis was that by doing so you would sort out many of the players whose behavior is perceived to be detrimental to arena play.
- oldman
-
I only wish to see wind as far as these go, I dont know how it would effect flying other then you get lift flying into it but Im sure it would make for some new fun.
HT 1
gavagai 0
:D :salute
-
Ok do not mind me, my credentials are only limited.
I only have about 20 hours total of real ACM.
I only have 1bout 600 total hours flying time.
I only have about 200 hours aerobatic.
The only planes I have done dog fights in, are T-6, P51ds, La7s, Marchietties, and RV8's.
Ok and never mind my credentials of very close to 20 years flight sim design.
So lets talk about your so called realism, that you are completely clueless about.
* Combat trim
You seem to believe combat trim some how is unrealistic, but obviously since you have spent so little time flying real planes, you are clueless how trim actually is used by a pilot. You seem to believe that flying a perfectly trimed plane gives some sort of advantage in a fight.l It is not, when flying hard manuvers the only time trim comes into play at all is when doing very large changes in air speed. When going from 160 to 360 the forces will become heavy in pitch, and with out ever thinking about it a pilot roll's in a little trim. Now the deal is, in most planes it is done with out ever moving your head out of the cockpit. Tell me how many players in a fight could find the correct key on a key board with out looking to roll in some trim?
2nd Tell me how they can feel the trim on the stick like you do in a real plane, Computer joy sticks work nothing like the real thing. You have zero feel for the forces acting on the stick, and it is much much harder to fly a sim as precesisly as a real plane. Combat trim is a compromise between how the real planes handle and the hardware that is available. It is an attempt at providing a much more realistic flying experience than what you believe it is.
* Aileron trim for aircraft that did not have it, e.g. a lot of Spitfire marks, 109, etc.
Aileron trim that exists on real planes is only there so that a pilot can trim his planes hands off for long flights. In my RV8 I do this by balancing fuel between the wing tanks, as I am fairly sure most pilots do who can control fuel from each tank. There is no advantage what so ever to have Aileron trim in a dog fight, it is only there to lower the work load for long cruises. Why do you think the P51 had it when other planes did not? SO can I assume because you wish to change aileron trim, you wish to also want to fly 6 - 8 hours missions. And if you do not have this time available you are not permited to take a sortie?
* Ammunition counters
We have a game where it is best for people to be able to fly many planes. In the real world pilots put in many hours learning the speciefices of each plane. They knew before they flew how man secs of ammo there plane had. In the world of AH we do not require pilots to have 10 hours of instructions before put into combat in a new plane. Do you really wish the same amout of instructions before you are allowed to fly any given plane type? Or are you once again only taughting makeing somthing more difficult than it was in the real world in the name of BS realism.
* No mixture controls
Mixture control has one purpose in life, to conserve fuel. When it is time to engage it is not even thought about to shove 3 levers ahead at the same time. Exactly how many people have 3 levers all beside each other like most real planes have? How easy is it to tak your right hand and push all head to max performance like most fighters were capable of?
* No supercharger controls
This one could be debated, but the real fact is do you really want to have to learn each planes critical altitudes just so you can do nothing more complicated than pushing one button? Because that is all you are asking for. Push 1 key when your altitude reaches one point. This sounds great fun to me, I tell you what since you believe it is so necessary to a good flight sim, I will write it, and you can come to my office and do nothing but watch the altitidude and press that so important button at the correct time.
* No radiator/cowl flap controls for engine cooling
Once again, these really have very little to do with dog fights, they have much more to do with engine life.
* No engine overheats
See above, exactly how high can you run your engine? Or would you wrather just have a randomize control your destiny.
* Weak engine torque
Engine torque is 100% accurate. We do take one liberty with how the tail wheel operates, but with out those liberties very very very few people including you could get in the air. Do you know a gentleman name Bob Shaw? You know the guy who wrote books, flew fantoms, did carrier landings and such? Well he was tail wheel endorced. The scariest moment I have had in a plane was the first time he flew mine, and on take off he proceeded to bend my airplane enough that it required 3 months of repair.
* 360 degree head swivel
In reality you have better than 360 deg field of view do to head and eye movement. Tracking an airplane in real life requires no thought as with a joy stick hat. Even with the 360 degree turning, tracking a plane in a sime is many many times more difficult than real life. So it is an atempt to bring things closer to reality. Not less as you seem to state.
* Flaps auto retract when airspeed increases
Once again choices on how to implement realism, Putting the book spec with auto retract flaps puts more not less realism into the game. It simply forces you to fly as real pilots did. Show me data where the real flaps broke, how they were bent, what happen to all the different type. This data does not exist in any form I have seen.
So the options are make flaps break at the speed the book sais, or make them retract. If we made them work like landing gear and break, we would just put a loud noise before the would break, once again all you are asking for is another key press that is more difficult than real life.
* No weather
Tell you what, Ill suspend your account 3 out of 7 days a week, because the simple matter is, with bad weather the planes did not fly.
* Automatic bomb sight calibration
This is now the way it is simply because of the lack of precision of joy sticks. The point is that a pilot must be in the bomb sight, and must be maintaining constant speed and headings before the drop, just as in real life.
* GPS clipboard map
Once again you are clueless about real life flying. 40 mile vis is not all that uncommon and 20 mile vis is very common. The detail of maps and compture screen do not even approach what real life is like. The volume of land marks you have in real life vs the sim do not compare. Before any long flight I spend a good 30 mins planing my flight path. Now if you wish to be forced to be on the ground for 30 mins before every flight, we could implement what you want, but I have a feeling you once again only what what YOUR brand of realism is, which really is nothing to do with reality.
The simple fact is in real life, people would not be in any of the planes we fly with out at least 100 hours of training. So tell you what, you send me 6 months of money in advance, and in 6 months I let you fly any of the planes we have. And in another 100 hours I will let you fly your first real sortie.
Because what you believe is realism, is nothing of the sort, you just wish to inflate your own ego on flying something that you perceive is more real when in fact it is much less realistic.
The fact is , AH is meant to simulate air combat.Learning this task alone is a never ending task. It is not meant to simulate all the boring pieces of flying that any one who has spent 20 hours of real life flying wishes they did not have to deal with.
HiTech
With tongue in cheek I commend this post to the house. With regards to the OP the concepts of management. It isn't what I signed up for. I'm sure this game would turn into a ghost town like the unmentionable sim HAS if anything near management was implemented.
I occasionally tune channel 6 help. The amount of new guys that actually stick with the game is probably less than 5% ....I kid you not. As easy as we find it to play they just give up after a day or 2. The upside to this is less kids, less gamers. The downside is less revenue for development / profit. One could argue the merits of "in ya face" tuturials but to make the game a tad more complicated for these newbies is a no brainer death sentence. Less targets my friends :t
The only real gripe I have and admittedly it's a 6 year grip is bombers. * Automatic bomb sight calibration
This is now the way it is simply because of the lack of precision of joy sticks. The point is that a pilot must be in the bomb sight, and must be maintaining constant speed and headings before the drop, just as in real life.
We know HTC can't code out stupidity but at least he could make it a tad harder for the gamey suicide bomber by only allowing bombs to drop from the F6 position. At present bombs can be released from the cockpit and or F3 external.
Much as I prefered the old method of calibration it's so much better to know why it's no longer used. :salute
-
We know HTC can't code out stupidity but at least he could make it a tad harder for the gamey suicide bomber by only allowing bombs to drop from the F6 position. At present bombs can be released from the cockpit and or F3 external.
one of my squaddies likes to do trad lanc runs for area targets where the lead will use the bombsite, the rest of the lancs release when they see the lead drop, great fun and you dont know what you've hit til you see the bursts :aok
-
Ok do not mind me, my credentials are only limited.
I only have about 20 hours total of real ACM.
I only have 1bout 600 total hours flying time.
I only have about 200 hours aerobatic.
The only planes I have done dog fights in, are T-6, P51ds, La7s, Marchietties, and RV8's.
Ok and never mind my credentials of very close to 20 years flight sim design.
So lets talk about your so called realism, that you are completely clueless about.
* Combat trim
You seem to believe combat trim some how is unrealistic, but obviously since you have spent so little time flying real planes, you are clueless how trim actually is used by a pilot. You seem to believe that flying a perfectly trimed plane gives some sort of advantage in a fight.l It is not, when flying hard manuvers the only time trim comes into play at all is when doing very large changes in air speed. When going from 160 to 360 the forces will become heavy in pitch, and with out ever thinking about it a pilot roll's in a little trim. Now the deal is, in most planes it is done with out ever moving your head out of the cockpit. Tell me how many players in a fight could find the correct key on a key board with out looking to roll in some trim?
2nd Tell me how they can feel the trim on the stick like you do in a real plane, Computer joy sticks work nothing like the real thing. You have zero feel for the forces acting on the stick, and it is much much harder to fly a sim as precesisly as a real plane. Combat trim is a compromise between how the real planes handle and the hardware that is available. It is an attempt at providing a much more realistic flying experience than what you believe it is.
* Aileron trim for aircraft that did not have it, e.g. a lot of Spitfire marks, 109, etc.
Aileron trim that exists on real planes is only there so that a pilot can trim his planes hands off for long flights. In my RV8 I do this by balancing fuel between the wing tanks, as I am fairly sure most pilots do who can control fuel from each tank. There is no advantage what so ever to have Aileron trim in a dog fight, it is only there to lower the work load for long cruises. Why do you think the P51 had it when other planes did not? SO can I assume because you wish to change aileron trim, you wish to also want to fly 6 - 8 hours missions. And if you do not have this time available you are not permited to take a sortie?
* Ammunition counters
We have a game where it is best for people to be able to fly many planes. In the real world pilots put in many hours learning the speciefices of each plane. They knew before they flew how man secs of ammo there plane had. In the world of AH we do not require pilots to have 10 hours of instructions before put into combat in a new plane. Do you really wish the same amout of instructions before you are allowed to fly any given plane type? Or are you once again only taughting makeing somthing more difficult than it was in the real world in the name of BS realism.
* No mixture controls
Mixture control has one purpose in life, to conserve fuel. When it is time to engage it is not even thought about to shove 3 levers ahead at the same time. Exactly how many people have 3 levers all beside each other like most real planes have? How easy is it to tak your right hand and push all head to max performance like most fighters were capable of?
* No supercharger controls
This one could be debated, but the real fact is do you really want to have to learn each planes critical altitudes just so you can do nothing more complicated than pushing one button? Because that is all you are asking for. Push 1 key when your altitude reaches one point. This sounds great fun to me, I tell you what since you believe it is so necessary to a good flight sim, I will write it, and you can come to my office and do nothing but watch the altitidude and press that so important button at the correct time.
* No radiator/cowl flap controls for engine cooling
Once again, these really have very little to do with dog fights, they have much more to do with engine life.
* No engine overheats
See above, exactly how high can you run your engine? Or would you wrather just have a randomize control your destiny.
* Weak engine torque
Engine torque is 100% accurate. We do take one liberty with how the tail wheel operates, but with out those liberties very very very few people including you could get in the air. Do you know a gentleman name Bob Shaw? You know the guy who wrote books, flew fantoms, did carrier landings and such? Well he was tail wheel endorced. The scariest moment I have had in a plane was the first time he flew mine, and on take off he proceeded to bend my airplane enough that it required 3 months of repair.
* 360 degree head swivel
In reality you have better than 360 deg field of view do to head and eye movement. Tracking an airplane in real life requires no thought as with a joy stick hat. Even with the 360 degree turning, tracking a plane in a sime is many many times more difficult than real life. So it is an atempt to bring things closer to reality. Not less as you seem to state.
* Flaps auto retract when airspeed increases
Once again choices on how to implement realism, Putting the book spec with auto retract flaps puts more not less realism into the game. It simply forces you to fly as real pilots did. Show me data where the real flaps broke, how they were bent, what happen to all the different type. This data does not exist in any form I have seen.
So the options are make flaps break at the speed the book sais, or make them retract. If we made them work like landing gear and break, we would just put a loud noise before the would break, once again all you are asking for is another key press that is more difficult than real life.
* No weather
Tell you what, Ill suspend your account 3 out of 7 days a week, because the simple matter is, with bad weather the planes did not fly.
* Automatic bomb sight calibration
This is now the way it is simply because of the lack of precision of joy sticks. The point is that a pilot must be in the bomb sight, and must be maintaining constant speed and headings before the drop, just as in real life.
* GPS clipboard map
Once again you are clueless about real life flying. 40 mile vis is not all that uncommon and 20 mile vis is very common. The detail of maps and compture screen do not even approach what real life is like. The volume of land marks you have in real life vs the sim do not compare. Before any long flight I spend a good 30 mins planing my flight path. Now if you wish to be forced to be on the ground for 30 mins before every flight, we could implement what you want, but I have a feeling you once again only what what YOUR brand of realism is, which really is nothing to do with reality.
The simple fact is in real life, people would not be in any of the planes we fly with out at least 100 hours of training. So tell you what, you send me 6 months of money in advance, and in 6 months I let you fly any of the planes we have. And in another 100 hours I will let you fly your first real sortie.
Because what you believe is realism, is nothing of the sort, you just wish to inflate your own ego on flying something that you perceive is more real when in fact it is much less realistic.
The fact is , AH is meant to simulate air combat.Learning this task alone is a never ending task. It is not meant to simulate all the boring pieces of flying that any one who has spent 20 hours of real life flying wishes they did not have to deal with.
HiTech
Sounds good :aok
-
It wasn't all or nothing, you could receive damage to vital components like elevators, ailerons, hydraulic/oil system, fuel but I think those were due to the randomizer and not really the damage model. There were a few times that I had to land my plane without elevators or ailerons and quite a few times with a messed up engine because the maintenance hangers were damaged.
ack-ack
Yep. AW hit damage results were similar to AH, but unlike AH how you got the damage was totally randomized.
-
It wasn't all or nothing, you could receive damage to vital components like elevators, ailerons, hydraulic/oil system, fuel but I think those were due to the randomizer and not really the damage model. There were a few times that I had to land my plane without elevators or ailerons and quite a few times with a messed up engine because the maintenance hangers were damaged.
Why I said IIRC but I flew Relaxed Realism Europe. Maybe this was different? It is entirely possible my memory is failing me.
-
I would suspect from these replies that there are not enough full realism people to adequately populate a separate arena. I know AW had engine overheats and random gun jams. There was no WEP key, you just firewalled the throttle and had to monitor your temps- if you overheated the engine could seize.
AW had WEP, there were many times I over heated my P-38J and damaged the engine because I left WEP on too long. The only difference between WEP in AW and AH is that in here WEP recharges while in AW it didn't. Don't recall the Kesmoids ever removing that feature from the game.
ack-ack
-
:aok
Definitely find the game a good mix of fun and mental stimulation as it is.
I have played IL-2, I understand how to play it in realism mode.. the reason I play Ah2: It's more fun and focus is on the actual combat.
-
:aok
Definitely find the game a good mix of fun and mental stimulation as it is.
I have played IL-2, I understand how to play it in realism mode.. the reason I play Ah2: It's more fun and focus is on the actual combat.
agreed. this is still fun. i've only been at this sim for a few years now, but a good fight still gets my heart thumping. same when i'm stalking a set of buffs.
get into a gv battle......a big noisey game of hide n seek, and there's that same heart thumping.
for what this sim costs me......us........it's a value that absolutely cannot be beat.
:aok
-
indeed, the most fun ive had recently was upping from a field taking on a steady stream of muppets. if anything adding 15 buttons to press it wouldve taken away from the experience by just making it frustrating having to do it over and over again (when I died).
No matter how much AH you play or how good you get you'll never be a WW2 combat pilot.
You'll just have a lot of fun and excitement.
-
AW had WEP, there were many times I over heated my P-38J and damaged the engine because I left WEP on too long. The only difference between WEP in AW and AH is that in here WEP recharges while in AW it didn't. Don't recall the Kesmoids ever removing that feature from the game.
ack-ack
Yeah, I think you're right, there was a WEP control. I guess my memory is not what it used to be. For some reason after a period I don't remember ever seizing my engine- I guess I just learned to adapt.
-
It is again, so simple.
"What are you here for?"
"Im here to fly sir!"
"can and do you fly here?"
"Sir yes sir!"
Mission accomplished.
-
It is again, so simple.
"What are you here for?"
"Im here to fly sir!"
"can and do you fly here?"
"Sir yes sir!"
Mission accomplished.
Things become a lot more complex once you realize the same analogue applies to Space Invaders.
-
* No weather
Tell you what, Ill suspend your account 3 out of 7 days a week, because the simple matter is, with bad weather the planes did not fly.
this is my favourite bit, FA brought in cloud rooms and those rooms helped contribute to killing it, your screen was all white everytime you looked up = bad eyes, bombers would climb into it and not come out until they were about to drop. Japanese fighters would hide in it constantly and only come out if they could see a number advantage. you couldn't see through this cloud it was non transparent, I only managed to kill a handful of guys whilst flying right behind them listening to engine vibrations. it was a layer of about 4000feet thickness and TOTALLY pointless. They announced their first operating loss last month, so should be dead soon enough, has only taken 3 years of decline.
I get a bit pissed when the dawn/ dusk comes in on some maps and I struggle to see plane aspects against the water. same applies to night flying. it isn't practical in your main arenas.
-
I hate to mention this but I think the reason IL-2 has ANYONE in its arenas is due to COST not FM fidelity, I have both games and I much prefer Dales game (no offense Oleg), if anything I would like larger target sizes at longer ranges (cause I am old and my eyes are beginning to suck).
I dislike some of the things Dale has put in but NOT the flight Model, I dislike eny I wish instead that AI planes would come on and off due to numbers, but hey I don't coad so I have NO idea how hard that would be.
When perks were first introduced I went balistic, and now see that they were needed and in fact in some cases need to be upped (can we say 262 :lol). I too have flown these things for along time, back prior to AW when the only online thing was Red Baron on The Sierra Network, so I have seen things come and go.
I think AHII is doing just fine, my wish list is for Dale to dust off the old DoA code make some changes (for legal reason I suspect) give us WWI again :D
-
There was a game like that with more engine and cooling controls...... WAS.
-
Graphics are a major reason people play Il2.
-
Please don't make HTC made again guys... :cry :cry :cry
-
I prefer to not have to worry about caging gyros, switching on gun heaters and gunsight heaters, setting cowl flaps, mixture and blowers before a dogfight because I prefer that HTC thrives and stays in business so we can continue to enjoy this game.
I can has bof?
-
It was called "full realism" and lots of people flew there ...me included. There was no trim controls.
Helm ...out
NB ...in....
It was Ultra-Realism and NO ONE flew there.
-
You make a sim that is so simply a caveman can fly it, you get what you have.
...and that would be a GIECO sim?? :D
I don't think Anaxagoras is suggesting HTC make a wide sweeping change to AH2 that causes him to lose subscriptions.
Actually, what he was suggesting is that people that don't support more realism have no right to complain about game play issues.
Gotta give a big :aok to any thread that gets HT pumped enuff to post twice...:)
-
...and that would be a GIECO sim?? :D
Actually, what he was suggesting is that people that don't support more realism have no right to complain about game play issues.
Gotta give a big :aok to any thread that gets HT pumped enuff to post twice...:)
not only twice, but did you see how long the second one was/? since i've been here, i've never seen him type more than a couple sentences in one of his replies. :D
-
kweassa, I dig your posts and have always welcomed/respected your opinion. In this case, you don't speak for me. Sure I could learn to know how much ammunition is left in a plane with no ammunition counters. I could learn to fiddle with trim and cowl flaps. You can call it immersion, I call it unnecessary busy work.
I have a house full of kids and run a small business. I don't want to become so immersed in the game that I can literally think of nothing else; not even getting a fresh beer, or soothing a hurt a one of the 3 yr olds, or answering the phone, etc. Heck, sometimes I'm dogfighting a gang, on the phone, and with a 3 yr old(or 2 or 3 or 4) on my lap who wants to watch daddy shoot planes. I've got all I can handle. I want to be able to fly around and BS with my friends on Vox, not worry about whether I'm going to overheat my engine because I forgot cowl flaps.
OTOH, I don't want to play an arcade game either. It seems to me that Dale and CO. have just about found the perfect compromise between the two. Are there things that could be improved? Sure, few things in life are perfect but this game is the best fit between realism and playability, IMHO.
Nothin personal Kweassa, I admire your depth of knowledge and your thoughtful posts, but I like the game about how it is. :salute
Steve
eidt: my kids love the check 6. My wife has taught them to say "Daddy watch out, there's a Focke Wulf behind you!" It cracks her up, 4 of them at once... lol.
-
eidt: my kids love the check 6. My wife has taught them to say "Daddy watch out, there's a Focke Wulf behind you!" It cracks her up, 4 of them at once... lol.
I don't think young children should be saying Focke. :lol
-
Ive said it before.... excite bike vs professional motocross (LMAO).......that is about what the paralell is. Im sure ww2 pilot would say about the same comparing A/H to real fighter combat. :O
-
I don't think young children should be saying Focke. :lol
But these fokkers were in messerschmitts! :lol