Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: trigger2 on July 13, 2009, 02:06:29 AM
-
Here's some pictures from the film that should clearly show that you initiated guns on the merge, not I. :salute
Notice my guns are still cold in these...
Your plane
(http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m56/alecksismeboo/HO.jpg)
My plane
(http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m56/alecksismeboo/HO2.jpg)
-
HO fest in the DA wooot!
-
HO fest in the DA wooot!
Unfortunatly it was...
That's when I went into the MAs.
And remember the teachings of wise Denholm...
It's the most, wonderful time, of the year. ;)
-
(http://i295.photobucket.com/albums/mm134/waystin2/AnotherUglyHOthread.jpg)
-
No offense but, I don't see the problem...he opens fire, do a little jig and light him up...but then I'm seeing a lot of people here that view HOs as noob tactics...for me it's better than giving the other guy an opportunity to get behind me...
-
No offense but, I don't see the problem...he opens fire, do a little jig and light him up...but then I'm seeing a lot of people here that view HOs as noob tactics...for me it's better than giving the other guy an opportunity to get behind me...
Now when you learn a bit more about flying your plane you'll quit doing that and try to win a fight rather than just get a kill. New folks tend to HO because they know no other way. Once they gain experience then they learn to maneuver their aircraft to actually fight. At that point the real fun starts.
-
If it's your intent to just shoot someone down, then you have no reason to be upset. If, on the other hand, it's your intent to have a good fight, then you are justified in being upset. Getting to dodge a faceful of lead on the initial merge is unfortunately the chance you take when you engage someone you don't know or can't trust. But then you shouldn't really be flying right at them, should you?
-
Notwithstanding the pilot involved (this is jester we're talking about!) if a P-40E goes up against a corsair, it's toast. It better HO while it can, because it won't make it very far past the merge.
:devil
-
(http://i295.photobucket.com/albums/mm134/waystin2/AnotherUglyHOthread.jpg)
as frightening as that picture COULD be, if i were taking prescription pain killers.....it is FRAKKIN FUNNY!! on normal over the counter pain killers. :x
-
Notwithstanding the pilot involved (this is jester we're talking about!) if a P-40E goes up against a corsair, it's toast. It better HO while it can, because it won't make it very far past the merge.
:devil
<<<<<<<<<thinks ist's still the pile-it. i've seen f4f's, p40's, etc. take on planes that everyone says they can't.
-
Notwithstanding the pilot involved (this is jester we're talking about!) if a P-40E goes up against a corsair, it's toast. It better HO while it can, because it won't make it very far past the merge.
:devil
Very poor excuse for a vet to HO imho!
-
Now when you learn a bit more about flying your plane you'll quit doing that and try to win a fight rather than just get a kill. New folks tend to HO because they know no other way. Once they gain experience then they learn to maneuver their aircraft to actually fight. At that point the real fun starts.
As I told xtiger last night in the MW arena, it was amazing how quickly his kills stopped when people started to avoid his HO passes.
ack-ack
-
No offense but, I don't see the problem...he opens fire, do a little jig and light him up...but then I'm seeing a lot of people here that view HOs as noob tactics...for me it's better than giving the other guy an opportunity to get behind me...
LOL HO'ing in the DA.
-
As I told xtiger last night in the MW arena, it was amazing how quickly his kills stopped when people started to avoid his HO passes.
ack-ack
:rofl true
-
No offense but, I don't see the problem...he opens fire, do a little jig and light him up...but then I'm seeing a lot of people here that view HOs as noob tactics...for me it's better than giving the other guy an opportunity to get behind me...
Hoing from noobs is NEVER an issue! I would say 90% of all successful HOs are from vet pilots who know better!!!and would complain about it if they lost :rofl
Boxboy is the only one I know who "unabashidly" will HO with gleee, and never complains if it's done to him :aok At least he'll admit it :salute
Most of the heros in here use the old "high angle" excuse! Which is like saying "I just HOd him better use the standard excuse" so I can save face :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl Ahhh! priceless :aok
-
Make no mistakes, I'll take a HO now and then. Comes from flying the 190A for years.
As for "it's the pilot, not the plane" -- IMO that's ego talking. Put a decent pilot in a P-40B and a worse pilot in a spit16, and 99 times out of 100 the spit will eat the P-40B for lunch 6 ways from Sunday.
I'm a firm advocate that the plane amplifies or dulls the pilot's natural abilities. It's neither one nor the other, but a combination of both pilot and plane capabilities. Knowing jester (hah!) let's just compare the planes as-is, hehehehe.
-
Make no mistakes, I'll take a HO now and then. Comes from flying the 190A for years.
As for "it's the pilot, not the plane" -- IMO that's ego talking. Put a decent pilot in a P-40B and a worse pilot in a spit16, and 99 times out of 100 the spit will eat the P-40B for lunch 6 ways from Sunday.
I'm a firm advocate that the plane amplifies or dulls the pilot's natural abilities. It's neither one nor the other, but a combination of both pilot and plane capabilities. Knowing jester (hah!) let's just compare the planes as-is, hehehehe.
i'm on the low side of average. i was in a spit5 or 9...can't remember which......vs 1duke1 in a p40. i had alt, and speed.........i lost. 2 or 3 times if i recall. :noid
-
I think the big problem with 90% of the HO arguments is just a differing opinion of what constitutes a HO and what does not. Most seem to boil down to a semantics argument (same with picking, vulching, ganging, etc.). Personally a front quarter shot to me is different than head on attack. To me a head on implies that both parties can get a gun solution, if I work inside of the turn in a fight and get the angles for a shot that the other plane cannot then that's a fair shot and not one to complain about. I generally dislike firing on the first merge although there are exceptions to that policy, typically they're environmental things like being outnumbered or in some other situation of desperation, hell I've done it from time to time out of sheer frustration at one thing or another. The big exception to that little rule is the blind under the nose attack on a higher con which I just love, when you pull up under someone who can't see that you're there and hit them with a front quarter or bottom shot. I just call that being sneaky. :)
-
for me it's better than giving the other guy an opportunity to get behind me...
If you knew some ACM then you wouldn't have to rely on head on shots and you too would be able to 'saddle up' on someone's six like the other guys seem to easily do to you.
ack-ack
-
No offense but, I don't see the problem...he opens fire, do a little jig and light him up...but then I'm seeing a lot of people here that view HOs as noob tactics...for me it's better than giving the other guy an opportunity to get behind me...
It is a noob tactic. However, I confess I do welcome the attempt.
When you line up nose-to-nose with an EAC, you are immediately communicating to him that you don't understand the very elementary concepts of the lead turn and vertical/horizontal separation. Once this is clear to the EAC, he will quickly, and with a high degree of accuracy, conclude that your understanding of "Step 2" is equally lacking.
That being the case, should the other individual have some idea of what he's doing, you will have immediately placed yourself at a tangible disadvantage. His aircraft will be in a better state to assume the offensive position immediately following the merge. In a best case scenario for you, your options will be to run, to run or to run. As you may have guessed, this is why the Channel 200 text buffer is filled with whines about HO'ing and running.
This is all determined, digested and filed away by the EAC driver before you've even rested your index finger on the trigger. When you smack the WEP key and begin to steady your hand in preparation for the joust, he is already at least three steps ahead of you and has visualized the exact moment, 15 seconds from right now, where he will have gained a firing solution and you'll be dead.
Once you learn how to maneuver your aircraft so as to fully exploit your advantages in any Plane X vs. Plane Y contest, you will quickly come to the conclusion that the practice of leaving the result of a fight, which you spent ten minutes finding, up to chance and two seconds of "fun," is a poor investment of your time.
-
LOL...think we hijacked this thread. :lol
Looking around these forums it appears as though many of the "adults" playing these online flight sims (especially those most active in the forums) live just to complain about someone doing something they think is "lame" in one of the arenas...then the crowd mentality sets in...lots of chiming in "yeah that's lame" from people who had no opinion in the first place...(not gonna mention the trolls with their "see rule #...)...
Hence the first post in this thread...I suppose Jester complained about losing a HO...response should have been, "oh well, you took a chance and lost, fly smarter next time"...then move on.
HO, pick, vulch, whatever...as long as the person isn't doing some sort of warping or cheating...a kill is a kill.
-
(http://i295.photobucket.com/albums/mm134/waystin2/AnotherUglyHOthread.jpg)
:eek: :uhoh
-
HO, pick, vulch, whatever...as long as the person isn't doing some sort of warping or cheating...a kill is a kill.
The warp is the only one you mentioned that is beyond the users control.
..... a kill is a kill is exactly what the new folks look for. Most of the folks that have been here awhile look for the fight. Get good at the fight and the kills will come. When you win a fight then you can say you actually did something.
-
If you knew some ACM then you wouldn't have to rely on head on shots and you too would be able to 'saddle up' on someone's six like the other guys seem to easily do to you.
ack-ack
Must have me mistaken for someone else...I don't "rely" on anything...but I will take whatever shot is presented to me.
It is a noob tactic. However, I confess I do welcome the attempt.
When you line up nose-to-nose with an EAC, you are immediately communicating to him that you don't understand the very elementary concepts of the lead turn and vertical/horizontal separation. Once this is clear to the EAC, he will quickly, and with a high degree of accuracy, conclude that your understanding of "Step 2" is equally lacking.
That being the case, should the other individual have some idea of what he's doing, you will have immediately placed yourself at a tangible disadvantage. His aircraft will be in a better state to assume the offensive position immediately following the merge. In a best case scenario for you, your options will be to run, to run or to run. As you may have guessed, this is why the Channel 200 text buffer is filled with whines about HO'ing and running.
This is all determined, digested and filed away by the EAC driver before you've even rested your index finger on the trigger. When you smack the WEP key and begin to steady your hand in preparation for the joust, he is already at least three steps ahead of you and has visualized the exact moment, 15 seconds from right now, where he will have gained a firing solution and you'll be dead.
Once you learn how to maneuver your aircraft so as to fully exploit your advantages in any Plane X vs. Plane Y contest, you will quickly come to the conclusion that the practice of leaving the result of a fight, which you spent ten minutes finding, up to chance and two seconds of "fun," is a poor investment of your time.
No offense but there must be a lot of people who don't have the "elementary" part down...
-
Gyrene, you can take it or leave it, but you've received sound advice.
-
Two vets should understandd what a HO is.
Jester has been around for a long time..
-
No offense but, I don't see the problem...he opens fire, do a little jig and light him up...but then I'm seeing a lot of people here that view HOs as noob tactics...for me it's better than giving the other guy an opportunity to get behind me...
thats a crazy way to think if thats all its about in this game i dont think we would have 5 to 10 year vets in this game .... well simple no fun here....remember "THE FUN IS THE FIGHT"win or loose :salute
-
Newbies would do well to heed these "should do's/how do's" - Dicta Bloecke. Over 95 years old and still relevant.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dicta_Boelcke (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dicta_Boelcke)
I think the difference in what constitutes acceptable play is split in relation to which type of player you are :
"arcade" style players - get me to the action as fast as I can - this is some sort of war of honour/knights jousting etc etc - fair play enters in here in a big way.
AND
"sim" style players - lets re-enact as best we can the RL situation as it occured - no RL airforce let "fair" enter into the equation - get em before they had a chance to defend themselves - get out before things get bad - always bring your bird home etc etc. (BTW HO's were a rarity because of the very real chance of a death dealing collision)
...and rarely will the two styles meet in attitudes about play. <shrug> something we gotta live with eh!
-
i'm on the low side of average. i was in a spit5 or 9...can't remember which......vs 1duke1 in a p40. i had alt, and speed.........i lost. 2 or 3 times if i recall. :noid
That's because 1Duke1 is one of those damn cheaters when he flies the P40E.
-
Boelke's rules are outdated even in WW2, but still useful. Nowadays (modern times) they are not very useful at all.
However, I would like to point newbies to rules 3 and 4 of Boelke's Dicta. The rest are not so important.
In fact, in this game, only attacking from a position of advantage is considered "weak" or "lame" (see "picking"). Some of the best fights I've had in the MA were surviving bad odds being bounced by 4 planes and shooting 3 of them down.
In fact, another one of his rules is wrong as well. When you start an attack, it's also quite wise to know when the heck to get out of it! If you always follow every fight through you'll always end up dead. Know when to get out, keep an eye out for the 5 reinforcements the enemy has coming in from the stratosphere, and head home before they engage you.
My point basically is, while there is some wisdom to be taken from Boelke, if newbies follow his rules we get inexperienced vets that never learn how to mix things up.
-
"arcade" style players - get me to the action as fast as I can - this is some sort of war of honour/knights jousting etc etc - fair play enters in here in a big way.
I'd call them (us) "sport" style players, personally. "Arcade" doesn't really fit, IMO.
Either that or Marseille-styled players, as opposed to Hartmann-styled players.
-
Marseille was a cherry picker!!!!
;)
-
I like a fight on the deck. Last night a few of the 80th were on and I don't think any of us ever got over 5k. The cons were coming in around 6 to 10k. It was great. You'll learn more about what you and your plane can do by staying low. Just because someone has a physical advantage does not mean they have all the marbles. :aok
-
As I said : there will always be "arcade/sports" players AND "sim" players.
Interesting that some feel it necesary to to sing the praises of their style while speaking degradingly of the other. <shrug>
Regardless of your style there is never any reason IMHO to speak down about someone elses play. How YOU play is obviously right for you - doesn't mean for everyone else.
Takes all kinds I guess....go figure eh!
-
Marseille was a cherry picker!!!!
;)
Oh the irony :D
-
Now now, Bear, that last time I killed you as SO much closer to a vulch than a cherry pick! :devil
-
One thing people would be wise to think about when trying to apply any sort of historical doctrine or lesson here is that the stakes are completely different. If my life is on the line the a lot of what Boelke advocates makes sense, I sure as hell am going to try and stack the odds as much in my favor as possible.
This is a game, if you lose your plane you get a shiny new one immediately, in an armed conflict it's the results that matter. Here we have the luxury of appreciating how those results are achieved.
-
No offense but, I don't see the problem...he opens fire, do a little jig and light him up...but then I'm seeing a lot of people here that view HOs as noob tactics...for me it's better than giving the other guy an opportunity to get behind me...
This is a game. It's meant to be fun. The fun is in the fight and pitting your skills against your opponents skills.
If flying for 5 minutes to arrive and then taking a 50-50 chance on a joust is what you like then go for it. You'll always be a .5 K/S flyer and be viewed as a n00b.
:salute
-
Now now, Bear, that last time I killed you as SO much closer to a vulch than a cherry pick! :devil
Krusty the one thing you have in your favor is no one expects much from you so we're never disappointed.
-
Apparently Bear has no sense of humor, nor can he read any.
-
Apparently Bear has no sense of humor, nor can he read any.
Yes, I get it......you're a joke :D
-
My ... such hostility.
In case anybody ELSE has issues reading sarcasm or telling when folks are just being silly, I was being both in my "Marseille is a cherry picker" and my "more of a vulch" posts.
-
I get a kick out of how wound up some get over this game.
After over three years of play I noticed that ive been hoed several times by many of those that cry the loudest about being hoed.
If your being hoed, then your hoing back 9 times out of 10 anyway.
A Flying Tiger lives in my town and will tell you the ho is a valid and effective tactic, one which he used many times. I dont think I will call him a noob. (and yes I understand this is a game and that was real life). I just hear a lot of folks talking about tactics.
I always figured if I want to avoid the ho that is what the DA is for.
Also, if someone turns into me on a ho, I can avoid them 9 out of 10 times.
I dont go up looking for the ho but if you turn into me and start firing, your gonna get shot in the face.
Had a few cry on 200 after I won the joust and they went guns first on me.
I guess my point is, why does this get folks so worked up.
Im here to have fun and its a kick to meet new folks. If I get in a bad situation, I switch air fields. But thats just me, not telling anyone what to do. Just my opinion.
Fly on. <S>
-
My ... such hostility.
In case anybody ELSE has issues reading sarcasm or telling when folks are just being silly, I was being both in my "Marseille is a cherry picker" and my "more of a vulch" posts.
Actually, you're missing the sarcasm :D
-
I guess my point is, why does this get folks so worked up.
Fly on. <S>
the answer to this follows!
After over three years of play I noticed that ive been hoed several times by many of those that cry the loudest about being hoed.
Fly on. <S>
:aok
-
This is a game. It's meant to be fun. The fun is in the fight and pitting your skills against your opponents skills.
Some would say the fun is in getting the kill and landing to see their name lit up in the buffer...points hounds. Just taking a guess here but your main ride in this game is a pony or spit...maybe an f4u?
If flying for 5 minutes to arrive and then taking a 50-50 chance on a joust is what you like then go for it. You'll always be a .5 K/S flyer and be viewed as a n00b.
:salute
LOL...I'm not even that right now...too aggressive (and I don't own $200 worth of sim flying gear)...if someone is coming straight at me co-alt then I can only assume he's gonna open fire as soon as he get within range...I'll take the shot and not worry about whether someone thinks I'm a n00b...or the crying in the text buffer.
<S> see you in the arena
-
Actually, you're missing the sarcasm :D
You're confusing what sarcasm is with cheap insults. There is a difference.
-
You're confusing what sarcasm is with cheap insults. There is a difference.
My bad, but I can't help it you're cheap.
-
See Rule #4
-
I like a fight on the deck. Last night a few of the 80th were on and I don't think any of us ever got over 5k. The cons were coming in around 6 to 10k. It was great. You'll learn more about what you and your plane can do by staying low. Just because someone has a physical advantage does not mean they have all the marbles. :aok
Agreed. Usually I'm around 10k for what little speed I can get in my A6M5b, but it's always a blast to get jumped by a couple of plans above me and come out victorious.
-
I still stand firm, like i have stated before, dont want me to shoot you in your face, simply turn your plane around. Im just as happy to chase you down and put some .50's in your tail pipe.
I cannot understand for the life of me WHY people who fly 38's "vertical roll overs 24/7" F4u's "Dump power hit Q 4 times pull back" or spitfires "uhm..pull back?" INSIST on other pilots letting them have that chance to do something so simple and dominate a fight ** Almost every time the same way over and over and over*, just because someone came along and shoots them in the face first.
Most ho WHINES are from people who want the fight the way THEY want it, well its combat..and its not about you. Its about me. :rock
If two pilots want* to have a merge then combat, that is upto them.
:x
-
See Rule #4
-
See Rule #4
-
See Rule #4
I smell a shade, and a particularly stinky one at that.
-
So many of these kids just don't get it.
As I said : there will always be "arcade/sports" players AND "sim" players.
Interesting that some feel it necesary to to sing the praises of their style while speaking degradingly of the other. <shrug>
Regardless of your style there is never any reason IMHO to speak down about someone elses play. How YOU play is obviously right for you - doesn't mean for everyone else.
Takes all kinds I guess....go figure eh!
It's called a community. You may live in one. How do you feel about drug dealers in your community..... do you pat them on the back and say it's ok... it's your life. Some folks have expectations of how this community should be and they are disappointed when some fail. When someone fails it is probable that someone will say something. No PC here, just telling it like it is.
If no one says anything the play will degrade into a cesspool where many would just up and leave for better pastures.
-
I smell a shade, and a particularly stinky one at that.
So that's what that smell was... :noid :uhoh
-
So many of these kids just don't get it.
It's called a community. You may live in one. How do you feel about drug dealers in your community..... do you pat them on the back and say it's ok... it's your life. Some folks have expectations of how this community should be and they are disappointed when some fail. When someone fails it is probable that someone will say something. No PC here, just telling it like it is.
If no one says anything the play will degrade into a cesspool where many would just up and leave for better pastures.
"drug dealers" "cesspool"...... I am indeed saddened to see you have such a low view of THIS community here - but know that I've seen those OTHER pastures and they ain't much better - I hope things improve for you.
Generally tho:
Isn’t it always that there are a few who have :
Communed with the Almighty and have been given THE WORD of the GAME and it is the ONLY WORD and they have been COMMANDED from on HIGH to spread THE WORD to the unclean and dim witted that surround their AUGUST personage. For THE WORD is all that is HOLY in the LAND and it SHALL be OBEYED. Their voices shall RING forth with a SACRED CRUSADE to cleanse the LAND so that it will be SAFE from CORRUPTION as THEY see it. From on HIGH they shall thunder forth their WORDS so that the peons below them may SEE the LIGHT and the LAND will be as it should be in THEIR minds….and those who may nay say them shall be BEATEN into the dust with the FORCE and VOLUME of their preaching………
<PHHTTTT>
To be told you are wrong if you attempt to incorporate historical actions into a WWII Air combat simulation is ludicrous – unless of course it is just an “arcade” game. In that case it will be all right to see flying saucers and be told it is OK as long as they agree to T&B and don’t HO. LOL
What I’m hearing here is justification that you MUST use the FM’s you have in ways that they were never intended – and crapping all over people who say “No I’m going to fight my plane the way it was intended". You can bloody believe if I’m in a 190A8 you will NOT see me doing much TnB - it operated mainly as a jabo/buff kiler/B’nZ fighter – sure a good stick can mix it up low ‘ n slow but THAT wasn’t where it excelled. It’s like saying a dump truck should be used for regularly running to the 7-11 for milk – you can do it but not very well. Or using a Tommy Gun as a sniper weapon – heheh
Like I said : arcade vs sim players – Let each to their own is my attitude – In 20+ years enjoying this game I’ve never understood some peoples insistence THEY are the holders of the ONLY WAY to play the game <shrug>
…go figure eh!
-
I'm on the side that agrees it takes Two to Ho. Always avoid being in the line of sight of ANY Gun. Don't expect a Plane to Pass by you and set up a fight unless you're in the DA and set the rules with an opponent.
If you think the Ho is the best way to get kills watch that good pilot that flames you every time. As you attempt your run he will avoid your Ho and because he knows where you're headed he easily gets your six. :uhoh Nothing is more satisfying than out manuvering an opponent in a Dogfight as you both twist and turn to gain gun solution.
(http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s151/evylbytch/Olympia%20Airshow%2009/F4UCorsairNavalFighter.jpg)
-
I'm on the side that agrees it takes Two to Ho. Always avoid being in the line of sight of ANY Gun. Don't expect a Plane to Pass by you and set up a fight unless you're in the DA and set the rules with an opponent.
If you think the Ho is the best way to get kills watch that good pilot that flames you every time. As you attempt your run he will avoid your Ho and because he knows where you're headed he easily gets your six. :uhoh Nothing is more satisfying than out manuvering an opponent in a Dogfight as you both twist and turn to gain gun solution.
(http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s151/evylbytch/Olympia%20Airshow%2009/F4UCorsairNavalFighter.jpg)
is that tom duffy;s corsair?
-
"drug dealers" "cesspool"...... I am indeed saddened to see you have such a low view of THIS community here - but know that I've seen those OTHER pastures and they ain't much better - I hope things improve for you.
Generally tho:
Isn’t it always that there are a few who have :
Communed with the Almighty and have been given THE WORD of the GAME and it is the ONLY WORD and they have been COMMANDED from on HIGH to spread THE WORD to the unclean and dim witted that surround their AUGUST personage. For THE WORD is all that is HOLY in the LAND and it SHALL be OBEYED. Their voices shall RING forth with a SACRED CRUSADE to cleanse the LAND so that it will be SAFE from CORRUPTION as THEY see it. From on HIGH they shall thunder forth their WORDS so that the peons below them may SEE the LIGHT and the LAND will be as it should be in THEIR minds….and those who may nay say them shall be BEATEN into the dust with the FORCE and VOLUME of their preaching………
<PHHTTTT>
To be told you are wrong if you attempt to incorporate historical actions into a WWII Air combat simulation is ludicrous – unless of course it is just an “arcade” game. In that case it will be all right to see flying saucers and be told it is OK as long as they agree to T&B and don’t HO. LOL
What I’m hearing here is justification that you MUST use the FM’s you have in ways that they were never intended – and crapping all over people who say “No I’m going to fight my plane the way it was intended". You can bloody believe if I’m in a 190A8 you will NOT see me doing much TnB - it operated mainly as a jabo/buff kiler/B’nZ fighter – sure a good stick can mix it up low ‘ n slow but THAT wasn’t where it excelled. It’s like saying a dump truck should be used for regularly running to the 7-11 for milk – you can do it but not very well. Or using a Tommy Gun as a sniper weapon – heheh
Like I said : arcade vs sim players – Let each to their own is my attitude – In 20+ years enjoying this game I’ve never understood some peoples insistence THEY are the holders of the ONLY WAY to play the game <shrug>
…go figure eh!
Again you just don't get it. I never said this community is a cesspool. However it could be if folks don't speak up as a community.
-
No offense but there must be a lot of people who don't have the "elementary" part down...
True. This is why the quality of gameplay has deteriorated in recent years.
-
Well I absolutely DO get it my friend - hasn't changed since '86 in AW/GEnie when someone parked a 50cal jeep right behind an enemies spawn point - I, and I'm sure many others also, am one who just won't be dictated to by people who insist THEIR highway is the only one. (we're NOT talking about players who abuse the game - ackstars/bomb&bail/hackers etc etc.) And I don't think this is any place to go bashing people who don't see things exactly your way.
If you want to change peoples views you'll have better success with educating them to your point of view - but don't be surprised if there are just as strongly held positions on the other side.
If you're rolling from a capped field - use a BnZ plane in a fur ball - try to outdive F4u in a zeke - then don't be too surprised if there is a negative outcome - don't then go calling the other people, who nail you, out saying they shouldn't be playing that way.
Once again : arcade style/historical stlye - to each their own without judgement.
Remember however - if you find yourself in a fair fight - you made a BIG mistake!! LOL
Safe Skys! :)
...just my opinion eh!
-
I have a question for the people who enjoy taking bases:
Considering that when taking bases in an unlimited-life situation such as Aces High, the attacker faces much higher attrition (because of the longer time it takes them to reach the base), is it really in the attacking force's best interest to have their limited "resources" immediately present their enemy with a 50/50 chance of shooting them down?
I'm not much of a base-taker myself, so I'd hope someone could clear this up for me. I'm under the impression that much of the community thinks this is a great idea.
-
A Flying Tiger lives in my town and will tell you the ho is a valid and effective tactic, one which he used many times. I dont think I will call him a noob. (and yes I understand this is a game and that was real life). I just hear a lot of folks talking about tactics.
won the joust and they went guns first on me.
Used to be friends with David Lee Hill (also an AVG pilot if you didn't know), and if you'd look at the REASON they'd HO (even if they were forward deflection shots most of the time, high 12'o'clock), you'd be asking a P-40B who's pilot was most likely once off of a carrier, and some never had flight experience before Clair Chennault, to get into a "stall" (turning) fight with a Japanese plane, ie the KI or A6M, which we all know wouldn't turn out so well, which is why the AVG had such HUGE success, they knew to use their gun advantage rather than feed into the maneuverability advantage the Japanese had due to the lightweight and practically armorless airframe.
This thread was not designed to be a "he's a noob he HOd" thread, this thread was made to clear up a discrepancy with Jester as to who's guns went hot first, his or mine. He had said he saw my guns going, and I knew I saw his. Both our planes walked away with oil damage, and his limped away without an engine. ;)
-
Yawn.
-
(http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt86/splittiebus66/large_KVETbust.jpg)
wake up waystin, I got's an AK47 and some crack. Lets party. :x
-
Well I absolutely DO get it my friend - hasn't changed since '86 in AW/GEnie when someone parked a 50cal jeep right behind an enemies spawn point - I, and I'm sure many others also, am one who just won't be dictated to by people who insist THEIR highway is the only one. (we're NOT talking about players who abuse the game - ackstars/bomb&bail/hackers etc etc.) And I don't think this is any place to go bashing people who don't see things exactly your way.
If you want to change peoples views you'll have better success with educating them to your point of view - but don't be surprised if there are just as strongly held positions on the other side.
If you're rolling from a capped field - use a BnZ plane in a fur ball - try to outdive F4u in a zeke - then don't be too surprised if there is a negative outcome - don't then go calling the other people, who nail you, out saying they shouldn't be playing that way.
Once again : arcade style/historical stlye - to each their own without judgement.
Remember however - if you find yourself in a fair fight - you made a BIG mistake!! LOL
Safe Skys! :)
...just my opinion eh!
There are many highways.... I am refering to the ones who operate under the highway and might improve with some guidance.
-
True. This is why the quality of gameplay has deteriorated in recent years.
Sorry man but I have to disagree...the "quality of gameplay" is primarily dictated by the game itself...not the people...the players simply learn to use the various elements of the game to their own advantages...in an FPS it's character flexibility, simulated weapons and environment...in a flight sim it's simulated aircraft, simulated weapons and understanding the basics of simulated flight...
I'm willing to bet the percentage of real life combat experienced pilots playing this game is very slim...even then those who are combat experienced pilots are most likely jet age pilots...big difference in tactics and strategies from WWI to WWII to jet era...technology forced those changes.
Why is it that "old cyber aces" here as well as the "other flight sim" automatically assume you're the ultimate experts in aerial combat just because you've been playing a flight simulator for 10 or more years? Because you've read every book ever written on WWII aerial combat? Because you spent more money on your cyber flying hardware than you have on clothes in the past 10 years? All it proves is you know how to read and calibrate a joy stick. squeaking, moaning, whining, chiding, talking trash, etc...at people who don't immediately conform to your idea of how to fight in their cartoon planes only makes you look like a little kid.
I enjoy a good dogfight as much as anyone...but if I find myself in circumstances that dictate the expeditious dispatching of an opponent to improve my chances of survival...I'll take whatever shot is available...
For all you "expert uber cyber aces"...if you're that good...you should know how to outmaneuver someone who may end up ho'ing just so you don't have something to squeak about in the first place...
Sorry for hijacking your post Trigger.
-
Sorry man but I have to disagree...the "quality of gameplay" is primarily dictated by the game itself...not the people...the players simply learn to use the various elements of the game to their own advantages...in an FPS it's character flexibility, simulated weapons and environment...in a flight sim it's simulated aircraft, simulated weapons and understanding the basics of simulated flight...
I'm willing to bet the percentage of real life combat experienced pilots playing this game is very slim...even then those who are combat experienced pilots are most likely jet age pilots...big difference in tactics and strategies from WWI to WWII to jet era...technology forced those changes.
Why is it that "old cyber aces" here as well as the "other flight sim" automatically assume you're the ultimate experts in aerial combat just because you've been playing a flight simulator for 10 or more years? Because you've read every book ever written on WWII aerial combat? Because you spent more money on your cyber flying hardware than you have on clothes in the past 10 years? All it proves is you know how to read and calibrate a joy stick. squeaking, moaning, whining, chiding, talking trash, etc...at people who don't immediately conform to your idea of how to fight in their cartoon planes only makes you look like a little kid.
I enjoy a good dogfight as much as anyone...but if I find myself in circumstances that dictate the expeditious dispatching of an opponent to improve my chances of survival...I'll take whatever shot is available...
For all you "expert uber cyber aces"...if you're that good...you should know how to outmaneuver someone who may end up ho'ing just so you don't have something to squeak about in the first place...
Sorry for hijacking your post Trigger.
Cheesehead. :rofl :rofl :rofl
Sorry, couldn't resist.
<--- Minnesota
-
Cheesehead. :rofl :rofl :rofl
Sorry, couldn't resist.
<--- Minnesota
ROFLMAO!!! :rofl I bet on the Vikings every year...shhh... ;)
I'm just a cheesehead by geography...chased some kitty up here from New Orleans and the bus hasn't returned to take me back... :D
-
Now when you learn a bit more about flying your plane you'll quit doing that and try to win a fight rather than just get a kill. New folks tend to HO because they know no other way. Once they gain experience then they learn to maneuver their aircraft to actually fight. At that point the real fun starts.
I call BS on this statement, I play this game because its a way to get frusteration out of a long days work, getting away from the wife, and just having fun. Shooting down planes NO MATTER how I do it is fun, I like to take up bombers and purposly fly into a furball to get kills,
Remember it takes 2 to HO and if you really know how to fly you can avoid the HO no matter what, if you dont like the HO then avoid it, dont fly straight into it like an idiot
If i wanted to have fun by manuevering aircraft, I would go offline and fly circles around the drones.
-
I have a question for the people who enjoy taking bases:
Considering that when taking bases in an unlimited-life situation such as Aces High, the attacker faces much higher attrition (because of the longer time it takes them to reach the base), is it really in the attacking force's best interest to have their limited "resources" immediately present their enemy with a 50/50 chance of shooting them down?
I'm not much of a base-taker myself, so I'd hope someone could clear this up for me. I'm under the impression that much of the community thinks this is a great idea.
I have a feeling this is one of those questions that won't be answered...
-
Why is it that "old cyber aces" here as well as the "other flight sim" automatically assume you're the ultimate experts in aerial combat just because you've been playing a flight simulator for 10 or more years? Because you've read every book ever written on WWII aerial combat? Because you spent more money on your cyber flying hardware than you have on clothes in the past 10 years? All it proves is you know how to read and calibrate a joy stick. squeaking, moaning, whining, chiding, talking trash, etc...at people who don't immediately conform to your idea of how to fight in their cartoon planes only makes you look like a little kid.
I was crushed in a fight the other day by a fellow who flies with just a mouse...
IMO, you're getting pretty worked up over what was (initially) mere advice. Your initial post came across as someone who might benefit from some. If you keep up your attitude, however, I'm not so certain people are going to continue offering it (and we ALL need it).
-
Remember it takes 2 to HO
No, it doesn't. Another noobs attempt to redefine long standing terms: DENIED
-
IMO, you're getting pretty worked up over what was (initially) mere advice. Your initial post came across as someone who might benefit from some. If you keep up your attitude, however, I'm not so certain people are going to continue offering it (and we ALL need it).
I'm not worked up Vudak...takes more than some sideways snipe attempt at ridicule to get me worked up.
If some of what was posted in my direction is advice...no thanks...I tend to give advice in a way that makes it more likely to be received...(i.e. "some people really dislike having someone HO them, you can avoid it fairly easily by doing...blah blah blah.")...that's advice.
-
No, it doesn't. Another noobs attempt to redefine long standing terms: DENIED
Wrong again Steve...fail
-
No, it doesn't. Another noobs attempt to redefine long standing terms: DENIED
of my entire post all you responded to was that, apparently you agree with the rest of it.
-
Remember it takes 2 to HO and if you really know how to fly you can avoid the HO no matter what, if you dont like the HO then avoid it, dont fly straight into it like an idiot
If i wanted to have fun by manuevering aircraft, I would go offline and fly circles around the drones.
Again your wrong on HOs. The one who HOs is the one who pulls the trigger.
As for maneuvering I use it to kill folks like you all day long. You miss your Ho your pretty much done.
Steve forget this one... he's determined to fly under the highway. So be it.
-
Wrong again Steve...fail
Two to merge, one to make it a HO.
I wasn't addressing you, noob. You should keep to one lame argument at a time. It's clear you'd rather bicker than anything else. The time I'm going to waste on you is over.
-
If some of what was posted in my direction is advice...no thanks...I tend to give advice in a way that makes it more likely to be received...(i.e. "some people really dislike having someone HO them, you can avoid it fairly easily by doing...blah blah blah.")...that's advice.
You don't get to choose the terms and conditions of advice in here any more than you would get to choose how a professor teaches you at your university. Some are going to offer advice in ways that you like, and others won't. This board certainly has its share of grumps.
You don't have to listen to it if you don't want to, but if you only accept counsel from people who sugarcoat it, you're losing out on half the board's knowledge :D
-
of my entire post all you responded to was that, apparently you agree with the rest of it.
Flip, you are in a discussion with someone else about it, but since you(well me too) brought me in here's my 2 cents: if you choose to HO regulary on your merges you will often be reducing your chance at a successful mission to less than favorable odds. Even if you win a mutual HO, chances are that you are going to suffer some damage too, thus ending your flight. Statistically speaking, you'll get more fights, and therefore more kills if you don't use the HO as a first option.
I do agree with some of your post though, you are right about that:
One should become adept at avoiding the HO because it happens with frequency in the MA.
Flying bombers into a furball is a blast.
It's your $15.00 .. have fun but if you HO an experienced stick and you miss, you have really put yourself at a disadvantage for that fight. :salute
-
Again your wrong on HOs. The one who HOs is the one who pulls the trigger.
As for maneuvering I use it to kill folks like you all day long. You miss your Ho your pretty much done.
Steve forget this one... he's determined to fly under the highway. So be it.
This is like trying to convert an atheist to a catholic. (from me to you, and you to me)
No one is going to change their mind, no matter what anyone says.
Look I will not argue with or anyone about HOs anymore, (this goes for all who read this) I have been a member here since 04 despite what my forum title says, this is a different alias. It has been the same arguement since, and nothing has changed, we all have different views on everything, just cause one person who has been here for ages says one thing, does not mean that is more right or more wrong than a guy who just started a few months ago. In fact just because someone likes to HO does not mean that they can not maneuver, i have seen many vets who have done it, and you all know it. Thats all im going to say. Im here to engage in friendly discussions, not blood baths of arguments to the point of throwing my keyboard across the room.
I appologize for my rude comments.
But we all must understand that nothing is going to change, the noobs will always be here, like they always have, and the vets will always have their views and so will the noobs. Its a game, there is no right or wrong way to play a game IMHO
If you play it the way you want and you are having fun then thats what its all about. We are all gamers, each and everyone of us, and it seems like we forgot that along the way here.
EDIT:
Steve jsut read your comment, and I appologize to you for my attitude. Like i said above its about having fun, sometimes people like to be in a disadvantage in a fight, thats why i switch to the low pop countries alot, its what makes the game fun and if we all have fun in the end, thats what its about
-
Two to merge, one to make it a HO.
I wasn't addressing you, noob. You should keep to one lame argument at a time. It's clear you'd rather bicker than anything else. The time I'm going to waste on you is over.
Another virtual hero...I was over being a noob before you bought your first computer...in here some people may think you're a "top dog" but I and many like me live outside of this virtual playground you consider yourself the "all knowing master" of...so do yourself a favor and climb down off that booster seat and spare us the great show of indignant superiority.
Had you taken the time to answer in the same manner as you just did (see quote below) I wouldn't have pissed on your b.s.
Flip, you are in a discussion with someone else about it, but since you(well me too) brought me in here's my 2 cents: if you choose to HO regulary on your merges you will often be reducing your chance at a successful mission to less than favorable odds. Even if you win a mutual HO, chances are that you are going to suffer some damage too, thus ending your flight. Statistically speaking, you'll get more fights, and therefore more kills if you don't use the HO as a first option.
I do agree with some of your post though, you are right about that:
One should become adept at avoiding the HO because it happens with frequency in the MA.
Flying bombers into a furball is a blast.
It's your $15.00 .. have fun but if you HO an experienced stick and you miss, you have really put yourself at a disadvantage for that fight. :salute
-
But we all must understand that nothing is going to change, the noobs will always be here, like they always have, and the vets will always have their views and so will the noobs. Its a game, there is no right or wrong way to play a game IMHO
It's the vets' niche to help out the newbies... They do that by passing along information that they have often learned the hard way. Then the vets get to hear a bunch of people who are still a few steps behind completely contradict the advice, pull the "$15 card," and generally just pass along misinformation. That right there will go a long way towards increasing rudeness on the vets' part.
You're right in that "time played" doesn't necessarily correlate to "better advice," but I wouldn't bet on it.
And yes, everyone here has taken a "front quarter shot," or "HO," depending on what you want to call it. Most have probably done so a few times this past week (I sure have). But, overwhelmingly, the players who know what they're doing do not approach a single bandit with the intention of shooting him before the first merge. It is a horribly unsound tactic. There are almost always better options.
-
EDIT:
Steve jsut read your comment, and I appologize to you for my attitude. Like i said above its about having fun, sometimes people like to be in a disadvantage in a fight, thats why i switch to the low pop countries alot, its what makes the game fun and if we all have fun in the end, thats what its about
Flip, no worries, and no apology needed. :salute
Heck, if you switch sides to the lowest populated side regularly, we've crashed and burned together, for I do the same. :lol
-
(http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt86/splittiebus66/large_KVETbust.jpg)
wake up waystin, I got's an AK47 and some crack. Lets party. :x
Woot woot I'll be there for Titanic Tuesday!!! :rofl
-
<<<<<<<<<thinks ist's still the pile-it. i've seen f4f's, p40's, etc. take on planes that everyone says they can't.
A 4-Hog.....against P40E......all the hog has to do is run and climb even if it doesnt want to use every other advantage it already has :eek:
-
Two to merge, one to make it a HO.
I wasn't addressing you, noob. You should keep to one lame argument at a time. It's clear you'd rather bicker than anything else. The time I'm going to waste on you is over.
I hate when people say it takes 2 to HO, where do they get this belief :noid
-
guns are pointed forward for a reason
-
guns are pointed forward for a reason
And tails are in the rear for a reason... Point?
-
I have a question for the people who enjoy taking bases:
Considering that when taking bases in an unlimited-life situation such as Aces High, the attacker faces much higher attrition (because of the longer time it takes them to reach the base), is it really in the attacking force's best interest to have their limited "resources" immediately present their enemy with a 50/50 chance of shooting them down?
I'm not much of a base-taker myself, so I'd hope someone could clear this up for me. I'm under the impression that much of the community thinks this is a great idea.
Still waiting on this one.
-
Still waiting on this one.
Sometimes taking a base can spawn some very good fights...its when people overwhelm a base NOE or shut down the hangars so there isnt a fight that gets on my nerves :salute
-
Sometimes taking a base can spawn some very good fights...its when people overwhelm a base NOE or shut down the hangars so there isnt a fight that gets on my nerves :salute
You're not answering the question at all, Junky.
It's a question about whether or not a HO is really that great of an idea from a base-taker's perspective. It's also a question that would be very awkward for some of this crowd to answer, so it probably won't be.
-
You're not answering the question at all, Junky.
It's a question about whether or not a HO is really that great of an idea from a base-taker's perspective. It's also a question that would be very awkward for some of this crowd to answer, so it probably won't be.
if they're overwhelming the base, then yes, it can be a good tactic. granted, you're standing a good chance of dying, but you don't give the other guy a chance to down you, a squaddie, or hit your troop carrier, or troops.
when they're taking a base, all base takers want is that base...at any cost. it does make sense.
i like to find the fights when they're doing that. often, a furball will erupt somewhere near the base that they're trying to take. if not, i'll go look elsewhere. the other night, i flew over an undefended base.....i flew slow, hoping that someone would see me on their dar, and think i was buffs, and come up. no one did, so i upped from another base, and flew almost 3 sectors to find a big bardar.
back to the original thing though.....if there's a group of say 10 trying to take A45, and they had to fly a full sector to get there.......they have a goon with them.....town just about flat......you're off the runway, running with the throttle firewalled, heading to town to stop the take, and you're skimming the trees.....and they have you outnumbered......it could make sense to risk losing one of their numbers to keep you off their troops.
-
Sorry man but I have to disagree...the "quality of gameplay" is primarily dictated by the game itself...not the people...the players simply learn to use the various elements of the game to their own advantages...in an FPS it's character flexibility, simulated weapons and environment...in a flight sim it's simulated aircraft, simulated weapons and understanding the basics of simulated flight...
I'm willing to bet the percentage of real life combat experienced pilots playing this game is very slim...even then those who are combat experienced pilots are most likely jet age pilots...big difference in tactics and strategies from WWI to WWII to jet era...technology forced those changes.
Why is it that "old cyber aces" here as well as the "other flight sim" automatically assume you're the ultimate experts in aerial combat just because you've been playing a flight simulator for 10 or more years? Because you've read every book ever written on WWII aerial combat? Because you spent more money on your cyber flying hardware than you have on clothes in the past 10 years? All it proves is you know how to read and calibrate a joy stick. squeaking, moaning, whining, chiding, talking trash, etc...at people who don't immediately conform to your idea of how to fight in their cartoon planes only makes you look like a little kid.
I enjoy a good dogfight as much as anyone...but if I find myself in circumstances that dictate the expeditious dispatching of an opponent to improve my chances of survival...I'll take whatever shot is available...
For all you "expert uber cyber aces"...if you're that good...you should know how to outmaneuver someone who may end up ho'ing just so you don't have something to squeak about in the first place...
As with everything else in life, one is entitled to opinion, no matter how misguided.
On all relevant fronts, we disagree.
Suggesting that the quality of gameplay is the result of the game and not the player base is like suggesting that the quality of a boxing match is dictated by the ring and not the boxers.
Suggesting that the percentage of players who have combat hours is low is likely accurate. Not sure how this is relevant.
Suggesting that the fundamental tactics of air combat change as a result of technology is inaccurate. The fundamentals remain the same. Not sure how this is relevant.
Suggesting that... actually Im not sure what youre trying to suggest with the paragraph ending with the words "little kid" but it certainly appears as though youve accurately described yourself with the phrase.
If I may, I would support the previously voiced statement that youve received sound advice in this thread. The delivery method is immaterial. If you can not identify quality information through your haze of emotionally charged opinions, that not really our problem.
You can choose to consider the advice and grow or you can choose to ignore the advice and stall.
-
if they're overwhelming the base, then yes, it can be a good tactic. granted, you're standing a good chance of dying, but you don't give the other guy a chance to down you, a squaddie, or hit your troop carrier, or troops.
when they're taking a base, all base takers want is that base...at any cost. it does make sense.
I disagree. Assuming the attacker wants to have at least energy/altitude advantage upon arrival, they need to climb en route. It can take them 10+ minutes to arrive. Even if they don't want the altitude, and scream in from the deck, it will take them several minutes to show up.
Meanwhile, the defender need only spend 30-90 seconds to get up enough speed to present a legitimate threat.
Logistically, the further away you are from your base of operations, the worse of an idea going for a HO shot becomes. The defender can afford to lose as much as 20 times the HO shots as the attacker.
Are there exceptions? Sure. If a defender is headed towards your goon, by all means, take the shot. But if we're talking the early stages of base-taking, going for that HO is not in your best interest as the base-taker.
Many people in these HO arguments pull out the "if you're so good, why don't you avoid it" argument. Fair enough for a 1v1. But what about a 4v4? There have been many, many times where I have gone into a 4v4 fight only to find it a 1v4 in a matter of moments because the friendlies took 50/50 odds, and lost.
In an ideal world, all the red guys try to HO, and none of the green guys do.
-
As with everything else in life, one is entitled to opinion, no matter how misguided.
On all relevant fronts, we disagree.
Suggesting that the quality of gameplay is the result of the game and not the player base is like suggesting that the quality of a boxing match is dictated by the ring and not the boxers.
Oh you know what, thank you for letting me know I'm misguided since I haven't played AH for as long as you have...I tend to forget that one has to be a 10 year veteran armchair cyber ace pilot to be able to form a valid opinion...forgive me for not bowing down to the supreme level of greatness around here...<whatever>
Your analogy between game play and boxing is out in left field...one is direct interaction between 2 people with no pre-programmed influences (unless the fight is fixed)...the other is interaction of 1 person and a large amount of computer code...in online multiplayer games it's multiple people with the same computer code exchanging bits of that computer code over various distances...if the code is bad, the interaction is bad...look around these forums at the number of complaints about one factor or another in the game...those little glitches and anomalies directly affect the "quality" of game play for those who experience them...do I have to dummy this down further?
Suggesting that the percentage of players who have combat hours is low is likely accurate. Not sure how this is relevant.
Suggesting that the fundamental tactics of air combat change as a result of technology is inaccurate. The fundamentals remain the same. Not sure how this is relevant.
Your idea of "relevance" is as far off as your misguided sense of superiority...(1) real life combat hours - relevance: no one without first hand knowledge of combat can authoritatively dictate absolute knowledge of said subject to anyone...(2) aerial combat tactics and technology - relevance: historical documentation shows that aerial combat tactics in WWI were different than those developed in WWII due to the technological advances in aircraft, (i.e. faster planes, more guns, additional armaments, etc...)...similar documentation shows that aerial combat tactics in turbine powered jet aircraft is far different than the tactics used in WWI or WWII...(i.e. dogfights now involve onboard radar and guided missile systems at long ranges rather than large caliber bullets at short ranges...a head on attack can occur at super sonic speeds using both hyervelocity solid projectiles as well as guided missile systems).
Suggesting that... actually Im not sure what youre trying to suggest with the paragraph ending with the words "little kid" but it certainly appears as though youve accurately described yourself with the phrase.
You really don't understand the concept of "context" do you?...in the "context" that the words "little kid" were written, I was suggesting that anyone who feels the need to complain about or ridicule someone for something as trivial as a head on attack is acting childish.
If I may, I would support the previously voiced statement that youve received sound advice in this thread. The delivery method is immaterial. If you can not identify quality information through your haze of emotionally charged opinions, that not really our problem.
You can choose to consider the advice and grow or you can choose to ignore the advice and stall.
You may and you have...though I have yet to see any sort of sound advice in this thread directed toward myself...it's all opinion...there is no good or bad, it's just opinion...and I never get "emotionally charged" over anything as trivial as what happens in a video game...unlike a large number of the people around here...it's actually quite humorous.
-
I HO'd 3 guys last night. :uhoh
Rooks were working the Bish over in the south area of the Pinwheel map (Titanic Tuesdey). I upped a 190A-8 to go buff hunting but after flying around for quite a while I hadn't found any buffs.
Menwhile Rooks had a full red dar bar over one of our fields with no Bish resistance. I was there circling on my perch looking for buffs but nothing. Then I noticed a couple of friendly fighters coming in from the west and thought what the h*ll, I'm in.
I dove in to find 8-10 enemy cons vulching the field. Within minutes the two friendlies were dead and I was alone with 5-6 cons of all sorts on me. I had speed but not enough to climb out so I made a few fast turns taking two cons out on HO shots (A Jug and a Pony) along the way then tried to egress with five still chasing me. Thank Kurt Tank for the 190's outstanding roll rate as I used it to remain an elusive target. Finally all had turned off except a Zeke and we were playing a game of scissors.
Just as the Zeke was closing for the overshoot I ran out of fuel, rolled a few last times to bleed E then ditched safely.
I also HO'd another Pony last night who started with an alt/E advantage on my Spit XVI. He'd BnZ then run. After I turned he'd come back a few minutes later and repeat. Finally, fed up with this pest and realizing this "gun and run" crap could go on forever, I just HO'd him on one of his passes killing his engine.
I guess there's a time and place for the HO. When facing overwhelming odds in an "inferior" aircraft then you do what you have to do. When someone's just being a pest with no real intent to fight they get what they get.
Yes, most of us do or have HO'd. I did it last night but I still wouldn't advocate HOing in most situations. It takes a lot of the "sport" out of the game.
-
opps - wron thread - thanx
-
Intersting reading here...I see a lot of demeaning/belittling statements right here from both new AND old sticks. Guess it's just part and parcel of the culture.
So perhaps a little direction please. While I understand the reason/intent of the ".report" function I'm a little hazy on the mechanics of it.
If I understand it correctly : If a X# of ".reports" are sent during a certain period of time then a communication penalty is assessed against the named individual.
-is this immediate?
-for how long?
-is there a right/method for adjudication?
-guidelines for language? (I find things today on TV/Radio that would heve been no-no 20 years ago)(you'd be surprised at the language that kids 8-10yo use in the school yard today heheh)
I did do a "search" and found bits an pieces here and there but nothing definitive.
thanx for this - a PM pointing me in the right direction is fine.
cheers eh!
Wrong thread.
-
guns are pointed forward for a reason
LoL...That's why I put the rato units on my 234s backwards
-
I disagree. Assuming the attacker wants to have at least energy/altitude advantage upon arrival, they need to climb en route. It can take them 10+ minutes to arrive. Even if they don't want the altitude, and scream in from the deck, it will take them several minutes to show up.
Meanwhile, the defender need only spend 30-90 seconds to get up enough speed to present a legitimate threat.
Logistically, the further away you are from your base of operations, the worse of an idea going for a HO shot becomes. The defender can afford to lose as much as 20 times the HO shots as the attacker.
Are there exceptions? Sure. If a defender is headed towards your goon, by all means, take the shot. But if we're talking the early stages of base-taking, going for that HO is not in your best interest as the base-taker.
Many people in these HO arguments pull out the "if you're so good, why don't you avoid it" argument. Fair enough for a 1v1. But what about a 4v4? There have been many, many times where I have gone into a 4v4 fight only to find it a 1v4 in a matter of moments because the friendlies took 50/50 odds, and lost.
In an ideal world, all the red guys try to HO, and none of the green guys do.
i see your point. i was thinking farther along in the taking process.....the point where there's only a few buildings left, and troops inbound...or already there.
now, don't mis-intrepret me......i'm not defending the ho'er in any way shape or form........i was just throwing a possibility out there.
-
just to remind you guys: HO shots are not any sort of problem. The only reason folks are whining so loudly is because the LW arenas are simply packed too tightly with too many players. This overcrowding results in frenzied gameplay where people horde and end up treating the game cheaply.
Simple overcrowding.
I am confident when I say more people would enjoy their playing more, and there would be far less whining, if arenas were capped at 120 on small maps.
-
Oh you know what, thank you for letting me know I'm misguided since I haven't played AH for as long as you have...I tend to forget that one has to be a 10 year veteran armchair cyber ace pilot to be able to form a valid opinion...forgive me for not bowing down to the supreme level of greatness around here...<whatever>
No, we just ask you kids to bow down to those who actually know what they're talking about, you, obviously, are not one of them.
And btw, the game does not make the gameplay, the players do. The players make the decision on how to interact and how to use their aircraft (including ACM), where the coding (which I will assume you've never seen any of...) is concrete, there are variables, but those variables are used depending on user input. There are 3 parts to any good code...
INPUT, CALCULATION, OUTPUT.
The user controls the input and the output, which is why the PLAYER is what makes gameplay, not the game itself.
I hope that one day your misguided little mind will mature enough to appreciate the sound of good advice that others who know more than you give. As someone once said...
"Learn from the mistakes others make, because life's too short to make them all yourself."
-
Oh you know what, thank you for letting me know I'm misguided since I haven't played AH for as long as you have...I tend to forget that one has to be a 10 year veteran armchair cyber ace pilot to be able to form a valid opinion...forgive me for not bowing down to the supreme level of greatness around here...<whatever>
I think you need to settle down. Your reactions to some of the posts in this thread are borderline ridiculous.
I have stated *that* your opinion is misguided, not *why* your opinion is misguided.
I have not mentioned the length of time I have spent playing AH or any other online flight sim of a similar nature. By default then, I have also not made any comparison between one's time spent playing and the validity of one's opinion.
By putting words in my mouth to "create" an argument, you are only arguing with yourself, which is silly.
Your analogy between game play and boxing is out in left field...one is direct interaction between 2 people with no pre-programmed influences (unless the fight is fixed)...the other is interaction of 1 person and a large amount of computer code...in online multiplayer games it's multiple people with the same computer code exchanging bits of that computer code over various distances...if the code is bad, the interaction is bad...look around these forums at the number of complaints about one factor or another in the game...those little glitches and anomalies directly affect the "quality" of game play for those who experience them...do I have to dummy this down further?
Actually, my analogy is 100% accurate. The collection of words you have piled together, above, is jibberish.
Simplify the discussion and draw a logical conclusion. We can use the form of a multiple choice question if it helps.
Q: Two cartoon airplanes positioned nose to nose in a virtual arena are as...
A. Two virtual arenas comprising the Matrix, within which Neo resides, and HO's you.
B. A whole bunch of computer "bits" and "code" and glitchy forum servers placed at the warning track in left field of Wrigley Park.
C. Skuzzy loves you.
D. Two boxers positioned toe to toe in a tangible ring.
The correct answer is D. Two cartoon airplanes positioned nose to nose in a virtual arena are as... Two boxers positioned toe to toe in a tangible ring.
Now, that didnt really need to be said, but it was fun, so thanks. On to the next.
Your idea of "relevance" is as far off as your misguided sense of superiority...(1) real life combat hours - relevance: no one without first hand knowledge of combat can authoritatively dictate absolute knowledge of said subject to anyone...(2) aerial combat tactics and technology - relevance: historical documentation shows that aerial combat tactics in WWI were different than those developed in WWII due to the technological advances in aircraft, (i.e. faster planes, more guns, additional armaments, etc...)...similar documentation shows that aerial combat tactics in turbine powered jet aircraft is far different than the tactics used in WWI or WWII...(i.e. dogfights now involve onboard radar and guided missile systems at long ranges rather than large caliber bullets at short ranges...a head on attack can occur at super sonic speeds using both hyervelocity solid projectiles as well as guided missile systems).
Ack. Again with the "word piling." Paragraphs are everyone's friend. Use them and be well.
I will again state that what you have written in jibberish. Nevertheless, I will make an attempt to respond after putting your words through my HAL9000 Translator v.2.0.
:::buzzing, beeping, etc:::
Ok. By point, then:
1.) Untrue. While first hand knowledge is always preferable, it is not the only absolute perspective from which to gain understanding. In fact, you could make a very good argument that a similarly myopic perspective would hinder full understanding.
For example, if you attend a hockey game and sit right up against the glass, its neat and fun and you can impress the dame on your arm. But... you cant see whats going on. You need to be in the mezzanine level to really watch the ice.
By the same token, there are countless, first-hand accounts from Allied pilots about the Fw-190's "superior" turning ability. Today, we know these claims to be incorrect due to mathematical impossibility. All you need is a calculator and the appropriate inputs which, in that case (simplified), would be weight and wing area.
2.) Untrue. Im am unsure to which "historical documents" you are referring because you have not cited sources, but the fundamentals of air combat have remained the same since, in the words of Chuck Yeager, "...the first idiot brought a pistol with him, decided to shoot at the other idiot, and ruined a perfectly good thing."
There might be a difference between us with respect to the definition of "fundamentals." You cite technology as your primary example of a catalyst for change. While technology alters the ability and the means, the end is always the same. From the first bloke to take a pistol into the cockpit to Luke Skywalker's X-Wing, the fundamental rule (in reality) is to approach without detection, with every conceivable advantage, and to end the "fight" before one begins.
Technology does not change this fundamental. Whether you are diving out of the sun or firing a missile beyond the radar detection range of your target, you are still approaching unseen, with every attainable advantage, and ending the fight before it becomes one.
You really don't understand the concept of "context" do you?...in the "context" that the words "little kid" were written, I was suggesting that anyone who feels the need to complain about or ridicule someone for something as trivial as a head on attack is acting childish.
I understand the concept of context quite well. Contextually speaking, it is entirely possible that you do not understand the concept of satire.
You may and you have...though I have yet to see any sort of sound advice in this thread directed toward myself...it's all opinion...there is no good or bad, it's just opinion...and I never get "emotionally charged" over anything as trivial as what happens in a video game...unlike a large number of the people around here...it's actually quite humorous.
We agree on something! This is humorous.
-
i see your point. i was thinking farther along in the taking process.....the point where there's only a few buildings left, and troops inbound...or already there.
now, don't mis-intrepret me......i'm not defending the ho'er in any way shape or form........i was just throwing a possibility out there.
Hey, you can not defend it, or defend it all you like. No worries here.
I only wanted to point out that you don't need to like 1v1, fair fights, or anything of the sort to benefit from trying to avoid a head on merge. It's just not a pragmatic first tactic regardless of how you enjoy this game, be it 1v1's, base-taking, lone wolfing, or hording.
-
Oh you know what, thank you for letting me know I'm misguided since I haven't played AH for as long as you have...I tend to forget that one has to be a 10 year veteran armchair cyber ace pilot to be able to form a valid opinion...forgive me for not bowing down to the supreme level of greatness around here...<whatever>
*Snip*
I hope you're either an amazing player, or content at mediocrity, because with this attitude, you'll soon burn your bridges towards assistance.
-
Whether you've got 10,000+ or 10+ replies to your nic here I think a lot of you are incredibly rude and insulting to each other - ALL of ya should step back - take a breath and think whether you'd get away with these sort of antics verbally face to face.
It's like being in a kindergarten sand box.
<looks around> Oh - this IS a kiddy's sand box! :rofl
Carry on eh!
-
I hope you're either an amazing player, or content at mediocrity, because with this attitude, you'll soon burn your bridges towards assistance.
Sorry Vudak, nothing personal to you but, "assistance" is one thing, stale overbearing assinine opinion is another...which one do you see most in abundance on just this thread alone?
I'm amazingly happily mediocre, but then I'm not a points hound nor am I looking for any virtual medals/commendations.
-
Along with experience comes knowledge. Those that do not want to partake of that knowledge are welcome to continue down a long path of mistakes that were made by many others for years and years. Those that chose to partake of the knowledge of others will find they will improve at a rapid pace.
You have to crawl before you walk. You'll learn more about walknig from someone who has walked than you will from another that is crawling.
Some like gyrene tend to belittle themselves for their lack of experience. There is no reason for that as we all started somewhere. No one ever came on to anything and knew alot about it. The first step is putting your pride aside and asking questions. Next is to delve through the answers and use the ones you feel will help you.
Very simple actually.
-
Sorry Vudak, nothing personal to you but, "assistance" is one thing, stale overbearing assinine opinion is another...which one do you see most in abundance on just this thread alone?
I'm amazingly happily mediocre, but then I'm not a points hound nor am I looking for any virtual medals/commendations.
Gyrene,
Forgive me for paraphrasing you, but your first post read something (at least to me) along the lines of:
"It is better for me to take a HO shot than to give the enemy a chance of getting on my six."
People then, "suggested" ;) you try to take other steps. They didn't do it as nicely as they may have, sure, but it was "assistance" (Maybe with a healthy dose of the first three letters).
Suggesting that going for the HO on the merge is not usually a good idea is not an opinion. It is a fact. And the typing of the fact is "assistance."
:salute
-
Sorry Vudak, nothing personal to you but, "assistance" is one thing, stale overbearing assinine opinion is another...which one do you see most in abundance on just this thread alone?
I'm amazingly happily mediocre, but then I'm not a points hound nor am I looking for any virtual medals/commendations.
Im not agreeing with you nor am i, just realize that there is a point to where you need to man up and just agree to disagree and just let it go. Just fly the way that makes you happy, basically this whole argument is about what is the correct way to fight...there is no correct way to fight, but there is only one way to have fun...
and thats YOUR way...someones way of having fun is different than your way, just do it your way, if they dont like it then thats their problem its your money and your experience, not theirs.
-
And btw, the game does not make the gameplay, the players do. The players make the decision on how to interact and how to use their aircraft (including ACM), where the coding (which I will assume you've never seen any of...) is concrete, there are variables, but those variables are used depending on user input. There are 3 parts to any good code...
INPUT, CALCULATION, OUTPUT.
The user controls the input and the output, which is why the PLAYER is what makes gameplay, not the game itself.
I'll beg to differ - in a more civil tone other than what seems to be common here. :)
If I understand correctly; the issue of game technology affecting game play was raised. I for one believe it most certainly does.
If I may use the following as an example of such.
In the RL WWII during the LW the majority of operational/strategic bombing (not tactical) took place at altitudes far above game play here - B24's in the 18k to 24k levels and B17's and their escorts frequently flew at 30k+ ( you've all seen the numerous photos of bomber streams and the numerous contrails) Contrails DO NOT form below 30k!!!
I've played in 3 other major air sim games over the years and 20k to 30k flight patterns were not uncommon.
Not the case here. In the past week I've seen very few buffs above 15k and most below 10k if not lower.
Why??
Well for one thing there has been created a psycological "soft" ceiling by the game mechanics - the 15k altitude thin clouds. Even though there is absolutley no reason to not fly above them ( many will state they can see through them quite well) there has been created this "ceiling" that most will NOT go above even tho there is no reason not to.
I don't have a problem with this and see no fault in it but "game mechanics" can and DOES affect play.
I'm sure there are other examples
...just my opinion eh!
-
Contrails DO NOT form below 30k!!!
Contrails actually will form below 30k... They are temperature dependent, not altitude dependent.
http://asd-www.larc.nasa.gov/GLOBE/faq.html
-
-37F @ 30k
Perhaps at a lower alt if colder but not much lower - 2-3k maybe
Point is that's a LONG way above from 10k for operating buffs. WWII buffs rarely operated at the accpeted low levels we see here. It's all right - just has no relationship to what actually happened.
cheers eh!
-
-37F @ 30k
not all over the world, Europe in the 1940's had a colder climate than of today, and therefore contrails could form as low as 22K during the winter.
-
Sorry man but I have to disagree...the "quality of gameplay" is primarily dictated by the game itself...not the people...the players simply learn to use the various elements of the game to their own advantages...in an FPS it's character flexibility, simulated weapons and environment...in a flight sim it's simulated aircraft, simulated weapons and understanding the basics of simulated flight...
I'm willing to bet the percentage of real life combat experienced pilots playing this game is very slim...even then those who are combat experienced pilots are most likely jet age pilots...big difference in tactics and strategies from WWI to WWII to jet era...technology forced those changes.
Why is it that "old cyber aces" here as well as the "other flight sim" automatically assume you're the ultimate experts in aerial combat just because you've been playing a flight simulator for 10 or more years? Because you've read every book ever written on WWII aerial combat? Because you spent more money on your cyber flying hardware than you have on clothes in the past 10 years? All it proves is you know how to read and calibrate a joy stick. squeaking, moaning, whining, chiding, talking trash, etc...at people who don't immediately conform to your idea of how to fight in their cartoon planes only makes you look like a little kid.
I enjoy a good dogfight as much as anyone...but if I find myself in circumstances that dictate the expeditious dispatching of an opponent to improve my chances of survival...I'll take whatever shot is available...
For all you "expert uber cyber aces"...if you're that good...you should know how to outmaneuver someone who may end up ho'ing just so you don't have something to squeak about in the first place...
Sorry for hijacking your post Trigger.
Funny, I have yet to die in Aces High despite many many fights I've lost over the years. My survival is always assured unless the ceiling falls on me or I have a heart attack :)
-
LMFAO Saurdakar...you now have several people around my office scratching their heads... ^5 great attempt.
No, we just ask you kids to bow down to those who actually know what they're talking about, you, obviously, are not one of them.
So you're one of the resident "experts" in aerial combat...amazingly, I'm not impressed, should I be? I've learned more from real life pilots.
And btw, the game does not make the gameplay, the players do. The players make the decision on how to interact and how to use their aircraft (including ACM), where the coding (which I will assume you've never seen any of...) is concrete, there are variables, but those variables are used depending on user input. There are 3 parts to any good code...
INPUT, CALCULATION, OUTPUT.
The user controls the input and the output, which is why the PLAYER is what makes gameplay, not the game itself.
Also an expert in programming I see. Amazing how you associate "player interaction" with "quality of gameplay". Correct me if I'm wrong (as I'm sure you will), but you're saying that even if the game is unplayable due to the poor coding, the "quality of gameplay" is enhanced by the people who are playing it...makes one wonder why people complain about glitches and anomalies in video games.
I hope that one day your misguided little mind will mature enough to appreciate the sound of good advice that others who know more than you give. As someone once said...
"Learn from the mistakes others make, because life's too short to make them all yourself."
Ya know, if it weren't for that last little tidbit of actual good advice, I would question your IQ...but I'll be nice.
-
Maybe we should just let this die. Some are content to argue just for the sake of it. Let them be content in their ignorance and suckage. Some people just don't want help. I am always amused by those new people who come in here and somehow know more than people who have been here for years. Their bleating make me chuckle. In a few short months they will be gone, moved on to project their unhappiness onto another group of gamers/simmers. Sure we must suffer them for a while, at least there is another target in the virtual air for a while. Thank you Hitech, for the squelch command.
-
Suggesting that going for the HO on the merge is not usually a good idea is not an opinion. It is a fact. And the typing of the fact is "assistance."
:salute
Agreed Vudak... :aok :salute
Truth be told, I just enjoy pulling chains to see how much dung flies. :t
Maybe we should just let this die. Some are content to argue just for the sake of it. Let them be content in their ignorance and suckage. Some people just don't want help. I am always amused by those new people who come in here and somehow know more than people who have been here for years. Their bleating make me chuckle. In a few short months they will be gone, moved on to project their unhappiness onto another group of gamers/simmers. Sure we must suffer them for a while, at least there is another target in the virtual air for a while. Thank you Hitech, for the squelch command.
See...another example of someone who assumes that just because a person shows up on the scene here, they have no experience. Why is that? Just because we're not bowing down to your inflated ego?
Just FYI, so you don't make a love muffin out of yourself making erroneous assumptions again...I'm not a real life pilot, but I have learned from several real life pilots who had real life combat experience in WWII, Korea, and Vietnam...and I've been "playing" flight sims since Redbaron 3d after I got a copy from a real life Korean War USMC pilot (my former C.O.).
-
Contrails DO NOT form below 30k!!!
As long as you're in an area with the ground temperature is -40 degrees F or lower and with high humidity, contrails will form below 26,000ft. In Antartica and other places (Alaska, Siberia and central Canada), contrails will even form while the plane is idling if the conditions are just right. There have been cases were airports in those regions had be closed when low-level clouds (ice fog) composed of aircraft-generated ice crystals have proved persistent.
I've played in 3 other major air sim games over the years and 20k to 30k flight patterns were not uncommon.
Not the case here. In the past week I've seen very few buffs above 15k and most below 10k if not lower.
Why??
Well for one thing there has been created a psycological "soft" ceiling by the game mechanics - the 15k altitude thin clouds. Even though there is absolutley no reason to not fly above them ( many will state they can see through them quite well) there has been created this "ceiling" that most will NOT go above even tho there is no reason not to.
I don't know what major 3 online air sims you've played but the most common altitudes that players flew in the three that I've played (AW, WB and AH) were in the range of 10,000ft or lower. This was largely due to these games (AW and WB) being pay by the hour so a lot of players didn't want to waste money by spending unnecessary time climbing when they could be fighting instead.
ack-ack
-
Maybe we should just let this die. Some are content to argue just for the sake of it. Let them be content in their ignorance and suckage. Some people just don't want help. I am always amused by those new people who come in here and somehow know more than people who have been here for years. Their bleating make me chuckle. In a few short months they will be gone, moved on to project their unhappiness onto another group of gamers/simmers. Sure we must suffer them for a while, at least there is another target in the virtual air for a while. Thank you Hitech, for the squelch command.
+1
-
Maybe we should just let this die.
+1, particularly since Jester (the one I'm thinking of, anyway) has yet to respond in nine pages of posts. Fizzle out, pointless thread...
-
LMFAO Saurdakar...you now have several people around my office scratching their heads... ^5 great attempt.
Maybe they are wondering why youre not working?
Truth be told, I just enjoy pulling chains to see how much dung flies. :t
Last bastion of BBS defense.
Just FYI, so you don't make a love muffin out of yourself making erroneous assumptions again...I'm not a real life pilot...
Just FYI, so you dont make a love muffin out of yourself, making erroneous assumptions again... many of us are.
When you are ready to learn, we are more than willing to teach.
-
Maybe we should just let this die. Some are content to argue just for the sake of it. Let them be content in their ignorance and suckage. Some people just don't want help.
Yep, some people are just happy wallowing in the gutter of mediocrity. No skin off my back since I know if I ever run into gyrene81 that I have what will amount to essentially a free kill for me.
ack-ack
-
As long as you're in an area with the ground temperature is -40 degrees F or lower and with high humidity, contrails will form below 26,000ft. In Antartica and other places (Alaska, Siberia and central Canada), contrails will even form while the plane is idling if the conditions are just right. There have been cases were airports in those regions had be closed when low-level clouds (ice fog) composed of aircraft-generated ice crystals have proved persistent.
I don't know what major 3 online air sims you've played but the most common altitudes that players flew in the three that I've played (AW, WB and AH) were in the range of 10,000ft or lower. This was largely due to these games (AW and WB) being pay by the hour so a lot of players didn't want to waste money by spending unnecessary time climbing when they could be fighting instead.
ack-ack
Maybe so in Antartica / Canada and others - I'm only referring to western Europe - and the exact/fluctuating level of contrails is miles away from the point of my post - that was only as an aside from my point of game tech affecting game play.
It must be a long time since you've been in WB's - for quite some time you rarely see the pony mafia below 20k and S3 action is frequently in the 25k to 35k level weekly( if it at all concerns strategic bombing). Started out in AW in '86 - Atari ST1040 c/w 12" screen and mouse LOL and FHWB 2.77 for a few years too.
Only been here for a few weeks but AHII is MILES ahead of the competition - It has an active community (head bashing aside lol) and terrific flight modelling from what I've seen so far. Hoping this is the last place I'll have to hang my hat - pleasure to meet you all.
cheers eh!
-
MA flying is not historical in the least and you will only be met with frustration if you try to fly historically there.
I fly in the MA simply for the thrill of the fight (whether that be 1v1 or diving in and out of a giant red blob with a few squadies and racking up kills), not worrying much about score/living/dieing etc.
FSO is a completely different matter however and it is most likely the reason I still play the game. If you can get signed up for the next event I would encourage you do so.
-
Maybe so in Antartica / Canada and others - I'm only referring to western Europe - and the exact/fluctuating level of contrails is miles away from the point of my post - that was only as an aside from my point of game tech affecting game play.
In theory, if the conditions are met then you'd have the same thing in Western Europe. As someone said, it's based on temperature and not altitude but the conditions have to be there for it to happen.
It must be a long time since you've been in WB's - for quite some time you rarely see the pony mafia below 20k and S3 action is frequently in the 25k to 35k level weekly( if it at all concerns strategic bombing). Started out in AW in '86 - Atari ST1040 c/w 12" screen and mouse LOL and FHWB 2.77 for a few years too.
Yeah, it's been a long time since I've played WB. I left shortly after HiTech sold it to Wild Bill, which was back around '98 or so. Since at the time WB was still primarily charge by the hour, it was actually rare to find fights above 10,000ft. Same with AW when I first started (back in '93), since people were paying up to $12 an hour to play they'd rather spend that time fighting then climbing and again rarely saw planes above 10,000ft. When AW went to unlimited play, the 'glass ceiling' disappeared and fights got higher.
ack-ack
-
So you're one of the resident "experts" in aerial combat...amazingly, I'm not impressed, should I be? I've learned more from real life pilots.
No, I'm quite a ways away from an expert, but I would say I know more than most. I've learned most of my information from real pilots as well, both combat and private.
Also an expert in programming I see. Amazing how you associate "player interaction" with "quality of gameplay". Correct me if I'm wrong (as I'm sure you will), but you're saying that even if the game is unplayable due to the poor coding, the "quality of gameplay" is enhanced by the people who are playing it...makes one wonder why people complain about glitches and anomalies in video games.
That, I am. C#, PHP, various scripts/action scripts.
Here's the definition I've got for gameplay
Gameplay includes all player experiences during the interaction with game systems, especially formal games. Proper use is coupled with reference to "what the player does".
and as far as I know, there is more interaction with other players than there are glitches, that there should be enough to show why what the player does affect gameplay more than the coding. I think you're thinking of Game Mechanics.
Ya know, if it weren't for that last little tidbit of actual good advice, I would question your IQ...but I'll be nice.
No worries, we've all been questioning yours.
-
I do find it entertaining that a thread designed to settle an argument has spawned 120+ replies worth of arguments. :)
-
I do find it entertaining that a thread designed to settle an argument has spawned 120+ replies worth of arguments. :)
Isn't it always that way?
-
Isn't it always that way?
Is not :furious :)
-
Maybe they are wondering why youre not working?
Actually they were trying to figure decipher what you wrote...it was funny.
Last bastion of BBS defense.
Actually this isn't a bbs any longer...but ok.
Just FYI, so you dont make a love muffin out of yourself, making erroneous assumptions again... many of us are.
You missed the point, I don't assume on way or the other...the presumption is that approximately 15% +/- 3 of the general active population here has actual flight experience and of that, perhaps 25% +/- 5 has combat experience in a fighter of some sort.
When you are ready to learn, we are more than willing to teach.
Been ready as long as the respect is mutual.
-
the presumption is that approximately 15% +/- 3 of the general active population here has actual flight experience and of that, perhaps 25% +/- 5 has combat experience in a fighter of some sort.
I'd wager big cash that those estimations are really really high. The 15% with flight experience... Maybe, but I doubt it is anywhere near that... The 25% of those folks having actual combat experience is insanely high in my opinion.
But none of that really is important in regards to the original post of this thread.
-
I'd wager big cash that those estimations are really really high. The 15% with flight experience... Maybe, but I doubt it is anywhere near that... The 25% of those folks having actual combat experience is insanely high in my opinion.
But none of that really is important in regards to the original post of this thread.
i flew combat with my r/c zagi...does that count?
:noid :rofl
-
Maybe we should just let this die. Some are content to argue just for the sake of it. Let them be content in their ignorance and suckage. Some people just don't want help. I am always amused by those new people who come in here and somehow know more than people who have been here for years. Their bleating make me chuckle. In a few short months they will be gone, moved on to project their unhappiness onto another group of gamers/simmers. Sure we must suffer them for a while, at least there is another target in the virtual air for a while. Thank you Hitech, for the squelch command.
Yup.