Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Magnus on October 24, 2009, 02:45:29 PM
-
I think some will find it fun and new.
I voted for the Korea war plane set and arena. Here are just a short list.
Just a thought and my 2 cents from a paying customer. :salute
Korean War
(CV = Aircraft Carrier supported)
U.S. aircraft
F9F Panther - jet - CV
F80 - jet
F84 - jet
F86 - jet
F-94 Starfire - jet
F2H Banshee - jet - CV
F-82 Twin Mustang
F4U's - FG -1 Corsair - CV
F7F - Tigercat
F8F - Bearcat - CV
A-1 Skyraider - CV
P47D's thru N models
P-51 Mustang
T-6 Texan
PB4Y-2 Privateer
P-2 Neptune
B-29
A-26 Invader
C-124 Globemaster II
C-119 Flying Boxcar
Helicopters
Sikorsky H-19
Sikorsky H-5
Westland Dragonfly
OH-23 Raven
Britain
Gloster Meteor - jet
Super marine Spitfire - CV
Hawker Sea Fury - CV
Chinese / Russian / North Korean
Ilyushin IL-10
Yak 3
Yak 15 - jet
La-11
LA 160 - jet
Mig9 - jet
Mig15 - jet
Mig 17 - jet
-
no thank-you never been interested in jets, never will be.
-
A Korean planeset just doesn't do it for me.
-
I think some will find it fun and new.
I voted for the Korea war plane set and arena. Here are just a short list.
Just a thought and my 2 cents from a paying customer. :salute
Korean War
(CV = Aircraft Carrier supported)
U.S. aircraft
F9F Panther - jet - CV
F80 - jet
F84 - jet
F86 - jet
F-94 Starfire - jet
F2H Banshee - jet - CV
F-82 Twin Mustang
F4U's - FG -1 Corsair - CV
F7F - Tigercat
F8F - Bearcat - CV
A-1 Skyraider - CV
P47D's thru N models
P-51 Mustang
T-6 Texan
PB4Y-2 Privateer
P-2 Neptune
B-29
A-26 Invader
C-124 Globemaster II
C-119 Flying Boxcar
Helicopters
Sikorsky H-19
Sikorsky H-5
Westland Dragonfly
OH-23 Raven
Britain
Gloster Meteor - jet
Super marine Spitfire - CV
Hawker Sea Fury - CV
Chinese / Russian / North Korean
Ilyushin IL-10
Yak 3
Yak 15 - jet
La-11
LA 160 - jet
Mig9 - jet
Mig15 - jet
Mig 17 - jet
MIG-17's didn't see action in the Korean Conflict.. I don't think P-47's did either..
Anyhow, I'd much rather see them improve what we've already got.... There are models in the game that still have Octagonal front ends, for heaven's sake!!
-
NO
-
I voted for the Korea war plane set and arena.
:huh was or is there a voting going on? If so, I vote NO!
Well, I know that jet sims are fun (I like "Wings over Vietnam")...but there is no match for dogfighting like you can do right now in AH. Maybe the WWI arena will push this to the edge, but definitely not a Korean arena.
SF
-
Bulgogi! Yummmmmmmmmmmmmmmm :cool:
-
This game is based on WWII not Korea....no to the jets.
-
This game is based on WWII not Korea....no to the jets.
Apparently you don't read the news on the website page as they are adding a WWI arena so your statement that this game is based on WWII is no longer true.
All the Best...
Jay
awDoc1
-
"In" before the lock :noid
-
Apparently you don't read the news on the website page as they are adding a WWI arena so your statement that this game is based on WWII is no longer true.
All the Best...
Jay
awDoc1
Aces High is still WWII based. They are just trying the WWI bit for some that for some reason came to a WWII game wanting to play WWI. Go figure.
-
Aces High is still WWII based. They are just trying the WWI bit for some that for some reason came to a WWII game wanting to play WWI. Go figure.
I didn't mean to ruffle your feathers Shuffler. AirWarrior was recognized as a WWII air simulation but had a WWI and Korea arena but we all just thought of it as a WWII game, I was just being sarcastic in my response. I know that Aces High II is a "WWII" game that will have a variant. I'm excited that HTC is expanding the horizons of the game and don't really care if it goes forward or backward in history for arenas, as long as we DO have a WWII arena.
All the Best...
Jay
awDoc1
-
I remember f86 v mig 15.. in AW.. it was a bore.
It's like 262 vs 262 in the game we have now. long and drawn out.
-
no. go play flight simulator for jets.
-
I'd love jets
-
I think it would be a HUGE mistake for HTC to limit themselves to just WW2. I am confident that they will add a WW1 component soon, and I would be willing to bet that eventually a Korean war component will be part of the AH evolution. I do not know what the creators of AH think about modern weapons systems and avionics modeling but I would be willing to bet they would seriously consider a Vietnam component at "some point in the future". Who knows they may live long enough to do modern air warfare.....that is unless they are planning on pulling the plug on AH once the creators get old and die. Who knows......
:salute
-
Aces High is still WWII based. They are just trying the WWI bit for some that for some reason came to a WWII game wanting to play WWI. Go figure.
Ah not completely true. I am sure alot came for the dogfights and adding a WWI arena or a later one only enhances the playabilty.
I never saw ACE's HIGH as a WWII simulator but a flight simulator with some other enhancements to help the air combat. I think HTC stated that he wanted to build the best flight simulator of its kind. If I am wrong Im sure someone will let me know.
-
MIG-17's didn't see action in the Korean Conflict.. I don't think P-47's did either..
Anyhow, I'd much rather see them improve what we've already got.... There are models in the game that still have Octagonal front ends, for heaven's sake!!
yes,p47n's did see action in korea in the very begining,along with p51s which were changed to f51s and f4us.
they were used for ground support,dive bombing vehicles,straffing troops
but im with everyone else,jet on jet plane set would be long and boring,you think the mustang is runner.
i could see it now,chasing mig-15s for 3 sectors just to have em ack hug,no thanks.
-
Bugolgi is good, bibimbop is better, but Dog takes the crown from the burger king. Anyone interested in some Soju in the mail? send me a pm :aok :salute
not right now but +1 for a Korean War plane set in the future once the WW2 plane set is finished
-
Ah not completely true. I am sure alot came for the dogfights and adding a WWI arena or a later one only enhances the playabilty.
So you dont think there will be vulching, pick and running, and just plain running in the WW-1 forum?
Tho overall I agree. For dogfighting WW-1 makes more sense. I have no real interest in it but that doesnt mean others wont like it and it shows a vision. Besides you cant judge anything right now.
-
I think including Korea it would be an interesting idea but agree there could be some issues regarding mixing props and jets. As for jet being the death of ACM, that's just crazy. Korea was the time when most of the modern theories of ACM such as energy fighting were finally recognized and developed. Jets rapidly evolved after WWII but during Korea the improvements were focused more on the airframe and engine technology rather than weapon systems. They were better jets but they still had WWII era weapons (with a single exception) so ACM remained the primary means to achieve an air-to-air kill (get on his six and gun his brains out). It may be a good idea to consider a Korean JET only arena to minimize the differential in aircraft speeds and preclude excessive hit and run tactics.
-
Mace2004,
The problem is that those engine improvements, coupled with the long, slow turns for 500+mph combat make a lot of classic tactics almost unusable. Bleeding the E out of a F-86 or MiG-15 while flying one of them is very difficult due to the increased power to weight ratios and the decreased ability to apply pressure.
Korea would not be a good arena for ACM leading to a kill. Almost all kills would be ambush kills where the victim never saw his killer.
-
The Korean War was the last pure gun air to air fight. Flying Mig 15s vs F86s would be a great experience and SEA events with a good planeset would be very entertaining.
-
I do believe that alot of American Korean war pilots were WWII vets that had plenty of experience in air to air combat (dogfighting)! They still used the 50 cal on most of the jet birds! All in all adding another arena would be logical later on of course! I do agree with others that would like to see the WWII planeset to be completed before adding either WWI or Korean war arenas! Of course I don't make those decisions even though I'm a paying customer!
-
Ok.. A concern in regards to a Korean War arena is this:
In a prop fighter, around 350-400mph, it's pretty easy to black out if you turn just a tad too tight..
Korean era jets will be doing at least 450mph while "fighting".. I can only imagine what a turn
at around 600mph would be like.. Instant black out....?
Also, I dabbled in AW for a time and the Korean era was exactly as described....Boring..
-
I think some will find it fun and new.
I voted for the Korea war plane set and arena.
Just a thought and my 2 cents from a paying customer. :salute
Thats a big 'ol "no go" on that one....
-
The problem is that those engine improvements, coupled with the long, slow turns for 500+mph combat make a lot of classic tactics almost unusable. Bleeding the E out of a F-86 or MiG-15 while flying one of them is very difficult due to the increased power to weight ratios and the decreased ability to apply pressure.
This is incorrect. First, even with the improved engines none of the Korean War vintage fighters came even close to a 1:1 thrust to weight ratio and bleeding is exactly what they did. Yes, all of the jets were faster than their contemporary prop-driven counterparts which is why I suggested that limiting the arena to jets would limit the hit and run tactics but, since all the jets performed in the same speed range, two opposing jets would have no greater ability to shoot and scoot than we see now with the props.
Second, jets are governed by the same aerodynamic properties as props. Turning above corner velocity results in reduced turn performance (called "arcing") and you still get max instantaneous turn at corner, not at 500+mph. Combine that with the fact that older jets bled like stuck pigs, nose low turns were required to sustain corner velocity and high speed fights rapidly degenerated into slow ones. Sound familiar? It should as it's not really any different than what we see now. That's not to say that there are no differences of course.
Props are more efficient as airspeed is reduced while jets are more efficient as airspeed increases. This changes the dynamics of the fight but the fundamentals remain the same. From a dynamics perspective sustained turn speeds (Ps=0) are much closer to corner velocity because the jet engines (especially non-afterburning ones like in Korea) require ram air to generate the thrust required to sustain best level turn performance while props tend to have best sustained turn performance near stall. That said, corner velocity remains defined by the intersection of the lift limit with load limit. Jets therefore have a smaller optimum performance range but the maneuvers and goals remain exactly the same. Barrel rolls, lag rolls, lead/lag/pure pursuit, high and low yo-yos, one-circle/two-circle fights, etc., etc., are the same whether you're in a jet or prop. Actually, the concepts of energy and angles fights came out of jet combat in Korea, not WWII. That hasn't stopped us from applying those concepts to WWII fighters.
There really ends up being only a few noticeable differences. Forward quarter closure is much higher meaning you have to "think" farther out. There can be a smaller window for high angle snapshots. The biggest difference would be the "size" of the fight. Even though the same principles apply, jets are still generally faster than props. This means larger turn radius equating to a "larger" fight. But, since the same occurs for both jets and the speeds are still similar to the WWII arenas (i.e., subsonic) this won't have a major effect.
The major differences in ACM occurred after the invention of air-to-air missiles and radar. This had a major effect on ACM because you couldn't just extend away because you'd receive a heater enema. Beyond Visual Range missiles meant the ACM environment expanded and sudden death from a BVR bandit became a concern. Of course, none of that applies in Korea.
Korea would not be a good arena for ACM leading to a kill. Almost all kills would be ambush kills where the victim never saw his killer.
This is no different than either WWII or WWI. Most kills have always been from the unobserved Bandit.
-
Korea areana might bring me back quicker if ever added
-
Mace I fully understand what you are saying here, and I'm in no position to disagree with your points. However let me ask you the the following -- Are 262 vs 262 fights in any way enjoyable to you? Cause to me it's like watching paint dry. Give me a couple jugs or 109s any day of the week.
-
The Korean War was the last pure gun air to air fight. Flying Mig 15s vs F86s would be a great experience and SEA events with a good planeset would be very entertaining.
Yep, HTC could pull off a Korean Theater no problem and it would be fun as hell.
-
I think some will find it fun and new.
I voted for the Korea war plane set and arena. Here are just a short list.
Just a thought and my 2 cents from a paying customer. :salute
Korean War
(CV = Aircraft Carrier supported)
U.S. aircraft
F9F Panther - jet - CV
F80 - jet
F84 - jet
F86 - jet
F-94 Starfire - jet
F2H Banshee - jet - CV
F-82 Twin Mustang
F4U's - FG -1 Corsair - CV
F7F - Tigercat
F8F - Bearcat - CV
A-1 Skyraider - CV
P47D's thru N models
P-51 Mustang
T-6 Texan
PB4Y-2 Privateer
P-2 Neptune
B-29
A-26 Invader
C-124 Globemaster II
C-119 Flying Boxcar
Helicopters
Sikorsky H-19
Sikorsky H-5
Westland Dragonfly
OH-23 Raven
Britain
Gloster Meteor - jet
Super marine Spitfire - CV
Hawker Sea Fury - CV
Chinese / Russian / North Korean
Ilyushin IL-10
Yak 3
Yak 15 - jet
La-11
LA 160 - jet
Mig9 - jet
Mig15 - jet
Mig 17 - jet
No F8Fs saw combat in Korea.
No P-47s saw combat in Korea.
None of the F4U-1 series saw combat in Korea.
No MiG-17s saw combat in Korea.
Plus, you left out a few aircraft that did...
My regards,
Widewing
-
yes,p47n's did see action in korea in the very begining,along with p51s which were changed to f51s and f4us.
they were used for ground support,dive bombing vehicles,straffing troops
but im with everyone else,jet on jet plane set would be long and boring,you think the mustang is runner.
i could see it now,chasing mig-15s for 3 sectors just to have em ack hug,no thanks.
Actually, you're dead wrong... No P-47's saw action in Korea.. I'd really like to see where you got this info from....
P-51, F-51: semantics.... :lol
Anyhow, while it is widely agreed that the Jug would've probably been the better choice for the Mustang's role, P-51's were
apparently more abundant....
-
Mace I fully understand what you are saying here, and I'm in no position to disagree with your points. However let me ask you the the following -- Are 262 vs 262 fights in any way enjoyable to you? Cause to me it's like watching paint dry. Give me a couple jugs or 109s any day of the week.
Have you ever been in a KOTH 262 round? Like Mace says its still alot alike just with some differences which would make it fun, maybe even better....I have fought 262s 1v1 and it was much difference just the distance from which your opponent was from you seemed to be increased. I waited for my opponents to bleed E to get a shot then once they did I would dump E in a reverse to get the over shoot. Its really not different at all with any other aircraft going against similar aircraft
-
Mace2004,
You didn't understand what I wrote.
-
Mace2004,
You didn't understand what I wrote.
I understand exactly what you wrote. If what you wrote is not what you meant then you need to clairify yourself because what you wrote is incorrect. "Classic tactics" are completely relevant to jet tactics except where development of the weapon systems has expanded the envelope.
-
Actually, you're dead wrong... No P-47's saw action in Korea.. I'd really like to see where you got this info from....
P-51, F-51: semantics.... :lol
Anyhow, while it is widely agreed that the Jug would've probably been the better choice for the Mustang's role, P-51's were
apparently more abundant....
read a book now and then,Battle Hymn by Col. Dean E. Hess USAF retired who started out flyin 47s late ww2 and who went on to korea and at the very start was in 47s training korean pilots in the 47s til the f51s came along,and yes they were used in combat to hit ground targets.
he was also the person,along with the guys in his outfit, who got Operation Kiddy Kar started,taking orphans and getting them away from combat areas and raising funds to get them the things they needed to survive.
and btw the p51 name was changed to the f51
-
No F8Fs saw combat in Korea.
No P-47s saw combat in Korea.
None of the F4U-1 series saw combat in Korea.
No MiG-17s saw combat in Korea.
Plus, you left out a few aircraft that did...
My regards,
Widewing
The Mig17 made production in 1951 -52 ....correct.... was not introduce in mass quantities to the Korean war.
I am sorry I put up F4U-1 ...maybe should of referenced to F4U-4 / -5
F4U-1 / -5 (http://www.vectorsite.net/avf4u.html)
Signal squadron books (http://79thfg.low-ping.com/user/59132/WWII%20-%20Planes/F4U/vought_f4u_corsair.pdf) <-------But here is some F4U information
Show some links
:salute Magnus
-
UGH no more distractions from the WW II plan/vehicle set please....
-
I understand exactly what you wrote. If what you wrote is not what you meant then you need to clairify yourself because what you wrote is incorrect. "Classic tactics" are completely relevant to jet tactics except where development of the weapon systems has expanded the envelope.
And I didn't say otherwise. I said they were much harder to apply as the aircraft had much better thrust to weight ratios. I didn't claim the idiotic strawman you built of 1 to 1 thrust/weight ratios. It takes more time to come back around to the target (fact) and the target rebuilds his energy faster (fact) than in WWII piston engined fighters. The airframes may have been able to come around just as fast as Spitfires and Zeros, I don't know, but at those speeds the pilots could not come around that fast.
So what you have is a environment in which there are only two competitive fighters and defense is vastly easier in relation to offense if you know your opponent is there.
Most kills would be ambush kills.
Korea is a poor environment for a MMO fight sim. WWI and WWII both offer far better balance with multiple units being effective and players being able to have a shot at learning by trial and error. WWII also offers aircraft that are capable of applying all classic tactics.
-
I'm with Yeager on this.
Just because a few need some metamuxel in their diets doesn't mean
there 's no interest in the current player base or outside of it.
Fortunately HTC is going to do what they want to and WWI aircraft
are coming in spite of the whining, spamming tantrums of a couple of
posters. Some day perhaps there'll be a Korean era offering.
-
I would hardly be in the MA if there was a jet arena
-
None of you remember the Korean War Jet Night we did in the MA? :noid
(http://hitechcreations.com/pyro/f86_2.jpg)
-
:huh
-
jets..... :yawn:
-
"Korean War Jet Night ....?"
my side split. That's brutal.
-
None of you remember the Korean War Jet Night we did in the MA? :noid
(http://hitechcreations.com/pyro/f86_2.jpg)
Don't tease me..
-
M was there an actual vote on the opening of a new era arena I missed? :(
-
None of you remember the Korean War Jet Night we did in the MA? :noid
(http://hitechcreations.com/pyro/f86_2.jpg)
That's hot.
Korean war just doesn't have enough competitive air frames to keep me interested,,,, as opposed to WW1.
-
That's hot.
Korean war just doesn't have enough competitive air frames to keep me interested,,,, as opposed to WW1.
Migs vs sabres.........that would keep me interested more then dodging 51s. LA, and Spits.....
-
Would love to fly a Sabre. Nice screenie Pyro :lol
-
M was there an actual vote on the opening of a new era arena I missed? :(
vote?
-
Closing speeds too high, gunnery here too bad.
Jet on Jet combat especially with guns is split second snapshots, with maneuvering barely within visual range. You don't saddle up at 400.
Collisions would abound, as folks can't compensate. There goes your pretty little Sabre perks, from some noob diving in a -17 at just about the speed of sound.
99.9% of you would get frustrated beyond compare. Again, it's been done before, and it was horrible. You'd have a whole arena, with two competitive airframes. Yay. <Snore>
Whatever, if it makes people happy, go for it. But, as I've said before, over-diversifying one's product has been the bane of many a company. Many of the people saying they're not interested in either WW1 or Korea have already seen it once. But, it seems, history is doomed to repeat itself over and over again.
This mysticism with jets by folks that can't fly a spitfire in the MA's is surreal.
<shrug>
-
None of you remember the Korean War Jet Night we did in the MA? :noid
(http://hitechcreations.com/pyro/f86_2.jpg)
I hope thats a development screenshot and not a photoshop.
I'd like to see a Korean arena. It wouldn't need all the planes listed in the OP. Add the F-86 and the Mig 15. Pull the P-51D and a few other existing models in and it's started.
Down the road it would be nice to see a few of the later aircraft like the F8F, A26 and others added.
I just don't see expansion of the game as a bad thing at all. More planes, more eras, more arenas = more options, more fun.
-
Still questionable why anyone interested in WWI or korea would go to a WWII game to play.
Your going to spread it out.. how about nam or balloon wars.
Hope what most of us came here for does not stagnate again!
-
Lol this is just like reading the reasoning why the F-4 Phantom was originally built without a gun :)
"Jets are too fast" "they cannot turn" "there's no ACM involved anymore" :rofl
I'd love to fly Aces High Korea and all the special events, which could be built around those planes... drooool :pray
-
Count me in!
-
Migs vs sabres.........that would keep me interested more then dodging 51s. LA, and Spits.....
You mean Sabres vs Sabres, right? Few people would take the MiG I expect.
Lol this is just like reading the reasoning why the F-4 Phantom was originally built without a gun :)
"Jets are too fast" "they cannot turn" "there's no ACM involved anymore" :rofl
Actually, it is exactly not like that.
-
Still questionable why anyone interested in WWI or korea would go to a WWII game to play.
Your going to spread it out.. how about nam or balloon wars.
Hope what most of us came here for does not stagnate again!
Maybe they come here because they want to do this with other humans. Maybe other people are interested in other eras of air combat. Maybe the fact that the closest thing to the WWI arena on here is RoF. RoF is for all intents and purposes is like a late stage beta and it's beta testing period was like an alpha. On people wanting Korean war stuff, as far as I remember there hasn't been a good Korean war sim in a while. Instead of whining in every thread about your fear of stagnation, you should look at it this way. If the WWII MAs(all for of them) get stagnant maybe it would be a good time to take a break.
-
Allaire don't bother wasting the text on him. The many reasons why people would like
what's coming have been spelled out clearly by several folks but all he continues to do
is post negatively in order to derail the topic and kill any decent discussion.
But you are 100% right. People come her to "fly or" play against other people with
WWII aircraft and soon it can be with WWI aircraft. Simply because people came here
because HTC offered AH with it's WWII aircraft it would be shallow and myopic for
someone to think that many wouldn't also like a WWI (or Korea or Vietnam) venue.
I came for the WWII aircraft, got bored with the fantasy MA thing and stopped "flying"
online to await CT. It never happened. But now WWI aircraft are coming and it'll be fun.
Maybe enjoyable enough to stick around until the MA fantasy setup loses it's luster
again but by then maybe something nice and promising will be boiling in the pot.
-
Maybe they come here because they want to do this with other humans. Maybe other people are interested in other eras of air combat. Maybe the fact that the closest thing to the WWI arena on here is RoF. RoF is for all intents and purposes is like a late stage beta and it's beta testing period was like an alpha. On people wanting Korean war stuff, as far as I remember there hasn't been a good Korean war sim in a while. Instead of whining in every thread about your fear of stagnation, you should look at it this way. If the WWII MAs(all for of them) get stagnant maybe it would be a good time to take a break.
Now try to answer thwe question. You failed in this post.
If you think every post you do not agree with is a whine.. I feel very sorry for you. Maybe some day when your old enough you find out how to have a discussion.
-
I have given several reasons why someone interested in WWI and/or Korea would be play AH. Not only that but you have resort to a personal attack with your comment.
Maybe some day when your old enough you find out how to have a discussion.
You have nothing to say about the WWI arena except for negative comments, this is the reason that I said you were whining. I am done with this toejam.
-
I do like the idea of a Korean arena. The WW1 planeset is indicative of HTC vision to continually improve their sim.
In this new market with more focus on MMO's, there may be a competitor who will come along and offer a complete World War experience and do a good job of it. Seeing that HTC are continually updating/adding to Aces High is a good sign.
-
"MIG-17's didn't see action in the Korean Conflict.. I don't think P-47's did either.."
And neither did the Spitfire; it was the Griffon-engined contra-prop Seafire FR.47 that 800 Naval Air Squadron flew into action from HMS Triumph in the first few weeks of the Korean War.
Splice the mainbrace!
:cheers:
-
Shuffler they play here because this is what they have.
Granted, the WWII audience is bigger, the war lasted longer, there is a hugely diverse planeset.
All of which helps keep people happy.
but I for one started out flying WWI planes, and in many respects still prefer them.
So yes, for WWI arena, I'm bouncing around doing the happy dance.
Eventually Korea? Shrug, sorry, doesn't turn my crank. La's and tiffys and 109k4's are plenty fast enough.
Not like there is anything that we say is going to have any effect one way or the other.
Its all firmly in HTC's pocket and they have their thumb tightly on the pulse of this community.
-
Still questionable why anyone interested in WWI or korea would go to a WWII game to play.
I came to an air combat game.
-
I have given several reasons why someone interested in WWI and/or Korea would be play AH. Not only that but you have resort to a personal attack with your comment. You have nothing to say about the WWI arena except for negative comments, this is the reason that I said you were whining. I am done with this soup.
If you think that is personal you need to grow some thicker skin. From your post I can only judge your fairly young and inexperienced in life.
I came here for WWII and do not wish it to be negatively affected by other endeavors.
With your last line I can see you stomping your feet and running out the door.
-
Shuffler they play here because this is what they have.
Granted, the WWII audience is bigger, the war lasted longer, there is a hugely diverse planeset.
All of which helps keep people happy.
but I for one started out flying WWI planes, and in many respects still prefer them.
So yes, for WWI arena, I'm bouncing around doing the happy dance.
Eventually Korea? Shrug, sorry, doesn't turn my crank. La's and tiffys and 109k4's are plenty fast enough.
Not like there is anything that we say is going to have any effect one way or the other.
Its all firmly in HTC's pocket and they have their thumb tightly on the pulse of this community.
I might point allair to this post as the way to do a discussion.
I agree it matters not what we want but what HT wants to do and what happens after that.
Well said Ghosth. I'm still concerned about WWII being stagnant again though.
-
I came to an air combat game.
And that's it in a nutshell. Having the option of WW I- through Korea is good thing in my opinion and I would bet more than a few share it.
-
And that's it in a nutshell. Having the option of WW I- through Korea is good thing in my opinion and I would bet more than a few share it.
not sayin i wouldnt play in that arena,but you guys know that opens a whole nuther can of worms leading up to radar guided missiles and sams
that would make things more than just flyin around and dogfighting,maybe not at the very begeining but eventually it would come to that.
-
If you've ever done a 163 battle thats what korea would be like. ;)
-
not sayin i wouldnt play in that arena,but you guys know that opens a whole nuther can of worms leading up to radar guided missiles and sams
that would make things more than just flyin around and dogfighting,maybe not at the very begeining but eventually it would come to that.
Well the good thing is you wouldn't be forced to play in that arena if it came to be. You could be fat and happy in props with out a thought of the other arena. Besides, you have the Thirdwire sims for that and I enjoy the hell out of them. And if some one makes another Korea sim I hope it's HTC because I know it would be made the way I would want it to be.
-
And you can run Korea in the voided AvA areana...
-
Trolling kind of late arent we candyass?
-
(http://www.candidz.com/forum/images/smilies/lock1.gif)
-
korean war = day i quit
-
Ill bite. Why?
-
i just want to fly the A-1 skyraider...
-
I vote yes
I'd MUCH rather have Korea than WW1
-
I vote yes as well. AH2 is a MMO air combat game. Don't see any technical issues, have successfully flown the 262 and 163 and hit stuff. (next time I will try using the guns).
Infidelz.
-
I vote yes
I'd MUCH rather have Korea than WW1
Because an arena with only two competitive airframes, of which one will be picked 75+% of the time, is a good idea.
-
Many here think that in a modern dogfight or near-modern like Korea the speeds are too high and they will not have any chance for a real dogfight. Dont think so. Here a vid of an actual dogfight between a HAF Mirage 2000 and an TuAF F-16. Speeds are quite normal and there fully ACM implemented. Speeds vary from 210 too 230 or 240 so i don't see any problem why F-86s against MiG-15s will not have the same kind of dogfight
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GG0vv3BqU8A (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GG0vv3BqU8A)
-
Many here think that in a modern dogfight or near-modern like Korea the speeds are too high and they will not have any chance for a real dogfight. Dont think so. Here a vid of an actual dogfight between a HAF Mirage 2000 and an TuAF F-16. Speeds are quite normal and there fully ACM implemented. Speeds vary from 210 too 230 or 240 so i don't see any problem why F-86s against MiG-15s will not have the same kind of dogfight
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GG0vv3BqU8A (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GG0vv3BqU8A)
Because the ones that decide to do that are meat on the table for the ones that decide to keep the airspeed above 500mph.
-
Because the ones that decide to do that are meat on the table for the ones that decide to keep the airspeed above 500mph.
And how is this any different from a lot of the current MA fights??
-
And how is this any different from a lot of the current MA fights??
The speed differential is not as lopsided and there are more than two planes that are competitive. The F-86 would be used for far more than 50% of the flights. If it was like the MA it would basically be F-86s vs F-86s. If it were done on historical sides it would be a bunch of F-86s looking for the one schmuck who upped a MiG-15.
-
Still questionable why anyone interested in WWI or korea would go to a WWII game to play.
Your going to spread it out.. how about nam or balloon wars.
Hope what most of us came here for does not stagnate again!
Same reason why a lot of us played in the WW1 and Korean War arenas in AW, it was fun. I don't recall anyone being against either of those arenas in AW because they weren't "WW2".
ack-ack
-
You mean Sabres vs Sabres, right? Few people would take the MiG I expect.
Actually, it is exactly not like that.
The MiG15 would be just as a popular ride as the F-86 would be. The MiG15 did outclass early F-86s in quite a few areas such as turn, climb and ceiling while the early F-86s were better in a dive. Things improved for the Sabre when the all-moving tailplane was introduced with the E model did things start to shift in the Sabre's direction. The F-86F-30 with the '6-3' wing things completely shift in the Sabre's direction and reversed pretty much all the advantages the MiG 15 had over the Sabre.
One thing for certain, the MiG 15 was a far more difficult plane to fly than the Sabre was, especially at low speeds with its very poor stall characteristics.
ack-ack
-
not sayin i wouldnt play in that arena,but you guys know that opens a whole nuther can of worms leading up to radar guided missiles and sams
that would make things more than just flyin around and dogfighting,maybe not at the very begeining but eventually it would come to that.
How does having jet combat in a Korean War arena open up a can of worms? You should take some time to read about the air conflict in Korea...no SAM missiles and no A2A missiles so that pretty much invalidates your 'fear'.
ack-ack
-
Trolling kind of late arent we candyass?
storchita was always a little on the slow side...
ack-ack
-
korean war = day i quit
Seriously? You'd be that much of a wuss and quit if a Korean War arena was added? If that's the case, then by all means, I hope we get that arena really soon so I can laugh at you before you cancel your account.
ack-ack
-
read a book now and then,Battle Hymn by Col. Dean E. Hess USAF retired who started out flyin 47s late ww2 and who went on to korea and at the very start was in 47s training korean pilots in the 47s til the f51s came along,and yes they were used in combat to hit ground targets.
he was also the person,along with the guys in his outfit, who got Operation Kiddy Kar started,taking orphans and getting them away from combat areas and raising funds to get them the things they needed to survive.
and btw the p51 name was changed to the f51
You should have someone that has basic reading comprehension skills read the book to you again so you can understand what it says.
Col. Dean E. Hess did not fly P-47s in Korea nor did ROKAF fly the P-47. Hess was the commander of 'Bout One' which was the USAAF operation to train ROK pilots in the F-51. Once the USAAF instructors deemed the ROKAF pilot ready, the USAAF instructors would then fly combat missions with them.
If you really did read the book or even watch the movie of the same name, you would have read that the only time Hess flew Thunderbolts was when he served in WW2 and flew P-47s over Europe in 1944.
At no time did the P-47 fly over Korea by any country. The USAAF deemed that the F-51 was more suitable for logistical reasons as the plane was both in the reserve AF units and with the Air National Guard. The P-47 by this time was only in the Air National Guard inventory and was no longer flown by regular USAAF units (reserve or active). During Korea, the P-47 was relegated to Air National Guard duty as an interceptor on the East Coast.
ack-ack
-
LOL ack ack on a roll. :aok
-
It's amazing how many people don't want other people to have the option to choose something that they don't want for themselves.
I don't like mustard because it reminds me of squishing caterpillars as a kid. It would be pretty retarded of me to say "Don't add mustard to your menu, this place is based on ketchup"
If it was added to the arena that concerns you, then it would concern you. Since we are discussing an arena that doesn't concern you... it doesn't concern you.
I know, it's hard to understand.
-
blabla
I know, it's hard to understand.
:huh
-
It's amazing how many people don't want other people to have the option to choose something that they don't want for themselves.
I don't like mustard because it reminds me of squishing caterpillars as a kid. It would be pretty retarded of me to say "Don't add mustard to your menu, this place is based on ketchup"
If it was added to the arena that concerns you, then it would concern you. Since we are discussing an arena that doesn't concern you... it doesn't concern you.
I know, it's hard to understand.
If you could -poof- it in without costing any developer time I'd have no problem with it, but you can't.
-
Amazing the propaganda people always have on the mind set that the F-86 would be the most dominant fighter.
Russian had way less combat aircraft in the war and yet when you look at the aircraft kill status they have more double digits of kills for amount of pilots in the war.
Also check the specification out on the Mig 15 ...... take a deep breath .......... now time to do your home work ..... time to read ..... :headscratch:
I also included some links of F-86 specifications
MIG 15 Aces of Korean War (http://www.acepilots.com/russian/rus_aces.html)
Quote from the linked article above ^^^^
Did differences in equipment explain the disparity? Probably not. Essentially the technological contest between the Soviet MiG-15 and the American F-86 Sabre was an even match. The MiG-15 studmuffinot was better than the F-86 in many aspects (superior climb rate, faster acceleration, more powerful weaponry) but the F-86 Sabre compensated that with more stable diving, a better gunsight, and a g-suit for their pilots, allowing them to resist the tremendous g-forces involved in dogfights. So, the edge were the men in the cockpits, and in the "Honcho Period" the Soviets had such slight edge. Quoting Chuck Yeager: "It's the man, not the machine".
Additionally, Korea was for the Russian MiG-15 pilots a "target-rich environment." In April-May 1951 there were only two regiments of MiG-15s in Manchuria, with a total of only 72 MiGs (despite the fantastic US reports which talked about 200 MiGs in China at that time). These six dozen MiGs faced about 700 UN aircraft, odds of 10 to 1. The arrival of the 3 regiments of the 303rd IAD reduced the odds to 4 to 1 by October 1951, but the Soviets actually never enjoyed the numerical superiority so often mentioned in US sources. By July 1953 the Russians had about 300 MiG-15s in the theater (plus a similar number of Chinese MiGs) against 1,000 UN aircraft (297 of them F-86E/Fs, plus a similar number of F-84s). Taking into account such figures, it is clear that the Russians always found the Korean skies full of American aircraft, and that's why scores of 15, 10 or 8 were not uncommon.
Mig 15 Specifications Link
(http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/mig-15-specs.htm)
Quote from above link ^^^^
Mig 15 "studmuffinot"
Specifications
Span 33 ft. 1 1/2 in.
Length 33 ft. 3 5/8 in.
Height 11 ft. 2 in.
Weight 11,270 lbs. max.
Armament Two 23mm cannons and one 37mm cannon, plus rockets or 2,000 lbs. of bombs
Engine VK-1 of 6,000 lbs. thrust (copy of British Rolls-Royce "Nene" engine)
Maximum speed 670 mph.
Cruising speed 525 mph.
Range 500 miles
Service Ceiling 51,000 ft.
F86 Aces of Korean War (http://www.acepilots.com/korea_aces.html)
F-86 Specification (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/f-86-specs.htm)
Quote from above link ^^^^^
F-86 "Sabre"
Specifications
Wing Span 35 feet, 11 inches
Length 37 feet, 6 inches
Height 14 feet, 8 inches
Weight 13,791 lbs. loaded
Armament Six .50-caliber machine guns and eight 5-inch rockets or 2,000 lbs. of bombs
Engine One General Electric
J47 engine with 5,200 lbs. of thrust
Cost $178,000
Maximum speed 685 mph
Cruising speed 540 mph
Range 1,200 miles
Service Ceiling 49,000 feet
Quoting Chuck Yeager: "It's the man, not the machine"
:salute
-
Someone get the "holy necro bump" picture in here quick!!!!!!!!
-
Magnus:
Many of the pilots flying against the US were also skilled ww2 veterans, so more than piloting skills were in action. The extraordinary disparity in kill ratio was a puzzle to even some of the American pilots who flew in Korea, enough so that one of them -- Col. John Boyd -- spent enormous time analyzing the problem.
And that led to one of the 20th century's most important conceptual advances in combat theory -- the OODA loop. Boyd imagined that in combat information was processed in a particular way. First the pilot would OBSERVE what was happening, then he needed to ORIENT that observation into context enough to decide what it meant. Only after that could he DECIDE what to do and then ACT on the decision. Success would require continuously passing through those stages, with the victory going to the pilot who could make the best, fastest decision.
Which leads to the biggest thing your stats left out....the Mig-15 had entirely manual, human powered controls, while the F86 had hydraulic assistence. That meant the US pilot could consistently get his plane into and through manuevers faster than his Godless Commie opponent, and get decisive advantages even when pilot skill was equal.
The OODA loop is the origin of the "speed kills" concept of air-ground combat underlying current US tactics. Move so fast that the enemy never gets a chance to orient, keep things changing so rapidly that you have steamrolled him before he knows you're even close.
The OODA loop became critical to ground combat theory in the last 15 years, to the point that I'm told Boyd is one of the few USAF officers to be honored with Globe and Anchor insignia being placed in his casket. I've also read that his portrait hangs in the USMC headquarters.
-
Mig 15 "studmuffinot"
:O
-
Stuff
All of that misses the point, which is that the vast majority of players will want to fly the USA's fighter and not the evil Commie fighter.
-
I want to play in Korea
:noid
-
Magnus:
Many of the pilots flying against the US were also skilled ww2 veterans, so more than piloting skills were in action. The extraordinary disparity in kill ratio was a puzzle to even some of the American pilots who flew in Korea, enough so that one of them -- Col. John Boyd -- spent enormous time analyzing the problem.
And that led to one of the 20th century's most important conceptual advances in combat theory -- the OODA loop. Boyd imagined that in combat information was processed in a particular way. First the pilot would OBSERVE what was happening, then he needed to ORIENT that observation into context enough to decide what it meant. Only after that could he DECIDE what to do and then ACT on the decision. Success would require continuously passing through those stages, with the victory going to the pilot who could make the best, fastest decision.
Which leads to the biggest thing your stats left out....the Mig-15 had entirely manual, human powered controls, while the F86 had hydraulic assistence. That meant the US pilot could consistently get his plane into and through manuevers faster than his Godless Commie opponent, and get decisive advantages even when pilot skill was equal.
The OODA loop is the origin of the "speed kills" concept of air-ground combat underlying current US tactics. Move so fast that the enemy never gets a chance to orient, keep things changing so rapidly that you have steamrolled him before he knows you're even close.
The OODA loop became critical to ground combat theory in the last 15 years, to the point that I'm told Boyd is one of the few USAF officers to be honored with Globe and Anchor insignia being placed in his casket. I've also read that his portrait hangs in the USMC headquarters.
Interesting, and I of course agree that anything that distracts from situational awareness and focus on the combat itself should be viewed as a major flaw.
Luckily, though, not a gram of any of that would be a part of how the Mig 15 or any other plane is flown in game.
-
Interesting, and I of course agree that anything that distracts from situational awareness and focus on the combat itself should be viewed as a major flaw.
Luckily, though, not a gram of any of that would be a part of how the Mig 15 or any other plane is flown in game.
Dont be so sure. THink about how the zero gets really stiff unresponsive controls at high speeds...which is about exactly what we'd see in a Mig-15 model, I suspect.
That the stiffness comes from lack of hydraulics rather than pure aerodynamics won't matter a bit when you're in a fight.
-
Mig 15 Aces of Korean War (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,276691.msg3491334.html#msg3491334)
Mig 15 Specifications Link (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/mig-15-specs.htm)
Quote from above link ^^^^
Mig 15 "studmuffinot"
Specifications
Span 33 ft. 1 1/2 in.
Length 33 ft. 3 5/8 in.
Height 11 ft. 2 in.
Weight 11,270 lbs. max.
Armament Two 23mm cannons and one 37mm cannon, plus rockets or 2,000 lbs. of bombs
Engine VK-1 of 6,000 lbs. thrust (copy of British Rolls-Royce "Nene" engine)
Maximum speed 670 mph.
Cruising speed 525 mph.
Range 500 miles
Service Ceiling 51,000 ft.
F86 Aces of Korean War (http://www.acepilots.com/korea_aces.html)
F-86 Specification (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/f-86-specs.htm)
Quote from above link ^^^^^
F-86 "Sabre"
Specifications
Wing Span 35 feet, 11 inches
Length 37 feet, 6 inches
Height 14 feet, 8 inches
Weight 13,791 lbs. loaded
Armament Six .50-caliber machine guns and eight 5-inch rockets or 2,000 lbs. of bombs
Engine One General Electric
J47 engine with 5,200 lbs. of thrust
Cost $178,000
Maximum speed 685 mph
Cruising speed 540 mph
Range 1,200 miles
Service Ceiling 49,000 feet
Quoting Chuck Yeager: "It's the man, not the machine"
Now lets look at the information provided. Since your not going to the max straight in line performance of the aircraft in turns, loops, low yo yo's ...etc. Thus this happening both planes will be slowed down. Now it comes back to the pilot of the aircraft. We see this in Aces High II in the WWII fighters we fly now.
It's been know for many years that the .50 cal machine guns had some flaws and jammed. That's why they have six.
But what does the Russian have. Ah! yes 2 cannons - 23 MM & 37 MM cannons. Thus saying both are using older weapons technology from WWII.
But if you are down to lower speed and we get a more turning fight and use the full effects of the aerodynamics of both aircraft. And the pilot of the Mig 15 gets his shots on the F86 with 2 or 3 rounds of 37MM in the wing of the F86, that baby is going down. Even a few shots the 23MM cannon will bring a aircraft down.
Russian Mig 15 where built to take down enemy B29 bombers quickly. But the Russian Aces knew that if you can kill a big bomber quickly then a small fighter is going to get a torn up and go down quickly missing wings and etc. Let alone damage hydraulic controls with one 23MM or 37MM cannon round. What happens if you have no hydraulic to help your rudder, etc ...your in sorry shape the least, if it stays attached.
Remember the IL-2 Type 3M - tank killer? ..... ring a bell .... IL-2 Type 3M - 2 x 37mm cannon ........how many pilots try to HO an IL-2 in Aces High or has been on the deadly end of their 2 x 37MM cannons.
HMMMmm! .... Didn't come away with a clean kill. You were either damaged or killed. You would of had to BnZ him from above, but watch your back side on pull out and climbing.
So it still comes back to the pilots knowledge of his aircraft and how well he uses the aircraft to the limits.
And a nice cannon round....:lol
-
Remember the IL-2 Type 3M - tank killer? ..... ring a bell .... IL-2 Type 3M - 2 x 37mm cannon ........how many pilots try to HO an IL-2 in Aces High or has been on the deadly end of their 2 x 37MM cannons.
HMMMmm! .... Didn't come away with a clean kill. You were either damaged or killed. You would of had to BnZ him from above, but watch your back side on pull out and climbing.
So it still comes back to the pilots knowledge of his aircraft and how well he uses the aircraft to the limits.
And a nice cannon round....:lol
You know, talking down to us and thinking we don't know what it means by 23mm and 37mm cannons is not going to win you any arguments. We know that the Russian guns can hit hard, it is the entire point of the Yak-9T. We know the F-86 was armed with six Browning M3 .50 cal machine guns with about 50% faster rate of fire than the Browning M2 .50 cal guns on the WWII American fighters.
I believe that would all be moot simply due to the choice between two aircraft that are fairly close in performance and one of which is from the USA and the other from the nasty, evil (not in a cool way like Nazi Germany) USSR. Americans, due to our history, have a much larger antipathy for totalitarian leftist nations than for totalitarian rightist nations. This is the opposite of European perspective, due to their history.
-
You know, talking down to us and thinking we don't know what it means by 23mm and 37mm cannons is not going to win you any arguments. We know that the Russian guns can hit hard, it is the entire point of the Yak-9T. We know the F-86 was armed with six Browning M3 .50 cal machine guns with about 50% faster rate of fire than the Browning M2 .50 cal guns on the WWII American fighters.
I believe that would all be moot simply due to the choice between two aircraft that are fairly close in performance and one of which is from the USA and the other from the nasty, evil (not in a cool way like Nazi Germany) USSR. Americans, due to our history, have a much larger antipathy for totalitarian leftist nations than for totalitarian rightist nations. This is the opposite of European perspective, due to their history.
Well said
-
Just trying provide some extensive information and references, which tends to get skipped quite a bit in the BB's. :aok
-
Well said
Really?? I thought the Nazi's and the Ruskies were from the same cloth?? They both killed millions and they were both socialist. I don't really understand all this left versus right stuff. The Nazi's were by definition a national socialist party (left). The USSR and Mao's China were also left. The USSA will of course be left.
Infidelz.
-
. The Nazi's were by definition a national socialist party (left).
Infidelz.
Nazi Party is generally considered far right, but extremists due tend to look similar.
-
Really?? I thought the Nazi's and the Ruskies were from the same cloth?? They both killed millions and they were both socialist. I don't really understand all this left versus right stuff. The Nazi's were by definition a national socialist party (left). The USSR and Mao's China were also left. The USSA will of course be left.
Infidelz.
You need to read more. A socialist government nationalizes industries, at the extreme end such as the Soviet Union, all national industries. Nazi Germany did not do that and cracked down hard on workers rights. It doesn't matter what they call themselves, all that matters is what they do. I know some right wingers try to pass them off as leftist, but that absurdity doesn't pass even a cursory examination. A really (really, really) crude way of looking at it is this: in a fascist nation the businesses own the government and in a extreme socialist government the government own the businesses. In both cases there is an unhealthy marriage of government and business, but who is the dominant and who is the submissive varies.
The basic truism here is that totalitarian nations are a bad thing and it doesn't matter if they are rightist or leftist, it is the totalitarian part.
-
Holy irrelevant discussion batman
-
You need to read more. A socialist government nationalizes industries, at the extreme end such as the Soviet Union, all national industries. Nazi Germany did not do that and cracked down hard on workers rights. It doesn't matter what they call themselves, all that matters is what they do. I know some right wingers try to pass them off as leftist, but that absurdity doesn't pass even a cursory examination. A really (really, really) crude way of looking at it is this: in a fascist nation the businesses own the government and in a extreme socialist government the government own the businesses. In both cases there is an unhealthy marriage of government and business, but who is the dominant and who is the submissive varies.
The basic truism here is that totalitarian nations are a bad thing and it doesn't matter if they are rightist or leftist, it is the totalitarian part.
Your arguments are mainly made up of insults. I therefore stand corrected. I guess. Not really. bye.
Infidelz.
-
Your arguments are mainly made up of insults. I therefore stand corrected. I guess. Not really. bye.
Infidelz.
Hmmm. I reread what I wrote and don't see any insults in there. <S>
-
And that's it in a nutshell. Having the option of WW I- through Korea is good thing in my opinion and I would bet more than a few share it.
Since when did your opinion count? :P
I'd try it for a change of pace.
-
All of that misses the point, which is that the vast majority of players will want to fly the USA's fighter and not the evil Commie fighter.
Ahhh...right. I guess that explains why you never see the IL-2, I-16, Yak-9, LA-5, LA-7 or P39 (with Soviet markings) in AH. Foolish pontificating aside, I suspect most here are more interested in the airplanes themselves than the political philosophy that produced them and there would be plenty that would welcome the opportunity to try out a MiG.
-
simple arena that was small with only mig-15's and F-86's would be fun I think..., a nice diversion from the bustle in the ww2 arenas. though im sure it wouldnt fly with the managment... :frown:
-
Ahhh...right. I guess that explains why you never see the IL-2, I-16, Yak-9, LA-5, LA-7 or P39 (with Soviet markings) in AH. Foolish pontificating aside, I suspect most here are more interested in the airplanes themselves than the political philosophy that produced them and there would be plenty that would welcome the opportunity to try out a MiG.
Personally, I think it would echo how it was in the Korean War arena in AW. The MiG was very popular and you would see it in the skies more often than you'd see the Sabre (I think the Sabre in AW was the F-86A). If we were to get a Korean War arena and depending on which Sabre we would get, I believe plane usage would be like it was in AW, with the MiG being the preferred choice because of it's better turning and BnZ capabilities over the F-86A. However, if we received the F-86E that introduced the "all flying" tail then the Sabre usage would probably be close to the MiG and if we were to get the F-86F-30 that introduced the "6-3" wing, than at Sabre would be the one that most would fly as it beats the MiG in pretty much all aspects.
ack-ack
-
Really?? I thought the Nazi's and the Ruskies were from the same cloth?? They both killed millions and they were both socialist. I don't really understand all this left versus right stuff. The Nazi's were by definition a national socialist party (left). The USSR and Mao's China were also left. The USSA will of course be left.
Infidelz.
Do you imply that the U.S. will turn communist? I think we MIGHT go about as far as Canada in those lines, but not communist, regardless of who's president.
-
Do you imply that the U.S. will turn communist? I think we MIGHT go about as far as Canada in those lines, but not communist, regardless of who's president.
War will come before those looneys destroy this country. I'm american... undfortunately most in DC are not.
-
I'm inclined to agree with you. To be honest, I don't believe that America will become socialist without pissing A LOT of people off. Really if you piss off half the country bad enough, then that half attacks.
-
Yes,yes,Yes! they could perk the different variants of the jets....the b-29???
-
If the Mig and Sabre were heavily perked than that would work to put the bulk
of the player base in the other rides for the most part.
Also, how about we keep the color commentary concerning modern politics
to some other forum instead of trying to derail this discussion?
-
If the Mig and Sabre were heavily perked than that would work to put the bulk
of the player base in the other rides for the most part.
Also, how about we keep the color commentary concerning modern politics
to some other forum instead of trying to derail this discussion?
Unfortunately they war and politics go hand in hand. That is why this is not a war game. It is Aces High a flight game for fighters.
The bulk of what wars are fought for are not allowed on these boards. :aok
-
Like all things if modeled correctly the Mig would out perform the Saber, with all the resulting screams about historic facts.
The real facts are, NEVER has any conflict pointed out "the pilot not the plane" like the Korean conflict. When our guys ran into Russian pilots in those Migs they got a huge suprise.
-
Like all things if modeled correctly the Mig would out perform the Saber, with all the resulting screams about historic facts.
The real facts are, NEVER has any conflict pointed out "the pilot not the plane" like the Korean conflict. When our guys ran into Russian pilots in those Migs they got a huge suprise.
Yup... like I always say..... learn your plane. We run into fights way more than the actual pilots in war so we have more training in those cartoon birds.
-
Like all things if modeled correctly the Mig would out perform the Saber, with all the resulting screams about historic facts.
It would depend on which Sabre would be modeled. The MiG 15 had a clear advantage over early model F-86s, in terms of rate of climb, and maneuverability and ceiling. The Sabre's performance was better at lower altitudes. When the "all flying" tail was introduced in the F-86E, the advantages the MiG had was narrowed and with the "6-3" wing introduced in the F-86F-30, the Sabre erased any advantages the MiG 15 had over it.
The real facts are, NEVER has any conflict pointed out "the pilot not the plane" like the Korean conflict. When our guys ran into Russian pilots in those Migs they got a huge suprise.
Soviet and Chinese claims of shooting down over 600 Sabres is grossly exaggerated. USAF records show that 224 Sabres were lost to all causes, including non-combat losses. Also, many Sabres were lost due to enemy AA and not from A2A engagements.
ack-ack
-
It would depend on which Sabre would be modeled. The MiG 15 had a clear advantage over early model F-86s, in terms of rate of climb, and maneuverability and ceiling. The Sabre's performance was better at lower altitudes. When the "all flying" tail was introduced in the F-86E, the advantages the MiG had was narrowed and with the "6-3" wing introduced in the F-86F-30, the Sabre erased any advantages the MiG 15 had over it.
Soviet and Chinese claims of shooting down over 600 Sabres is grossly exaggerated. USAF records show that 224 Sabres were lost to all causes, including non-combat losses. Also, many Sabres were lost due to enemy AA and not from A2A engagements.
ack-ack
So are you saying my statements are wrong or just flexing your web search knowledge?
-
"Unfortunately they war and politics go hand in hand"
Well duh. Fundamentally war and politics do. However posting on current politics, as
was done by you and a couple of other posters, is completely irrelevant to this online
game which is centered around air-combat from 50 plus yrs ago.
(edited: solution came. "We also added a simple "ignore user" feature." see ya.)
Leaving pilot skill out of it the equation (cause 80% of the MA fighter pilots do not
"know" their airplane) the Mig would definitely take any Sabre to task in a main arena
environment. Because main arena "fighter" behavior is mainly head-on joust fights and
twisty-turny gang bangs at 5k which all feed the Mig's strengths. Course some Sabre
"pilots" will cherry-pick kills by zipping those fights like they do now in WWII aircraft.
But ip higher and with boom & zoom tactics is where the Sabre would do much better.
Since the MA is anything but historical it causes some to get histerical when things don't
play out like they did in the stories they read on Wikipedia or in their twenty pound Time
Life coffee table book on Korean war air combat.
-
So are you saying my statements are wrong or just flexing your web search knowledge?
Yes, I'm saying you're wrong. One just needs to look as the USAF records to see that the Soviet and Chinese claims of shooting down over 600 Sabres during the Korean War was grossly exaggerated.
Also, if you had compared the MiG 15 to the various Sabre models that were built, you would see that the MiG 15's early advantage was erased as the Sabre was updated with the all flying tail and the 6-3 wing.
ack-ack
-
But ip higher and with boom & zoom tactics is where the Sabre would do much better.
At higher altitudes, the MiG 15 would chew the Sabre up, at least the early Sabers. The MiG 15 had a far superior climb rate and service ceiling. MiG 15 would loiter above the Sabre, where the Sabre couldn't touch it and then they'd zoom down into the Sabre formation and zoom back up to their perch. However, when the F-86F-30 came out with the redesigned 6-3 wing, the MiG 15 lost this advantage as the Sabre was now able to match the MiG 15 in climb rate, service ceiling and maneuverability.
ack-ack
-
Ah, thanks for the correction. I'd honestly not read up on any of this lately and was
going with what my memory (bad! memory. bad!) I though the Mig was weaker up
at higher alts.
Perk it more! ;)
-
I though the Mig was weaker up
at higher alts.
Perk it more! ;)
Neither the F-86 or MiG-15 could be perked without destroying the Korea era feel of the arena.
-
If a historical feel is what is wanted then I imagine an UN vs Communist arena (cousin to the
current AvA arena) would suffice. Having different set-ups reflecting diff parst of that war_
er, conflict. But your point about "feel" is kind of moot given that AH offers mainly a fantasy
style of game with the "MA." I mean there's nothing about the current MA that has any
kind of WWII "feel" to it with Spitfires shooting down B-24's and P-51's dogfighting P-38s.
-
Interesting discussion of the advantages between those fighters.
Might be worth considering the opinion of an icon in fighter theory - Col. John Boyd, who flew in the war and whose work in combat theory sprang directly from analyzing the wide difference in K/D seen (to the F-86s advantage).
He credited the hydraulic control assist of the F86, which allowed the US pilots to execute maneuvers far faster (especially at higher speeds) than the manually controlled Mig could. This allowed the Americans to go through the process of the OODA loop (Observing events/Orienting their significance in the combat situation/Deciding the next move/Acting to make the move a reality; repeat)more rapidly and gain advantage that way.
-
no no no no no no. There's LOTS of cool aircraft HTC could add to WWII yet.
-
Punting a bad topic is........................... .................
-
if what Hitech said here a few days ago is true......(WW2 interest is predicated on our fathers/grandfathers in that war) then this would be the next logical step..in both retaining old customers...and garnering new ones.
because he feels this way...I was also surprised to see the WWI arenas though.....so who knows.
-
Interesting discussion of the advantages between those fighters.
Might be worth considering the opinion of an icon in fighter theory - Col. John Boyd, who flew in the war and whose work in combat theory sprang directly from analyzing the wide difference in K/D seen (to the F-86s advantage).
He credited the hydraulic control assist of the F86, which allowed the US pilots to execute maneuvers far faster (especially at higher speeds) than the manually controlled Mig could. This allowed the Americans to go through the process of the OODA loop (Observing events/Orienting their significance in the combat situation/Deciding the next move/Acting to make the move a reality; repeat)more rapidly and gain advantage that way.
The hydraulic control was an ace in the hole to be sure, but the OODA loop factor credit belongs to the canopy design of the 86, which allowed easier tracking of the enemy plane, and thus quicker reactions were possible.
-
I am heavily bored to tears with ww2 (I start yawning at the thought of it lol). ww1 is a fresh start and despite some teething problems still holds my kindrid interest and in my case at least, continues the subscription.
I would totally love a Korean war arena and think HTC should definately pursue it. Unlike some, my approach to air combat history is not narrowly defined by a single era (or worse, a single plane type). The entire history of it is what intrigues me.
-
take a look at the ww1 arena's...most of the time they are empty..that being said.trying to do a a whole different era whould be a HUGE undertaking...the resource's would be have to be taken away from the ww2 era NO
Boots
-
take a look at the ww1 arena's...most of the time they are empty.
It does make our argument look weak. There is a reason for it and I hope HTC makes the necessary adjustments in the near future. I am sure they will.
There will come a day, and it is not far off, when there simply will no longer be anything left worthwhile to do in the WW2 arena. I would guess that HTC is 90% done with the bulk of WW2 and could wrap it up before 2011 if they had to. But no, they will not. Instead they have begun laying the foundation for the rest of their product. That's what the WW1 arena is all about. The evolution of AH. Korea will be next. It is simply inevitable imo.
-
It does make our argument look weak. There is a reason for it and I hope HTC makes the necessary adjustments in the near future. I am sure they will.
There will come a day, and it is not far off, when there simply will no longer be anything left worthwhile to do in the WW2 arena. I would guess that HTC is 90% done with the bulk of WW2 and could wrap it up before 2011 if they had to. But no, they will not. Instead they have begun laying the foundation for the rest of their product. That's what the WW1 arena is all about. The evolution of AH. Korea will be next. It is simply inevitable imo.
great. another diversion like how WWI has been and is.
other than WWI being a test platform, i dont think that arena even pays off for it's server use.
if hitech opens another arena, AHII will be the jack of all arenas, master of none.
can we complete the planeset for WW2 first, please? before we move on to another arena?
-
great. another diversion like how WWI has been and is.
other than WWI being a test platform, i dont think that arena even pays off for it's server use.
if hitech opens another arena, AHII will be the jack of all arenas, master of none.
can we complete the planeset for WW2 first, please? before we move on to another arena?
Im reminded of the scene in the great Santini where the dad is bouncing the basketball off his kids head extolling the dreaded squirt except the above post is more like the Austen Powers version.
Heres the keeping it real part: the addition of four new planes and a tiny terrain has not killed your AH2. Nor will any other new plane or terrain kill your AH2. Jack of all trades master of none? That is pure nonesense. just my opinion, but its a good one.
-
MIG-17's didn't see action in the Korean Conflict.. I don't think P-47's did either..
Anyhow, I'd much rather see them improve what we've already got.... There are models in the game that still have Octagonal front ends, for heaven's sake!!
You're correct, the Jugs never saw any action in Korea despite being better choice than the Mustang. There were a greater number of Mustangs in the USAAF and ANG inventory, so that's why they saw action over there.
ack-ack
-
Im reminded of the scene in the great Santini where the dad is bouncing the basketball off his kids head extolling the dreaded squirt except the above post is more like the Austen Powers version.
Heres the keeping it real part: the addition of four new planes and a tiny terrain has not killed your AH2. Nor will any other new plane or terrain kill your AH2. Jack of all trades master of none? That is pure nonesense. just my opinion, but its a good one.
i'm sorry. i know of the austin powers movies and don't find that kind of humor pleasant nor cerebral enough.
but i guess demeaning people with opinions that do not agree with yours is standard fare for your kind?
:salute
-
Aces High: Vietnam!
-
If a historical feel is what is wanted then I imagine an UN vs Communist arena (cousin to the
current AvA arena) would suffice. Having different set-ups reflecting diff parst of that war_
er, conflict. But your point about "feel" is kind of moot given that AH offers mainly a fantasy
style of game with the "MA." I mean there's nothing about the current MA that has any
kind of WWII "feel" to it with Spitfires shooting down B-24's and P-51's dogfighting P-38s.
Setting it up that way would result in 5ish players on the UN side attacking undefended North Korean bases hoping that maybe, tonight, somebody will show up and play for the North Koreans.
-
Aces High: Vietnam!
+1
-
Aces High: Modern Conflict 4 Good Company All or Nothing!
-
Aces High: Vietnam!
Bunch of people in F-4s hoping for a MiG to up so that they can gang it, but mostly just attacking undefended bases.
-
i'm sorry. i know of the austin powers movies and don't find that kind of humor pleasant nor cerebral enough.
do NOT diss the international man of mystery :aok
-
I want korean stuff but, now that we have WW1 planes guess that won't be happening soon.
-
None of you remember the Korean War Jet Night we did in the MA? :noid
(http://hitechcreations.com/pyro/f86_2.jpg)
Dear Pyro,
I must have this for an early Christmas present .... PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE
this looks like much more fun than kite furball lake
that is all
froger
-
I say give the Korean jets some play in the AVA or SEA and see what kind of attention it gets.
Maybe shoulda done that with the kites first.
just a thought.
froger
-
jets..... :yawn:
yup :yawn:
-
Love jets, especially ones that actually perform :banana:
-
I vote yes on this. I have played several jet fighting games and with the talent that HTC has, you know it would be good. I think everyone is still recovering from the WWI shock, just give it time guys...
-
A "guns only" jet arena from 1945 to say 1960 would be cool
-
i think a korean set would be awesome but instead of aceshigh2 it would be like aceshigh3 maybe idk but it sounds awesome
-
And...and..and we need a Star Wars Themed Arena with X-Wing Fighters and Tie-Bombers!!!!11
It will be as famous as the current WW1-Arena, I promise!
"Current player numbers in WW1 Arena: 3/300"
-
And...and..and we need a Star Wars Themed Arena with X-Wing Fighters and Tie-Bombers!!!!11
The death star is in the KOTH terrain :noid
-
Jets with guns arena would be hot. :banana:
WWI arena, is novel but lacks purpose. :old:
So lets not make the same mistake there...
tanks.
Infidelz
-
considering there are 1000+ people on here, and maybe twenty great sticks, I for one am still trying to learn WWII Planesets .
To re learn jets is not in the cards for me .
This is the reason I think that WWI isn't more popular because we get tired of trying and go back to what we know.
I know there are ppl here that can do it all ( or think they can !lol) But the majority can't.
On this alone I say Pass!
-
Jets with guns arena would be hot. :banana:
WWI arena, is novel but lacks purpose. :old:
So lets not make the same mistake there...
tanks.
Infidelz
Plenty of bombers tween 1945-1960 to please the "win the war" types I'm sure :aok
SHhhhhh! be a great place for the B29, there I said it :D
-
Meh. Korea is interesting but WWII much more so. WWI was interesting too but this guy was disappointed to see biplanes on the AH website especially given the amount of relevant material on the wishlist thread and dwindling numbers... I want to see the F7F and F8F as much as the next guy... I also you periods alot in my posts...
-
(http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d64/fuzeman/3Jetsareforkids.jpg)
Definitely not the best picture but the text on the red thing says:
"JETS ARE FOR KIDS"
-
Meh. Korea is interesting but WWII much more so. WWI was interesting too but this guy was disappointed to see biplanes on the AH website especially given the amount of relevant material on the wishlist thread and dwindling numbers... I want to see the F7F and F8F as much as the next guy... I also you periods alot in my posts...
Do you have access to this information? If not, then why type that in the first place?
-
Again, having another era represented by dedicated arena can do only one thing: Provide more play options for a larger group of subscribers. If you complain that your beloved era is going to get neglected then you are shortsighted. Dedicated? Yes...but the company needs to grow and incorporating new material, new planes, new vehicles, new terrains does only one thing: It grows AH and it is GOOD. Pyro HT and crew have work for years and years and we will have AH for years and years. It is all good people.
-
Definitely not the best picture but the text on the red thing says:
"JETS ARE FOR KIDS"
LOL....Sure they are...
(http://trainers.hitechcreations.com/files/mace/gw_tomsndbar.jpg)(http://trainers.hitechcreations.com/files/mace/Carrier1.jpg)
-
I want to see the F7F and F8F as much as the next guy... I also you periods alot in my posts...
No F7F or F8F in Korea either.
You must be thinking of the 1946-1949 arena where you just fly around threatening each other. No shooting allowed.
wrongway
-
F-86 VS Mig-15 would see use im sure...
There are alot of 262 pilots out there like myself that have been waiting for a multi-player jet oriented game to use thier skills.
The thing is... the B-29 would be a MAJOR factor in any Korean Sim, since it was the target of the MIG's in the first place.
Though I would love to see the F4u, A1 skyraider, F-84,86, and MIG implimented, there is ALOT of modeling yet to achieve in the WW2 arena before we could have an accurate arena.
WW1 Arena is in the most need of update..., it's dying on the cross, and needs our famouse HT's attention...., my advice is to be patient, tell your friends about the game, and get them involved.
Without players, our game is doomed to fail... :aok
It might not be the most popular oppinion, but this game needs a revamp as far as the B-29 in concernd.
Having this bomber would lower the perk cost of all interceptors,and though it would take a remodeling of the hangers, I believe it would be worth it to have a more fierce comepition.
A way to lighten the affect of the B-29 would be to allow 163's a larger area of bases from which it could up..., so that in a deffencive possition the losing country could more affectivly defend against the American SUPER bomber, though the Japs didnt have the same choice, im sure the community could come up with an effective deterent.
This game is currently butting heads with reality and community prefrence, and its tricky to ask the staff to figure out how to implement VASTLY supperior aircraft...., Perk them, and lets move on guys.
I hate to admit it, but the 29's time has come, and behind it rests the possibility of a larger community, and a succesful Korean Arena...
Its a giant risk for HT..., but mabey, JUST mabe it can be brought to fruition. :aok
-
(http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d64/fuzeman/3Jetsareforkids.jpg)
Definitely not the best picture but the text on the red thing says:
"JETS ARE FOR KIDS"
Guess I've been a kid for a while then, phbtbtbtbtbt :D
(http://www.ratemyscreensaver.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/tfs4.jpg)
Say Allo to My Leetl Frenz!
-
No F7F or F8F in Korea either.
You must be thinking of the 1946-1949 arena where you just fly around threatening each other. No shooting allowed.
wrongway
classic :rofl
-
NO! WWI arena did not take off that well and really doupt the Korea war Arena too.
-
The WW1 arena didnt take off that well? Really?
You ever play there Oakranger? You have any idea why the WW1 arena didnt take off well?
-
The WW1 arena didnt take off that well? Really?
You ever play there Oakranger? You have any idea why the WW1 arena didnt take off well?
Yes, been in there and since then the arena die down. I thought a lot of people would be in there but it dose not seem to attract a lot of attention.
-
Its funny that there was a huge demand for the WW1 arena,and although it was pretty busy initally,I never see more than 10 people at a time there.Just wondering where all those people are now. Cant hurt to give Korea a try.
-
Its funny that there was a huge demand for the WW1 arena,and although it was pretty busy initally,I never see more than 10 people at a time there.Just wondering where all those people are now. Cant hurt to give Korea a try.
Yea, be lucky if you see 20 ppl on there now. Personally, it would be time consuming to design the Koreans War AC with exceptions that we have a few right now.
-
Its funny that there was a huge demand for the WW1 arena,and although it was pretty busy initally,I never see more than 10 people at a time there.
10 people is a big crowd in there. You know, I figured it would take a few months to pan out and it has been somewhat disappointing, but I tell you I dont think its because WW1 era simply sucks. I believe a better initial planeset might have been more reasonable, but I really cant say.........Im not the expert in game design. However, there is something at play in there that is keeping the casual gamers away. Right now most of the people that frequent the WW1 arena are very capable with the planeset. Perhaps the WW1 arena is just too difficult for the average LW players. I do not know.
Hopefully a SE5a and Albatross combo...maybe a Spad and Niewport might perk things up. The rotary engined airplanes are sort of like bucking broncos, very hard to get a feel for....
-
Perhaps the WW1 arena is just too difficult for the average LW players.
No, it's just not immersive at all. It doesn't feel like a war is going on. Even when it was populated, it never felt right.
-
10 people is a big crowd in there. You know, I figured it would take a few months to pan out and it has been somewhat disappointing, but I tell you I dont think its because WW1 era simply sucks. I believe a better initial planeset might have been more reasonable, but I really cant say.........Im not the expert in game design. However, there is something at play in there that is keeping the casual gamers away. Right now most of the people that frequent the WW1 arena are very capable with the planeset. Perhaps the WW1 arena is just too difficult for the average LW players. I do not know.
Hopefully a SE5a and Albatross combo...maybe a Spad and Niewport might perk things up. The rotary engined airplanes are sort of like bucking broncos, very hard to get a feel for....
I agree with you that the WWI era dose not sucks. Not sure what happen that the number of people in there is that low but maybe that is a idal number. Maybe the Korean War era would be far better then i think it would be. Having the saber and mig jets would attract more people especially thous who can not fly the 262, 234 or 163 do to perk points. Who would pass up flaying something like this (post # 29) http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,288234.msg3662004.html#msg3662004 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,288234.msg3662004.html#msg3662004)
-
No, it's just not immersive at all. It doesn't feel like a war is going on. Even when it was populated, it never felt right.
Point made, and Im not disagreeing with you but the immersion kicked in for me last night when both Worm and I in D7s had the most incredibly hard time taking down AKRaven also in a D7. Rav was willingly going 1v2 with us, and Worm being one of the best in there so far, with me being no slouch, and AKRaven was just handing us our asses. Doing incredible things with the D7. It was the most insane fun time (aka immersive) I have had in ages playing this game. There were just the 3 of us in there and NO Dr1s. Who knows....but I do agree with you, there really needs to be more happening. More opportunities. Still, I had a ball last night.
-
A Korean War Arena Would be nice as it was also a major turning point in areal warfare.
for example
WW1 planes where spotters and Fighter Planes only developed to Shoot Either sides spotter planes down.
WW2 planes where the first true mono wing and fast highly monuoverable Aircraft. thus new dogfighting tactics had to be developed.
Korea planes are now jets an capable of 500mph or above ( thanks to Germany ). this is new for pilots from WW2 and they had to relearn alot of new tactics. Like how to pull even more lead whilst combating more G-force.
Vietnam Pilots now became dependant on missiles. So They now had to be trained in dogfighting an using their missles to the best of their abilities. And fly against an airforce with smaller faster an better aircraft.
You see all conflicts From WW1 to the present day are monumental to the history of war and the men and machines who used them.
now if hitech creations do a Korean war theatre It should be looked on as a monument to the men who fought in Korea.
As i believe that was the main intention of Ace's High to be a lasting shrine to the men and women Of WW1 and WW2.
#
So why not Honour the Men and Women Of The Korean War :salute :angel: :cheers: :airplane: :joystick: :rock :old: :aok
-
NO! WWI arena did not take off that well and really doupt the Korea war Arena too.
Agreed. And who the hell brought this thread back from the grave :cry?
-
Agreed. And who the hell brought this thread back from the grave :cry?
Now, i could be wrong with it not taking off. BulletVI and grizz do make a point of why WWI arena did not take off well and the ideal of jets would change your skills in a whole new level, except of those that fly the heck out of the 262.
-
Yes, but my bet is that once the "new" wears off, the base takers will leave because there is nothing to do. The dedicated bomber hunters will leave because there is nothing in the arena they can shoot down. And finally most of the fighter pilots will leave because most of their targets have already left.
-
Korea war would not just bring new aircraft, but also new generation of tanks, troop transports, carrier groups and support vehicles.....etc. Which could evolve into more than just a air battle like in WWI arena. In turn could be similar to WW2 arenas.
-
The speed differential is not as lopsided and there are more than two planes that are competitive. The F-86 would be used for far more than 50% of the flights. If it was like the MA it would basically be F-86s vs F-86s. If it were done on historical sides it would be a bunch of F-86s looking for the one schmuck who upped a MiG-15.
I call the schmuck slot! EAT 37MM!
:rock
Seriously, though, I disagree with your assertion that it would be all F-86's versus F-86's. Sure, some of it would be that way, just as there's lots of folks in the MA's now who fly Spit 16's, LA-7's, and the like exclusively. But there's also a HUGE number of pilots who don't want to just hold alt, then dive down picking everything in sight, then run away and do it again. Those are the folks that would figure out a way to make the underrated planes be competitive with the higher-performance ones, just as they do now in P-40's, P-39's, Spit and Hurri I's, and so forth. The folks who will turn on a diving P-51 in a Mossie with an engine out and half the plane shot off, and still kick his butt. I think you underestimate the stubbornness of many of the pilots here, who stick to their favorite planes no matter what the enemies are doing, and get lots of kills and have good fights and lots of fun, which is what the game is about, at least to me.
All that being said, I would only like to see a Korea arena AFTER we get the WWII planeset properly done, as there are still some decent-sized gaps there. (And I want my P-40N and P-63!) :pray
-
I would only like to see a Korea arena AFTER we get the WWII planeset properly done, as there are still some decent-sized gaps there.
+1
-
All that being said, I would only like to see a Korea arena AFTER we get the WWII planeset properly done, as there are still some decent-sized gaps there. (And I want my P-40N and P-63!) :pray
So in like... 10 years.
-
I call the schmuck slot! EAT 37MM!
:rock
Seriously, though, I disagree with your assertion that it would be all F-86's versus F-86's. Sure, some of it would be that way, just as there's lots of folks in the MA's now who fly Spit 16's, LA-7's, and the like exclusively. But there's also a HUGE number of pilots who don't want to just hold alt, then dive down picking everything in sight, then run away and do it again. Those are the folks that would figure out a way to make the underrated planes be competitive with the higher-performance ones, just as they do now in P-40's, P-39's, Spit and Hurri I's, and so forth. The folks who will turn on a diving P-51 in a Mossie with an engine out and half the plane shot off, and still kick his butt. I think you underestimate the stubbornness of many of the pilots here, who stick to their favorite planes no matter what the enemies are doing, and get lots of kills and have good fights and lots of fun, which is what the game is about, at least to me.
All that being said, I would only like to see a Korea arena AFTER we get the WWII planeset properly done, as there are still some decent-sized gaps there. (And I want my P-40N and P-63!) :pray
How many North Korea fans do you think post here? I know many people who think the German WWII stuff looks cool and neat, people who like the elegance of the fading British Empire, people gung ho for the rising power of the United States of America (the one thing that is retained in for Korea) even people who like the overt power and power of the Soviet Motherland (in the context of the Red Army's desperate fight with Germany) or the Eastern exoticism of a non-Western power risen to actually take on Western nations on some semblance of an even fight.
I do not know of a single person on this forum or in reality who has even the slightest affection for North Korea.
-
I do not know of a single person on this forum or in reality who has even the slightest affection for North Korea.
I would tend to agree. But that seems to be a bit off subject. I don't go out yelling about how awesome Germany is anytime I up a Luftwaffe plane, it has no bearing on why I'm flying it. I don't fly planes because I like who they are affiliated with. I fly them because the planes themselves are what I like. If it was the other way around, with the U.S. flying MiGs and the NK flying Sabres, I'd still want to fly the MiG, just beacause I find it cool. If the F-9F was included I'd fly it too, cause I've had a model of one for ages and love how it looks. I don't think folks right now fly Luftwaffe and Red Air Force planes because they think the respective countries are cool, it's all about the planes, imho.
-
I would tend to agree. But that seems to be a bit off subject. I don't go out yelling about how awesome Germany is anytime I up a Luftwaffe plane, it has no bearing on why I'm flying it. I don't fly planes because I like who they are affiliated with. I fly them because the planes themselves are what I like. If it was the other way around, with the U.S. flying MiGs and the NK flying Sabres, I'd still want to fly the MiG, just beacause I find it cool. If the F-9F was included I'd fly it too, cause I've had a model of one for ages and love how it looks. I don't think folks right now fly Luftwaffe and Red Air Force planes because they think the respective countries are cool, it's all about the planes, imho.
Yes, you don't care if it is the MiG or the Sabre, just that it is American.
Thus you end up in an arena full of F-86 Sabres.
-
Korea war would not just bring new aircraft, but also new generation of tanks, troop transports, carrier groups and support vehicles.....etc. Which could evolve into more than just a air battle like in WWI arena. In turn could be similar to WW2 arenas.
Give it 10 or so years for AH to develop 1/4 of that.
-
Yes, you don't care if it is the MiG or the Sabre, just that it is American.
Thus you end up in an arena full of F-86 Sabres.
How exactly did you derive that from the post of mine that you quoted, as I was saying the exact opposite? :huh
-
How many North Korea fans do you think post here? I know many people who think the German WWII stuff looks cool and neat, people who like the elegance of the fading British Empire, people gung ho for the rising power of the United States of America (the one thing that is retained in for Korea) even people who like the overt power and power of the Soviet Motherland (in the context of the Red Army's desperate fight with Germany) or the Eastern exoticism of a non-Western power risen to actually take on Western nations on some semblance of an even fight.
I do not know of a single person on this forum or in reality who has even the slightest affection for North Korea.
I had some affection when their striker was :cry during the national anthem.
Korea? jets? go play lock on and leave HT doing what he does best WW2 and more planes / re-models!!!
-
Thus you end up in an arena full of F-86 Sabres.
Not if you model the early Sabres, then you'll have a sky full of MiGs.
ack-ack
-
Mig-15's are like the bastard children of a combination of japanese/german aircraft...
Great climb, Great turn, and a blistering set of guns that can kill an enemy fighter with one well aim'd shot, but poor hi-speed performance. (though the mig seems to lean towards killing bombers more than fighters in its implimentation.)
I seem to recall as well that if the mig changed alt rapidly, the cockpit glass would fog up VERY quickly.
Its a question of American refinment vs Russian ruggedness.
Perhaps in a long protracted war the mig's virtues would really shine, but in a limited conflict (and with americas lead in mach1 oriented knowhow, and pilot training) The Russians really had thier foot in the bucket when trying to man thier less-technical, though excellent fighter.
Honestly within written history I cant find a biography where both sides preferd thier own version of a combat aircraft more exclusivly than in korea. Both aircraft have sufficent stength so that one might dominate the other when the THE INDIVIDUAL PILOTS SKILL is taken into account.
Pilot know-how really makes the plane in this case, and thats why I support a Korean arena. :aok
-
How exactly did you derive that from the post of mine that you quoted, as I was saying the exact opposite? :huh
You stated that you'd fly the MiG if it were American. Did you perhaps mistype and mean you'd fly the MiG even though it isn't American?
-
Not to set off the B-29 bomb again but in the context of Korea, you can't really do a full Korea where you capture territory arena without it. (BTW, I'm not in favor of having the B-29 in the WWII arenas at all, just to make that clear).
A lot of the Mig-15/F-86 fights happened around escorting or trying to get to the Superforts. It was the high Superfort losses that convinced the US they needed jet bombers.
The tactical plane set would introduce a lot of late WWII planes that could potentially imbalance the MA if reintroduced there. Planes like the A-26, Pe-2, AU-1 (F4U-6), Skyraider carry lots of ords.
You could go with just an all jet arena, F-80, F-84, F-86, Meteors, and Mig-15s to keep the performance band somewhat close.
-
I'd love to see it, but I'd hate to see HTC put alot of time and effort into something that is used by 20 people.
-
I'd love to see it, but I'd hate to see HTC put alot of time and effort into something that is used by 20 people.
Considering what has already been implimented in the vast WW2 arenas HTC are on the verge of running out of meaningful things to do. I would hate to see HTC turn into a secret weapons of the luftwaffe freak show when there are so many other things to do that deserve representation in this game. With regards to WW1 all I can tell you is if WW2 had four fighters in one arena and NOTHING ELSE TO DO there would be 20 people in there too. Put THAT in your pipe and smoke it :banana:
-
Anyone know how well the WWI arena is doing?
-
Considering what has already been implimented in the vast WW2 arenas HTC are on the verge of running out of meaningful things to do.
Not even close. The war was fought between 1939-1945, not 1944-45.
-
Anyone know how well the WWI arena is doing?
Random login screenshots from last 2 weeks:
(http://img341.imageshack.us/img341/6570/ww1m.jpg) (http://)
(http://img708.imageshack.us/img708/7027/ww2t.jpg)
(http://img203.imageshack.us/img203/5521/ww3z.jpg)
(http://img708.imageshack.us/img708/378/ww4k.jpg)
(http://img571.imageshack.us/img571/1165/ww5c.jpg)
Here some more objective numbers, based on number of kills:
(http://img704.imageshack.us/img704/5007/actind.jpg)
(This chart is dedicated to Delirium, because he was right and I was not :noid)
-
so I fell lucky now. Everytime I log into WWI arena I always find 4 / 5 guys dogfighting.
-
Actually that is fairly accurate for most of the Great War. The really big fights were few and far
between in everything I've read :lol
-
Random login screenshots from last 2 weeks:
(http://img341.imageshack.us/img341/6570/ww1m.jpg) (http://)
(http://img708.imageshack.us/img708/7027/ww2t.jpg)
(http://img203.imageshack.us/img203/5521/ww3z.jpg)
(http://img708.imageshack.us/img708/378/ww4k.jpg)
(http://img571.imageshack.us/img571/1165/ww5c.jpg)
Here some more objective numbers, based on number of kills:
(http://img704.imageshack.us/img704/5007/actind.jpg)
(This chart is dedicated to Delirium, because he was right and I was not :noid)
We won't ask why you have been taking screenshots of random log in screens. :lol
Only Lusche... ;)
-
PING
IDEA ALERT
HTC Can do it but as an addon that if you want it you download it. If you dont then dont download it Simple and effective way to satisfy everyone in here :) :rock :rock :rock :cool: :cool: :cool: :airplane: :joystick: :banana: :banana: :x :x :x :x :x :x
And Call it Ace's High Korea ???
-
The MiG15 would be just as a popular ride as the F-86 would be. The MiG15 did outclass early F-86s in quite a few areas such as turn, climb and ceiling while the early F-86s were better in a dive. Things improved for the Sabre when the all-moving tailplane was introduced with the E model did things start to shift in the Sabre's direction. The F-86F-30 with the '6-3' wing things completely shift in the Sabre's direction and reversed pretty much all the advantages the MiG 15 had over the Sabre.
One thing for certain, the MiG 15 was a far more difficult plane to fly than the Sabre was, especially at low speeds with its very poor stall characteristics.
ack-ack
All true for the most part. However, the MIG still had the higher service ceiling and thrust-to-weight ratio but these numbers are just me nit-picking. Am actually suprized you of all people didnt mention the huge technilogical advantage the F-86 had over the MIG 15. The F-86 had the radar ranging gun site which was affective at nearly 2 nautical miles. Thats a pretty distinct advantage in my book.
-
All true for the most part. However, the MIG still had the higher service ceiling and thrust-to-weight ratio but these numbers are just me nit-picking.
True but when the F-86F-30 came out, the tactic of flying above the Sabres with almost virtual safety wasn't really possible anymore and MiGs found themselves being pursued up in altitudes where the older Sabres were not able to fly.
Am actually suprized you of all people didnt mention the huge technilogical advantage the F-86 had over the MIG 15. The F-86 had the radar ranging gun site which was affective at nearly 2 nautical miles. Thats a pretty distinct advantage in my book.
Some of those technological advancements in the Sabre wouldn't be a factor in the game, such as the radar ranging gunsight since those wouldn't be modeled.
ack-ack
-
Not if you model the early Sabres, then you'll have a sky full of MiGs.
ack-ack
I agree Ack-Ack If they do do a Korean War arena they should at least start with the first 3 versions of the Sabre. Correct me if im wrong but i Believe that the F-86 C i think was the best as it had the rear stabiliser wing's movable as well as elevator's on them i think. And it could and i stress could almost match the mig 15 in a climb as they uprated the engine to give more power.
-
I agree Ack-Ack If they do do a Korean War arena they should at least start with the first 3 versions of the Sabre. Correct me if im wrong but i Believe that the F-86 C i think was the best as it had the rear stabiliser wing's movable as well as elevator's on them i think. And it could and i stress could almost match the mig 15 in a climb as they uprated the engine to give more power.
That was the E model with the "all flying tail" that gave it better performance and somewhat level the playing field but they were still hampered by their lower ceiling, it wasn't until the F-30 model with the 6-3 wing that the Sabre was finally able to reach the MiG 15 at high altitudes and out maneuver it.
If there ever was a Korean War arena, the F-86F-30 model would hopefully have a hefty perk tag to keep it from over running the arenas like the C-Hog did many years ago. The E model would of course have a lighter perk but high enough to also keep it from over running the arenas.
ack-ack
-
I'd love to see it, but I'd hate to see HTC put alot of time and effort into something that is used by 20 people.
agreed :aok
love to see it to but if it's all jet fighters it will probably go the way of ww1
i think
best of luck,
froger
-
it will probably go the way of ww1
i think
You mean where we have an arena with only four planes dogfighting? with one plane clearly superior to the other three its basically a one plane dogfighting arena. If that's all it stays then your comment might have merit. time will tell, but I hope HTC grows the heck out of it. Great idea great, nuclease of a concept, but arguably not the best choice of rides for introducing a new era arena.
Lastly, yes. A Korea Arena is a foregone deal. Its just a matter of time before they run out of believable things to add to WW1 and WW2 eras.
-
That was the E model with the "all flying tail" that gave it better performance and somewhat level the playing field but they were still hampered by their lower ceiling, it wasn't until the F-30 model with the 6-3 wing that the Sabre was finally able to reach the MiG 15 at high altitudes and out maneuver it.
If there ever was a Korean War arena, the F-86F-30 model would hopefully have a hefty perk tag to keep it from over running the arenas like the C-Hog did many years ago. The E model would of course have a lighter perk but high enough to also keep it from over running the arenas.
ack-ack
Ah thanks Ack-Ack i couldnt remember American jet's im ify with but better with UK jet's :salute :salute :rock :rock