Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: EDO43 on December 20, 2009, 01:26:26 PM
-
Before the tomatoes start flyin, let me put on my rain slicker first. Ok, I've got it on....fire when ready gridley!
Ok, having been here for more years than I can count on at least one hand, I have a couple suggestions for gameplay that might make it a bit more, shall we say, challenging. Since the real counterparts to the aircraft we fly around in the cartoon skies were more than just stick and throttle management, why not add some of these to the game? I'm speaking primarily of mixture controls, cowl flaps, oil cooler shutters, etc. I have no idea how difficult it would be to implement such things but it's something I thought of a few nights back, while sitting on a runway with the engine idling waiting for squadron mates to spawn for a fighter sweep over rookland. Watching the cylinder head temperature gauge gave me an idea to have a cowl flap command to open or close the cowl flaps to keep CHT's in the green. I also thought of this again while waiting for my 2800 to cool down after a protracted WEP climb. I'm getting in my way back machine now to a time when in AWIII, there was a scenario or period in general gameplay that running an engine full power for too long resulted in overheating and damage to your engine. Let's limit the WEP shall we? Our prototypes had limited War Emergency Power that did not recharge after it was used up. When the tanks empty, it's empty...an ADI gauge in the cockpit (if it's prototypically correct) would be a great addition. Our fuel tanks don't refill when they're empty...why does the WEP return after the engine cools down? Somewhere I got the idea that 5 minutes is all the time that War Emergency Power could be used for in total. I have no basis for this assumption and it might be wrong. I have no data on how big an ADI tank (MW50 for you luftwobble heads) is or how long it would last. Maybe gameplay now is accurate and I just don't know it. I see keyboard commands as a limiting factor to those who do not use joysticks and for that, there might be an auto setting, kind of like auto takeoff or the stall limiter. Some of us use it, some don't. I know I don't. There would have to be some sort of penalty for using the auto setting, just like the stall limiter...engines might not put out as much power or be as efficient with fuel as they otherwise would....just spitballing here.
In short, let's make it a little more challenging than to fly 10 minutes, engage, kill/die and reup for another go. Oh and let's not forget the obligatory smak talk on 200 for those that invariably feel they have been wronged when they die. No, I'm not alluding to changing the game to a Microsoft Flight Simulator, it's a game, not a simulator. Yes, it will bring it closer to the sim but it will make us think about condition monitoring and performance limitations. Oh and while I'm at it, how about a command to cage the gyro's before entering combat or they get tumbling damage? Hell I remember in Falcon 4.0 SP3 and 4, the aircraft had a nuclear consent switch just like the real one...and it worked IIRC, there was just no nuclear bomb option in the weapons loadout.
-
To paraphrase Hitech, and I'll take the time to search for it if you like:
Because it's no fun and really doesn't add anything to the game.
If anything, it would drive away the customer base who don't want to micromanage their planes. Pilots in real life didn't like to have to set and adjust everything. If they didn't get it right things turned out catastrophic and they ended up deep over Germany in a P-38 with a blown up turbo.
Case in point, as aircraft design progressed, more engine adjustments that formerly had to be individually adjusted all happened together with one throttle adjustment.
Would it be more fun if you had to adjust the timing and mixture on your car as you drove?
It's not about "driving" the plane, it's about fighting the plane.
wrongway
-
-1 Good reply AW. :salute
-
Yeah It's been discussed before, it could be fun, some would enjoy it. I think I probably would, but AWwrgwy really did sum it why it's not in the game well.
Although I do have to agree with the WEP part, I've never understood why it recharges.
-
I would love this, however HiTech does not. I wouldn't ever expect to see it in game...
-
Yeah It's been discussed before, it could be fun, some would enjoy it. I think I probably would, but AWwrgwy really did sum it why it's not in the game well.
Although I do have to agree with the WEP part, I've never understood why it recharges.
Well, WEP on an aircraft that doesn't have water injection just heats up the engine, so in theory it could cool back down, though probably not well, if at all, at full throttle. An aircraft that uses water injection really shouldn't be able to recharge WEP, though both of these does affect game playability. I think the real question is if it is affecting gameplay.
-
You should do a bit of checking. 5 minutes is the heat limit, NOT the additive-is-gone limit. MW50 on some German planes would last for 30-35 minutes. Not all at once, mind you! That's longer than most planes can fly on full internal fuel!
The P-47 had a lot of water onboard as well, for water injection. It had to cool down after 5 minutes, but it had plenty more stock in the tank, once the heat allowed it.
In almost all cases, emergency power is limited due to HEAT, not running out of "go-juice"...
-
Well, WEP on an aircraft that doesn't have water injection just heats up the engine, so in theory it could cool back down, though probably not well, if at all, at full throttle. An aircraft that uses water injection really shouldn't be able to recharge WEP, though both of these does affect game playability. I think the real question is if it is affecting gameplay.
Yeah, I doubt it really has too big of an effect. I'm certainly not going to get my panties in a bunch over it. I suppose making it more realistic would just complicate it and then hurt gameplay in the end. Thanks! :aok
-
Then why not just spawn at 15-20 or 25K and then fly full throttle toward your intended target? If it's all about the fight, what's the point in taking off, retracting landing gear, changing prop pitch...any of that? To use your terminology, to fight the plane, one has to drive it. I fully understand the customer base viewpoint and micromanagement...that's why I mentioned the auto option. But, like the stall limiter, there will be a slight performance downgrade. Not everyone will like or use it...those that want to achieve maximum performance will. Hell I'm not talking about every option, especially a supercharger option. Nobody wants a blown cylinder because of overboost....and we're not WWII combat pilots. Just a few relatively minor options that might be fun to use. Maybe I have too much aviation experience for my own good as far as gameplay is concerned.
They will probably never get implemented but i'd rather put it out on the board and let it be shot down, than not say anything and have a possible facet of gameplay go unappreciated. It's just an idea and I believe that's what this forum is here for. If HTC doesn't like it, then nothing will come of it as indicated. But having been here for about 10 years, if another, comparable game were to be offered with these options at a comparable subscription price, my subscription to AH2 would end. I disagree that it's no fun and doesn't add anything to the game. I think it adds immensely to the historical aspect of the game and it challenges us to think and not rely on almost robotic ACM to get a kill or evade an adversary. I do agree that pilots didn't like to adjust every aspect of their flight and that as the war progressed, more and more adjustments were made automatic but if you wanna fly, you do what you gotta do. However with the exception of some German aircraft, namely the 190 that had only the throttle control (jets and rockets excepted), most had the obligatory throttle, mixture and propeller controls. P-47M's, argueably an extremely late war aircraft, came with all of those and a supercharger control to boot...that was never made automatic. The turbosupercharger control IIRC was automatic.
I might be one of a very few that enjoys a more involved game but when AH started, the flight model was extremely tough to use. We stuck with it and with some modifications from HTC and some experience, it worked very well and was challenging. I like the idea of a total flight experience and if I'm one of a few then that's ok with me.
-
Well, WEP on an aircraft that doesn't have water injection just heats up the engine, so in theory it could cool back down, though probably not well, if at all, at full throttle. An aircraft that uses water injection really shouldn't be able to recharge WEP, though both of these does affect game playability. I think the real question is if it is affecting gameplay.
WEP, or War Emergency Power IS water injection.
-
Wrong.
In many aircraft, WEP is simply settings higher than recommended. They are settings that increase manifold pressure and RPM to produce more power (for a limited time).
In SOME planes, the increase in manifold pressure cannot be reached without an additive that prevents premature detonation inside the cylinder as it compresses, and that is what the additive is.
However, many planes do not require an additive, they just "run hotter"
-
which engines are those? I've never seen one but you are correct. I generally don't like use this but from Wikipedia
"Some earlier engines simply allowed the throttle to open wider than normal, allowing more air to flow through the intake. All WEP methods result in greater-than-usual stresses on the engine, and correspond to a reduced engine lifetime. For some airplanes, such as the P-51, use of WEP required the plane to be grounded after landing and the engine torn down and inspected for damage before returning to the air."
When I think of WEP i always think of Water/Meth injection and the R-2800, a fault in my thinking I suppose. I generally don't consider early war engines that might not be equipped with it
-
Then why not just spawn at 15-20 or 25K and then fly full throttle toward your intended target? If it's all about the fight, what's the point in taking off, retracting landing gear, changing prop pitch...any of that? To use your terminology, to fight the plane, one has to drive it. I fully understand the customer base viewpoint and micromanagement...that's why I mentioned the auto option. But, like the stall limiter, there will be a slight performance downgrade. Not everyone will like or use it...those that want to achieve maximum performance will. Hell I'm not talking about every option, especially a supercharger option. Nobody wants a blown cylinder because of overboost....and we're not WWII combat pilots. Just a few relatively minor options that might be fun to use. Maybe I have too much aviation experience for my own good as far as gameplay is concerned.
They will probably never get implemented but i'd rather put it out on the board and let it be shot down, than not say anything and have a possible facet of gameplay go unappreciated. It's just an idea and I believe that's what this forum is here for. If HTC doesn't like it, then nothing will come of it as indicated. But having been here for about 10 years, if another, comparable game were to be offered with these options at a comparable subscription price, my subscription to AH2 would end. I disagree that it's no fun and doesn't add anything to the game. I think it adds immensely to the historical aspect of the game and it challenges us to think and not rely on almost robotic ACM to get a kill or evade an adversary. I do agree that pilots didn't like to adjust every aspect of their flight and that as the war progressed, more and more adjustments were made automatic but if you wanna fly, you do what you gotta do. However with the exception of some German aircraft, namely the 190 that had only the throttle control (jets and rockets excepted), most had the obligatory throttle, mixture and propeller controls. P-47M's, argueably an extremely late war aircraft, came with all of those and a supercharger control to boot...that was never made automatic. The turbosupercharger control IIRC was automatic.
I might be one of a very few that enjoys a more involved game but when AH started, the flight model was extremely tough to use. We stuck with it and with some modifications from HTC and some experience, it worked very well and was challenging. I like the idea of a total flight experience and if I'm one of a few then that's ok with me.
Staying on topic :neener:
I don't retract my landing gear. It's automagic. I don't trim. It's automagic. Do you adjust your RPM and manifold pressure much while flying as it is now?
And now you want prop pitch, fuel control, but not the consequences of not adjusting them properly? What's the point? Immersion? Pretend to map a key on your keyboard that adjusts prop pitch and there you go.
As I previously stated, aircraft controls were continually simplified as the war went on. Real life pilots didn't have time, or sometimes the ability, to be micromanaging everything. Just more work.
Would you really go to another game with true to life controls if few if anyone else was there? Read the novel size operators manual? Need to learn different controls and setting for each plane? Where's F-16 online?
I just think the realism you are looking for would become tedious very quickly and add little if anything to the game.
wrongway
-
Staying on topic :neener:
I don't retract my landing gear. It's automagic. TBH that's just weird I don't trim. It's automagic. I do Do you adjust your RPM and manifold pressure much while flying as it is now? Yes all of the time
And now you want prop pitch, fuel control, but not the consequences of not adjusting them properly? What's the point? Immersion? Of course Pretend to map a key on your keyboard that adjusts prop pitch and there you go. Sit in a box and pretend to play a computer game... you can sell your computer and won't have to pay for an AH subscription
As I previously stated, aircraft controls were continually simplified as the war went on. Real life pilots didn't have time, or sometimes the ability, to be micromanaging everything. Just more work.
Would you really go to another game with true to life controls if few if anyone else was there? Read the novel size operators manual? Need to learn different controls and setting for each plane? Where's F-16 online? LOMAC seems to have a pretty loyal following despite being old... Il-2... MSFS... those kinds of sims are popular.
I just think the realism you are looking for would become tedious very quickly and add little if anything to the game.
I think it would add a lot and be very beneficial to those who would like to do that if you add a combat trim like feature :aok
wrongway
-
Then why not just spawn at 15-20 or 25K and then fly full throttle toward your intended target? If it's all about the fight, what's the point in taking off, retracting landing gear, changing prop pitch...any of that?
Fight/Gameplay[____________________________x_________________________]Realism/Immersion
It's a spectrum. HTC has decided on the proper balances between the two.
-
Yes, I do adjust my prop rpm and manifold pressure as needed (throttle setting) to achieve range and time on station. And we do have propeller pitch control, it's called the RPM adjustment. Mixture control is pretty simple, the settings are full rich, auto rich, auto lean and idle cutoff (for pressure carburetors). Not many consequences of misadjustment other than you'll run outta fuel too early or your engine will quit cause the mixture's too lean.
I like full immersion. I loved Falcon 4.0 SP3 and 4. Reason no online F16 sim? I think it'd be awful hard to model the online aspects of BVR and IR missles and the countermeasures....let alone modern avionics and targeting systems....You'd need a huge AI support system for in-threatre ATO's and such. Things like STT and TWS are just two modes in the look-down-shoot-down capability of the modern radar system that would be very hard to give to an airborne aircraft I would imagine. I don't mind reading a manual...I'm not a quakeaholic. I read Falcon SP3 and SP4 and had a great time....played with friends against AI and each other and had hours and hours of fun. I loved the ramp start function of the jet, it taught me how to start an F16. I like all that stuff. I learned how to use the radar modes to their best and the envelope of the jet based on factual information taken from F16 specifications and flight characteristics. It's the next best thing that I can access to actually getting in a real jet and flying it.
Oh and modern day complex, propeller driven aircraft still have a throttle, prop pitch control and mixture control....fuel injected or carbureted. Turbo supercharger waste gates still run by oil pressure and engines can still be overboosted and damaged..nothings changed in that respect since WWII. :salute
-
The P-47 had a lot of water onboard as well, for water injection. It had to cool down after 5 minutes, but it had plenty more stock in the tank, once the heat allowed it.
It didn't even HAVE to do that, I.E, you could abuse engines far outside published limitations with very little real chance of failure.
ALL sims I've ever encountered were fairly conservative about WEP times. What I like about AHII's approach is that they make the WEP automatically switch off, instead of doing some bogus engine damage thing that probably would *not* have happened if you left a P-51 in WEP 6 minutes instead of 5, etc.
-
Yes, I do adjust my prop rpm and manifold pressure as needed (throttle setting) to achieve range and time on station. And we do have propeller pitch control, it's called the RPM adjustment. Mixture control is pretty simple, the settings are full rich, auto rich, auto lean and idle cutoff (for pressure carburetors). Not many consequences of misadjustment other than you'll run outta fuel too early or your engine will quit cause the mixture's too lean.
I like full immersion. I loved Falcon 4.0 SP3 and 4. Reason no online F16 sim? I think it'd be awful hard to model the online aspects of BVR and IR missles and the countermeasures....let alone modern avionics and targeting systems....You'd need a huge AI support system for in-threatre ATO's and such. Things like STT and TWS are just two modes in the look-down-shoot-down capability of the modern radar system that would be very hard to give to an airborne aircraft I would imagine. I don't mind reading a manual...I'm not a quakeaholic. I read Falcon SP3 and SP4 and had a great time....played with friends against AI and each other and had hours and hours of fun. I loved the ramp start function of the jet, it taught me how to start an F16. I like all that stuff. I learned how to use the radar modes to their best and the envelope of the jet based on factual information taken from F16 specifications and flight characteristics. It's the next best thing that I can access to actually getting in a real jet and flying it.
Oh and modern day complex, propeller driven aircraft still have a throttle, prop pitch control and mixture control....fuel injected or carbureted. Turbo supercharger waste gates still run by oil pressure and engines can still be overboosted and damaged..nothings changed in that respect since WWII. :salute
So just adding a mixture control would satisfy you?
Slightly out of context but possibly the same idea:
Short answere Oddar: In my opinion it becomes less realistic to implement what you ask.
To implement an even close to reality engine temp model is far more than complex then what you are asking for.
2nd Implementing what you are asking for realy adds only nusaince items, not game enancing items.Let alone any resemplance to realism.
Right now you still have the WEP / heating concept. Only difference beeing it shuts it off for you.
Loddar do you always control your fuel tanks manualy when you fly AH?
If the answere is no, what you are asking for is somthing almost identical to manual fuel control. It realy dosn't add much to the game.
HiTech
Do we need to turn on the gunsights too? Arm the guns? Turn on the gun heaters?
wrongway
-
Gun heaters? Is that in the same category as headlight fluid, a box of grid squares, and chem light batteries.
-
And buckle up, or you fall out of the plane the first time you're inverted. :rolleyes:
-
There might be 10 people currently active in AH that would enjoy anything more complicated than what currently exists...most of the uber pile-its would see their k/d ratio drop to negative numbers if an engine management system was put in place. Too bad too...the runstangs wouldn't be able to run so far at full WEP.
It didn't even HAVE to do that, I.E, you could abuse engines far outside published limitations with very little real chance of failure.
ALL sims I've ever encountered were fairly conservative about WEP times. What I like about AHII's approach is that they make the WEP automatically switch off, instead of doing some bogus engine damage thing that probably would *not* have happened if you left a P-51 in WEP 6 minutes instead of 5, etc.
That's a bit of a stretch BnZs...Luftwaffe planes were documented to need full engine overhaul/replacement with regular use of WEP, and they weren't the only ones. The rate of in flight failure wasn't high but it happened enough for warnings to be put in pilot training manuals. WEP would not autmatically shut off after so many minutes in any aircraft, the pilot had to watch his engine temp closely and pull the throttle back to the the normal operating range. The water/methanol injection tanks weren't that big...only enough to provide added power for up to an estimated total allowable time before the engine failure was calculated to occur.
-
Adding what you ask on the grounds of making it more challenging is a false argument. You seem to miss the fact that everyone plays by the same rules. The real challenge is not flying the airplane but rather out flying your opponent. So adding what you ask would not make it more challenging, because the goal of killing some one does not become any more difficult or easy because your opponent has to deal with all the same items. So in the end what you ask for detracts from the fun part (fighting) and puts more emphasis on plane knowledge and cockpit management.
2nd in many cases what you ask for becomes less realistic when it comes to cockpit management. With most computer setups the easy of flying is far more difficult than flying the real thing in almost all regions of flight. So you are asking to make cockpit management much more difficult than flying the real thing.
3rd it would make it much more difficult for a new person to experience is first fight.
Finally as I have said before, you really are just asking to have to remember to push a few more keys on the keyboard. AH is about flying & fighting, not about having to remember a check list.
HiTech
-
That's a bit of a stretch BnZs...Luftwaffe planes were documented to need full engine overhaul/replacement with regular use of WEP, and they weren't the only ones. The rate of in flight failure wasn't high but it happened enough for warnings to be put in pilot training manuals. WEP would not autmatically shut off after so many minutes in any aircraft, the pilot had to watch his engine temp closely and pull the throttle back to the the normal operating range. The water/methanol injection tanks weren't that big...only enough to provide added power for up to an estimated total allowable time before the engine failure was calculated to occur.
Depends on the specific engine I suppose Gyrene, but...there were cases where pilots panicked, forgot their power settings, and went back to England "balls-to-the-wall". Etc. I'm sure you've heard of them. I'm not saying we should essentially give pilots unlimited WEP times, OTOH, like I say, I think the automatic shutoff system conforming to published limits is a better compromise than failing the engine on some unrealistically short time scale if the cartoon pile-it forgets to shut off the WEP.
-
I had a somewhat similar thought kind of along the same lines of making the game more realistic and challenging. The other day I had an idea come to me about maybe having random, but not too often, mechanical failures on the airplanes just like the pilots of the times had to deal with. Things like fuel line ruptures, engine oil leaks and other such problems. They wouldn't be predictable in the least and happen only every so often. I think, though, that the problem w/ that, similar to having micromanagement of the engines, is that I'm not sure it actually adds anything to the game. And if anything might get players so frustrated it'd do more harm than good. I agree w/ making the game more realistic. But can you imagine the first time a guy has a perfect gun solution on a target that he's worked hard to get and all of a sudden the engine starts leaking fuel or just shuts down altogether and all because of a random failure or poor management? It'd be really frustrating. I think the game tries to keep it as realistic as possible while maintaining somewhat ideal circumstances. I agree completely that it is a good idea, but only if it were that kind of simulator from the start but I think to throw it in now would make for very angry virtual pilots. :salute
-
I already have that. Sometimes the throttle axis on my joystick goes wonky and the manifold pressure starts bouncing up and down. Also, sometimes I "vanish without a trace". Which I guess simulates running into Bermuda triangle type phenomenon. I see no reason to pile additional difficulties on top of those.
I had a somewhat similar thought kind of along the same lines of making the game more realistic and challenging. The other day I had an idea come to me about maybe having random, but not too often, mechanical failures on the airplanes just like the pilots of the times had to deal with. Things like fuel line ruptures, engine oil leaks and other such problems. They wouldn't be predictable in the least and happen only every so often. I think, though, that the problem w/ that, similar to having micromanagement of the engines, is that I'm not sure it actually adds anything to the game. And if anything might get players so frustrated it'd do more harm than good. I agree w/ making the game more realistic. But can you imagine the first time a guy has a perfect gun solution on a target that he's worked hard to get and all of a sudden the engine starts leaking fuel or just shuts down altogether and all because of a random failure or poor management? It'd be really frustrating. I think the game tries to keep it as realistic as possible while maintaining somewhat ideal circumstances. I agree completely that it is a good idea, but only if it were that kind of simulator from the start but I think to throw it in now would make for very angry virtual pilots. :salute
-
3rd it would make it much more difficult for a new person to experience is first fight.
Finally as I have said before, you really are just asking to have to remember to push a few more keys on the keyboard. AH is about flying & fighting, not about having to remember a check list.
HiTech
Ok...that's true. But I do like check lists...they can be fun. I used to do an hour check on my tank before (if I had time) and after a mission.
Any way we could have a chance to kick the tires and maybe throw a wrench at the plane in the hangar? :D
-
I just don't see these as necessary. If your bored try a new plane, or customize your cockpit. http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,280151.0.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,280151.0.html)
-
And if anything might get players so frustrated it'd do more harm than good.
Failures and stuff have been discussed before and from memory, this was HT's basic gist of the response.
Random failures would bring the whine levels on the BBS to epic proportions.
Think of it this way... we ALREADY have complaints about how random it seems when people die or experience "rubber bullets", and that's without any randomness. Could you imagine if people experienced failures WITHOUT any assist from themselves or an enemy? Yikes.
-
I would suggest (and have) that instead of different arenas for different time periods, there should be different arenas of difficulty. I would add to the list of realisms no in cockpit dar and limited or no icons.
-
I would suggest (and have) that instead of different arenas for different time periods, there should be different arenas of difficulty. I would add to the list of realisms no in cockpit dar and limited or no icons.
If you want a good preview of how well that would work out...look at the AvA arena.