Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: olds442 on January 30, 2011, 08:22:28 PM
-
can we make this game like it would be in ww2 like with not just pressing E to start your engine and having to set ur fuel mix to rich and priming your engine and then sarting
-
why?
Would that be fun? Or tedious?
It's a game.
wrongway
-
I agree. It's a game. We already have "auto-takeoff." I've argued on the side of realism before, but the bottom line is that it's a simulation, not realism. We could debate all sorts of non-realistic issues in the game all day... I.E:
- Multi-Engine aircraft have the ability to start all engines at once. Extremely absurd in the case of the quad-engine bombers.
- When you decrease RPM in the high numbers, manifold pressure remains unaffected.
- We can fly through friendly targets without taking damage.
Implementing certain things destroy game play. I like realism too, but there's a limit!
-
olds442, I'm with ya, but prepare to see a lot of negative responses.
Hint: there are other flight sims that offer the kind of engine management of you're looking for.
-
Have I mentioned I spend too much time on these boards?
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
wrongway
-
olds442, I'm with ya, but prepare to see a lot of negative responses.
Hint: there are other flight sims that offer the kind of engine management of you're looking for.
yep if thats what you want IL-2 has it all but its not for everyone, I personally dont like it because I'm here to play a game but if you want all the engine management thats the place for you.
-
Have I mentioned I spend too much time on these boards?
wrongway
i've got more posts than you and in half the time and you say YOU spend too much time? :aok
I was thinking of the same quote. good find. <S>
-
Have I mentioned I spend too much time on these boards?
wrongway
well i get it (but i want to press the fuel mixtrue lever in the cockpit :rock :rock
-
well i get it (but i want to press the fuel mixtrue lever in the cockpit :rock :rock
You realize you will have to adjust you mixture every time you change your altitude, and yes if your really busy dogfighting and you will still have to do that or your engine will work like crap.
You can always get your self a second throttle (not connected to anything) and push it all the time as if it was your mixture :aok
-
You realize you will have to adjust you mixture every time you change your altitude, and yes if your really busy dogfighting and you will still have to do that or your engine will work like crap.
You can always get your self a second throttle (not connected to anything) and push it all the time as if it was your mixture :aok
Didn't late-war aircraft have automatic mixture control? I remember seeing "auto-rich" and "auto-lean" settings in the P-51 cockpit.
-
Didn't late-war aircraft have automatic mixture control? I remember seeing "auto-rich" and "auto-lean" settings in the P-51 cockpit.
As far as I know 190 was the only aircraft that had auto mixture. Perhaps it was a post war mod?
Most airplanes these days don't even have auto mixture. The ones that do are really nice :x.
-
As far as I know 190 was the only aircraft that had auto mixture. Perhaps it was a post war mod?
I've never had to adjust the mixture on the P-51D in Il-2 sturmovik, and the same goes for a lot of late-war American aircraft. None of the Bf 109E-Ks had mixture controls, either, but many aircraft did have manual mixture controls. I don't find it to be too much of a pain because it's very obvious when you need to adjust it, and there's no aircraft-specific knowledge you need to do it right.
The control that actually makes you know your aircraft is the manual blower. For example, the F4F has 3 stages, and if you don't know the right altitudes for them, you'll have a hard time escaping from an A6M when you need to.
Another one that affects combat performance a lot is cooling systems. Opening radiators and cowl flaps causes drag, and the slower you're going, the more you need to open them. Some aircraft had automatic radiator controls, but someone who knows his aircraft can get more from it with manual control. This was tested to death by P-51D pilots in Il-2 Sturmovik, and they found that the fastest sustainable settings were 95% throttle, 95% prop pitch, and the radiator closed. You can run like that indefinitely and you'll be damn fast; just don't get slow in a turn fight.
-
I've never had to adjust the mixture on the P-51D in Il-2 sturmovik, and the same goes for a lot of late-war American aircraft. None of the Bf 109E-Ks had mixture controls, either, but many aircraft did have manual mixture controls. I don't find it to be too much of a pain because it's very obvious when you need to adjust it, and there's no aircraft-specific knowledge you need to do it right.
The control that actually makes you know your aircraft is the manual blower. For example, the F4F has 3 stages, and if you don't know the right altitudes for them, you'll have a hard time escaping from an A6M when you need to.
Another one that affects combat performance a lot is cooling systems. Opening radiators and cowl flaps causes drag, and the slower you're going, the more you need to open them. Some aircraft had automatic radiator controls, but someone who knows his aircraft can get more from it with manual control. This was tested to death by P-51D pilots in Il-2 Sturmovik, and they found that the fastest sustainable settings were 95% throttle, 95% prop pitch, and the radiator closed. You can run like that indefinitely and you'll be damn fast; just don't get slow in a turn fight.
I'm almost 100% sure that 190 was the only aircraft. However I never flew the real pony of 109 so I can't say for a fact. If you want I can send you the operation manual for a P-51 so you can take a look, I'll be busy the next few days and wont have time to read it myself.
-
I'm almost 100% sure that 190 was the only aircraft. However I never flew the real pony of 109 so I can't say for a fact. If you want I can send you the operation manual for a P-51 so you can take a look, I'll be busy the next few days and wont have time to read it myself.
I recall someone calling the P-51 mixture system "semi-automatic." I assume this means you still have to set rich or lean, but it takes care of the little changes.
Perhaps the 190 was the only aircraft with a "full-auto" mixture control system.
-
How about an option for engine management through the clipboard? Slight performance increase if you select it and take the time to master it. Along the lines of removing the stall limiter. Just a thought.
-
How about an option for engine management through the clipboard? Slight performance increase if you select it and take the time to master it. Along the lines of removing the stall limiter. Just a thought.
Hitech has already said "no" to that. He even said "no" to having the controls with only the possibility of suffering performance decrease!
Really, take my word for it, this the wrong place to go around asking for all of the little rods and levers these aircraft had. AH is first and foremost a combat simulator, with aircraft controls streamlined down to what is essential for fighting with the aircraft.
CoD will be out soon, and I'm sure it will have all sorts of wonderful engine management goodies. :)
-
Don't forget to add controls for the pilot to inhale, exhale, and blink his eyes. A button to open pilot mouth for vox to work; this must be done in sequence with your own speech.
-
Don't forget to add controls for the pilot to inhale, exhale, and blink his eyes. A button to open pilot mouth for vox to work; this must be done in sequence with your own speech.
:rofl
-
No, I don't feel like taking 10 minutes to start my hog or jug, you have a lot of wants I notice to, maybe try to stay away from wishlist for a while
-
realism is spending 6 months training and practicing with a plane and flying only that plane and no others.
realism is spending 6 hours for a 30-minute-hop in both preplanning, preparation, engine starting, taxi, wait, takeoff, formup, navigating by guess, finding no enemy, turning around, and circling the pattern for 15 more minutes before being allowed to land, taxiing to the parking spot, getting out, filling out reports and debriefs for 3 hours, and calling it a day.
Realism is death by accidental failure more than it is finding any enemy combat whatsoever.
Realism is not fun.
EDIT: Not to be confused with historical accuracy, or "being realistic" -- you get my context, though, in reply to your post.
-
realism is spending 6 months training and practicing with a plane and flying only that plane and no others.
realism is spending 6 hours for a 30-minute-hop in both preplanning, preparation, engine starting, taxi, wait, takeoff, formup, navigating by guess, finding no enemy, turning around, and circling the pattern for 15 more minutes before being allowed to land, taxiing to the parking spot, getting out, filling out reports and debriefs for 3 hours, and calling it a day.
Realism is death by accidental failure more than it is finding any enemy combat whatsoever.
Realism is not fun.
EDIT: Not to be confused with historical accuracy, or "being realistic" -- you get my context, though, in reply to your post.
That can't be right, in the movie Pearl Harbor they were in the air and fighting in like, 5 minutes! :O
-
But those scenes were made using the ubisoft Birds of Prey flight model.... :noid
-
Watch this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxhSmeAqD0g
This is not a WW2 bird but it pretty much sums up the startup you'd have to go through EVERY SINGLE TIME you take off with "realism" like you want. This would be really cool the first time, however, every other time after that it would be boring and irritating as hell. I do not want to go through a 5-10 minute warmup for a flight in which I'll probably get killed 2 minutes after takeoff.
-
As far as I know 190 was the only aircraft that had auto mixture. Perhaps it was a post war mod?
Most airplanes these days don't even have auto mixture. The ones that do are really nice :x.
Don't know about other aircraft but there's a anecdote about this system in "Focke Wulf FW190 in Combat" by Alfred Price. The system was called the Kommandogerät and the idea was to "save he pilot having to worry about the optimum relationship between altitude and fuel flow, fuel mixture, propeller pitch setting, ignition timing, engine revolutions, and the selection of the correct supercharger gear." Apparently like any new system this one had it's quirks which almost cost them one of the test aircraft when the supercharger gear suddenly cut in at the top of a loop which was violent enough to throw the airplane into a spin. The day was hazy and the pilot never did find out if it was upright or inverted. Either way he was able to recover and the system was eventually made to work.
-
You should think about this one.
You spawn out on the runway going through your "checklist" and then from your right an noe pops up and your still on the runway trying to get your fuel mixture right........ all for not. :D
-
How about an option for engine management through the clipboard? Slight performance increase if you select it and take the time to master it. Along the lines of removing the stall limiter. Just a thought.
yes that is what i want :aok
-
No
Because again, that would put the advantage in the hands of the pros. Stall limiter is fairly harmless and improves performance when switched off. But this sort of thing is complicated and tedious.
Hitech is right. I want a realistic flight model with all that done before I take off. We SPAWN on Runways. So its safe to assume that was done by our pilot before take off when we join the battle.
I want to have realism in flight and gunnery, and not have to worry about everything else so I can enjoy the tooth and nail slug match that is aerial combat.
-
No
Because again, that would put the advantage in the hands of the pros. Stall limiter is fairly harmless and improves performance when switched off. But this sort of thing is complicated and tedious.
Hitech is right. I want a realistic flight model with all that done before I take off. We SPAWN on Runways. So its safe to assume that was done by our pilot before take off when we join the battle.
I want to have realism in flight and gunnery, and not have to worry about everything else so I can enjoy the tooth and nail slug match that is aerial combat.
your right i want bomb sight to be alrady cailbrated and i want the guns to work by them self then because the crew would have done that oh and to add to that can we have tank icons becuase the tank commander would have spoted then :furious oh and what about killstrecks like a nuke btw
-
Imagine all the players upping in 190's just because it has auto controls..... :lol
-
But those scenes were made using the ubisoft Birds of Prey flight model.... :noid
no no no it's all true ben afleck is the reason pear harbor still even exists!
big salutes to ben afleck :salute you are a true american hero!
-
your right i want bomb sight to be alrady cailbrated and i want the guns to work by them self then because the crew would have done that oh and to add to that can we have tank icons becuase the tank commander would have spoted then :furious oh and what about killstrecks like a nuke btw
I sense bitterness and sarcasm. Not needed. Implementing your idea requires a lot of work from our awesome game developers. I'd prefer they spend that time providing us with more equipment rather than more superfluous features on already existing equipment. I get enough checklist crap at my workplace. I don't want it in a game I play to RELIEVE stress.
-
So when you're 15 miles from the base you turn back when your effective range is 15 miles? That's poor planning and certainly does no warrent a crutch implemented. Try conservative flight planning for a change. Maybe you'll make it back despite multiple unplanned deviations.
People keep asking for increased margins to land their score. "Make it the whole field." "Make it the dar ring." "Make it so you can have extra gas given to you." What is so wrong with the boundaries we have now? They are challenging and that makes it fun. If this is implemented, where do the crutches end? "I want a mechanic in the jeep to repair my bent prop. Also have them bring me ammo. Also have them bring a giant industrial fan which will give me a headwind/reduced takeoff roll (because who knows what this terrain you landed on is like)." Yeah I'm being sarcastic, but I'm just illustrating a point. In real life could a jeep bring the aircraft some fuel? Sure, why not. Does it belong in this game? I doubt it. If it were voted to be implemented should it take priority over ANY other addon the game is in need of (more equipment perhaps??)? No, it should not... I'm sorry but this wish is not needed.
First off, Look whos talking about bitterness and sarcasm!!!!! Recognize this?
You should, you posted it THREE, Identical, times!
IN A ROW!
IN THE SAME POST! NOT NEEDED!
ALSO NOT NEEDED are halfwits that tell everyone what Hitech does and doesnt have time for because YOU prefer they work on what YOU want!
All you have to do is remember this is a wish list! We all have a right to say what we want and if you dont like a feature that we ask for, you can always ask for a dummy button to make it easy!
your right i want bomb sight to be alrady cailbrated and i want the guns to work by them self then because the crew would have done that oh and to add to that can we have tank icons becuase the tank commander would have spotted
Im with you olds. Their logic is a little under developed as you point out. I understand the arguments against as well. So I think that they should make it an option like combat trim but with no performance advantage either way. Of course if not operated properly you would suffer a disadvantage using full engine control. But thats the risk we take right? So let them fly the girly way if they want.
-
And this is why P-51 "dogfighting" in Il2 is not exactly a thing of beauty... :D
I've never had to adjust the mixture on the P-51D in Il-2 sturmovik, and the same goes for a lot of late-war American aircraft. None of the Bf 109E-Ks had mixture controls, either, but many aircraft did have manual mixture controls. I don't find it to be too much of a pain because it's very obvious when you need to adjust it, and there's no aircraft-specific knowledge you need to do it right.
The control that actually makes you know your aircraft is the manual blower. For example, the F4F has 3 stages, and if you don't know the right altitudes for them, you'll have a hard time escaping from an A6M when you need to.
Another one that affects combat performance a lot is cooling systems. Opening radiators and cowl flaps causes drag, and the slower you're going, the more you need to open them. Some aircraft had automatic radiator controls, but someone who knows his aircraft can get more from it with manual control. This was tested to death by P-51D pilots in Il-2 Sturmovik, and they found that the fastest sustainable settings were 95% throttle, 95% prop pitch, and the radiator closed. You can run like that indefinitely and you'll be damn fast; just don't get slow in a turn fight.
-
First off, Look whos talking about bitterness and sarcasm!!!!! Recognize this?
You should, you posted it THREE, Identical, times!
IN A ROW!
IN THE SAME POST! NOT NEEDED!
ALSO NOT NEEDED are halfwits that tell everyone what Hitech does and doesnt have time for because YOU prefer they work on what YOU want!
All you have to do is remember this is a wish list! We all have a right to say what we want and if you dont like a feature that we ask for, you can always ask for a dummy button to make it easy!
Im with you olds. Their logic is a little under developed as you point out. I understand the arguments against as well. So I think that they should make it an option like combat trim but with no performance advantage either way. Of course if not operated properly you would suffer a disadvantage using full engine control. But thats the risk we take right? So let them fly the girly way if they want.
at least some one gets it :rolleyes:
-
[quote author=muzik link=topic=305560.msg3935586#msg3935586 date=1296614733
ALSO NOT NEEDED are halfwits that tell everyone what Hitech does and doesnt have time for because YOU prefer they work on what YOU want!
All you have to do is remember this is a wish list! We all have a right to say what we want and if you dont like a feature that we ask for, you can always ask for a dummy button to make it easy!
Im with you olds. Their logic is a little under developed as you point out. I understand the arguments against as well. So I think that they should make it an option like combat trim but with no performance advantage either way. Of course if not operated properly you would suffer a disadvantage using full engine control. But thats the risk we take right? So let them fly the girly way if they want.
[/quote]
Hitech has said no. What's the confusion?
wrongway
-
so why did HTC say no is it to real
-
so why did HTC say no is it to real
I think it was something along the lines of"It isn't worth the time and energy to put the feature in just so you can have the pleasure of pushing a couple of buttons."
He has also stated that this is a GAME, not a FLIGHT SIMULATOR. Games are fun, simulators are are not. There are a lot more people in the public that will pay for a game than there are "air forces" that will pay for a simulator.
-
Actually, I think he said: it's a simulator used to play a game. :)
-
there is a realistic combat sim......its called...damn I cant remeber.....truly its not IL2......nope cant remember, someone remind me.......
-
there is a realistic combat sim......its called...damn I cant remeber.....truly its not IL2......nope cant remember, someone remind me.......
Targetware?
If so, I played it for 5 minutes once. Which incidentally is about how long I'd play Aces High if they implemented realistic engines.
-
Yoss- exactly thats the one thanx :-)
-
I think it was something along the lines of"It isn't worth the time and energy to put the feature in just so you can have the pleasure of pushing a couple of buttons."
He has also stated that this is a GAME, not a FLIGHT SIMULATOR. Games are fun, simulators are are not. There are a lot more people in the public that will pay for a game than there are "air forces" that will pay for a simulator.
I think simulators are fun... :(
-
We wouldn't have any game then silly man.
can we make this game like it would be in ww2
-
If you truly truly really want that level of detail...
I suggest you cancel your subscription and enlist in the air force. Now. today. Make a career change.
You'll get all the details you want there.
When you get tired of all the procedures, feel free to re-subscribe Aces High to relax and have fun.
P.S. Targetware sucked. Even a number of folks on their own forums were discussing "when does minutae get to be too much?" back when I checked it out....
-
so why did HTC say no is it to real
From the quote on the first page, fifth post (mine):
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
wrongway
-
so why did HTC say no is it to real
the answer was on the first page of this thread.. the 4th reply down.
edit: awwrngway beat me to it :)
-
You are not asking for realism, you wish to make things more complicated for it's own sake. An argument could be made for manual super charger gear change but not for mixture control. When in combat, mixture goes forward. I.E. just pushing a button. I never used a mixture control until after I had my license. Mixtures primary purpose is simply to extend range. We already have a engine management for range it's called RPM. What do you do in combat, hit WEP, I.E. full rpm.
Many planes simply used auto rich auto lean settings, in a super charged engine, mixture does not change with pressure, only with temperature changes, because the pressure is constant in the manifold.
The where we always try to draw the line is does it add fun to the game or does it simply add things that most people consider nothing more then a pain in the ass.
HiTech
-
If you want a total sim look into the Accu-sim series.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCLMgLB9Qlo&feature=related
This is a video of the B17 doing the pre-flights and starting up.
-
You are not asking for realism, you wish to make things more complicated for it's own sake. An argument could be made for manual super charger gear change but not for mixture control. When in combat, mixture goes forward. I.E. just pushing a button. I never used a mixture control until after I had my license. Mixtures primary purpose is simply to extend range. We already have a engine management for range it's called RPM. What do you do in combat, hit WEP, I.E. full rpm.
Many planes simply used auto rich auto lean settings, in a super charged engine, mixture does not change with pressure, only with temperature changes, because the pressure is constant in the manifold.
The where we always try to draw the line is does it add fun to the game or does it simply add things that most people consider nothing more then a pain in the ass.
HiTech
I understand that you dont have time to implement everything guys ask for and Im guessing this one is a doozy of a job. I also understand and agree that we dont want to run off the simple folk by making it too hard to understand. I have always hoped for the best for your company so I agree with that logic, but what you just said doesnt make any sense.
The "reality" = complicated, so yes we are (very much so) asking for realism. If you want to say we are asking for "complicated," go right ahead. Tom(ay)toes/tom(ah)toes, but it is not for the sake of. It's for the challenge.
And Im not here to argue the ins and outs of performance issues with you, but if you dont know what your doing in a high performance aircraft you will suffer a performance loss as a result of improper engine management however small it may be.
So what if you could implement this with default settings to easy mode and even make it difficult to find and change those settings to guarantee they are only changed intentionally. What skin off of anyones nose is it if I chose to fly with advanced settings? As some of us suggested we dont need or want an advantage like the stall limiter/no limiter function. And it only makes me an easier target if I fail to use it properly.
What percentage of IL2 players do you think would come to AH and reject it because of what you consider a minor or a perceived lack of realism? I have run into a few on the net who bashed AH because of this perception. I dont say this to knock the your game at all. Some of those guys are just groupies who refuse to take a real look. Others were logical and gave props for the good points, but seemed to prefer the complexity. How can this idea not be worth it if it allowed you buck one of the few arguments used against AH and potentially steal customers from the competition?
As I said, I have always hoped for the best for AH, so it only makes sense that if you could make hard core and casual simmers happy in the same arena why not? We know you're not going to just drop everything and say ok to this, but can you even see the possibility for something like this if a miracle happened that left you with nothing to do?
-
What percentage of IL2 players do you think would come to AH and reject it because of what you consider a minor or a perceived lack of realism? I have run into a few on the net who bashed AH because of this perception. I dont say this to knock the your game at all. Some of those guys are just groupies who refuse to take a real look. Others were logical and gave props for the good points, but seemed to prefer the complexity. How can this idea not be worth it if it allowed you buck one of the few arguments used against AH and potentially steal customers from the competition?
Now that's an interesting argument. I'm not sure anything will come of it, but I give you points for rhetorical excellence. The Il-2 community is huge, and so the idea of tapping into their reservoir of players is a good one.
There are still other things that prevent a lot of Il-2 folks from trying AH. Besides lack of engine management, the criticisms I've heard the most are:
main arena isn't like WW2
overly generous icons
inability to host your own coop or mini-arena
lack of aircraft outside of the 1944-45 ETO.
Ultimately, Aces High delivers its own experience that has its own strong points. There's plenty of room for different flight sims that emphasize different things, and a majority here seem happy with engine management as it is.
-
You can have everything you asked for as long as you are willing to get up at 2AM for briefing, eat lousy food, sleep in possibly a moldy tent in the jungle, or desert. Not everyone went to the ETO. You'll be expected to fly the mission you are given, in the plane you are assigned, which might not be the one you dreamed of flying. And if you get shot down and killed, you can no longer play the game.
Oh, and you have to sit in a freezer, sucking on oxygen, wrapped in 3 layers of clothes and you can't go to the bathroom until the mission is over. No alcohol in the cockpit either and having a significant other bring warm food to you is forbidden.
Sounds fair.
btW as a new player you will be given one of the older, worn out planes. Only vets get new planes with new engines. Newbies have to survive with the hand me downs.
<shuffles through papers> Ahh, here is your assignment. You are a Japanese Val pilot, stationed on Rabaul in 1943. Food has been pretty much cut off, and rumor has it that some troops are eating captured POWs. Allied air supremacy has been assured and your life expectancy, should your rebuilt Val get into the air, is about 20 minutes.
Good luck. We hope you enjoy the new, realistic Aces High. Engine management isn't hard on a Val, and you don't have to worry about raising the gear :)
-
You can have everything you asked for as long as you are willing to get up at 2AM for briefing, eat lousy food, sleep in possibly a moldy tent in the jungle, or desert. Not everyone went to the ETO. You'll be expected to fly the mission you are given, in the plane you are assigned, which might not be the one you dreamed of flying. And if you get shot down and killed, you can no longer play the game.
Oh, and you have to sit in a freezer, sucking on oxygen, wrapped in 3 layers of clothes and you can't go to the bathroom until the mission is over. No alcohol in the cockpit either and having a significant other bring warm food to you is forbidden.
Sounds fair.
btW as a new player you will be given one of the older, worn out planes. Only vets get new planes with new engines. Newbies have to survive with the hand me downs.
<shuffles through papers> Ahh, here is your assignment. You are a Japanese Val pilot, stationed on Rabaul in 1943. Food has been pretty much cut off, and rumor has it that some troops are eating captured POWs. Allied air supremacy has been assured and your life expectancy, should your rebuilt Val get into the air, is about 20 minutes.
Good luck. We hope you enjoy the new, realistic Aces High. Engine management isn't hard on a Val, and you don't have to worry about raising the gear :)
Dude, please dont tease me that way! Its too cruel. Ive been waiting for someone to tell me how to get to Fantasy Island or the StarTrek Next Gen. holodeck for years. I'll pay. You can have my left nut too! JUST GIVE IT TO ME NOW!
Pfft some of us dont live in fear of such things!
-
That was very entertaining Corky. I'm not sure what your argument is, but I had a good chuckle. :)
-
muzik: What do you believe the net effect of adding Mixture would be?
I have heard you argument that complexity and realism are the same thing and people trying to argue the point that they want things as real as possible. They are not the same thing.
Adding mixture control would only have effects on the range of the aircraft. When in a fight it has 0 effect and adding it would actually make things more difficult then in real life. Most planes with one hand you can put 3 levers forward in one motion. I.E. similar to what our wep key does, puts all forward. You would argue that it should be 3 different keys because it is more "realistic" but it actually adds complexity that does not exist in a real aircraft. There are so many things that are harder to do in a sim, then when flying for real. The net effect is that work load is higher in the sim then in the real thing.
On your IL2 argument you make a classic mistake of think only gain and not loss, how many people would not play do to the added complexity?
Do you really wish to wait 10 - 20 mins on the ground before flying each flight? Do you really wish to fly for many hours before engaging the enemy? If you answer no to any question then you really don't want everything to be realistic but only the things YOU wish. And hence the argument of wanting everything as real as can be falls apart ,and you are left with does the realism make it more or less fun for the most people.
HiTech
-
Playing devil's advocate here... ;)
I don't think he's asking to wait 10-20 minutes on the ground before each flight. That's a silly way to read it.
Some of the Il-2 mods have added engine warm up times, but almost no one uses them. For the most part, you turn on your engine and go, just like AH.
Do you really wish to wait 10 - 20 mins on the ground before flying each flight? Do you really wish to fly for many hours before engaging the enemy? If you answer no to any question then you really don't want everything to be realistic but only the things YOU wish. And hence the argument of wanting everything as real as can be falls apart ,and you are left with does the realism make it more or less fun for the most people.
I really don't see the logic of this argument. Wanting more engine management isn't the same thing as wanting things to be as real as they can be. Everyone has their own place where they drawn the line between fun and realism, including you Hitech. It's always selective realism, no matter how you do it.
---------
Anyway, it took me a long time, but I do agree that there's no reason for AH to change here. How things are now seems very successful, and there are plenty of other games to play when I want to push more buttons.
-
I really don't see the logic of this argument. Wanting more engine management isn't the same thing as wanting things to be as real as they can be. Everyone has their own place where they drawn the line between fun and realism, including you Hitech. It's always selective realism, no matter how you do it.
I agree Anax, but using the argument I want more engine management because it more real like saying as he did
The "reality" = complicated, so yes we are (very much so) asking for realism. If you want to say we are asking for "complicated," go right ahead. Tom(ay)toes/tom(ah)toes, but it is not for the sake of. It's for the challenge.
He is using the classic argument I want something because it is more real. And all I am saying is that this is a completely invalid argument when it comes to game design. I could very quickly add mixture control to the sim, similar to IL2, but don't think that it would be / is accurate or real. It simply would be press key, watch gauge, improve range. To make it accurate many other very complex things would need to be added. And most are not possible to find good information on.
2nd Real = complicated is not always true. Many time you can make something less real by adding complexity. It all depends on what you are trying to simulate. The simple fact that you would have to use 2 keys vs a lever makes it more complex then the real thing.
HiTech
-
You're right that "more real" isn't an argument. The trouble is that because there's a big difference in playable game mechanics versus a real war, some things that are "realistic" can have surprising consequences. The whole engine warm-up procedure is a good example of that. There was a server that wanted to encourage people to die less by having the engines start cold. Well, they made the engines cold, and suddenly the rate of suicide-vulch attacks dramatically increased because the temptation to shoot an aircraft warming on the ground was just too great...AAA be damned! :lol
I've flown Il-2 a bit and mixture is a feature of engine management that I pay very little attention to. Mostly it's "I'm at 12,000ft and my rpms are slowing," adjust the mixture with a button-push and it's back to normal.
The one thing that I do pay close attention to is heat, because cooling causes drag, which decreases performance. The airspeed difference between radiator open or closed seems to be very large in some aircraft.
-
I agree with Hitech on this, Mixture is to insignificant to add to the game as it would take up buttons on the key board that can be used for things like being able to open the canopy, or locking the tail wheel without pulling back on the stick :devil
-
I've flown Il-2 a bit and mixture is a feature of engine management that I pay very little attention to. Mostly it's "I'm at 12,000ft and my rpms are slowing," adjust the mixture with a button-push and it's back to normal.
Why would RPM slow on a constant speed prop due to lean mixture?
HiTech
-
That was very entertaining Corky. I'm not sure what your argument is, but I had a good chuckle. :)
The argument is, "You want realism? Well heres your realism."
-
I probably got that wrong. It's in the Russian aircraft that I usually encounter manual mixture, and I can't read the instruments worth a damn. There's a whole cockpit guide with English translations, but I don't fly them often enough to learn them. I just listen to the sound of the engine and go by that information to know when to adjust the mixture.
-------------
Just checked out the La-5F...
As I climb to altitude, the first thing that needs adjusting is the blower. The MP goes down, but RPM remains constant before I switch it.
I don't need to lean the mixture until I'm above ~4km, or about 13,000ft. The MP decreases, and RPMs drop too before I lean it.
Maybe it's wrong. I have no idea.
-
muzik: What do you believe the net effect of adding Mixture would be?
First let me reiterate again that I suggested that you have both complex and non-complex with no performance advantage for either! So the net result would be all of your customers are happy and not just the ones who hide behind you because they cant form opinions of their own. Not a single one of them can tell me how it would negatively effect them if the performance characteristics were the same either way.
The other result is that all of those twits who scoff at AH because of its lack of complex engine management no longer have a leg to stand on. And that argument alone is literally worth its weight in gold lest we forget "the customer is always right!" How much money have you lost because of negative feedback on the net (youtube) when someone reads "AH sucks, their FM is like pacman, blah blah blah?" Losing a single customer at a restaurant has been calculated that the lifetime loss is over 6 digits!
From a business standpoint this is a win/win for your current customers and it satisfies criteria that potential customers will use to judge and ultimately choose or reject your game. And that is not theory or a possibility, that is fact and has already happened to you on multiple occasions.
I have heard you argument that complexity and realism are the same thing and people trying to argue the point that they want things as real as possible. They are not the same thing.
We know the difference between FULL realism and a slightly more accurate game. Why are you asking us to choose between a little more complexity and an extreme we did not ask for?
Adding mixture control would only have effects on the range of the aircraft. When in a fight it has 0 effect and adding it would actually make things more difficult then in real life. Most planes with one hand you can put 3 levers forward in one motion. I.E. similar to what our wep key does, puts all forward. You would argue that it should be 3 different keys because it is more "realistic" but it actually adds complexity that does not exist in a real aircraft. There are so many things that are harder to do in a sim, then when flying for real. The net effect is that work load is higher in the sim then in the real thing.
As I said earlier I dont want to debate performance issues but this is a paragraph out of the following article.
"Engines run on a mixture of fuel and air. We know that, for takeoff, the mixture is set to full rich, while, for cruise, we lean. Why do we do that? What happens inside the engine? If the mixture is too lean – I mean way too lean – it won’t burn: it’s all air and hardly any fuel. If it’s too rich – way too rich – it won’t burn either: it’s all fuel and there’s no oxygen left to allow it to burn. Somewhere between too rich and too lean there’s an optimum mixture; the mixture that produces optimum power."
http://www.huygens.org/sape/pilotage/Engines/index.html
Yes I do understand why it's more difficult on a pc than in RL and that it would make an unattractive feature to many in game. I already addressed that.
But it is a little more complex than pushing 3 levers evenly regardless of altitude. So the difference comes down to whether someone fails to adjust these items correctly or at all in the heat of the combat. That isnt even considering the drag induced by cowl positions. From what Ive seen, IL2 has the complexity but no real substance behind it because they have apparently used a cookie cutter to do most of their work which means you have an opportunity to one up them!
On your IL2 argument you make a classic mistake of think only gain and not loss, how many people would not play do to the added complexity?
Do you really wish to wait 10 - 20 mins on the ground before flying each flight? Do you really wish to fly for many hours before engaging the enemy? If you answer no to any question then you really don't want everything to be realistic but only the things YOU wish. And hence the argument of wanting everything as real as can be falls apart ,and you are left with does the realism make it more or less fun for the most people.
I did not make that mistake, I suggested allow both, with no performance advantage.
You are trying put words in our mouths to push us to an extreme we (myself especially) did not asked for. That's not an argument, thats a gimmick to force people to back down. I told you I agree with not doing anything that would change the way current players enjoy the game. We never said anything about changing field locations or warm up times. Some of us arent stupid, we understand there is fine line and it's not in the same place for everyone!
Youre a businessman and we just gave you ideas that could bring in more discriminating customers and youre telling your current customers what they want is silly when there are other businessmen out there who offer what we ask for. All we want is for you to be more successful and to hear, "sure, that might work. But we dont have time for it right now. Maybe in the future if conditions change, we will see!" We will understand.
Respectfully MUZIK
-
Solution:
Add a placebo button or two.
Alt+C opens cooling flaps.
Alt+P primes the engine before take-off.
Alt+X does whatever else you want it to.
Etc.
The actual results of pushing extra keys on a computer keyboard"--> Nothing.
But it will make some people happy.
:banana:
wrongway
-
Oh and btw, there are hundreds of thousands if not millions of dedicated MSFS users out there who go to extremes making and using "realism" mods for that sim so they can fly for hours making around the world, true to life trips with no time compression because they enjoy those "silly/complex" aspects of flight.
Obviously not all of them are interested in ww2, but as I am sure you have seen with the add ons, some are. It just seems to me that your "line" in the sand could overlap into their customer bases interest just a little further.
-
muzik: What do you believe the net effect of adding Mixture would be?
I have heard you argument that complexity and realism are the same thing and people trying to argue the point that they want things as real as possible. They are not the same thing.
Adding mixture control would only have effects on the range of the aircraft. When in a fight it has 0 effect and adding it would actually make things more difficult then in real life. Most planes with one hand you can put 3 levers forward in one motion. I.E. similar to what our wep key does, puts all forward. You would argue that it should be 3 different keys because it is more "realistic" but it actually adds complexity that does not exist in a real aircraft. There are so many things that are harder to do in a sim, then when flying for real. The net effect is that work load is higher in the sim then in the real thing.
On your IL2 argument you make a classic mistake of think only gain and not loss, how many people would not play do to the added complexity?
Do you really wish to wait 10 - 20 mins on the ground before flying each flight? Do you really wish to fly for many hours before engaging the enemy? If you answer no to any question then you really don't want everything to be realistic but only the things YOU wish. And hence the argument of wanting everything as real as can be falls apart ,and you are left with does the realism make it more or less fun for the most people.
HiTech
cant we have it as a option like stall limiter if players dont like it take it off but i do wnat to have to prime my eng and have rich settings and some other ppl might too if its a option its the best of both worlds :aok
-
Solution:
Add a placebo button or two.
Alt+C opens cooling flaps.
Alt+P primes the engine before take-off.
Alt+X does whatever else you want it to.
Etc.
The actual results of pushing extra keys on a computer keyboard"--> Nothing.
But it will make some people happy.
:banana:
wrongway
perfect idea, but have it as a option i know some ppl dont want it but for us that want do it would be cool
-
I can see two arenas......main, as it is now, no change. AvA more in the WW2 format with full ''realism'' that way you could make everyone happy heck AvA is allready almost there.....I think that would be a smart thing to do. diddnt engines die randomly? code that also, everything :-)
-
Oh and btw, there are hundreds of thousands if not millions of dedicated MSFS users out there who go to extremes making and using "realism" mods for that sim so they can fly for hours making around the world, true to life trips with no time compression because they enjoy those "silly/complex" aspects of flight.
Obviously not all of them are interested in ww2, but as I am sure you have seen with the add ons, some are. It just seems to me that your "line" in the sand could overlap into their customer bases interest just a little further.
You really cannot compare MSFS users to AH. Goals of the each are different, and now even Microsoft is moving toward a simpler design.
Q:How does “Microsoft Flight” differ from “Flight Simulator?” Why the new name? What’s changed?
A:With “Microsoft Flight” we’re approaching the virtual flight genre from the ground up, with the focus on the universal appeal of the experience of Flight. We believe the simplicity of “Microsoft Flight” perfectly captures that vision while welcoming the millions of existing Flight Simulator fans. The new “Microsoft Flight” retains the full fidelity simulation longtime fans have come to expect while offering all players a whole new look and feel, a wide range of new game play and challenges, persistent experiences and social connectivity.
-
Muzik, you are requesting something that perhaps 1-2% of the customers actually care about.
Most would rather see new aircraft and gameplay that keep the game fresh and new (I am one of those). Not a feature that 99% of the community will not use.
Think about it this way:
Mixture is not coded into the power models as they stand now, why spend the time and resources to do so when a LOT of the LW aircraft don't gain anything from? He already stated most supercharged aircraft (which a lot of aircraft are) will not need mixture changes. Auto lean and auto rich are the options they had.
Also, 5pointOh, I've been following Flight very closely, and from the sounds of it, it's really not going to change much in terms of realism. If you put FSX on lowest realism settings, it's almost impossible to crash unless you put the a/c into controlled flight into the ground as it were. Apparently what they are focusing on is a more directed approach to those who want that. Missions, for instance, are going to be a larger portion of the game than they were previously. I think the biggest complaint they got from the non-hardcore flight simmers was that there was not nearly enough direction after the very few missions were completed.
From what I understand, all the complexity of the previous sims are going to be there for the the hardcore simmers, but the ability for the simulator to be simpler and directed is going to be an option as well.
-
Muzik wrote:
Youre a businessman and we just gave you ideas that could bring in more discriminating customers and youre telling your current customers what they want is silly when there are other businessmen out there who offer what we ask for. All we want is for you to be more successful and to hear, "sure, that might work. But we dont have time for it right now. Maybe in the future if conditions change, we will see!" We will understand.
You have just stepped completely across the line. And hence I'm done discussing this with you.
HiTech
-
:bhead ummmm no... absolutely not. i think u underestimate the amount of actual work it took to fly these planes. its much more than mixture, and starting one engine at a time. you have to constantly play with the controls as u change altitude, speed, etc... too many people would end up blowing the engine etc... as someone said i cant remember who but "its just a game"!!!
-
Has this thread been locked yet? Guess not.
-
Has this thread been locked yet? Guess not.
the BBS needs a squelch butten or im gunna pull the trigger with a 45 pointing towards me :bhead
-
Do you really wish to wait 10 - 20 mins on the ground before flying each flight? Do you really wish to fly for many hours before engaging the enemy?
I hope I'm not the only one who thought, "Hey, that'd be some serious immersion, I'd like to do that". :uhoh :D
-
:bhead ummmm no... absolutely not. i think u underestimate the amount of actual work it took to fly these planes. its much more than mixture, and starting one engine at a time. you have to constantly play with the controls as u change altitude, speed, etc... too many people would end up blowing the engine etc... as someone said i cant remember who but "its just a game"!!!
yet again some one finds a way to hate me
-
I hope I'm not the only one who thought, "Hey, that'd be some serious immersion, I'd like to do that". :uhoh :D
Honestly I would like do something like this, however, I only want to do it every blue moon. This type of realism would be great (IMO) for scenarios, I could easily see myself warming up the B25 while going over final details with my squadron, taxiing out the runway, going through the motions, etc. It would be awesome, but only for that. In the MA I want to take off immediately and get into the battle, not sit around fiddling with fuel mixtures, cowl flaps, and battery settings.
-
Honestly I would like do something like this, however, I only want to do it every blue moon. This type of realism would be great (IMO) for scenarios, I could easily see myself warming up the B25 while going over final details with my squadron, taxiing out the runway, going through the motions, etc. It would be awesome, but only for that. In the MA I want to take off immediately and get into the battle, not sit around fiddling with fuel mixtures, cowl flaps, and battery settings.
Agree 100%
-
If it's 100,000 people......... It's alot. Your opinion is flawed.
And last time I checked we don't want that kind of "realism"
Oh and btw, there are hundreds of thousands if not millions of dedicated MSFS users out there who go to extremes making and using "realism" mods for that sim so they can fly for hours making around the world, true to life trips with no time compression because they enjoy those "silly/complex" aspects of flight.
-
:bhead ummmm no... absolutely not. i think u underestimate the amount of actual work it took to fly these planes. its much more than mixture, and starting one engine at a time. you have to constantly play with the controls as u change altitude, speed, etc... too many people would end up blowing the engine etc... as someone said i cant remember who but "its just a game"!!!
Several people in this thread have underestimated it. But if you actually read the thread, you would notice it wasnt the advocates, it was the detractors. Advocates called it immersion or a challenge, detractors called it insignificant. AND once again I'll repeat myself, ONLY those who choose to fly with these features would have those problems, in which case the only fun being ruined is our own. So do have a real argument as to how this would hurt your game play?
-
And once again, somebody must tell you that HiTech has already ruled on, and given reasons for the big NO.
What are you not reading right brother? He's not wasting the time and effort for something 6 people will use. :salute
AND once again I'll repeat myself, ONLY those who choose to fly with these features would have those problems, in which case the only fun being ruined is our own. So do have a real argument as to how this would hurt your game play?
-
And once again, somebody must tell you that HiTech has already ruled on, and given reasons for the big NO.
What are you not reading right brother? He's not wasting the time and effort for something 6 people will use. :salute
sigh we need f3 in fighters then i mean its waaaaaaaaaaaay to real
-
LOL..........
sigh we need f3 in fighters then i mean its waaaaaaaaaaaay to real
Now don't get me wrong, I like the immersion idea. But I also "like" the policy HTC has about adding stuff and how it will affect gameplay. So although I think it would be "cool" I know I'd never use it and rather have them build that B29. :salute
-
See rule #4
-
Who's humping who here little doggy?
See rule #4
BUT.... That first sentence made me spit out vodka!!! Ya Bastage!
-
Who's humping who here little doggy?
BUT.... That first sentence made me spit out vodka!!! Ya Bastage!
some one say vodka wait im 12...still did some one say vodka :noid
-
(http://www.plentyoftorrents.com/flsh/pics/gif/spit.gif)
-
I agree. It's a game. We already have "auto-takeoff." I've argued on the side of realism before, but the bottom line is that it's a simulation, not realism. We could debate all sorts of non-realistic issues in the game all day... I.E:
- We can fly through friendly targets without taking damage.
Implementing certain things destroy game play. I like realism too, but there's a limit!
while it is true that there is a limit to the reality of a simulations, i would agree on the flying through friendly buildings is a LITTLE bit far-fetched :o
-
not reading 6 pages but here is a simple solution.
auto takeoff enabled-> current
auto takeoff not enabled-> manual engine starting
i for one like the idea of manually starting the engines if i choose too.
-
while it is true that there is a limit to the reality of a simulations, i would agree on the flying through friendly buildings is a LITTLE bit far-fetched :o
Try flying through a friendly building, I promise you won't make it out.
not reading 6 pages but here is a simple solution.
auto takeoff enabled-> current
auto takeoff not enabled-> manual engine starting
i for one like the idea of manually starting the engines if i choose too.
No, I have auto-takeoff off and I would much rather press E than do all the manual crap. It would have to be another option, but as HiTech said, it's not going to be implemented.
-
Reminds me of this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsPjn1L0elw
Available now for $32.99 (ouch).
-
Reminds me of this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsPjn1L0elw
Available now for $32.99 (ouch).
Oh man that is too damn cool.
-
Oh man that is too damn cool.
They have 5 videos up as a training on how to fly it, incredible.