Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: BnZs on March 16, 2011, 03:38:40 AM
-
Are there going to be any new planes added and/or modifications to existing flight models or changes to the arena itself any time in the foreseeable future?
-
Prepare for all the "Two Weeks" tard replies and their varients.
:rolleyes:
Wab
-
Are there going to be any new planes added and/or modifications to existing flight models or changes to the arena itself any time in the foreseeable future?
I would like to know the same. However, I would exclude player-made maps. We already know Ranger is making a map. I would like to know, what past that, are their plans. If any.
Wab
-
I wish I had the aerodynamic engineering credentials to say the DR1 torque modeling is moderately overstated (wrong) but I do not. So I have to live with it. Or do I?....actually no. that is why I don't visit there anymore. I can say here with confidence that my own personal needs for the suspension of disbelief when I fly in a flight simulator are simply raked over the coals when I fight in and against DR1s.
Having said that: an SE5a and Albatross would go a LONG WAYs towards bringing me back into the WW1 game. Just hate that little triplane devil :t
-
I wish I had the aerodynamic engineering credentials to say the DR1 torque modeling is moderately overstated (wrong) but I do not. So I have to live with it. Or do I?....actually no. that is why I don't visit there anymore. I can say here with confidence that my own personal needs for the suspension of disbelief when I fly in a flight simulator are simply raked over the coals when I fight in and against DR1s.
Having said that: an SE5a and Albatross would go a LONG WAYs towards bringing me back into the WW1 game. Just hate that little triplane devil :t
I gotta agree with Yeager here in that the use of the DR1 is an arena killer for me. I do go in there every-once-in-a-while and grab a Dr7 but if I encounter mostly DR1's then I'm out. I suppose I could fly the DR1 but frankly, I don't like it.
-
I gotta agree with Yeager here in that the use of the DR1 is an arena killer for me. I do go in there every-once-in-a-while and grab a Dr7 but if I encounter mostly DR1's then I'm out. I suppose I could fly the DR1 but frankly, I don't like it.
+1, except I'm partial to the F-1.
-
I see nothing wrong with the Triplane, aside from the fact that it is made of adamantium. And I know that cannot be historically accurate, because I've read the comic where Logan went into a berserker rage and slashed a whole Jasta of Dr1s to bits with his claws...
Seriously, the maneuver edge, I take it in stride, the little thing was a maneuverable lift monster. And I find the Camel *almost* as good a Turner Yeager. But the ability to absolutely absorb tons of ammo and to pull black-out G maneuvers more appropriate to WWII airplanes...nah. Don't buy it for a minute.
And don't forget the Spad. It would be flat-out fast, diving, bnz fighter in the WWI arena. Perhaps that would be annoying at times, yet it would also draw users.
Now, back to my question...
I wish I had the aerodynamic engineering credentials to say the DR1 torque modeling is moderately overstated (wrong) but I do not. So I have to live with it. Or do I?....actually no. that is why I don't visit there anymore. I can say here with confidence that my own personal needs for the suspension of disbelief when I fly in a flight simulator are simply raked over the coals when I fight in and against DR1s.
Having said that: an SE5a and Albatross would go a LONG WAYs towards bringing me back into the WW1 game. Just hate that little triplane devil :t
-
I would like to know the same. However, I would exclude player-made maps. We already know Ranger is making a map. I would like to know, what past that, are their plans. If any.
Wab
Submitted it over a week ago. Waiting on Skuzzy to put it into play. :salute
-
Seriously, the maneuver edge, I take it in stride, the little thing was a maneuverable lift monster. And I find the Camel *almost* as good a Turner Yeager. But the ability to absolutely absorb tons of ammo and to pull black-out G maneuvers more appropriate to WWII airplanes...nah. Don't buy it for a minute.
That and it's about 10 mph too fast...
-
Personally, while I defer to others on the historical modelling of the DR.I, I think balance-wise the main problem with the DR.I is the completely one dimensional game-play that centers, and is limited to, exactly the DR.I’s most advantageous envelope. The one mission profile available is exactly where the DR. I excels. So with-in that context, it will enjoy an unbalancing advantage.
Start adding other mission profiles (e.g. 15k Gotha bomber runs to destroy field and strategic resources, Fast moving SPAD XIII attacks on observation balloons, Zeplins at 20k, etc) and you would start to provide other contexts in which the DR.I might not dominate. It will still dominate its part of the arena ecosystem, but there will be other areas and mission available where the DR.I might not be the best plane to choose. That will start to add variety.
As long as there is only one mission profile available, and it’s the one dogfight available on the map, between the only 2 fields that get used, between the same 2 countries, and at the same alt it always is, then it will remain a mostly DR.I arena, most of the time (when anyone is actually in there).
Regards,
Wab
-
I see nothing wrong with the Triplane
I really wish I could say the same. The gyro effect on the DR1 allows it to maneuver in ways that simply defy virtual gravity, in my minds eye. Whether I am right or wrong can be argued and no doubt eventually proven, but if it kills my sense of believability then I cannot participate. From the numbers we see in the WW1 arena these past few months (zero to four at any given time, more often than not -zero) I cannot be the only one who feels the force, or lack of it.
-
The Dr1 is only utterly dominant when you must do a few dozen sustained 360 degree turns with it. Often the fight would not last that long if the triplane were not made of admantium.
Its other major disadvantage is ridiculous Gs it can pull. Being able to pull black-out Gs at speed is a huge cornering advantage when fighting planes that are substantially more G limited and I have been shown 0, none, nada, nill evidence that a Dr1 was tougher in this regard than a Camel or a DVII.
Personally, while I defer to others on the historical modelling of the DR.I, I think balance-wise the main problem with the DR.I is the completely one dimensional game-play that centers, and is limited to, exactly the DR.I’s most advantageous envelope. The one mission profile available is exactly where the DR. I excels. So with-in that context, it will enjoy an unbalancing advantage.
Start adding other mission profiles (e.g. 15k Gotha bomber runs to destroy field and strategic resources, Fast moving SPAD XIII attacks on observation balloons, Zeplins at 20k, etc) and you would start to provide other contexts in which the DR.I might not dominate. It will still dominate its part of the arena ecosystem, but there will be other areas and mission available where the DR.I might not be the best plane to choose. That will start to add variety.
As long as there is only one mission profile available, and it’s the one dogfight available on the map, between the only 2 fields that get used, between the same 2 countries, and at the same alt it always is, then it will remain a mostly DR.I arena, most of the time (when anyone is actually in there).
Regards,
Wab
-
Hmmmph...gyroscopic effects are part of combat, and frankly the Camel with its even greater instability in yaw can do even more exotic things.
-
Give us the SE5a.........
-
[quote author=BnZs link=topic=308898.msg3989822#msg3989822 date=1300291505
Its other major disadvantage is ridiculous Gs it can pull. Being able to pull black-out Gs at speed is a huge cornering advantage when fighting planes that are substantially more G limited and I have been shown 0, none, nada, nill evidence that a Dr1 was tougher in this regard than a Camel or a DVII.
[/quote]
The Dr1 wing design was so strong that it didn't need struts and wire bracing. The struts that were added to the original design were not necessary and were added simply to reassure the pilots who were uncomfortable seeing the wings flex. The top wing failures that occurred were reportedly manufacturing defects not design defects.
Have we seen any evidence that the Dr1 couldn't handle more G loading than the Camel or DVII ?
-
Hmmmph...gyroscopic effects are part of combat, and frankly the Camel with its even greater instability in yaw can do even more exotic things.
From my experience the F1 had no where near the gyroscopic anti gravity nonsense that the DR1 displayed regularly. We must be playing two different games. I loved the F1. Loved the D7. Enjoyed the F2b. Developed a dislike for the DR1 very early on. Came to despise the thing. It killed the WW1 arena for me, and it really is a shame. It can still be saved though. Check that gyroscopic stuff on the DR1. Make sure it is being properly impacted by gravity on all three axis. Also double check to make sure the sides of the fuselage are imparting drag when the thing fly's sideways. If checks out ok (which I seriously doubt), then perk the thing or delete it, and give us a plane in its place that fly's like a powered kite and not an imperial Tie Fighter.
-
The Dr1 wing design was so strong that it didn't need struts and wire bracing. The struts that were added to the original design were not necessary and were added simply to reassure the pilots who were uncomfortable seeing the wings flex. The top wing failures that occurred were reportedly manufacturing defects not design defects.
Aside from manufacturing defects, the top wing could also generate much more lift than the other two, leading to it disconnecting under high-lift scenarios, for obvious reasons.
Have we seen any evidence that the Dr1 couldn't handle more G loading than the Camel or DVII ?
Evidence of such is notoriously hard to come by with WWI planes. We are left with combat reports, which stress the Dr1s strengths as being climbing and turning ability, and its weaknesses being slow speed and tendency to loose the top wing. The topic of what to do in the face of lack of much verifiable data for the grist has been discussed before, and I believe if there is a certain amount of guessing involved, it makes sense to fudge things in the direction of good gameplay, rather than the opposite, IOW, in the direction of rough equity in plane strength.
-
We are not happy with the DR1 modeling also, we have a suspect where the problem is, but gyro is not the issue.
Ive been toying with a second goal (I.E. not just dog fighting) to implement in the WW1 arena that would provide a reason for fighting.
HiTech
-
We are not happy with the DR1 modeling also, we have a suspect where the problem is, but gyro is not the issue.
HiTech
:rock :rock :cheers: :aok :aok
-
We are not happy with the DR1 modeling also, we have a suspect where the problem is, but gyro is not the issue.
Ive been toying with a second goal (I.E. not just dog fighting) to implement in the WW1 arena that would provide a reason for fighting.
HiTech
(http://img.thepriceguide.com.au/66686.jpg)
-
We are not happy with the DR1 modeling also, we have a suspect where the problem is, but gyro is not the issue.
Ive been toying with a second goal (I.E. not just dog fighting) to implement in the WW1 arena that would provide a reason for fighting.
HiTech
Best news I've had in a year.
Its not a "when" issue. Its simply wanting to know that the problems are recognized and there is an intention of moving towards a more ideal state than what is currently available.
We all want the WWI arena to be the success that it could be (even if we all have our particular ideas on how to get there).
:salute,
Wab
-
We are not happy with the DR1 modeling also, we have a suspect where the problem is, but gyro is not the issue.
Ive been toying with a second goal (I.E. not just dog fighting) to implement in the WW1 arena that would provide a reason for fighting.
HiTech
You just made a LOT of people very VERY happy. Me included :x
Thanks, man :O :banana:
-
Ive been toying with a second goal (I.E. not just dog fighting) to implement in the WW1 arena that would provide a reason for fighting.
HiTech
That's great news hitech :banana:
-
Ive been toying with a second goal (I.E. not just dog fighting) to implement in the WW1 arena that would provide a reason for fighting.
Can you share just a broad outline of the direction you might be thinking here?
IMHO, this is by far the biggest problem with the WWI arena. What technical modelling issue might be affecting the DR.I are dwarfed by game-play consideration, IMHO.
There were hundreds in the arena early on. Then they started fading away. Most of my squadies were like "yeah these little planes are fun to fly and an interesting change of pace, but surely this isn't all they are planning to do with the arena. We'll be back when they get a full arena up and running."
Goal-Oriented-Combat is what made the WWII MA in AH a success. Without the goal structure, its just going in circles.
:salute,
Wab
-
That's great news Hitech look forward to any changes. :aok :banana:
-
the dogfighters need the toolshedders?
-
the dogfighters need the toolshedders?
Yep. And visa versa.
Like any ecosystem, an arena needs a healthy amount of biodiversity. It needs tards, aces, furballers, toolshedders, bomber and gv dweebs, and everything in between.
When a monoculture is established, that eventually leads to stagnation, toxicity, and eventual depopulation.
(Oh Lord. Someone stop me before I try and work in Global Warming. :O)
Wab
-
(Oh Lord. Someone stop me before I try and work in Global Warming. :O)
Wab
The reason we don't have any winter maps maybe?
-
We are not happy with the DR1 modeling also, we have a suspect where the problem is, but gyro is not the issue.
Ive been toying with a second goal (I.E. not just dog fighting) to implement in the WW1 arena that would provide a reason for fighting.
HiTech
Thank you kindly sir for your attention. I love this game and I am honored to be a guest in your house.
-
We are not happy with the DR1 modeling also, we have a suspect where the problem is, but gyro is not the issue.
Ive been toying with a second goal (I.E. not just dog fighting) to implement in the WW1 arena that would provide a reason for fighting.
Great news!
I have no idea where you guys think the problem might be, I just found the following interesting:
(http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f147/Wmaker/Wing2.jpg)
As said, not saying that there's anything wrong with the lift chracteristics per se. Just thought it was interesting. IIRC one reason why F2B's lower wing is attached below the fuselage was to elimate airflow around one wing interferring with the other.
-
Interesting, Wmaker. Thanks for posting that!
-
We are not happy with the DR1 modeling also, we have a suspect where the problem is, but gyro is not the issue.
Ive been toying with a second goal (I.E. not just dog fighting) to implement in the WW1 arena that would provide a reason for fighting.
HiTech
This is the best news Ive heard in a long time,most of us that still fly and love the WW1 arena despite all its deficiencies were fearing the worst.There have been countless posts on the subject with practically no response, to say that we have become disillusioned would be an understatement.
AKWabbit has come up with some great ideas for more involved gameplay that he and we hope would not be to costly and time consuming for you to implement, please check out his posts on the subject.
Rangers new terrain that he spent a lot of time and effort on and has been sitting on Skuzzys desk for over a week would be a good place to start.
thanks HiTech :aok
aka Shotdown
-
Well thanks for that Hitech, i have no problems with continuing my subscription providing i feel at least some of my money will be going towards the game i wish to play, without those words of yours it was very unlikely i would have renewed my sub when the time comes,
again...thanks :aok
-
I read somewhere that the Engine torque of the DR-1 was enough, at full revolutions, to keep the pilot from flying it in trim. The solution to this was asymmetrical Ailerons (The left one was actually one rib length longer than the right) to correct this problem.
Another thing about the DR-1 is that the length of the fuselage was considerably shorter than that of it's contemporaries. This, coupled with the foreshortened wingspan, allowed the plane ( because of the balance (moment) of the shorter fuselage, along with the Triplane design which allowed for more wing area and greater lift) made the DR-1 an extremely maneuverable plane. The only plane that was better than the DR-1 (from the ease of flying perspective) was the D-7. That plane head it all, Speed, Strength, balance and stability.
At least that is what I have learned over 45 years of playing with airplanes.
Tee
-
Ive been toying with a second goal (I.E. not just dog fighting) to implement in the WW1 arena that would provide a reason for fighting.
HiTech
Wonderful. Can't wait to hear more.
Vlas
-
this news made me go into the ww1 arena tonight and I found some others also had a rekindled interest in the place after reading this thread.
its the best place to find pure turn and burn dogfighting in mass quanitties but its one dimensional nature does lend to it getting stale and people moving back to the ma after they have had their turn and burn fix.
-
Just get something I can hit with a WWI plane like a BLIMP!...can you imagine the pleasure of seeing Shawk screaming as he jumps from his basket!
999000 <S>
-
AKWabbit has come up with some great ideas for more involved gameplay that he and we hope would not be to costly and time consuming for you to implement, please check out his posts on the subject.
Thanks for the kind words tinribs.
Just to save HiTech the trouble ;) here is how I was suggesting folding in some strat and base capture into WWI (there are many possible variations):
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,304627.75.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,304627.75.html)
Regards,
Wab
-
My pleasure Wab none of the WW1 fellas I have spoken to about your ideas have had anything other than praise for them,really hope Hitech takes a look. :cheers:
-
And the population has shown a spike this week...coincidence?
All the WWI arena needs is a little love.
-
B'nz...
Probably not. Was drifting away for sure, but the thread will keep me paying for awhile longer. I am sure others are thinking the same...doesn't take more than a little tidbit to keep us hoping.
One
-
Encouraging news! :aok
-
We are not happy with the DR1 modeling also, we have a suspect where the problem is, but gyro is not the issue.
Ive been toying with a second goal (I.E. not just dog fighting) to implement in the WW1 arena that would provide a reason for fighting.
HiTech
Any update on whats happening with WW1 HTC or the DR1?
-
Just a side note for all the WW1 buffs, 'Rise of Flight' the full game is now free. It includes the Spad and D5.
-
Questions for the staff should be emailed to the staff.
(http://www.clipartguide.com/_named_clipart_images/0511-0810-2705-1156_Cartoon_of_a_Hick_Boy_Going_Fishing_clipart_image.jpg)
-
Yes I would like too know as well.
-
Just a side note for all the WW1 buffs, 'Rise of Flight' the full game is now free.
Unfortunately it doesn't come with a computer being able to run it ;)
-
We just told you gents what we are currently working on 2 days ago.
HiTech
-
We just told you gents what we are currently working on 2 days ago.
HiTech
Well I searched but all I found was Pyro's post about arena changes and H2H?, I might be missing something on WW1 and the DR1? But to be more specific my main interest is about what you considered wrong with the flight model of the DR1, was it wrong? Or is it something that is on the to do list? Or have you already fixed it and are waiting until the idea you mentioned is ready to be implemented?
My main concern is that it is completely pointless to fly the ww1 arena when the people who make the game aren't happy with the modelling of the DR1 but nothing is being done about it. If you say the modelling is ok I'll go with that, if its not and nothing is being done about it then it can save me the trouble of popping in there.
Probably not what you want to hear at the minute given how busy you must be, but its been well over a year since WW1 arena was launched, I know the reason a lot of WW1 fans don't fly is because of their suspicions about the DR1's FM.
-
Well I searched but all I found was Pyro's post about arena changes and H2H?, I might be missing something on WW1 and the DR1? But to be more specific my main interest is about what you considered wrong with the flight model of the DR1, was it wrong? Or is it something that is on the to do list? Or have you already fixed it and are waiting until the idea you mentioned is ready to be implemented?
My main concern is that it is completely pointless to fly the ww1 arena when the people who make the game aren't happy with the modelling of the DR1 but nothing is being done about it. If you say the modelling is ok I'll go with that, if its not and nothing is being done about it then it can save me the trouble of popping in there.
Probably not what you want to hear at the minute given how busy you must be, but its been well over a year since WW1 arena was launched, I know the reason a lot of WW1 fans don't fly is because of their suspicions about the DR1's FM.
Yeah, I think what he's saying is that they are currently working on H2H, so WWI is not top priority atm.
-
Yeah, I think what he's saying is that they are currently working on H2H, so WWI is not top priority atm.
Ok cool just wanted to know so I didn't waste my time there anymore. :salute
Just a side note for all the WW1 buffs, 'Rise of Flight' the full game is now free. It includes the Spad and D5.
Just spotted this think I will give it a go cheers SF :salute
-
There's some modeling issues with the Dr1 and Camel that I want to look at but didn't have the time with all the vehicle changes in the last version. It's still on my to-do list for the next version.
-
There's some modeling issues with the Dr1 and Camel that I want to look at but didn't have the time with all the vehicle changes in the last version. It's still on my to-do list for the next version.
Thanks, I look forward to the next version.
-
Hope this ain't a double reply, but
as I stated in my original reply, my problem is that I try and fly the WWI aircraft like I do the LW plane's.
That is a big boo-boo on my behalf. The planes are fun to fly.
I've never tried them online, only offline.
I'd like to see some things carried over to the MA though, like over-reving the engine in a dive=kapow'd engine.
Coogan
-
H2H would be cool as long as it doesn't open up the sim to be stolen.
-
H2H would be cool as long as it doesn't open up the sim to be stolen.
HTC probably feels the same way :)
-
Pyro, I need a foot massage. What are the chances of getting this done in the next version? :x
:rofl
:aok
:huh
:bolt:
-
Pyro, I need a foot massage. What are the chances of getting this done in the next version? :x
:rofl
:aok
:huh
:bolt:
:rofl
-
Yeah, I think what he's saying is that they are currently working on H2H, so WWI is not top priority atm.
... but H2H could lead to semi-customizable (by the host) WWI arenas (maybe even WWI and WWII hybrids too)... this could be the biggest thing for the WWI side of AH since it was released.
-
this could be the biggest thing for the WWI side of AH since it was released.
That's a pretty good point