Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Midway on October 29, 2011, 09:57:07 PM
-
Not smart enough to know how, and it's awesome right now. There must be a way to improve it further, make it even more awesome. Please raise priority of said improvement high on the list. :aok
Thank you. :salute
:noid
-
What's wrong with the current system?
-
<grabs a lawn chair and reaches into the styrofoam cooler for an ice cold PBR>
-
:lol this is going to be fun
-
:O
-
What's wrong with the current system?
What was wrong with the Ferrari to cause Ferrari to come out with the new Ferrari? :headscratch:
What was wrong with the Iphone for Steve Jobs to come out with the new Iphone? :headscratch:
Questions best left for the owners / designers of said products.
Like Steve Jobs said, he didn't believe in customer focus groups, he came up with the vision for what people didn't even know that they were missing. Now they don't want to live without these improvements.
The flight model is awesome, maybe HiTech has some ideas on the table but no one has asked for them or thinks improvements are wanted / needed. New planes are nice, but improvements in flight modelling / atmosphere / physics modelling would also be great. :)
:old: :airplane: :joystick: :banana:
-
What was wrong with the Ferrari to cause Ferrari to come out with the new Ferrari? :headscratch:
What was wrong with the Iphone for Steve Jobs to come out with the new Iphone? :headscratch:
Questions best left for the owners / designers of said products.
Like Steve Jobs said, he didn't believe in customer focus groups, he came up with the vision for what people didn't even know that they were missing. Now they don't want to live without these improvements.
The flight model is awesome, maybe HiTech has some ideas on the table but no one has asked for them or thinks improvements are wanted / needed. New planes are nice, but improvements in flight modelling / atmosphere / physics modelling would also be great. :)
:old: :airplane: :joystick: :banana:
Okay
(http://s7.postimage.org/h34ivwezt/popcornandbeer.gif)
-
Just to add some value here besides hoping HiTech has some ideas on the table. :cool:
How about wake turbulance / buffetting modeled? :headscratch: Don't want to limit ideas though... Very interested if HiTech has any ideas he's been thinking about but no one has asked for them. :aok
:noid
-
Just to add some value here besides hoping HiTech has some ideas on the table. :cool:
How about wake turbulance / buffetting modeled? :headscratch: Don't want to limit ideas though... Very interested if HiTech has any ideas he's been thinking about but no one has asked for them. :aok
:noid
I thought you were asking for flight modeling? Turbulence is weather. We already have buffeting.
HTC is not going to add weather in the near future because far not all computers will be able to handle it.
-
I think the flight models are fine. What HTC could EASILY do is add in more clouds and some wind, perhaps some legit cloudy days so there is no glaring sun and the cloud layer at 15-17k can not be seen through.
The environment is what is lacking, imo. So much more could be added to the AH MA's with minimal tinkering. The settings are already there.
-
I thought you were asking for flight modeling? Turbulence is weather. We already have buffeting.
HTC is not going to add weather in the near future because far not all computers will be able to handle it.
:O I knew it! As soon as I put an "example" idea out, you would think that's what I'm asking for. Not at all. :bhead
Asking for ANY improvements to the flight modelling / physics / or atmosphere to the extend those affect flight. Just would like to see it be even more realistic (if HiTech has any ideas that he's thought about). :)
:old: :airplane: :joystick: :banana:
-
:O I knew it! As soon as I put an "example" idea out, you would think that's what I'm asking for. Not at all. :bhead
Asking for ANY improvements to the flight modelling / physics / or atmosphere to the extend those affect flight. Just would like to see it be even more realistic (if HiTech has any ideas that he's thought about). :)
:old: :airplane: :joystick: :banana:
have to ask...how many real spitfires have you flown in your limited lifespan to make you believe the ah flight model isn't as real as it can get?
-
I think the flight models are fine. What HTC could EASILY do is add in more clouds and some wind, perhaps some legit cloudy days so there is no glaring sun and the cloud layer at 15-17k can not be seen through.
The environment is what is lacking, imo. So much more could be added to the AH MA's with minimal tinkering. The settings are already there.
We have winds. They are not used in the MA, not sure why.
-
I'm sure that Hitech will be happy to improve Aces High for a change, now that somebody has suggested it, instead of continuing to waste his time with whatever it is he's been doing for the last 10 years. :devil
-
We have winds. They are not used in the MA, not sure why.
Oh my. I always enjoyed someone dropping troops or suplies from a goon in AH1 and not taking into account of the wind. Watching them float away from the town/runway and listening to Range Channel was classic.
-
Oh my. I always enjoyed someone dropping troops or suplies from a goon in AH1 and not taking into account of the wind. Watching them float away from the town/runway and listening to Range Channel was classic.
Didn't think of that.
Just wanted to clarify my previous post, I'm not saying we should have winds, I'm could not think of a reason why we don't have them.
-
I'm sure that Hitech will be happy to improve Aces High for a change, now that somebody has suggested it, instead of continuing to waste his time with whatever it is he's been doing for the last 10 years. :devil
higher priority for more realistic "flight modelling" and/or weather / physics to the extent they affect flight. :bhead
I understand Aces High is constantly improved and that is much appreciated. :aok
:)
-
Real clouds?
And not the giant fog of bank either. Real clouds that looks real. They can be just a simple 2D layer like we have now, but thicker, but when looking from above or below, they actually look real.
Wings of Prey have clouds 100x better than ours, yet my simple low end gaming rig can run it just fine on max settings.
Jane's WWII Fighters, a 12 year old game, had a mod that made clouds look amazing, and they were just simple 2D layers.
I don't know why HTC can't use the textures and models from these games. They look way, way, WAY better, but the thing is, their flight models are crap. HTC got the flight models down, now it's time for eye candy.
People keep saying "Oh, it'll hurt my FPS", yet how is it that a 12 year old game like Jane's look 10x better. Or how a relatively new game, Wings of Prey, looks SO much better, but still has a low system requirement. My Core2Duo at 2.9Ghz and a Radeon 5570 can max out WoP at 1920x1080. I don't understand why AH can't have better graphics.
It's not going to hurt your FPS, if it does, then you were probably barely able to run this game on the lowest settings in the first place. A simple purchase of a low end card like the 5570 or a nVidia 8800 would make your gaming experience that much better, for the cost of ~$50.
-
higher priority for more realistic "flight modelling" and/or weather / physics to the extent they affect flight. :bhead
I understand Aces High is constantly improved and that is much appreciated. :aok
:)
I have yet to see a PC based flight simulator that is more realistic than AH2. The only flight simulator I used/seen before that is more realistic than AH had a price-tag of a few million dollars. I don't think many people here would be able to afford that.
-
What was wrong with the Ferrari to cause Ferrari to come out with the new Ferrari? :headscratch:
What was wrong with the Iphone for Steve Jobs to come out with the new Iphone? :headscratch:
Questions best left for the owners / designers of said products.
Like Steve Jobs said, he didn't believe in customer focus groups, he came up with the vision for what people didn't even know that they were missing. Now they don't want to live without these improvements.
The flight model is awesome, maybe HiTech has some ideas on the table but no one has asked for them or thinks improvements are wanted / needed. New planes are nice, but improvements in flight modelling / atmosphere / physics modelling would also be great. :)
:old: :airplane: :joystick: :banana:
Ok, no more to say you got me with that... improve it!!! :noid
Not a nice wish if you don't know what are you asking for and don't think HTC is goin to make it a better sim game cuz.. well isn't a sim game, they are focus on the way you can play the game so you can enjoy the game.
-
I have yet to see a PC based flight simulator that is more realistic than AH2. The only flight simulator I used/seen before that is more realistic than AH had a price-tag of a few million dollars. I don't think many people here would be able to afford that.
Just thinking there may be some ideas on the table that HiTech has thought about or planned for some distant future. Asking for higher priority of said idea(s). :)
:noid
-
Just thinking there may be some ideas on the table that HiTech has thought about or planned for some distant future. Asking for higher priority of said idea(s). :)
:noid
Just for the sake of arguing, how do you know you'll like them?
-
How do you know you'll like them?
And as I said before, I don't see flight modeling being improved.
If it's more realistic / adds realism (as judged by HiTech / HTC), I'll like them. No doubt. :aok
-
If it's more realistic / adds realism, I'll like them. No doubt. :aok
Okay. Say HTC add the codes to make it a full motion simulator and will require everyone to buy it if they want to play online and all new versions. This will be more realistic, but are you going to be happy?
-
Okay. Say HTC add the codes to make it a full motion simulator and will require everyone to buy it if they want to play online and all new versions. This will be more realistic, but are you going to be happy?
:rofl :rofl :rofl :bhead :cry :cry :cry :bhead :headscratch:
:old: :airplane: :joystick: :banana:
-
:rofl :rofl :rofl :bhead :cry :cry :cry :bhead :headscratch:
:old: :airplane: :joystick: :banana:
English please
-
If it's more realistic / adds realism (as judged by HiTech / HTC), I'll like them. No doubt. :aok
geez, mr.clueless is talking about realism without any grasp of reality. do yourself a favor midway, give it a rest. most of us know if things got any more realistic, you couldn't get out of the hangar.
-
English please
Don't know whether to laugh or cry with such silliness... of course it would need to work in our current PC based setup. Let's stay within the realms of common sense.
:rolleyes:
-
Don't know whether to laugh or cry with such sillyness... of course it would need to work in our current PC based set-up. Let's stay within the realms of commen sense.
:rolleyes:
In that case please provide an idea that can be implemented on a PC based sim. That's what we been asking for you to do for the past two pages.
-
In that case please provide an idea that can be implemented on a PC based sim. That's what we been asking for you to do for the past two pages.
I left it to Steve Jobs to improve the Iphone.... I'll leave it to HiTech to improve the flight modelling. Flight modelling genius, I am not. But improvements that step it up a notch on the realism scale, with a higher priority, in other words implemented sooner rather than later, would be much appreciated. :aok :)
-
I left it to Steve Jobs to improve the Iphone.... I'll leave it to HiTech to improve the flight modelling. Flight modelling genius, I am not. But improvements that step it up a notch on the realism scale, with a higher priority, in other words implemented sooner rather than later, would be much appreciated. :aok :)
Alright I'll try to explain it to you. When your making an Iphone there is no limit to how cool it can be. When you are making a simulator, it simulates something, and you can't simulate something to a more "realistic" level than the thing your simulating.
-
Alright I'll try to explain it to you. When your making an Iphone there is no limit to how cool it can be. When you are making a simulator, it simulates something, and you can't simulate something to a more "realistic" level than the thing your simulating.
:rofl I'm not saying more realistic than real! :bhead
I am saying closer (more realistic) to real. Please. :cry I can not explain it further. I have tried. Will now be silent. :uhoh
:old: :airplane: :joystick: :banana:
:noid
-
I'm done here.
I recommend you take a look at some of my previous posts.
-
no use trying to get anything but nonsense from him machfly, he's talking out the wrong end and has less than zero clue.
-
yeah you want the flight model improved so you can ho every single airplane in sight like you do now. so how is that going to improve the game for you?
semp
-
i lol-ed Midfail again
btw. Titanic, the new stuff looks surprisingly good. The problem is with the old content, some parts of the game really looks like being 10 years old... Especially the ground textures, but heard some user-created maps look completely different. I hope they can be accepted for MA usage soon, that would help a lot.
-
but heard some user-created maps look completely different. I hope they can be accepted for MA usage soon, that would help a lot.
+10
-
+1 on weather!
-
geez, mr.clueless is talking about realism without any grasp of reality. do yourself a favor midway, give it a rest. most of us know if things got any more realistic, you couldn't get out of the hangar.
:salute rgr pre flight checks would be a pain in the arse.
-
I do notice that most of our planes seem to "land" at pretty much the same speed :noid
Do you mean stuff like that Midway?
-
Real clouds?
And not the giant fog of bank either. Real clouds that looks real. They can be just a simple 2D layer like we have now, but thicker, but when looking from above or below, they actually look real.
Wings of Prey have clouds 100x better than ours, yet my simple low end gaming rig can run it just fine on max settings.
Jane's WWII Fighters, a 12 year old game, had a mod that made clouds look amazing, and they were just simple 2D layers.
I don't know why HTC can't use the textures and models from these games. They look way, way, WAY better, but the thing is, their flight models are crap. HTC got the flight models down, now it's time for eye candy.
People keep saying "Oh, it'll hurt my FPS", yet how is it that a 12 year old game like Jane's look 10x better. Or how a relatively new game, Wings of Prey, looks SO much better, but still has a low system requirement. My Core2Duo at 2.9Ghz and a Radeon 5570 can max out WoP at 1920x1080. I don't understand why AH can't have better graphics.
It's not going to hurt your FPS, if it does, then you were probably barely able to run this game on the lowest settings in the first place. A simple purchase of a low end card like the 5570 or a nVidia 8800 would make your gaming experience that much better, for the cost of ~$50.
How many other players were being tracked while you were playing Jane's or Wings of Prey? I don't remember the Massive Multi-Player versions.
How much additional terrain was being mapped while you were flying alone?
That may be the difference between here and there.
wrongway
-
I do notice that most of our planes seem to "land" at pretty much the same speed :noid
Do you mean stuff like that Midway?
sure, anything that adds more realism to the feeling of flight. :aok
-
How many other players were being tracked while you were playing Jane's or Wings of Prey? I don't remember the Massive Multi-Player versions.
How much additional terrain was being mapped while you were flying alone?
That may be the difference between here and there.
wrongway
I don't understand how simple 2D clouds are going to kill someone's framerate. Does looking at the ground kill your framerate? No. If 2D clouds were added, they would probably cause less of a FPS drop by looking at them than at looking at the ground.
The game only renders what you are looking at, not the entire map/world at the same time. Currently, if you look at water, or a empty area in the sky, your FPS will always be higher than when looking at the ground, which is more detailed. Are you saying that there are people out there who can only play this game when looking at water or empty air? If your computer is SO slow that it can't even handle the ground textures, then it's either a $200 piece of crud from eMachines or something, or a 10 year old laptop.
SIMPLE 2D clouds, are not going to affect your FPS in anyway.
-
I don't understand how simple 2D clouds are going to kill someone's framerate. Does looking at the ground kill your framerate? No. If 2D clouds were added, they would probably cause less of a FPS drop by looking at them than at looking at the ground.
The game only renders what you are looking at, not the entire map/world at the same time. Currently, if you look at water, or a empty area in the sky, your FPS will always be higher than when looking at the ground, which is more detailed. Are you saying that there are people out there who can only play this game when looking at water or empty air? If your computer is SO slow that it can't even handle the ground textures, then it's either a $200 piece of crud from eMachines or something, or a 10 year old laptop.
SIMPLE 2D clouds, are not going to affect your FPS in anyway.
Clouds affect my frame rate now, which I don't understand because all I see is white. Shouldn't it make my frame rate better?
And yes, I am playing on a $200 piece of crud from eMachine that is ten years old. :O
wrongway
-
2D clouds would be a significant downgrade from what we have now. Why do you think otherwise?
-
:rofl I'm not saying more realistic than real! :bhead
I am saying closer (more realistic) to real. Please. :cry I can not explain it further. I have tried. Will now be silent. :uhoh
:old: :airplane: :joystick: :banana:
:noid
have you tried making your posts in a form of a Tweet? Might be able to get your point through a lot easier.
ack-ack
-
2D clouds would be a significant downgrade from what we have now. Why do you think otherwise?
Here. http://ww2fighters.org/downloads/general/OTE_Clds.zip
It's a mod for Jane's WWII clouds. It will look like an install, but ignore it, and put the install path to your desktop. You can delete later after viewing.
Inside is about 10+ pics of custom made clouds. This is from a 12 year old game. Anyone of those looks 10x better than our clouds.
-
Keep in mind that HTC needs to keep the game small in order to make it downloadable. If AH2 was made with the eye candy of current games like Wings of Prey, it would be a very hefty download.
ack-ack
-
Here. http://ww2fighters.org/downloads/general/OTE_Clds.zip
It's a mod for Jane's WWII clouds. It will look like an install, but ignore it, and put the install path to your desktop. You can delete later after viewing.
Inside is about 10+ pics of custom made clouds. This is from a 12 year old game. Anyone of those looks 10x better than our clouds.
If they are 2D they will not function as clouds. They'll just be a pretty back ground.
I am not saying the clouds in AH don't have significant room for improvement, they do, but 2D clouds are not the improvement you're looking for.
-
Arghh.. How do I explain this.
Think of it as 3 layers. One at the bottom for people looking UP, one at the top for people looking DOWN, and one thick one in the middle for people flying through it.
AH already has the middle layer, you fly through it and things become hazy and vis range becomes hard to make out.
Adding the first and third layer of clouds, is a simple 2D image. That way, when you look at the clouds, it has the ILLUSION of being real clouds, and not just a layer of haze.
That's how it is in Jane's pretty much, and if AH were to take it up a notch and add water effects like Wings of Prey, I would spend an entire week just flying at cloud level.
-
Keep in mind that HTC needs to keep the game small in order to make it downloadable. If AH2 was made with the eye candy of current games like Wings of Prey, it would be a very hefty download.
ack-ack
Understood, but when paying $15 / month for a game, you eventually come to a point where reasoning such as this, and the ever-popular "they can't improve the game because players will *gasp* have to upgrade their PCs :uhoh ", no longer holds water
It's a tricky situation, because on the one hand, the game will continue to die off without an influx of new blood, and one of the best ways to get that new blood (imo) is to have an exciting combat flight sim that looks like it was made THIS millenium rather than last.
On the other hand, the predominately elitist community of AH wants anything BUT a load of new players coming along hordeing and HOing and generally being annoying
tricky ;]
-
have you tried making your posts in a form of a Tweet? Might be able to get your point through a lot easier.
ack-ack
Tweet: The flight/physics/weather model is sweet, repeat, the model is sweet... Further improvements would be neat, and quite the treat. :aok
:)
-
this is one of those threads to post on so people can keep working towards radioactive status right/
-
Didn't think of that.
Just wanted to clarify my previous post, I'm not saying we should have winds, I'm could not think of a reason why we don't have them.
When was the last time you flew a taildragger?
Cross winds and ground loops would have most in the tower before they even got off the runway. The whines would be epic.
On second thought, I say go for it :aok :rock
-
this is one of those threads to post on so people can keep working towards radioactive status right/
nope, its one of the "look at me PLEEEAAAZZZE, noone else wanna do it anyway" ones
close, tho : )
-
+1
could use things such as 2 planes colliding at over 800mph neither flys away....(currently 1 of them useally survives)
but im all for the general idea
-
only 4 pages? weak troll Midway. you can do better.
-
+1
could use things such as 2 planes colliding at over 800mph neither flys away....(currently 1 of them useally survives)
but im all for the general idea
Your confusion stems from the fact that it's 4 planes not 2.
-
tweet: blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
(http://i564.photobucket.com/albums/ss87/Bids99/gtfo.gif)
-
Your confusion stems from the fact that it's 4 planes not 2.
well put :aok
-
Your confusion stems from the fact that it's 4 planes not 2.
now I'm actually confused...
and to clear up any more confusion... its 2 planes... as in 1 going in a dive and 1 climbing 1 is doing 300-400 in the climb and the other doing 300-400 in the dive smashing together engine to engine.. currently 1 of them useally survives
-
now I'm actually confused...
and to clear up any more confusion... its 2 planes... as in 1 going in a dive and 1 climbing 1 is doing 300-400 in the climb and the other doing 300-400 in the dive smashing together engine to engine.. currently 1 of them useally survives
There are two aeroplanes on your PC (yours and his)... and then there are the two aeroplanes on his PC (yours and his).... they are in different positions due to lag.... so you have to consider both planes from both perspectives and how they are in slightly different positions. :headscratch:
:old: :airplane: :airplane: :joystick: :headscratch: ------------- l a g ----------- :airplane: :airplane: :joystick: :headscratch:
http://trainers.hitechcreations.com/lag/lag.htm (http://trainers.hitechcreations.com/lag/lag.htm)
:)
-
Anyways... back to the original wish....
Tweet: The flight/physics/weather model is sweet, repeat, the model is sweet... Further improvements would be neat, and quite the treat. :aok
:)
:noid
-
There are two aeroplanes on your PC
it's airplanes, or aircraft, not "aero". You're not a Brit. The fact that you want to have Bruv's love child is creepy enough and I'm sure he appreciates you being an e-stalker, but give it a rest.
-
it's airplanes, or aircraft, not "aero". You're not a Brit. The fact that you want to have Bruv's love child is creepy enough and I'm sure he appreciates you being an e-stalker, but give it a rest.
:huh :headscratch: Must you insult? :uhoh
:old: Consider your way.
:angel:
-
now I'm actually confused...
and to clear up any more confusion... its 2 planes... as in 1 going in a dive and 1 climbing 1 is doing 300-400 in the climb and the other doing 300-400 in the dive smashing together engine to engine.. currently 1 of them useally survives
allow me to clear up your obvious confusion for realz. there is the plane you are in, #1, then there is the plane you see coming at you, #2, then there is the plane the guy coming at you is actually in, #3, and then there is the plane he sees you in from his FE, #4. its all a matter of what you both see, not just what you see. if you hit on your end and not his you go down, he flies off. if you hit on his end and not yours, he dies and you fly on. if you hit on his end and yours, you both go down. understand now? this issue has beaten past death, its been beaten back to life and then to death again. that's as simple as can state it, hope the clears up your confusion.
-
Add collisions with friendly planes to the game.
Make it occur above a certain altitude, say 50 feet, so that you can taxi without worry of a collision. But once in the air, any collision registers.
I know there would be griefers ramming friendlies just to be jerks though, so it won't happen.
-
only thing we dont have for mabey SE is rain.
-
It would be especially cool if HTC could model Midway to be more realistic, but alas he is just a cartoon pilot....
-
It would be especially cool if HTC could model Midway to be more realistic, but alas he is just a cartoon pilot....
:rofl :lol :aok zing...
-
It would be especially cool if HTC could model Midway to be more realistic, but alas he is just a cartoon pilot....
ooopps :ahand
get a life, nub
-
In AH the airplanes fly entirely too smooth. There's no jump, jitter or imperfection inherit in the various planes. Not to mention, some planes seem to defy gravity and physics and it's entirely too easy to stall fight.
Try stall fighting in IL-2, a much better overall and detailed game, it's much more difficult to both recover and maintain stability in otherwise unstable airplanes at lower speeds. And the phrase 'speed is life' means a lot more in that game.
The bombers in this game are a joke, far too easy to fly and with the ability to potentially aim 6 different gun turrets in a formation on the same area is just silly. The fact is if you lost control of your giant b-17 or b-24, or tried to make some silly turn, you would fall right out of the sky. The b-24 in particular was very difficult to fly and required constant correction and attention. Not to mention they are way faster than they should be especially at lower alts.
I like Ah2, it's fun, but I'd be careful calling it a simulator, particularly if the planes aren't modeled right! It's seems like propaganda really, the axis airplanes are nerfed. The 109 could drop flaps at 300 true and it wouldn't do justice to the 190 to say it was better than the P-47. It OUTCLASSED the p-47. P-51 pilots wouldn't engage Ki-84's, they were too dangerous and at some alts was FASTER. And the German guns were not as difficult to use as they are in this game, the 30mm was only 10% slower than the .50 post-muzzle, over distance I can understand the drop but not after 200 yards. The C205 is a good plane in this game, but like the 109, 190 and some Japanese planes, isn't right. It was a monster of an airplane in real life.
All of the planes in this game after all were excellent in their own right, at least in life. Plus some of them are completely backwards in this game. The Spit16 was a high alt fighter and the clipped wings didn't allow it to turn very well. In life, the Spit14 was the better turn fighter. They're backwards. The p47 outclasses the 190 in this game. That's backwards too. And the Brewster is probably the most outrageous of them all. If it was really that good, do you think it would have been replaced by the Wildcat? Or the P40? And how is it that the P-51B's 4 .50's don't seem nearly as powerful as the Brew's?
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/
-
like engine management midway? i agree it would be cool but the game is about fighting.
-
Try stall fighting in IL-2, a much better overall and detailed game
REALLY for real REALLY?!
(http://i44.tinypic.com/w7oqc6.png)
dude ive been in a P51 the thing dose not bounce up and down like a jack Russel terryer like you said.
-
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah luftwhine!!! blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah etc.
:lol :aok
edit: so its not just smileys, and to pick just one thing out of your rant, what do you think the LF in Spitfire LF Mk.IXe stands for? (being an experten you'll already know thats what our XVI actually is.)
-
In AH the airplanes fly entirely too smooth. There's no jump, jitter or imperfection inherit in the various planes. Not to mention, some planes seem to defy gravity and physics and it's entirely too easy to stall fight.
Try stall fighting in IL-2, a much better overall and detailed game, it's much more difficult to both recover and maintain stability in otherwise unstable airplanes at lower speeds. And the phrase 'speed is life' means a lot more in that game.
The bombers in this game are a joke, far too easy to fly and with the ability to potentially aim 6 different gun turrets in a formation on the same area is just silly. The fact is if you lost control of your giant b-17 or b-24, or tried to make some silly turn, you would fall right out of the sky. The b-24 in particular was very difficult to fly and required constant correction and attention. Not to mention they are way faster than they should be especially at lower alts.
I like Ah2, it's fun, but I'd be careful calling it a simulator, particularly if the planes aren't modeled right! It's seems like propaganda really, the axis airplanes are nerfed. The 109 could drop flaps at 300 true and it wouldn't do justice to the 190 to say it was better than the P-47. It OUTCLASSED the p-47. P-51 pilots wouldn't engage Ki-84's, they were too dangerous and at some alts was FASTER. And the German guns were not as difficult to use as they are in this game, the 30mm was only 10% slower than the .50 post-muzzle, over distance I can understand the drop but not after 200 yards. The C205 is a good plane in this game, but like the 109, 190 and some Japanese planes, isn't right. It was a monster of an airplane in real life.
All of the planes in this game after all were excellent in their own right, at least in life. Plus some of them are completely backwards in this game. The Spit16 was a high alt fighter and the clipped wings didn't allow it to turn very well. In life, the Spit14 was the better turn fighter. They're backwards. The p47 outclasses the 190 in this game. That's backwards too. And the Brewster is probably the most outrageous of them all. If it was really that good, do you think it would have been replaced by the Wildcat? Or the P40? And how is it that the P-51B's 4 .50's don't seem nearly as powerful as the Brew's?
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/
:rofl :lol
(http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/sstop.jpg)
-
In AH the airplanes fly entirely too smooth. There's no jump, jitter or imperfection inherit in the various planes. Not to mention, some planes seem to defy gravity and physics and it's entirely too easy to stall fight.
Try stall fighting in IL-2, a much better overall and detailed game, it's much more difficult to both recover and maintain stability in otherwise unstable airplanes at lower speeds. And the phrase 'speed is life' means a lot more in that game.
Il-2 uses a generic flight model with tweaks for an aircraft's speeds and climb rates. It does not model any of the airframe specific effects from speed that Aces High does. To claim that Il-2's flight model is even equal, let alone superior is absurd.
The bombers in this game are a joke, far too easy to fly and with the ability to potentially aim 6 different gun turrets in a formation on the same area is just silly. The fact is if you lost control of your giant b-17 or b-24, or tried to make some silly turn, you would fall right out of the sky. The b-24 in particular was very difficult to fly and required constant correction and attention. Not to mention they are way faster than they should be especially at lower alts.
The B-17 was known for sedate flying. You seem to fall prey to the "The pilots of WWII aircraft were gods whose like shall never be seen again!" line of reasoning. These things were being flown successfully by 20 year olds. That isn't to dismiss their skill, but to ward off the idea that these aircraft were incredibly hard to fly. The B-24 did have some problems at altitude.
I like Ah2, it's fun, but I'd be careful calling it a simulator, particularly if the planes aren't modeled right! It's seems like propaganda really, the axis airplanes are nerfed. The 109 could drop flaps at 300 true and it wouldn't do justice to the 190 to say it was better than the P-47. It OUTCLASSED the p-47. P-51 pilots wouldn't engage Ki-84's, they were too dangerous and at some alts was FASTER. And the German guns were not as difficult to use as they are in this game, the 30mm was only 10% slower than the .50 post-muzzle, over distance I can understand the drop but not after 200 yards. The C205 is a good plane in this game, but like the 109, 190 and some Japanese planes, isn't right. It was a monster of an airplane in real life.
Use a source other than Il-2. Your specific claims are flat out wrong. The P-47 broke the back of the Luftwaffe in the West, not bad for a fighter that was outclassed by everything it faced, no? Oh, it wasn't outclassed, sorry. The Ki-84 was faster than the P-51D at some altitudes in post war tests using 100 octane fuel that the Japanese did not have, they had, being generous, 87 octane. The Ki-84 in AH is modeled on Japanese flight data. The Ki-84 in Il-2 is modeled on post war US tests using 100 octane. I've never heard that P-51s wouldn't engage Ki-84s and their respective records in WWII don't support that claim. The MK108's and Browning .50's muzzle velocities are well documented, your claim that they were close to the same is flat out wrong. The C.205 was good, it was not a monster as you claim.
All of the planes in this game after all were excellent in their own right, at least in life. Plus some of them are completely backwards in this game. The Spit16 was a high alt fighter and the clipped wings didn't allow it to turn very well. In life, the Spit14 was the better turn fighter. They're backwards. The p47 outclasses the 190 in this game. That's backwards too. And the Brewster is probably the most outrageous of them all. If it was really that good, do you think it would have been replaced by the Wildcat? Or the P40? And how is it that the P-51B's 4 .50's don't seem nearly as powerful as the Brew's?
The Spitfire Mk XVI was most definitely not a high altitude fighter and I have no idea why you think it was. Its Merlin 266 had a critical altitude of about 18,000ft. The Spitfire Mk XIV was a high altitude fighter, its Griffon 65 having a critical altitude of about 27,000ft. Both of those facts are modeled correctly in Aces High. The Spitfire Mk XIV, having the heavy Griffon engine, is significantly heavier than the Merlin Spitfires. Adding weight does not improve turning capability. The Brewster in AH is the B-239 used by the Finns, not the F2A3 Buffalo used by the Marines at Midway, the B-239 has wing loading of about 25lbs per sq.ft, the F2A3 has wing loading of about 34.5lbs per sq.ft. It is very slow, slower than the F4F and much slower than the P-40s. As to its guns, the code for a given gun exists in only one place in the game and all aircraft using that gun call the same code, so sayeth HiTech. They are the same guns and your style with each aircraft probably explains why you find the Brewster's guns better.
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/
That is a great site that many of us use as a go to reference. It supports everything I've said here. Note, for example, how Il-2's roll rates don't match the NACA roll rate chart on that site.
-
And the German guns were not as difficult to use as they are in this game, the 30mm was only 10% slower than the .50 post-muzzle,
Source?
-
Have to disagree on il2 4breakfast, it looks truly wonderful and theres a lot more knobs to push but the flight model sucks compared to aces high. I could also argue that most of the soviet planes in the game have be en given the old ubered up treatment by Oleg think la7 ;) even the in game write ups telling you about the planes seem horribly biased to the Russian aircraft.
-
like engine management midway? i agree it would be cool but the game is about fighting.
not really... more with respect to the actually feeling of flying... the way the plane moves, the respective physics and relationship to the atmosphere. It's very good now but there might be additional improvements on the drawing board. Again, no complaints, nothing is wrong.... but it would be great to be even more right / realistic.
:)
-
not really... more with respect to the actually feeling of flying... the way the plane moves, the respective physics and relationship to the atmosphere. It's very good now but there might be additional improvements on the drawing board. Again, no complaints, nothing is wrong.... but it would be great to be even more right / realistic.
:)
Do you have the stall limiter and combat trim on?
-
Do you have the stall limiter and combat trim on?
Stall limiter, never. Combat trim, yes. :headscratch:
-
Real aircraft in WW2 didn't have combat trim. You can improve the "realism" of the feel of the flight model by keeping combat trim off and trimming manually.
-
not really... more with respect to the actually feeling of flying... the way the plane moves, the respective physics and relationship to the atmosphere. It's very good now but there might be additional improvements on the drawing board. Again, no complaints, nothing is wrong.... but it would be great to be even more right / realistic.
:)
we're all waiting to hear how many real planes you have piloted midway...you can tell us, come on.
-
we're all waiting to hear how many real planes you have piloted midway...you can tell us, come on.
Really, gyrene81? Really? :rolleyes:
-
yes really. you're saying the flight model isn't realistic enough...what is your frame of reference? how many hours do you have piloting real planes?
-
yes really. you're saying the flight model isn't realistic enough...what is your frame of reference? how many hours do you have piloting real planes?
Re-tweet: The flight/physics/weather model is sweet, repeat, the model is sweet... Further improvements would be neat, and quite the treat. :aok :bhead
:)
-
Re-tweet: The flight/physics/weather model is sweet, repeat, the model is sweet... Further improvements would be neat, and quite the treat. :aok :bhead
:)
twit...re-twit...what exact aspects are lacking in your much less than expert opinion, oh great super skilled pilot? your vague references to "flight/physics/weather" are very tiresome. be specific, if you're cranium can manage that. what aspects of the flight model could be improved? what aspects of the physics could be improved? no need to expound on the weather, you wouldn't be able to get off the runway if weather was added.
-
your vague references to "flight/physics/weather" are very tiresome.
your weak Midway ankle-humping is very tiresome
if you haven't got anything constructive to add why don't you shut your face? :aok
-
your weak Midway ankle-humping is very tiresome
if you haven't got anything constructive to add why don't you shut your face? :aok
your weak attempt at being something you're not is tireseome, try taking your own advice.
-
:headscratch:
yeah OK
-
only 4 pages? weak troll Midway. you can do better.
--> 7 <-- :D
:old: :airplane: :joystick: :O :banana:
:noid
-
--> 7 <-- :D
:rofl :aok
-
Are the wind settings in AH arena wide? e.g. I set the wind speed and direction [optional alt] , and the entire arena now has those conditions? Or can I set the wind differently in some areas? Maybe a few more layers in terrain.res's could be 'wind maps'. two layers, direction and gradient for speed. And if possible (don't know if it's already like this?) but set wind direction in z plane too, not just x,y.
Of course modeling the interactions between these fluids at their boundaries could be more than they're worth...
-
I believe the wind setting simply acts as a force on any aircraft anywhere in the arena. So there is no wind in the arena, there is just the effect of wind on the aircraft CG. I expect Hitech will correct me if I'm wrong.
-
Are the wind settings in AH arena wide? e.g. I set the wind speed and direction [optional alt] , and the entire arena now has those conditions? Or can I set the wind differently in some areas? Maybe a few more layers in terrain.res's could be 'wind maps'. two layers, direction and gradient for speed. And if possible (don't know if it's already like this?) but set wind direction in z plane too, not just x,y.
I understand you can have several layers of different wind (not sure how many) and you can set the wind direction in the z-axis too - iirc some events have used a strong downdraught to enforce alt caps. pretty sure the layers apply to the whole terrain (ie. no local wind.)
-
You can set 15 layers. Each layer is 2000 ft high and covers the entire arena. You can set 8 directions and the speed can be 0-127 mph. The updraft/downdraft can be -127 to 127 mph.
-
imagine the "HTC hates us knits/rooks/bish! we ALWAYS have to fly into the wind!" whines ;)
-
You can set 15 layers. Each layer is 2000 ft high and covers the entire arena. You can set 8 directions and the speed can be 0-127 mph. The updraft/downdraft can be -127 to 127 mph.
Model a vortex with that! :)
-
That's what the custom arenas are for. :D
-
I believe the wind setting simply acts as a force on any aircraft anywhere in the arena. So there is no wind in the arena, there is just the effect of wind on the aircraft CG. I expect Hitech will correct me if I'm wrong.
You are wrong.
Wind is modeled as wind when turned on in the arena.
HiTech
-
You are wrong.
Wind is modeled as wind when turned on in the arena.
HiTech
Well, he wasn't entirely wrong.
You did correct him...
-
You are wrong.
Wind is modeled as wind when turned on in the arena.
HiTech
Does the wind affect the clouds?
I haven't played with wind in a while but IIRC setting opposing winds in adjoining layers and crossing the boundary just results in a lateral displacement as the CG crosses the boundary. Maybe I didn't have the velocity high enough?
Also it seems a crosswind still affects you while flying through a hanger.
-
Well, he wasn't entirely wrong.
You did correct him...
It's certainly easier to avoid mistakes if you don't help people. :D
-
Well, he wasn't entirely wrong.
You did correct him...
:rofl
-
I got it! different wind direction in each country and a giant tornado in the center of it all where TT shall be and no aircraft may enter the vicious storm to bomb gv's
-
I honestly feel bad for Midway, we all have our stupid moments.. some more than others. Maybe he has something going on in real life which causes him to play this game to find comfort. Maybe here he feels he can express himself, and you're all digging him a hole to China. I recall him telling me he had medical issues holding him back, sorry if you didn't want that out here Midway. /Humane switch off.
But hey, I'm down for Seasonal changes in game. Maybe some red/orange trees, snow patches on the ground, or thick forests like we had before the graphical update.
-
Well actually if he is in the USA the hole dug would put him on or near the Kerguelen Islands out in the southern Indian Ocean, depending upon his location here in the states. :aok
-
Well actually if he is in the USA the hole dug would put him on or near the Kerguelen Islands out in the southern Indian Ocean, depending upon his location here in the states. :aok
Who said you were digging in a straight line? :neener:
-
Midway, you want AH to be this freakin complicated??
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QnDqwB_Tghk&feature=related
:bhead not me, TYVM!
-
Midway, you want AH to be this freakin complicated??
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QnDqwB_Tghk&feature=related
:bhead not me, TYVM!
No... not more complex. Just talking about the modelling of flight / physics / weather and how it affects the way the aeroplane moves / feels when you're flying. :aok :)
-
Midway, you want AH to be this freakin complicated??
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QnDqwB_Tghk&feature=related
:bhead not me, TYVM!
oh yes please do this is great :aok
-
What game is that? Does it have multiplayer where you shoot non-ai players?
-
Its the new, if im not mistaken version of IL2, Cliffs of Dover and yes there is an online community as well.
-
any good? ill be getting that after my new pc comes in
-
All I know from what I read in their forums is that COD is a pc-killer In a sense that you need a state-of-the art equipment to run the game. Many people have complains but in any case it is huge step forward in WWII simulators.
-
My new pc will be built this may. The new simpit starts in a couple of weeks, the new warthog stick gets here around christmas. I hope this game is updated by the summer. I like how COD looks. This game seems stuck in the xp days of the 90's.
-
Source?
Why don't we address the issue with 109 flaps? They were used at & above 300 mph ALL the time, much like the Jugs in AH, (Even though in the D-11 cockpit it says not to use them above 195 :rofl, also in the jug manual)
German manuals only give speeds at which the flaps should be deployed for LANDING purposes, and that info has been cut/pasted all over the interwebz. The manuals do not cover flap use in combat, leaving it to pilot's discretion.
(they didnt have to worry about flap failure, I bet even at 400mph) Same thing with 190's. 200mph and they auto retract? PLEASE! We even had a 190 ace communicate on the boards (a few years back) that he used flaps all the time in combat, and definitely not limited to 200mph!
What's the deal?
oh yes please do this is great :aok
:huh It took that guy 5 minutes of BS before he could even take off! And talk about frame rate difficulties! You need a $400 vid card to run it, looks like.
-
All I know from what I read in their forums is that COD is a pc-killer In a sense that you need a state-of-the art equipment to run the game. Many people have complains but in any case it is huge step forward in WWII simulators.
ehh no, my 01 gateway with a dual core CPU no grafics card or anything, on normal settings runs around 30 FPS.
-
ehh no, my 01 gateway with a dual core CPU no grafics card or anything, on normal settings runs around 30 FPS.
Il2: Cliffs of Dover?
I suspect you are misreading that as Call of Duty.