Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Groth on May 03, 2014, 04:16:36 PM
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jK8ydLY5QHQ
this is NOT a wish...
JGroth
-
Never saw service.
-
Yep, I know...IE:not a wish....<<<<<<<< ???
I've known of it..even made model....30+ years ago.
But never really saw it in relation to real people...what a big monster. IE: my point..glad you got it(maybe). It's the point where the pilot goes up steps to climb in...
JGroth
-
But never really saw it in relation to real people...what a big monster.
(http://img186.imageshack.us/img186/7131/do335mnchenkleinti2.jpg)
the young lad looking at that plane was about 190cm tall at that time... :old:
-
(http://img186.imageshack.us/img186/7131/do335mnchenkleinti2.jpg)
the young lad looking at that plane was about 190cm tall at that time... :old:
Now an old gastropod :lol
Pretty cool though.
-
Wish: 1946 Arena, one of the denizens of which is: the Pfeil...
-
Never saw service.
Pierre Clostermann reportedly encountered one while flying with a flight of Tempests.
-
Pierre Clostermann reportedly encountered one while flying with a flight of Tempests.
For one, I generally take Closterman's words with a grain of salt generally. ;)
But apart from that, you could encounter any kind of prototype (or trainers) over Germany late war, because there was about no place left where they could fly in absolute safety all the time.
The single prototype of the mighty BV 238 was sunk by Allied fighters, but was also never in service either.
The 335 was in production and had done many test flights, but never went operational.
-
Pierre Clostermann reportedly encountered one while flying with a flight of Tempests.
I never said it didn't fly. I said it didn't see service.
As far as a 1946 arena goes, I'd take a Hornet or Bearcat over the Do335.
-
I never said it didn't fly. I said it didn't see service.
So, by "service," you mean "widely fielded"? Or... something else? Without records, encountering one during the war, even a single one, only leans toward that it was in service.
-
So, by "service," you mean "widely fielded"? Or... something else? Without records, encountering one during the war, even a single one, only leans toward that it was in service.
So a protoype or a pre production plane flying tests flights makes any plane being "in service"?
-
So a protoype or a pre production plane flying tests flights makes any plane being "in service"?
No, not at all - however, there's no evidence that the one encountered was either (that was my point). Claiming they absolutely never saw service, when there is a clearly a report of encountering one, seems rather speculative.
-
No, not at all - however, there's no evidence that the one encountered was either (that was my point). Claiming they absolutely never saw service, when there is a clearly a report of encountering one, seems rather speculative.
It is not speculative at all, as the history of the Do 335 is quite well documented.
-
Well, yes I understand about the prototypes being encountered by allied combat planes.. Good point!
And I understand that HT isn't going to model every German freakfighter that flew, even tho it may have
even scored operational kills....
But some primeval aero instinct still makes me want to fly in the dark, hunting Lankstankers from an UHU..
What a freakin cool airplane!
I'd come back to fly a genuine nightfighter scenario! :banana:
-
It is not speculative at all, as the history of the Do 335 is quite well documented.
Exactly. This is not an unknown thing.
The Do335 never saw service.
The A7M2 never saw service.
Were examples built? Yes.
Did they ever see service? No.
This is well documented.
And I understand that HT isn't going to model every German freakfighter that flew, even tho it may have
even scored operational kills....
The Do335 scored no kills.
-
My Point...
It WAS a BIG MOFO...
Just sayin'
JGroth
-
Oh sure.. Sorry, I was just dreamin for a moment there... :pray
-
My Point...
It WAS a BIG MOFO...
Just sayin'
JGroth
BUT IT NEVER SAW SERVICE!! :old:
:D
-
For one, I generally take Closterman's words with a grain of salt generally.
Agreed.
- oldman
-
Never saw service?? NO watermelon Yep, I know...IE:not a wish....<<<<<<<< ???
Let's say it again.....
NEVER SAW SERVICE.
Dam..get a clue.
JGroth
-
I never said it didn't fly. I said it didn't see service.
As far as a 1946 arena goes, I'd take a Hornet or Bearcat over the Do335.
Maybe, but I'd like to try the Shinden, regardless....
-
Pierre Clostermann reportedly encountered one while flying with a flight of Tempests.
The differnces between the Bantam War series edition of The Big Show and the latest updated edition he did are many, I think he revised some of his tales and added more anti-american feelings.
-
Well... it was a good thing we all agreed the Bloody Hun was the most dangerous of the Axis. Cause they could throw some hardware at ya. Elektroboats, 262s, super tanks, missiles,anti ship smart missiles, nerve gas, this fracking twin prop thing. They had all kinds of toys in the attic to throw at us given time. Good bloody thing we didnt give them the time.
-
this is NOT a wish...
JGroth
-
Yep, and note he did not post this in the wish list forum..
-
With the wing position, did it have bad stall characteristics?
The rear blind spots were considerable I would think.
-
I was thinking the same thing when watching the video. Looks like the AC had rear visibility worse than a F6F
-
Never saw service?? NO watermelon Yep, I know...IE:not a wish....<<<<<<<< ???
Let's say it again.....
NEVER SAW SERVICE.
Dam..get a clue.
JGroth
But did it see service?
-
IL2 1946, it's in that and is good fun until it gets slow.
-
With the wing position, did it have bad stall characteristics?
The rear blind spots were considerable I would think.
It had mirrors installed as far as I know, but I'm not sure.
-
It had mirrors installed as far as I know, but I'm not sure.
So you get the vibra-view? When it's blurry and red, you know you're about to see tower.
-
Had WW2 persisted,, this would have been a very very bad aircraft ... :frown:
-
Had WW2 persisted,, this would have been a very very bad aircraft ... :frown:
It would already have been somewhat outdated when entering service.
Great performance (speed!) for a plane intoduced in early/midd 44 (as planned), but for a mid/late 45 resp "Luftwaffe 46" not all that impressive overall anymore compared to the contemporaries (P-80, P-47M, P-51H, Bearcat, Tigercat - later Me 262 variants, Ta 183 (46 what if) and so on.
-
It would already have been somewhat outdated when entering service.
Great performance (speed!) for a plane intoduced in early/midd 44 (as planned), but for a mid/late 45 resp "Luftwaffe 46" not all that impressive overall anymore compared to the contemporaries (P-80, P-47M, P-51H, Bearcat, Tigercat - later Me 262 variants, Ta 183 (46 what if) and so on.
Meteor Mk III, Meteor Mk IV, Hornet Mk I, Tempest Mk II, Vampire Mk I.
The Luft 46 hype always seems to ignore the stuff the Allies had in the pipeline.
-
A high-speed bomber interceptor... Rather redundant with the Me 262 in service. Largely worthless against fighters, its defense was speed.
Like the XP-72 Superbolt, advances in technology made it unneeded.
-
This minimization is entertaining, even credible (eg, the allied stuff coming was indeed also very good), but my guess is, were we to have the type or the arena, you guys would all take a turn in the beast.
As for widewing's point about its role, my own opinion is that most late-war Luftwaffe ac can be binned to a similar category. They all give up lateral turn capability for the weightier toys needed to intercept and bring down bomberen. There is no pure air superiority aircraft in the Luftwaffe inventory by '45. Both k-4 and d-9 have lousy turn rates. When you consider the mission (interception) it makes sense, but Mr. Spitty they ain't.
-
Very cool. Thanks for the post.
-
Actually the primary mission the Do-335 was designed for originally was high speed bombing. The 335 was a fighter bomber from the start, and the internal bomb bay has been a key feature of this design. That's also why the initial 'A' series carried a somewhat 'light' armament for it's size (1x30mm and 2x20mm in the nose), and only the projected B (destroyer) series was to upgrade this to 3x30mm and 2x20mm.
In late 43, when the Luftwaffe still had hopes to get it into service soon, the 335 was intended to help smashing the upcoming invasion in the west in a Schnellbomber role similar to the me 262 (but much better suited to that task).
The first regular unit to be equipped with the 335 was a bomber unit, the KG-2.
-
For about the first 4 feet out from the fuselage. The wing leading edge is a semi-knife edge, then blends to rounded. You also notice there is a very small amount of filleting at the fuselage wing joint.
Does the knife edge have a relationship to influencing the airflow through the 90 degree shape created by the fuselage and wing with minor filleting?
-
As much as I like the Do-335, it was outdated by 1945. Had it been introduced sooner, it could have made a difference, but not in those late stages of the war. Late versions of the P-47, P-51 and Tempest could already match its performance, except maybe for the armament loadout.
Now other fighters that were ready for the production line as the Horten IX were a whole different breed, but those are jets.
As a note, Dornier already had a substitute for the Do-335 planned. It's definitely one of my favourite aircraft projects, the Do P.252. Two engines driving pusher propellers, armament concentrated on the nose, 577mph top speed extracted by some quite accurate calculations. 6 30mm cannons, being 4 taters and 2 MK213C. And a 41K ceiling to catch the expected B-29 raids.
(http://www.luft46.com/dornier/3bd252-3.gif)
(http://www.luft46.com/dornier/do252-2.gif)
-
Yes, but not so much as a prototype was made. This is vapor, even by luft. 46 standards. Nonetheless, tres kewl...
Btw, surely we've had people flakking for the Bachem Natter?
-
If we get a 1946 arena, I want my super 162D, the TA jet, the jet that was to replace the Stuka, and the B32 :D
-
Personally I'd be in one of these in a "1946 what if" arena.
(http://www.simhq.com/_air7/images/Me-262HGII.jpg)
The transonic Me 262HG II.
Prototype flew in January 1945. Would have been faster then F-86 and MiG-15.
-
No sir, this f8f was a monster.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XcI1RCXXJU
And this F-7f
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1IM6nXsdQc
Oh and they were carrier fighters. :rock
And before anyone says it, yea i know they didn't see combat service.
-
A high-speed bomber interceptor... Rather redundant with the Me 262 in service. Largely worthless against fighters, its defense was speed.
Like the XP-72 Superbolt, advances in technology made it unneeded.
What is the Superbolt?
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_XP-72
(http://hsfeatures.com/images/xp72je_title.jpg)
-
. Both k-4 and d-9 have lousy turn rates.
19.6 degrees per second isn't too lousy on the K4's end. I'd love to have that turn rate in a Pony with one notch of flap. Also the full flaps radius of the K4 shrinks to 534 feet while still maintaining that 19.6 DPS. Compared to late-war planes of similar engine performance, it is fairly maneuverable.
https://onedrive.live.com/view.aspx?cid=4F7912F19B484B3B&resid=4F7912F19B484B3B%21761&app=WordPdf&authkey=%21AH41epN2ncdKKcg&wdo=1 (https://onedrive.live.com/view.aspx?cid=4F7912F19B484B3B&resid=4F7912F19B484B3B%21761&app=WordPdf&authkey=%21AH41epN2ncdKKcg&wdo=1)
-
You know what is a lot of fun? Shooting down guys that think they are hot to trot in their He-162s in my La-9. (Okay, I was just a bullet shield, but my sacrifice allowed my other La-9 buddies the opportunity to shoot down all He-162s)
The whole "it never saw service" thing is pretty outdated. Me-262s never saw service against Bf-109K4s either, doesn't mean the end result doesn't still equal a hell of a lot of fun.
-
*drool*
Anyone else ever feel a slight twinge of wistfulness because prop planes in service never quite reached their zenith. Too bad jets couldn't have come along just a little later.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_XP-72
(http://hsfeatures.com/images/xp72je_title.jpg)
-
19.6 degrees per second isn't too lousy on the K4's end. I'd love to have that turn rate in a Pony with one notch of flap. Also the full flaps radius of the K4 shrinks to 534 feet while still maintaining that 19.6 DPS. Compared to late-war planes of similar engine performance, it is fairly maneuverable.
https://onedrive.live.com/view.aspx?cid=4F7912F19B484B3B&resid=4F7912F19B484B3B%21761&app=WordPdf&authkey=%21AH41epN2ncdKKcg&wdo=1 (https://onedrive.live.com/view.aspx?cid=4F7912F19B484B3B&resid=4F7912F19B484B3B%21761&app=WordPdf&authkey=%21AH41epN2ncdKKcg&wdo=1)
It is, but I compared it to the Spit. When I use the g-14 against the Pony, the trick is to slow him down and get him into a turn fight. When I use the K-4, the Pony doesn't have a lot of advantage outside of his high-speed handling and ballistics.
Generally, all I worry about with Ponies is getting picked - same with the Typh (only worse - those damn Hispanos). It's the Spit, imj, that is really the best pure air-to-air fighter. It's good at everything, pretty much: climb, speed, firepower, lateral turn.
Mind, I don't dislike either the d-9 or k-4, though I spend most of my flying time in the g-14. I just don't do that much turnfighting in it. Mostly, it's dive, fire, climb, roll, reverse, dive...Sometimes, I'll saddle up, mainly because I'm not that great of a shot. Yesterday, for example, I saddled up on a P-38. There were only 38s a nd LAncs in the neighborhood so I said wtf and went fangsout. Generally, I'd call this dangerous, since, in the 109, it is safest/best to retain that alt advantage so that I can always climb away. Those 38s were so poorly flown that dispatching the hapless pilot was relatively easy, then I just extended away from his hapless remaining mates and landed my kills.
BTW, I tried the "porpoise" maneuver Saturday and evaded about 4 bad guys with it. It bought me time to run to ack. Whilenboth the maneuver and the run to ack may be game'y, so was the mix of baddies (Yak, La-la, Spitties).
The Porpoise: an Ace move...
Thanks for providing the link to this chart. It's very useful.
-
The whole "it never saw service" thing is pretty outdated. Me-262s never saw service against Bf-109K4s either, doesn't mean the end result doesn't still equal a hell of a lot of fun.
I agree with this. I know there needs to be a line drawn at some point as to what should or shouldn't be in the game, but I would like to see some of the aircraft included that almost made it into the war, like the Do-335, F-8F, F-7F, P-63, P-80 and others as long as there is enough data available to model them accurately. No drawing board fantasy planes mind you, just those that were actually built and were reasonably close to becoming operational or seeing combat in WWII. If its fun who cares if its not absolutely historically accurate. Much of the game is not historically accurate as it is, so I don't see that as a defining criteria for whether any plane should be included or not.
-
For about the first 4 feet out from the fuselage. The wing leading edge is a semi-knife edge, then blends to rounded. You also notice there is a very small amount of filleting at the fuselage wing joint.
Does the knife edge have a relationship to influencing the airflow through the 90 degree shape created by the fuselage and wing with minor filleting?
I wonder a little about the stall characteristics of that portion of the cross section. Early root stall is certainly prefereable to tip stall.
My reco on some of these knife edged sections, going back to Aero grad school (about thirty years back) is that the peak pressure decrease is really, really senstive to that leading edge geometry. You can get crazy peaks off of finer leading edges.
-
This would be an interesting late-war unflushable: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_XP-58_Chain_Lightning
-
A 1946 LWA arena would be a huge coup and bring back players in mobs. Most of all when powered by a new engine.
-
What is the Superbolt?
XP-72
from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_XP-72
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/41/Republic_XP-72_061024-F-1234P-038.jpg)
"designed around the Pratt & Whitney R-4360 28-cylinder air-cooled radial engine with a supercharger mounted behind the pilot"
"The order included an alternate armament configuration of four 37 mm cannon."
R-4360 and 4x37mm! Ye gods.
-
*drool*
Anyone else ever feel a slight twinge of wistfulness because prop planes in service never quite reached their zenith. Too bad jets couldn't have come along just a little later.
I'm with you! :aok
-
I agree with this. I know there needs to be a line drawn at some point as to what should or shouldn't be in the game, but I would like to see some of the aircraft included that almost made it into the war,
Not me. They are very interesting planes, but a bunch of them don't have much performance data, so the modeling would be based on guesses. Also, it would suck a lot of the player base away from the aircraft that really did fight in WWII.
I like HTC's criterion: it had to be in service in WWII.
-
I agree with this. I know there needs to be a line drawn at some point as to what should or shouldn't be in the game, but I would like to see some of the aircraft included that almost made it into the war, like the Do-335, F-8F, F-7F, P-63, P-80 and others as long as there is enough data available to model them accurately. No drawing board fantasy planes mind you, just those that were actually built and were reasonably close to becoming operational or seeing combat in WWII. If its fun who cares if its not absolutely historically accurate. Much of the game is not historically accurate as it is, so I don't see that as a defining criteria for whether any plane should be included or not.
Not merely about what to include, but priorities, so long as HTC is such small team. Along with above reasons by Brooke, it means those fringe WWII birds ought to be done after models that were the actual meat of WWII. You really have to have a model that was within AH gameplay and/or within general WWII performance envelope, and be a lot of fun and be very popular to survive inclusion filter.
-
(http://img186.imageshack.us/img186/7131/do335mnchenkleinti2.jpg)
the young lad looking at that plane was about 190cm tall at that time... :old:
I dig the pajama pants!
-
Generally, all I worry about with Ponies is getting picked - same with the Typh (only worse - those damn Hispanos). It's the Spit, imj, that is really the best pure air-to-air fighter. It's good at everything, pretty much: climb, speed, firepower, lateral turn.
Agreed, I have only felt that Ponies were a threat when one had to fight them along with turny planes like ki-84s... The ki-84s would force a turn fight, Ponies would dive from 20k above and pick you.
-
Not me. They are very interesting planes, but a bunch of them don't have much performance data, so the modeling would be based on guesses. Also, it would suck a lot of the player base away from the aircraft that really did fight in WWII.
I like HTC's criterion: it had to be in service in WWII.
The P-51H was once on a poll for inclusion. Frankly it would be great to have a perkable AAF plane. I think some "nearly saw service in WWII and saw real service post-war" deal could be okay.
-
I can think of many allied and specially Axis "nearly made it" planes, but ww2 arena would die 4-ever, and the mid-war planes would be on the scenario scrapheap.
No thanks.
-
(http://karopka.ru/upload/iblock/4d6/photo_1_1308030728.jpg)
-
I agree with this. I know there needs to be a line drawn at some point as to what should or shouldn't be in the game, but I would like to see some of the aircraft included that almost made it into the war, like the Do-335, F-8F, F-7F, P-63, P-80 and others as long as there is enough data available to model them accurately. No drawing board fantasy planes mind you, just those that were actually built and were reasonably close to becoming operational or seeing combat in WWII. If its fun who cares if its not absolutely historically accurate. Much of the game is not historically accurate as it is, so I don't see that as a defining criteria for whether any plane should be included or not.
Keep in mind that the F8F-1, F7F-1/F7F-2N, P-63A and P-51H were all operational, in squadron service... The P-63A saw combat. The others were just days away from action. When Japan surrendered in mid August, 1945, Marine Tigercats on Okinawa, P-51H on Iwo Jima and the F8F on carriers two days sailing from joining Halsey's 3rd fleet. F8Fs were part of the Tokyo Bay fly-over when the surrender was signed.
-
A '46 arena might attract some market share. *Shrug*
-
I can think of many allied and specially Axis "nearly made it" planes, but ww2 arena would die 4-ever, and the mid-war planes would be on the scenario scrapheap.
No thanks.
That's what the perk system is for...
-
I can think of many allied and specially Axis "nearly made it" planes, but ww2 arena would die 4-ever, and the mid-war planes would be on the scenario scrapheap.
No thanks.
Its already on the scrap heap. A 1946 arena would also include ALL airplanes with 1946 planes perked, or most of them. Even better "Bought"! That way you want a Bear Cat then give AH $19.99 for one, or more.
Combat flight nuts are like waterfowlers. They will buy anything flight related. I guarantee you I would spend money on some 1946 planes.
-
Its already on the scrap heap. A 1946 arena would also include ALL airplanes with 1946 planes perked, or most of them. Even better "Bought"! That way you want a Bear Cat then give AH $19.99 for one, or more.
Combat flight nuts are like waterfowlers. They will buy anything flight related. I guarantee you I would spend money on some 1946 planes.
I would too. I spent money on stupid war thunder crap...
-
Its already on the scrap heap. A 1946 arena would also include ALL airplanes with 1946 planes perked, or most of them. Even better "Bought"! That way you want a Bear Cat then give AH $19.99 for one, or more.
Combat flight nuts are like waterfowlers. They will buy anything flight related. I guarantee you I would spend money on some 1946 planes.
Introducing paying with real money for gear into Aces High would be a mistake. The lack of such crap in here is one of the attractive aspects of the game.
-
Introducing paying with real money for gear into Aces High would be a mistake. The lack of such crap in here is one of the attractive aspects of the game.
Yes, but, look at the success of WT... As with the pusher, they gave the first taste for free. The rest is for good stuff.
I've got a friend in fl who refuses to pay a monthly to play ah but was happy to buy upgrades in WT.
What it takes: a means to enable the cheap to rationalize spending money.
-
A $15 dollar gate is much more fair than basically buying advantage. One of the best things about Aces High is the basically level nature of it all.
-
Introducing paying with real money for gear into Aces High would be a mistake. The lack of such crap in here is one of the attractive aspects of the game.
Attractive? Using LWA K/D stats we have lost 62% of the player base since 2008. Even the loss from 2013 to 2014 for APR was 645,919 in 2013 and 510,039 for 2014.
"Attractive" seems to be a relative term.
-
It's dying, BnZ. I think Rich is right. It needs a business model that works.
-
It's not the business model, it's the audience and the graphics mostly. After that I'd say the difficulty/learning curve (incl player competitiveness) and size of planeset (incl outliers like 51H, F7F, etc).
-
It's not the business model, it's the audience and the graphics mostly. After that I'd say the difficulty/learning curve (incl player competitiveness) and size of planeset (incl outliers like 51H, F7F, etc).
Graphics: maybe... Audience? How do you figure when a crap game like WT draws so many? the biggest a:b diff b/w them and us is the revenue model. I've got at least 1 anecdotal data point of a guy who will not pay a subscription but will pay for upgrades.
The rest: i buy the planeset arg but think some level of difficulty saves us from arcade status.
-
I'm all ears. I'm just calling it like I see it.
I agree on buffering us from arcade status and players. I do think AH has to have max number of planes, cause that's IMO one of the core draws: giving a would-be pilot his fantasy poster warbird. Plenty of those not yet in game that pass AH's pretty strict criteria.
Graphics I think are pretty damn clear... For instance see me: I'm old school non-eye candy purist not just in AH, e.g. LFS rather than iRacing. WT? Those clouds, etc.. It's just ecstasy. No comparison with AH.
On the revenue model specifically I'm all ears, I really don't see why AH model is definitely worse.
-
Better graphics and advertising will make AH compete with war blunder. When I'm watching aircraft videos on youtube I get War Thunder links to click on. I do not get AH links to click on. That more than anything accounts for relative growth rates.
-
I would shell out $$ for 3 or 4 1946 airplanes in a heart beat. just saying.
-
I can think of many allied and specially Axis "nearly made it" planes, but ww2 arena would die 4-ever, and the mid-war planes would be on the scenario scrapheap.
No thanks.
If that is the case there is the MW and EW that you could go fly in. But I agree that part of the problem is that needs to advertise. My Father is a business adviser.
He goes in and looks at the books and tells you what you need to change. One thing he has always hammered home with these failing business is Advertisement.. No matter how tight you are you still need more customers. The only way you get them is by mass or middle of the road advertisements.
To make a business successful is to " 10% of your profit into advertisement." Word of mouth is the best way but also any type of advertising in papers billbords or even youtube will bring a customers.
-
It's not the business model, it's the audience and the graphics mostly. After that I'd say the difficulty/learning curve (incl player competitiveness) and size of planeset (incl outliers like 51H, F7F, etc).
Its both. The true strength of the game is both the community and the flight model. I "like" how the airplanes are setup, their controls, the way the game interacts and achieves. That the graphics is outdated nobody argues with and AH is on top of but more is needed.
When they built WW1 they did a fine initial job, and it is fun to play in, but I said here it was a waste of time. Things is there was , and is, already an established WW1 game and its a small niche to begin with. A lot of players wants fast planes with big guns. I sympathize with purists who want early war planes but i also believe not only would they be a waste of time but the ones calling for them would probably never fly them. Certainly not enough would.
What the game needs is excitement and a change into a new era. a '46 arena would be a major coup, most of all coupled with a new engine. Start with a few '46 planes and build from there. Eventually you'd have maybe two arenas, the '46 arena would still have all the other planes.
It would be nice to get the International players back. They brought a lot to the game and losing them took a lot away. I cant play late so I kinda get it why the lack of action made them leave.
I believe this game brings enough to the table that with a new engine it would be worth a monthly fee AND a fee for '46 planes.
-
Attractive? Using LWA K/D stats we have lost 62% of the player base since 2008. Even the loss from 2013 to 2014 for APR was 645,919 in 2013 and 510,039 for 2014.
"Attractive" seems to be a relative term.
You can't use the in game stats to measure player retention, it will not provide an accurate metric.
ack-ack
-
You can't use the in game stats to measure player retention, it will not provide an accurate metric.
ack-ack
Maybe, but it does give us an idea in the macro
-
Graphics: maybe... Audience? How do you figure when a crap game like WT draws so many? the biggest a:b diff b/w them and us is the revenue model. I've got at least 1 anecdotal data point of a guy who will not pay a subscription but will pay for upgrades.
The rest: i buy the planeset arg but think some level of difficulty saves us from arcade status.
The appeal of WT isn't its business model, the game is successful because it is easy to get into and start playing. You don't need fancy controllers, just a keyboard and mouse and its primarily aimed at the 'non-simmer', which is why it's arcade mode arenas are far more populated than it's 'full realism' arena.
ack-ack
-
Maybe, but it does give us an idea in the macro
K/D stats aren't even going to provide that.
ack-ack
-
You are right - it would be impossible to get an accurate figure from that. Having said that, when I retired my AH account in 2004, There were two MAs with better prime time numbers and FSO (whatever it was called then) were twice what they are now.
-
cool plane
-
While WAY off topic...I think(Me, Myself & I..all 3 of us) that HTC should sell this as 'most accurate WW2 flite sim'...
JGroth
-
The appeal of WT isn't its business model, the game is successful because it is easy to get into and start playing. You don't need fancy controllers, just a keyboard and mouse and its primarily aimed at the 'non-simmer', which is why it's arcade mode arenas are far more populated than it's 'full realism' arena.
ack-ack
Easy to get into..? Yes, but part of that is also tied to revenue. They charge zero. There is no hurdle. We charge a sub after two weeks. I mean, to me that $15 a month is basically nothing. I've retained it even months I don't play but, for some -and especially the young and terminally broke, it makes a difference. Some people will actually even refuse a subscription on principle.
Bottom line: change nothing and nothing will change...
-
You can't use the in game stats to measure player retention, it will not provide an accurate metric.
ack-ack
Its accurate enough. Does anyone truly doubt at least 1/2 of the players left this game and probably more? I remember the arena numbers back then, at least generally. And I see the numbers now. Actually, based on memory, were someone to ask me how much the game has lost in that time frame, and without looking up K/D stats, I'd probably have said some wheres in the area of 60%.
-
Its accurate enough. Does anyone truly doubt at least 1/2 of the players left this game and probably more? I remember the arena numbers back then, at least generally. And I see the numbers now. Actually, based on memory, were someone to ask me how much the game has lost in that time frame, and without looking up K/D stats, I'd probably have said some wheres in the area of 60%.
No, as I mentioned previously, it's not an accurate measurement at all nor will it ever be.
ack-ack
-
:)
-
No, as I mentioned previously, it's not an accurate measurement at all nor will it ever be.
ack-ack
Okay, but do you dispute that total kills and deaths correlate to total participation? I'd go as far as to say that that correlation is likely pretty strong.
-
Okay, but do you dispute that total kills and deaths correlate to total participation? I'd go as far as to say that that correlation is likely pretty strong.
Are you saying that total kills and deaths stats can be used as an accurate metric? If you are, I disagree for the obvious reason, it's not an accurate measurement to track player population.
ack-ack
-
Are you saying that total kills and deaths stats can be used as an accurate metric? If you are, I disagree for the obvious reason, it's not an accurate measurement to track player population.
ack-ack
WTF is your rationale? No one disputes HTCs customer base has lessened over the years. Dale can post something to argue but I don't think he will - he knows he score better than all of us.
My hope is the new engine will go a long way to build a stronger customer base, but I won't do what you are doing and post counter arguments not germane to the point being made. Piss on me all you want but don't tell me it's raining while you do.
-
Are you saying that total kills and deaths stats can be used as an accurate metric?
I think we have to define "accurate" in this context, or you guys will just turn in circles ;)
-
WTF is your rationale? No one disputes HTCs customer base has lessened over the years. Dale can post something to argue but I don't think he will - he knows he score better than all of us.
I agree, the only one that can accurately track the player population base is HiTech, he has all the tools that provide that info. All we can do is basically offer conjecture since we do not have the complete picture ourselves. I was just disagreeing with PJ that total kills/deaths could be used.
My hope is the new engine will go a long way to build a stronger customer base, but I won't do what you are doing and post counter arguments not germane to the point being made. Piss on me all you want but don't tell me it's raining while you do.
I hope the new engine also attracts new players and causes old players to return, I certainly don't want to see this game wither on the vine and die. Nor do I really understand why you are getting upset, since I'm just saying to Rich and PJ that using in-game stats to track player population isn't going to provide the metric they're looking for. It's rather obvious when there is only 385 during US prime time that the player base has shrunk, when there used to be 700+ during US prime time a few years ago.
Using in game stats would be like me tracking the player population for the game I work on by using how many free companies have cleared Turn 5 of Coil in FFXIV during March compared to April.
ack-ack
-
Are you saying that total kills and deaths stats can be used as an accurate metric? If you are, I disagree for the obvious reason, it's not an accurate measurement to track player population.
ack-ack
For total kill/deaths to go down, there either have to be fewer subscribers or a large percentage of subscribers have to be playing less for some reason. The first answer seems simpler and more plausible than the first, and a smaller number of ranked players every tour would seem to support this also.
-
I agree, the only one that can accurately track the player population base is HiTech, he has all the tools that provide that info. All we can do is basically offer conjecture since we do not have the complete picture ourselves. I was just disagreeing with PJ that total kills/deaths could be used.
I hope the new engine also attracts new players and causes old players to return, I certainly don't want to see this game wither on the vine and die. Nor do I really understand why you are getting upset, since I'm just saying to Rich and PJ that using in-game stats to track player population isn't going to provide the metric they're looking for. It's rather obvious when there is only 385 during US prime time that the player base has shrunk, when there used to be 700+ during US prime time a few years ago.
Using in game stats would be like me tracking the player population for the game I work on by using how many free companies have cleared Turn 5 of Coil in FFXIV during March compared to April.
ack-ack
I'm not upset at all. Dude, you're posts were misleading and therefore my response
-
I'm not upset at all. Dude, you're posts were misleading and therefore my response
How were they misleading? Were you translating his posts to Farsi and then back to English or something?
-
How were they misleading? Were you translating his posts to Farsi and then back to English or something?
Cute.
-
Are you saying that total kills and deaths stats can be used as an accurate metric? If you are, I disagree for the obvious reason, it's not an accurate measurement to track player population.
ack-ack
It depends on what you mean by accurate. If kills and deaths correlate strongly with participating player count, then depending on the distribution of error; kills plus deaths versus true player count, you could establish a confidence that a given kill and death count for a month was scaleable to the true count. There would still, of course be some probability that the proxy gives an erroneous result.
But it's one hell of a lot more plausible than obtusely and against all observable evidence stating that the two don't trend sympathetically...
-
Nobody said it was dead on accurate but it most certainly shows trends, that is if counting the numbers in the arena today and remembering what they used to be years ago, isnt enough. And a Apr MWA K/D count of over 80,000 in 2008 compared to a 2014 MWA of about 13,000 shows a further "trend". The loss might be even more then 62%.
EWA was roughly 18,000 in 2008 and was about 1,200 in 2014. The "trend" is clear enough.
-
And a Apr MWA K/D count of over 80,000 in 2008 compared to a 2014 MWA of about 13,000 shows a further "trend". The loss might be even more then 62%.
EWA was roughly 18,000 in 2008 and was about 1,200 in 2014. The "trend" is clear enough.
The minor arenas are only remotely related to LW (and thus overall activitly, of which the LW has a more than 90% share). They have a population dynamics all of their own, especially when shrinking (the old 'if nobody is there, nobody goes there' problem).
In the end, it's all about the Late War Main Arena, globally seen.
-
As someone who read the first two few entries then skipped to the end of the thread`. I say bring on the 1946 plane set. It will be that much funner killing them in the early war bird set