Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Bored123 on May 31, 2016, 02:12:57 PM
-
It would be cool to have random failures. Something just out of the blue, not often.
-
I am the random failure in my squad. brought supplies 3 times in a row to a base take. I am not trusted to bring another goon.
but the question is, why would you think it's cool? random engine failures or mg would only upset customers.
semp
-
@OP -- No thanks.
-
It sounds great and all for reallistic effects, but if my plane farts up for no reason in a video game I'm going to be angry. Already gotta deal with random puff ack, AAA and all that. Most people have enough problems keeping a whole plane in the sky. I think it would end up being complaints galore and inevitably piss everyone off.
-
Like Demon said it sounds good on paper but in practice it's not fun. Wait until your engine dies in a fight or your 100 perk B29 has a random engine fire and explodes. I would prefer to keep the status quo.
-
-1
We don't need anything else for people to cry about.... :bhead
:ahand
-
No :old:
-
(http://i241.photobucket.com/albums/ff252/DropkickYankees/Thisishorible.jpg~original) (http://s241.photobucket.com/user/DropkickYankees/media/Thisishorible.jpg.html)
-
(http://i343.photobucket.com/albums/o460/caldera_08/AH%20motivationals/wishlist.jpg~original) (http://s343.photobucket.com/user/caldera_08/media/AH%20motivationals/wishlist.jpg.html)
-
It would be cool to have random failures. Something just out of the blue, not often.
We already have that. We call them discos.
-
We already have that. We call them discos.
This
:aok
-
There's a reason this game has a binary damage system (ie your wing is perfect until it breaks)
-
+1, just because it would be fun to see a La or a Yak tearing off the plywood covering the wings in a high G pull up :D
-
+1, just because it would be fun to see a La or a Yak tearing off the plywood covering the wings in a high G pull up :D
This was an historic problem that plagued the Russian plywood coverings on La and Yak wings. This made me think about all the complaints concerning the Yak3 having armor plating like a Tiger2. Did some testing offline with La5\7, Yak 3\9u, Mossi6 and P47-D40 as a control. I single shot all of these planes in the drone circle from 200yds with the P39Q 37mm, Yak 9T 37mm, Ta 152 30mm, K4 30mm and the P39-D 20mm.
All shooting was into the rear of the fuselage to test the kill ability of the round.
1. - 37mm US and Ru - One shot destroyed all fighters.
2. - 30mm - One shot destroyed all fighters with the exception of the Yak3 one time took an oil hit then second 30mm destroyed it. I shot at the Yak3 for testing one extra time after each time I shot down the other planes as a comparison. The oil hit, then second round killing the Yak3 occurred only once during this.
3. - 20mm - up to 5 shots was the maximum of 20mm for any plane and that was the P47 most of the time. Average for the La5\7 was 2, Yak-9u was 2, Mossi6 was 3 and the Yak 3 all over the place, sometimes 2 and up to 5 at times.
I performed an additional test with the 20mm of shooting sub 200. All planes went down 1-2 rounds, with the Russian planes going down with single hits. Seems 200 and beyond has some effect on the effectiveness of rounds. The La5\7 and Yak 3\9u at 200 were easy to miss with all the cannon round types slipping past the fuselage or over the wings. Then considering the small cross section and my observation about 200 yards, it's quite easy to think the Yak3 has Tiger2 armor plating. Also depending on where in the 200 distance showing from the icon, I ran into at least once the La5\7 needing 5 rounds to take them down and the Yak 3\9u.
-
This was an historic problem that plagued the Russian plywood coverings on La and Yak wings. This made me think about all the complaints concerning the Yak3 having armor plating like a Tiger2. Did some testing offline with La5\7, Yak 3\9u, Mossi6 and P47-D40 as a control. I single shot all of these planes in the drone circle from 200yds with the P39Q 37mm, Yak 9T 37mm, Ta 152 30mm, K4 30mm and the P39-D 20mm.
All shooting was into the rear of the fuselage to test the kill ability of the round.
1. - 37mm US and Ru - One shot destroyed all fighters.
2. - 30mm - One shot destroyed all fighters with the exception of the Yak3 one time took an oil hit then second 30mm destroyed it. I shot at the Yak3 for testing one extra time after each time I shot down the other planes as a comparison. The oil hit, then second round killing the Yak3 occurred only once during this.
3. - 20mm - up to 5 shots was the maximum of 20mm for any plane and that was the P47 most of the time. Average for the La5\7 was 2, Yak-9u was 2, Mossi6 was 3 and the Yak 3 all over the place, sometimes 2 and up to 5 at times.
I performed an additional test with the 20mm of shooting sub 200. All planes went down 1-2 rounds, with the Russian planes going down with single hits. Seems 200 and beyond has some effect on the effectiveness of rounds. The La5\7 and Yak 3\9u at 200 were easy to miss with all the cannon round types slipping past the fuselage or over the wings. Then considering the small cross section and my observation about 200 yards, it's quite easy to think the Yak3 has Tiger2 armor plating. Also depending on where in the 200 distance showing from the icon, I ran into at least once the La5\7 needing 5 rounds to take them down and the Yak 3\9u.
:salute interesting how do the rubber bullets apply? :cheers:
-
I also fly il2-BoS, and I enjoy having so much control over my aircraft; water and oil radiators and also cowl openings. A small mistake can lead to failures, adding another dynamic as well as immersion to flying. In a score orientated/infested game like AcesHigh random failures would meet zero support. What probably might be more welcome as a wish could be asking for more control over the engine systems. That would provide failures completely in the control of the pilot.
-
bortas,
Get a friend, go into the DA and let him shoot at you in all of those planes using the planes I tested with. If you want rubber bullets, open two CMD windows and set off a ping in each window. One to your router and one to your local PC, localhost.
ping -t address
Use ctrl c to stop when you are done.
If that causes the dreaded udp\tcp message and disco, turn off the ping to your PC and run only the one to your router. Run multiple instances of ping to your router then if needed to duplicate a bad connection. Reduce the number when you force a disco. A congested or bad connection is a congested or bad connection........ ;) Don'tcha think...... :rolleyes:
-
It would be cool to have random failures. Something just out of the blue, not often.
No, no, no, and no.
-
I also fly il2-BoS, and I enjoy having so much control over my aircraft; water and oil radiators and also cowl openings. A small mistake can lead to failures, adding another dynamic as well as immersion to flying. In a score orientated/infested game like AcesHigh random failures would meet zero support. What probably might be more welcome as a wish could be asking for more control over the engine systems. That would provide failures completely in the control of the pilot.
dolby we arent actually pilots, we just pretend to be one. adding more crap just for the sake of pushing buttons is gonna further reduce the player base. most of us in here dont even use trim, it could help, but to be honest I dont really care to learn. I dont come here to learn the intricacies of the internal combustion engine. I am just here to aim and shoot.
semp
-
I am just here to aim and shoot.
semp
You'd be better off on the NES, it had a game called duck hunt. All you had to do was aim and shoot, there wasn't even any flying involved to complicate things.
:neener:
-
But he has a point, complexity scares people off, WT is even simpler to fly and they have scores of people flying, any noob can jump in a plane and score some kills.
-
But he has a point, complexity scares people off, WT is even simpler to fly and they have scores of people flying, any noob can jump in a plane and score some kills.
Yep. I read an article once where they talked about the "feeling of realism" in games. Regardless of how realistic it actually is, as long as people perceive it as being realistic, they're happy.
My opinion is also that different people have different thresholds for the amount of realism that feels right to them. For myself, I'd love for the air to act more like a fluid, with updrafts, turbulence, etc etc. I'd also love for the damage model to be more detailed. However, engine management doesn't do a thing for me. Just a personal preference. If the game had both, I'd likely tolerate learning the engine management because of the other.
I can kind of see the mindset of unreliable aircraft being fun for some, particularly in scenarios. However I also realize it doesn't have broad appeal for most.
Wiley.
-
You'd be better off on the NES, it had a game called duck hunt. All you had to do was aim and shoot, there wasn't even any flying involved to complicate things.
:neener:
why you don't aim and shoot?
semp
-
why you don't aim and shoot?
semp
Master Jedi am I. Kill them with the force I do.
-
AW had randomized failures. If maintenance hangers were porked, you might take off with faulty engine that produced around 75% power or might blow up in mid-air due to an engine malfunction. It sucked.
-
I also fly il2-BoS, and I enjoy having so much control over my aircraft; water and oil radiators and also cowl openings. A small mistake can lead to failures,
In IL-2 perhaps, not so much in real life.
-
In IL-2 perhaps, not so much in real life.
This I have to hear.
-
This I have to hear.
You first, what small mistake do you think is going to lead to failure in the real world?
Cowl flaps? Only if you're so brain dead you don't notice a temp rise.
Mixture mis-set? Again only if you're not paying attention. Although this one probably has the most potential for an immediate issue if you cause detonation. Most WWII aircraft had set and forget mixture controls -- either cutoff, auto lean or auto rich. No tweaking needed.
Over boost? Once ran the props on the B-24 down thinking I was closing the cowl flaps (major brain fart). The grunting from the engines alerted me that "something ain't right here". No ill effects but we did pay pretty close attention for the next couple of weeks just in case I had weakened a cylinder.
Small mistakes don't cause problems. It will be a cascade of mistakes.
-
You first, what small mistake do you think is going to lead to failure in the real world?
Cowl flaps? Only if you're so brain dead you don't notice a temp rise.
Mixture mis-set? Again only if you're not paying attention. Although this one probably has the most potential for an immediate issue if you cause detonation. Most WWII aircraft had set and forget mixture controls -- either cutoff, auto lean or auto rich. No tweaking needed.
Over boost? Once ran the props on the B-24 down thinking I was closing the cowl flaps (major brain fart). The grunting from the engines alerted me that "something ain't right here". No ill effects but we did pay pretty close attention for the next couple of weeks just in case I had weakened a cylinder.
Small mistakes don't cause problems. It will be a cascade of mistakes.
In the heat of battle its very easy to make a, what I consider, small mistake regarding all those you consider being brain dead not to notice. That's unfortunate, I thought you might have listed inaccuracies in il2BoS engine management and failures. Do you have anything worth reading at your finger tips?
-
Do you have anything worth reading at your finger tips?
Come on Dolby, you are better than that. Show a little respect to someone who has actually flown the aircraft he's talking about please. :salute
-
Come on Dolby, you are better than that. Show a little respect to someone who has actually flown the aircraft he's talking about please. :salute
Come on Zoney read the part he uses the term "brain dead" and lend us a comment on that
-
In the heat of battle its very easy to make a, what I consider, small mistake regarding all those you consider being brain dead not to notice. That's unfortunate, I thought you might have listed inaccuracies in il2BoS engine management and failures. Do you have anything worth reading at your finger tips?
IL-2's engine management is, if anything, more gamey than AH's. It is a prime example of creating an unrealistic gamey system to make a game seem more realistic.
Real engine management isn't nearly as constant as IL-2 makes it out to be.
From a P-38 pilot, paraphrased: "In combat we'd push the throttles all the way forward and leave them there. No WWII airplane generated enough power to make lower power settings worth anything in combat."
There are also multiple examples of Allied aircraft being run at full WEP for durations well beyond the handbook's stated limits with no ill effects to the engine. In testing engines were run at WEP settings for even longer.
Realistic engine management would not be as engaging as in IL-2 because it wasn't a constant thing.
-
Engines for WW2 combat aircraft were extremely tough and purpose designed that way partially because humans are imperfect.
British ran a Merlin for 200 hours at WEP. Only micro fractures were found in some major components. The R2800 was run for 8 hours on WEP. It only needed a spark plug change before it was put in a test P47 and finished out it's 110 hours under highly stressing test regiments.
IL2 is targeting an audience just like War Thunder, DCS, and Aces High.
Dolby you seem to have a personal dysfunction to show everyone you are superior to them no matter the Pyrrhic outcome. I flew right seat in Beach 18's, you had a nursery rhyme you repeated from startup to shutdown for engine management. Worse case was costing management a new engine sooner than they budgeted for. Even the "superior" pilot has bad days in real life but, world wide you do not see planes with vintage engines killing their pilots every other day in the news over bad engine management. Some body just gets a huge bill for a rebuild of an antique. You are way over complicating this for that Pyrrhic outcome.
-
You have essentially said in every follow on post that having flown a B24 gives you free reign to be a dick.
Completely sweeping under the carpet that everyone is "brain dead" for making mistakes and that he only has "brain farts" for his mistakes. There is no dysfunction from my end, only the hypocrisy of his and the opportunist "free jab at Dolby" of yours.
bustr I have not once tried to point out or show I am superior to anyone, I can easily debunk anything you wish to provide in evidence of such.
-
IL-2's engine management is, if anything, more gamey than AH's. It is a prime example of creating an unrealistic gamey system to make a game seem more realistic.
Real engine management isn't nearly as constant as IL-2 makes it out to be.
From a P-38 pilot, paraphrased: "In combat we'd push the throttles all the way forward and leave them there. No WWII airplane generated enough power to make lower power settings worth anything in combat."
There are also multiple examples of Allied aircraft being run at full WEP for durations well beyond the handbook's stated limits with no ill effects to the engine. In testing engines were run at WEP settings for even longer.
Realistic engine management would not be as engaging as in IL-2 because it wasn't a constant thing.
If this is the case, then why do games such as Il2 and even AcesHigh restrict the engine power if engines did not suffer ill effects running the engines outside of guidelines?
-
You'd be better off on the NES, it had a game called duck hunt. All you had to do was aim and shoot, there wasn't even any flying involved to complicate things.
:neener:
That game cheats :furious
-
If this is the case, then why do games such as Il2 and even AcesHigh restrict the engine power if engines did not suffer ill effects running the engines outside of guidelines?
Gameplay. As Bustr stated, they were over engineered IRL because peoples' lives were depending on them. The WEP restrictions on planes that didn't involve an additive were pretty much there to save the ground crew hours.
Most of us run the same plane for no more than 20 minutes at a time. Not much can happen to an engine in that time.
Wiley.
-
Dolby are you a pilot? I'm going to guess you're not. If you were you would know that a lot of this nit pick "system management" stuff isn't realistic.
The brain dead comment is because you would have to be brain dead not to notice something is wrong in many cases. Sometimes you will hear it, you should dang sure be looking at the gauges once in a while so you can see it, you might feel it in vibration or control feel...the airplane is talking to you but you have to listen.
** And if it makes you happier replace brain fart with brain dead.
-
Dolby are you a pilot?
Of course this has everything to do with having the systems there to add to the immersion of flying or my enjoyment of having them present in another game I fly within. I should have known better that I have no right, being that I am not a pilot, for daring to adjust a wish for more immersion. :rolleyes:
-
And thus the Pyrrhic outcome by claiming the highest ground in the universe on planet earth today. Victim-hood at the hands of meenies...... If they are beating you with facts, claim they are violating your rights by using facts to hurt your feelings.
-
I should have known better that I have no right, being that I am not a pilot, for daring to adjust a wish for more immersion.
I think that's the point: it's a false sense of immersion.
- oldman
-
And thus the Pyrrhic outcome by claiming the highest ground in the universe on planet earth today. Victim-hood at the hands of meenies...... If they are beating you with facts, claim they are violating your rights by using facts to hurt your feelings.
bustr, you have added nothing to this discussion, are you only here to troll or are you going to add something to the discussion worth while? Why don't you start by bolstering the present facts with documentation and irrefutable proof.
I think that's the point: it's a false sense of immersion.
- oldman
Perhaps so, but, immersion is immersion. It makes one more engaged and involved in the game, I have never found that a game breaker.
-
Of course this has everything to do with having the systems there to add to the immersion of flying or my enjoyment of having them present in another game I fly within. I should have known better that I have no right, being that I am not a pilot, for daring to adjust a wish for more immersion. :rolleyes:
I think the point they are trying to make is that to have that stuff just isn't realistic.
This has been asked for many times before, and if I remember right, Hitech said he wouldn't add a bunch of button pushes just for the sake of pushing more buttons.
-
Just a wish after all :lol
-
bustr, you have added nothing to this discussion, are you only here to troll or are you going to add something to the discussion worth while? Why don't you start by bolstering the present facts with documentation and irrefutable proof.
Perhaps so, but, immersion is immersion. It makes one more engaged and involved in the game, I have never found that a game breaker.
I wear a leather jacket and boots only for the sake of immersion. and when I say only, i mean that's the only thing I wear. feel free to add goggles and leather mask and look like a gimp for the sake of immersion if you want.
semp
-
I wear a leather jacket and boots only for the sake of immersion. and when I say only, i mean that's the only thing I wear. feel free to add goggles and leather mask and look like a gimp for the sake of immersion if you want.
semp
Thanks semp for your fashion tips, much appreciated, but I think I'll stick to my customary Shirt and Jeans. I'll occasionally slip on jumper if it gets chilly, never needed a mask and goggles at 4k in a c152 though.
-
Thanks semp for your fashion tips, much appreciated, but I think I'll stick to my customary Shirt and Jeans. I'll occasionally slip on jumper if it gets chilly, never needed a mask and goggles at 4k in a c152 though.
you will never know the joy of killing another fellow player while you are touching only leather. it feels like victory.
sep
-
dolby we arent actually pilots, we just pretend to be one. adding more crap just for the sake of pushing buttons is gonna further reduce the player base. most of us in here dont even use trim, it could help, but to be honest I dont really care to learn. I dont come here to learn the intricacies of the internal combustion engine. I am just here to aim and shoot.
semp
Also a keyboard is a poor substitute for real-life engine controls. No thanks. It is fine as is.
-
You have essentially said in every follow on post that having flown a B24 gives you free reign to be a dick.
Completely sweeping under the carpet that everyone is "brain dead" for making mistakes and that he only has "brain farts" for his mistakes. There is no dysfunction from my end, only the hypocrisy of his and the opportunist "free jab at Dolby" of yours.
bustr I have not once tried to point out or show I am superior to anyone, I can easily debunk anything you wish to provide in evidence of such.
Colombo is right. You are wrong.
Lose the attitude. It isn't helping. :salute
-
Of course this has everything to do with having the systems there to add to the immersion of flying or my enjoyment of having them present in another game I fly within. I should have known better that I have no right, being that I am not a pilot, for daring to adjust a wish for more immersion. :rolleyes:
Map some keys that don't do anything and label them as Cowl Flaps, Mixture, etc., then bang away at them to your satisfaction. :joystick: Problem solved.
-
You're a day late and a dollar short Vraciu.
-
You're a day late and a dollar short Vraciu.
Yeah, that makes sense. :headscratch:
-
The closest to a Ww2 aircraft i've flown was an AN-2 (from the right seat).
I'm used to the simplicity of an ultralight plane, really hard work compared.
In IL2 Cliff of Dover I had to learn no to over-speed that darn engine in the 109s when diving, and also set proper prop pitch during the flight in the early 109s.
-
bortas,
Get a friend, go into the DA and let him shoot at you in all of those planes using the planes I tested with. If you want rubber bullets, open two CMD windows and set off a ping in each window. One to your router and one to your local PC, localhost.
ping -t address
Use ctrl c to stop when you are done.
If that causes the dreaded udp\tcp message and disco, turn off the ping to your PC and run only the one to your router. Run multiple instances of ping to your router then if needed to duplicate a bad connection. Reduce the number when you force a disco. A congested or bad connection is a congested or bad connection........ ;) Don'tcha think...... :rolleyes:
:salute what? :noid
-
It would be cool to have random failures. Something just out of the blue, not often.
You just had one...With this thread.
-
You just had one...With this thread.
I see what you did there. :noid
-
people need to be more concerned with what ACM they are about to pull on the un-suspecting con than worrying how quickly their engine will overheat when they extend to run.
That being said It might be quite funny seeing guys engine quit for running too hard. But you said random failures which would suck balls!
-1
-
people need to be more concerned with what ACM they are about to pull on the un-suspecting con than worrying how quickly their engine will overheat when they extend to run.
That being said It might be quite funny seeing guys engine quit for running too hard. But you said random failures which would suck balls!
-1
Boom.
/thread
-
-1
We don't need anything else for people to cry about.... :bhead
:ahand
This
-
In the heat of battle its very easy to make a, what I consider, small mistake regarding all those you consider being brain dead not to notice. That's unfortunate, I thought you might have listed inaccuracies in il2BoS engine management and failures. Do you have anything worth reading at your finger tips?
If you want a flight sim that does a good job of modeling engine management is Rise of Flight. In that flight sim, the developers modeled the thermodynamics on an engine and does a decent job of it.
-
:aok
If you want a flight sim that does a good job of modeling engine management is Rise of Flight. In that flight sim, the developers modeled the thermodynamics on an engine and does a decent job of it.
:aok