PLEASE JUT DO IT ALREADY. make aces high version 3.0 the regular already, yourre bleeding even more players by having both up. I played 3 and its working just fine. I have a 23 inch monitor and setting the vid setting at 1366 made the frame rate just fine. please don't use up any more time, patches are easy when 2.0 goes away.
REALLY?
(http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x39/PanosGR/steve-martin-dirty-rotten-scoundrels_zpsds2hzrcu.jpg) (http://s186.photobucket.com/user/PanosGR/media/steve-martin-dirty-rotten-scoundrels_zpsds2hzrcu.jpg.html)
Seriously now: Leave AH2 running for all the rest of us
When does the billing cycle start?
Enjoy it. I read that they were shooting for monday or Tuesday next week to go live in AH3 and close out AH2.
I know Fugi that they will shut down AH2 eventually. Point is in order to help people that they cannot afford a new pc right now, keep AH2 as an alternative option in AH3 environment.
We have WWI arena, early and middle war, special events etc. How hard is it to add another one option in AH3 main card, an AH2 arena, like the one that is running right now?
That is all. This can help many people keep playing the game, give sometime until they shut off permanently in year or so.
That would be foolish on HTCs part. They are looking to breath new life into the game with all the new bells and whistles and hopefully bringing new players into the game. Leaving an outdated version available will turn some new players off if they stumble onto AH2 before AH3. Lost revenue.
Also there is the issue of splitting the already low numbers between to MA arenas. Again, not good for bringing new people.... numbers are too low to find a good gaming experience in either MA.
Sorry to say they will lose some people to the switch, but that is the price they are willing to pay to advance the game and their BUSINESS.
I believe that it will be shut down this week. It is time.
Maybe you misunderstand. There are folks currently playing that have a system that will not run AH3. I am one of those people. Without AH2, those who need it to play will not contribute to the revenue stream. I am motivated to play AH3 and I will, just not quite yet. In the mean time, I, and others like me will happily pay our subscription, continue to enjoy what we have even with low numbers, and be motivated to join AH3 more so than if we cannot play at all.
Maybe you misunderstand. There are folks currently playing that have a system that will not run AH3. I am one of those people. Without AH2, those who need it to play will not contribute to the revenue stream. I am motivated to play AH3 and I will, just not quite yet. In the mean time, I, and others like me will happily pay our subscription, continue to enjoy what we have even with low numbers, and be motivated to join AH3 more so than if we cannot play at all.
Keeping the old version available hurts the new version and they are after all out to make money, not keep old timers happy.
So unbelievable that there are folks spending money on a game when they can't afford it. Makes me wonder if they play and we pay for their food and rent.... Public dole.
To have so much time to save for a 75 buck video card and just fail to plan.
So unbelievable that there are folks spending money on a game when they can't afford it. Makes me wonder if they play and we pay for their food and rent.... Public dole.
To have so much time to save for a 75 buck video card and just fail to plan.
Thank you for your opinion, but you have absolutely no idea if it is true. If it is true, and I trust HiTech to know this, and only him, then fine, HE will shut it down.
Shutting down AH2 will not make me upgrade sooner. I will do it when I can. My point is, AH2 is up and running and besides the server use costs next to nothing in my opinion to keep up.
If you are worried about brand new players making the mistake of downloading the new game and being disappointed the solution would be simple, give them a message that tells them AH3 is available, and if they have a system that can handle it, they will download the new version instead.
Keeping this "old timer" happy still brings some money in and I guarantee I am not the only one.
I've always loved this game and the way HiTech runs it and his company. I'm damn glad it isn't yours.
One last thing just to be clear. I will absolutely not cancel my subscription even if I am not playing. Playing or not Dale, I am still your customer. Do what is best for the game,
Maybe you misunderstand. There are folks currently playing that have a system that will not run AH3. I am one of those people. Without AH2, those who need it to play will not contribute to the revenue stream. I am motivated to play AH3 and I will, just not quite yet. In the mean time, I, and others like me will happily pay our subscription, continue to enjoy what we have even with low numbers, and be motivated to join AH3 more so than if we cannot play at all.
I understand your concern and viewpoint. That said, I struggle to understand how any halfway modern PC can't run AHIII with decent framerates. I realize many of you only play AHII so the graphical updates to AHIII look spectacular and high tech, but AHIII is nowhere near what is considered cutting edge these days.
I understand your concern and viewpoint. That said, I struggle to understand how any halfway modern PC can't run AHIII with decent framerates. I realize many of you only play AHII so the graphical updates to AHIII look spectacular and high tech, but AHIII is nowhere near what is considered cutting edge these days.
Sir, whom are you speaking to?
AH is a much fuller game than those others that have the eye candy that is lacking here. I've watched your streams of that other game and Im not all that impressed. Messing with dials, searching forever for contacts. engaging the contacts only to lose them in the sky/sea, or get shot up in a HO.
AH has also been living on its much better game. The graphics were old for a long time and no one needed to update their machines. I think too many believed the new game was still way down the road. Thank fully, that is not the case. We need new blood and it looks like the game will finally change to a a newer version with graphics that will rival those other games. Hopefully those players will migrate over here for the much better game.
AH is a much fuller game than those others that have the eye candy that is lacking here. I've watched your streams of that other game and Im not all that impressed. Messing with dials, searching forever for contacts. engaging the contacts only to lose them in the sky/sea, or get shot up in a HO.
AH has also been living on its much better game. The graphics were old for a long time and no one needed to update their machines. I think too many believed the new game was still way down the road. Thank fully, that is not the case. We need new blood and it looks like the game will finally change to a a newer version with graphics that will rival those other games. Hopefully those players will migrate over here for the much better game.
You are joking, right?
There is a reason why those games have high system requirements, and it is not just the eye candy. The flight models are far more complex, and while not perfect all of them certainly reflect flight and combat conditions far, far better than Aces High. One regular viewer of my stream called AH "sim light" and I tend to agree with that assessment. That isn't to say AH is not fun, but in the end it is at best gamey, maybe even more so than War Thunder. I also think that is the crux to the question why many AH players never branch out: those other games are too complex and not gamey enough.
You are joking, right?
There is a reason why those games have high system requirements, and it is not just the eye candy. The flight models are far more complex, and while not perfect all of them certainly reflect flight and combat conditions far, far better than Aces High.
That isn't to say AH is not fun, but in the end it is at best gamey, maybe even more so than War Thunder. I also think that is the crux to the question why many AH players never branch out: those other games are too complex and not gamey enough.
You are joking, right?
There is a reason why those games have high system requirements, and it is not just the eye candy. The flight models are far more complex, and while not perfect all of them certainly reflect flight and combat conditions far, far better than Aces High. One regular viewer of my stream called AH "sim light" and I tend to agree with that assessment. That isn't to say AH is not fun, but in the end it is at best gamey, maybe even more so than War Thunder. I also think that is the crux to the question why many AH players never branch out: those other games are too complex and not gamey enough.
I have already said that invictus is just here advertising another game. Some said he wasn't and even Scuzzy stepped in on his behalf.
Seems to me someone is shooting their self in the foot but it's not my company to worry about.
So we got Invictus talking about BOS in the forum, and Krup and DAPacman talking about BOS on 200 in AHIII, and FESS talking about BOS in the forum.
Lotta BOS talking going on by people who are supposedly playing our game.
Skuzzy has said in the past talking about other games in our forums is not a problem, until it crosses some invisible line known by himself and Hitech. It is not like members of our forum have taken a blood oath and can never look at other games unless they cancel their subscription.
Below is from Hitech when he was pushed on the realism aspect of flight simms. Remember, Hitech is a pilot and owns two aircraft, one he built and a master game programmer. He has engaged in real life P51 to P51 dueling against Robert Shaw. Everything else in this game aside from the physics is setup for the convenience of getting into the fight. The physics is some of the most realistic in the industry for WW2 aircraft. Mr. Shaw gave a good opinion on Hitech's presentation of the physics after playing the game if I remember correctly.
I agree with Hitech, I doubt any of this audience every herded Holsteins with a T28 at grass top level or even bounced other aircraft in one, or rebuilt an Aeronca Champ. The argument for realism is bunk, it's an argument over how close the programmers make you feel like you are in a CGI movie. This game has never been sold as that. It's sold on the physics modeling and your ability to function with it in combat against other aircraft. It just happens to look really cool when you attack 100 B17 over the continent as they come out of the giant cloud bank in the middle of your gaggles of 262, Ta152, dora's and 109s. Or puckers your "whats it" when you are a gunner in one of those 100 B17 when that swarm suddenly cuts through your formations. Funny how none of those other games can support that many planes and players in their arenas and our game's arena is a world 512miles by 512miles.
-------------------------------------------------------
Below is Hitech on realism.....
-------------------------------------------------------
Tac: Flip side sarcasim.
All planes should require 10 min warm up and preflight, All fields should be spaced at least 1:00 hour flying time arpart, no airfield was ever that close together, all auto pilots should be removed because most planes didn't have them, and you should have a relife tube so you can't leave your chair, oh yah need to get rid of the channel 100 because in WWII no one ever talked to the enemy, an if you die you should never be able to play the game again.
Sarcasm off:
I realy do get sick of the realism argument because people who use it only wan't there special nit pick on realism but want to protray realism as the only goal worth going after. To that I say bull pucky, Realism is a game issue just like every other topic such as, fun,socail issues, technical issues , balencing getting new players into the game vs provideing a challeng for older players,balancing the difference in all peoples equipment some people have 25" monitors running at 1600x1200 others run 17" at 800x600 now tell me no icons is even close to fair between those 2 different systems.
HiTech
Wow. I bring up BoS and other games and I am once again a heretic. Burn me at the stake!
We could sit here all night and argue FMs. I'm not interested in doing so. If you guys want to believe the AH FM blows the others out of the water more power to you.
P.S. By the way, Bustr: I am aware what Shaw said about AH. The key point is he said that MANY years ago. A lot has changed since then.
Games like War Thunder and World of Warplanes do not have complex flight models (compared to AH), quite the opposite really. The only areas that those two games have over AH is the better graphics and quick action.
As far as making a more accurate claim. I have never seen any data posted that shows any other game is as accurate as AH in performance and handling flight modeling.
HiTech
Thank you for your opinion, but you have absolutely no idea if it is true. If it is true, and I trust HiTech to know this, and only him, then fine, HE will shut it down.Saturday sept. 10th hitech come on 200, he was asked if it were possible to keep AH2 active he said NO that it was time to move on. so there is no doubt AH2 will be gone he said probably this week
Shutting down AH2 will not make me upgrade sooner. I will do it when I can. My point is, AH2 is up and running and besides the server use costs next to nothing in my opinion to keep up.
If you are worried about brand new players making the mistake of downloading the new game and being disappointed the solution would be simple, give them a message that tells them AH3 is available, and if they have a system that can handle it, they will download the new version instead.
Keeping this "old timer" happy still brings some money in and I guarantee I am not the only one.
I've always loved this game and the way HiTech runs it and his company. I'm damn glad it isn't yours.
One last thing just to be clear. I will absolutely not cancel my subscription even if I am not playing. Playing or not Dale, I am still your customer. Do what is best for the game,
I don't have the "data" you're looking for and I don't feel like digging it up, but in Aces High, one can slam the throttle home on a P-51D on takeoff without damaging the engine and only need a little bit of rudder correction. However, on DCS and in reality, not only would such a dramatic increase in throttle and 60 plus inches of manifold pressure from a stand still damage your engine, the torque would have you fighting a ground loop and struggling to avoid scraping the wing tips. This is just one example (of many) of how the DCS performance and flight models more accurately portray the real thing.
I don't have the "data" you're looking for and I don't feel like digging it up, but in Aces High, one can slam the throttle home on a P-51D on takeoff without damaging the engine and only need a little bit of rudder correction. However, on DCS and in reality, not only would such a dramatic increase in throttle and 60 plus inches of manifold pressure from a stand still damage your engine, the torque would have you fighting a ground loop and struggling to avoid scraping the wing tips. This is just one example (of many) of how the DCS performance and flight models more accurately portray the real thing.
Engine damage and advanced fuel/throttle settings aren't really a flight model thing. It's a decision on if you want people to spend time with minutia or not.
The difference you talking about is the same as driving cross country in a car, or running a sub 10 second run in a quarter mile on a drag strip.
What you find in DCS is a complicated TEDIOUS set of events to accomplish nothing more than going from point A to point B. AH is designed more around a balls out, hair on fire activity.
I PAY to have fun, not to bored out of my mind.
The difference you talking about is the same as driving cross country in a car, or running a sub 10 second run in a quarter mile on a drag strip.Why are you passing judgement on a game you have obviously never played before?
What you find in DCS is a complicated TEDIOUS set of events to accomplish nothing more than going from point A to point B. AH is designed more around a balls out, hair on fire activity.
I PAY to have fun, not to bored out of my mind.
What you find in DCS is a complicated TEDIOUS set of events to accomplish nothing more than going from point A to point B. AH is designed more around a balls out, hair on fire activity.You are thinking of Microsoft FSX or Prepar3d... the former of the two is rather fun, as I have not tried the later yet.
AH is simply the best overall Aircombat game.
Those other games flight models and games modes fly like cheese doodles compared to AH.
I stick to AH because it takes the most skill to be good at. Most people just simply cannot handle or have the patients to be good in AH. AH leaves me with a challenge every sortie.
It has better games modes like FSO and special events. That right there takes it leaps and bounds better than any other air combat game.
Hence the "performance" part of Hitech's quote and my response.
Hajo, I am here (in this thread) because Hitech and others are arguing that Aces High has the best and most accurate flight and performance models, and that is not true. I gave an example to help prove my case with DCS, and you guys take a turn towards Albuquerque and start defending Aces High's game play. Don't worry, I am perfectly capable of arguing that aspect of DCS as well, but again, if you read my reply to Hitech, that is not why I am on this thread.
If you want to go in that direction Hajo, I'm all for a good game play discussion. We might have to make a new thread for that though.
I don't have the "data" you're looking for and I don't feel like digging it up, but in Aces High, one can slam the throttle home on a P-51D on takeoff without damaging the engine and only need a little bit of rudder correction. However, on DCS and in reality, not only would such a dramatic increase in throttle and 60 plus inches of manifold pressure from a stand still damage your engine, the torque would have you fighting a ground loop and struggling to avoid scraping the wing tips. This is just one example (of many) of how the DCS performance and flight models more accurately portray the real thing.
Why are you passing judgement on a game you have obviously never played before?
You are thinking of Microsoft FSX or Prepar3d... the former of the two is rather fun, as I have not tried the later yet.
I get that Aces High is kind of a "best case" scenario that removes the need to consider engine damage. I'm OK with that and it's fine if you aren't. Both sims offer different things, which is fine.
I am curious though - what about the actual flying part is off? (Aside from the fact that it is best case).
<S>
That is exactly my point. Aces High is as you put it, the "best case" for each aircraft. I'm not saying it's a bad flight model, I'm saying it isn't the most accurate out there for that reason. Aces High is more of a "game" and DCS is more of a "simulation," and hence they are two very different games. Aces High is a "gamey" combat sim, yet the community will preach its realism over any other game out there, and when I come back with examples from a game like DCS, the community comes back and says "I don't want to mess with engine management, I just want to get into a fight!" You can't make the argument both ways. Yes, Aces High is more realistic than War Thunder, but it is also more gamey than DCS. I for one prefer the more realistic sims, but that's just me.
That is exactly my point. Aces High is as you put it, the "best case" for each aircraft. I'm not saying it's a bad flight model, I'm saying it isn't the most accurate out there for that reason. Aces High is more of a "game" and DCS is more of a "simulation," and hence they are two very different games. Aces High is a "gamey" combat sim, yet the community will preach its realism over any other game out there, and when I come back with examples from a game like DCS, the community comes back and says "I don't want to mess with engine management, I just want to get into a fight!" You can't make the argument both ways. Yes, Aces High is more realistic than War Thunder, but it is also more gamey than DCS. I for one prefer the more realistic sims, but that's just me.
1. There is no reason an engine should be damaged simply by applying full throttle.
2. You may wish to do some research on what you call torque and the tail wheel locking of a p51.
3. If you don't want to go look up performance DATA. Then your simply speaking out an orifice.
HiTech
I dont think anyone said anything about AH being more of a sim than DCS. No one brought up DCS with the exception of you and Invictus. I think we can all agree that DCS is more of a sim when it comes to engine management and the likes.
Every product listed in the thread is a game just the same as AH. The only differences is what is emphasized in the simulation.
As far as making a more accurate claim. I have never seen any data posted that shows any other game is as accurate as AH in performance and handling flight modeling.
HiTech
I'm pretty sure DCS falls under "any other game."
I dont think anyone said anything about AH being more of a sim than DCS. No one brought up DCS with the exception of you and Invictus. I think we can all agree that DCS is more of a sim when it comes to engine management and the likes.
Please re-read what I posted. Here I'll repost it for you. My statement still stands.
So far RagingPineapple you have not posted one piece of DATA. You are simply stating that you like DCS modeling better then AH. Nothing you post has any basis in factual data.
You make drastic assumptions that are simply not true.
HiTech
whats is it we're supposed to be looking for?
He is probably talking about REAL DATA not linking to DCS's website or whatever that link is...
Here is a description on how DCS builds their flight models, and the extensive detail they go through to do it: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/support/faq/505/
Is this what you're looking for? If not, I can dig deeper. I don't really want to go through that much effort for you guys though. It's like trying to tear down a brick wall with a spoon.
So like this link to a P-51 checklist that backs what I was saying about take off power settings? http://www.aerofiles.com/checklist-p51.html
And you wont even take the time to read the first link I posted. That right there reinforces my "brick wall" theory.
Also, adding "REAL" in front of "DATA" still does not clarify what Hitech means by "DATA."
Here is a description on how DCS builds their flight models, and the extensive detail they go through to do it: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/support/faq/505/
Is this what you're looking for? If not, I can dig deeper. I don't really want to go through that much effort for you guys though. It's like trying to tear down a brick wall with a spoon.
The link points to what DCS uses as abbreviated terms when describing their take on a flight model.
DATA is the numbers, of torque, horsepower at different setting of the manifold, forces applied to the stick an rudder to counteract the forces supplied by the engine at those settings and so on.
I'm sure I'd have to message Eagle Dynamics directly to get that info, and it would probably be a post about 50 forum pages long for one airplane, considering they're attention to detail even covers the change of CG from the landing gear extending/retracting. I am not fetching that info for you. My effort for you guys ends here.So, in short, you're taking their word for it.
Here is a description on how DCS builds their flight models, and the extensive detail they go through to do it: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/support/faq/505/
So like this link to a P-51 checklist that backs what I was saying about take off power settings? http://www.aerofiles.com/checklist-p51.html
And you wont even take the time to read the first link I posted. That right there reinforces my "brick wall" theory.
Also, adding "REAL" in front of "DATA" still does not clarify what Hitech means by "DATA."
Posting DCS marketing descriptions is not exactly posting flight model data about real aircraft, and then checking performance numbers against or real aircraft vs either flight model.
Data would be things like X static thrust at 40 inches MP. Or Creates X yaw torque at y power settings. Or with no rudder input a plane X creates a yaw velocity Y at Z power settings.
You know things that can actually be measured ant then compared flight molding.
Or simple testing DCS and real world on these type of charts.
HiTech
I bet there's a forum out there where someone just posted "Watch how I reel them in over there at Aces High" :noid
When Eagle Dynamics was working on perfecting the FW190D9 model, they consulted Erich Brunotte, a Luftwaffe pilot who flew the 190D9 in combat. He tells them what they got right and what they need to fix after flying their early model of the 190.Cool as that is, it's not evidence that they've got the flight model right.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvKs9VLUcCg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvKs9VLUcCg)
Has HTC ever contacted pilots who flew the real counterparts the ones depicted in AH?
And you were as incorrect then as you are now, for all the same reasons I stated before but will restate for you now: Those communities don't need to add AH players to the ranks, quite the opposite. The question is can AH do so. I suppose time will tell.
Look, this is really a simple concept: Aces High is not a simulator, or is at best a "light" simulator in the same catagory of War Thunder Sim Battles (not the Arcade or Realistic battles, and certainly not crappy World of Warplanes). We can get into endless debates about this, but by the developers own admission AH isnt meant to be a hard core simulator. If that insults some here I suggest you take a breath and deal with reality. The thing that has struck me since I started streaming AH is that the majority of comments I've received so far from players of sims like BoS or Clod is that they do think AH looks like fun but in general don't see the value in subscribing. It is almost a direct parallel to the comments from many AH players towards sims like DCS or BoS. I suppose if you haven't played both you simply can't appreciate those differences and the attraction of both sides.
But to get back to the original point of my first post, AH may not be cutting edge but it NEEDS AH III to have any chance of getting new blood. While I simpathize with some players not having a PC up to playing the new version I cannot understand why, after several years of development, the change over seems to be viewed with surprise.
When Eagle Dynamics was working on perfecting the FW190D9 model, they consulted Erich Brunotte, a Luftwaffe pilot who flew the 190D9 in combat. He tells them what they got right and what they need to fix after flying their early model of the 190.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvKs9VLUcCg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvKs9VLUcCg)
Has HTC ever contacted pilots who flew the real counterparts the ones depicted in AH?
I'm just as right as the first day I said it. Now others are realizing what your true colors are.
This...
And I got rule #'ed for it... :noid
I'm just as right as the first day I said it. Now others are realizing what your true colors are.
Invictus, I haven't taken any issues with anything you've done. I do appreciate your efforts streaming this game and trying to get us some new customers. I also agree that "sim light" isn't a bad thing. :salute
You do raise some interesting points about the perspectives and all, but here's mine... I think some of the DCS crowd are taking for granted that just because something is more complicated, it is also more accurate. In one sense, I guess they're indisputably correct - In real life, you have to do certain things/steps to take off, fly, and land an aircraft, and DCS makes you do more of those things than Aces High does. So I do concede that the simulation of the actual "process" is more accurate.
What I would like to throw out there, however, is that doesn't necessarily mean the flight model is more accurate than AH. To simplify, let's just say DCS models 30 steps/actions, and AH only models 10. All this really proves is that DCS is more complicated. This in and of itself is not evidence that DCS has accurately modeled those 30 steps and AH has not. AH might be hitting their 10 things at 90% whereas DCS could be hitting their 30 at 60% (or vice versa). Unless actual data is supplied side by side, we really don't know. HiTech provided at least his charts - the DCS crowd provided a press release without any data attached.
I think that is what people were driving at when they asked RagingPineapple for data. His response was that he'd have to ask the developers for it (meaning he didn't have it), that it'd "probably" be 50 pages (meaning he has no idea how long it is), and then he threw in "they're [sic] attention to detail even covers the change of CG from the landing gear extending/retracting", which is basically him just defaulting to "DCS models 30 things so it is therefore more accurate" which I feel doesn't make sense and is a fallacy. It might be true, but he really has no idea and is simply taking DCS's developer's word for it.
Anyway, this is interesting, but also a little stupid to argue about if you ask me as DCS and AH might as well be on different planets with what they offer. I don't see why someone couldn't enjoy both games given they offer completely different challenges and opportunities for fun. If you're serious about helping us increase our numbers, I'd suggest maybe streaming some FSO's or the upcoming scenario as those seem to be things that AH has the edge in over some of its competitors (FSO had about 170 players or more on Friday - some past scenarios have had 500+ - I'm personally more interested in that kind of immersion than the minutia immersion, but YMMV).
S!
Sorry I lost track of who posted what about what game.
Heh,
some people talk a big game, but couldn't actually prove it with experience if they tried. You can call it what ever you want Invictus, just like people who have to name every band by some sweetheart arse genra, but you couldn't even get top 10 fighter score in AH if you tried. You more than likey have a very miniscule rationality about how to play AH effectively.
AH takes a lot of patients to actually learn how to deal with unfair combat situations. Something no other game achieves as well as AH. You can criticize and critique all you want, but when you actually post some real fighter #s, I'll take you seriously in AH.
Heh,
some people talk a big game, but couldn't actually prove it with experience if they tried. You can call it what ever you want Invictus, just like people who have to name every band by some sweetheart arse genra, but you couldn't even get top 10 fighter score in AH if you tried. You more than likey have a very miniscule rationality about how to play AH effectively.
AH takes a lot of patients to actually learn how to deal with unfair combat situations. Something no other game achieves as well as AH. You can criticize and critique all you want, but when you actually post some real fighter #s, I'll take you seriously in AH.
I'm tried of hearing his smack talk drivel.
I only play 15 hours a month. Which is far less than I'd like to.
If you don't like the game. Leave already. No one wants to listen to BS comparisons about "real life" combat. Each game has their niches. Get over it already.
Someone comes here and plays 3 months and think they they know how the game is. Psshh.
Heh,
some people talk a big game, but couldn't actually prove it with experience if they tried. You can call it what ever you want Invictus, just like people who have to name every band by some sweetheart arse genra, but you couldn't even get top 10 fighter score in AH if you tried. You more than likey have a very miniscule rationality about how to play AH effectively.
AH takes a lot of patients to actually learn how to deal with unfair combat situations. Something no other game achieves as well as AH. You can criticize and critique all you want, but when you actually post some real fighter #s, I'll take you seriously in AH.
The DCS flight models are about as good as you are going to get for PC. Anyone who believes AH has better flight models is lying to themselves.
Enemy planes are small and very hard to see, which is realistic. I did a fighter combat experience a few years ago and even after an offset merge just finding the enemy was a major part of the fight.
I have no real desire to post Top10 numbers in AH or any game for that matter. I routinely fly into multi vs one situations that tend to result in low scores because I enjoy having fun. I also haven't posted a single critque of AH. You simply view my posts as such.
On the other hand, the only thing I've seen from you so far are posts bragging about your skills in AH (which I am sure are quite impressive :joystick: :)) and a few insults which are the virtual pilot equivalent of threats to beat me up for my lunch money. :O
By the way, I actually like AH III very much. :)
Since my name was brought up :o Yes, I have been exploring the options out there and so far here is my synopsis:
War Thunder
I have invested very little time in this so far. I tried getting into the full realism (cannot remember the true name) arena but no-one else was and I just sat there with a timer waiting to join a fight. I tried the next level down, which I hated. and which is why I have not been tempted to invest more time in it. I might try it again but I will have to be bored to tears to do that and that is not a good base from which to play a game.
BoS
I have started to explore this game. So far I am really looking to set up all the controls properly and am playing some of the missions against AI. There is no doubt the graphics are better than AHIII. The physics of the flight model is up for debate in terms of my preference for a game but this may be down to my controller set up. I experience a lot of initial lag in controller input and then of course I am over correcting causing a lot of bounce and a distinct lack of smooth flying. The landings are much more difficult than in either AHIII or DCS but I put this down to the bounce.
My gunnery in this game is much worse than in AHII but on a par with AHIII. A combination of the input bounce and lack of visual feedback on hits. From videos I have seen on this game the input bounce is not limited to me and it is a big part of the reason I have not invested more time in the game.
DCS
I have had this game for some time now. It flies very nicely. Inputs are smooth and the terrain detail is very nice. Enemy planes are small and very hard to see, which is realistic. I did a fighter combat experience a few years ago and even after an offset merge just finding the enemy was a major part of the fight.
Graphics are very nice. Gunnery is tricky, once again with the visuals being very similar to AHIII with no massive sprites to confirm you are on target. I like the fact you can change the gunsight size, that is more realistic, but in terms of gameplay it adds little. The biggest issue I have with DCS is the engine management part of the game. I have tried the tutorials several times and always get stuck on the engine start tutorial as I simply cannot find a way to use the trim controls and primer buttons in the cockpit. I use a macro to start the engine and that is how I get through the game.
This game flies so well, just I am not convinced I want to do all the engine management stuff. Plus, a large portion of the community like more modern jets. I have no interest for anything other than ww2.
AHIII
Despite some of you thinking I am a troll or out to promote other games, nothing could be further from the truth. I am however a realist and not against speaking my mind.
AH is probably the best WW2 based fighter game out there. It allows us to strap into a cockpit and within a very short period of time we are up and playing. It is rather like chess, relatively easy to learn but with so many levels of mastery there is always someone better out there. This is good for all level of players.
I never minded the AHII graphics and I am not convinced the AHIII change is much of a leap forward when compared to other games. But I agree it needed to happen. There are some really nice touches, like the clouds we now get to fly through and there are some horrors, like the light misty disc above our heads. AHIII is still a work in progress and I am sure many of the glitches will be fixed.
If there was a fault you would have to look at planes such as the Brewster. If they were that good in real life then I am sure they would have featured as killers in the war. In addition to that I see planes flip and flop around in impossible fashion when people are 'stick stirring'. We all know it and see it. I have not seen that in other games and I would say that has to be a FM 'thing'
The biggest issue is IMO with the player base and the propensity to avoid combat. That is 95% of the reason I have been actively seeking out other games. And there is little Hitech can do to force people to fight. That has to come from within the community. I know I ran from Fugitive the other day as I had expended all my ammo, otherwise I would have stayed and killed him :p
Thanks for listening.
It just sounds like you mock every persons posts, like you you know everything about flight model and "simulators" but my point about scoring is that if you can't achieve top 20 even, and or haven't flown AH for longer than a year, I don't think you can make an accurate assement of the flight models in AH based on your in game knowledge of how the airplanes fly. I just want you to see how hard it is to achieve, so that you can understand how much strategy this game actually takes. It's something no one really gives any credit for. I think that in itself makes this game better than the others.
You are joking, right?
There is a reason why those games have high system requirements, and it is not just the eye candy. The flight models are far more complex, and while not perfect all of them certainly reflect flight and combat conditions far, far better than Aces High. One regular viewer of my stream called AH "sim light" and I tend to agree with that assessment. That isn't to say AH is not fun, but in the end it is at best gamey, maybe even more so than War Thunder. I also think that is the crux to the question why many AH players never branch out: those other games are too complex and not gamey enough.
Hi Fulcy, kisses
No way!!!!!!! :noid
You are joking, right?
There is a reason why those games have high system requirements, and it is not just the eye candy. The flight models are far more complex, and while not perfect all of them certainly reflect flight and combat conditions far, far better than Aces High. One regular viewer of my stream called AH "sim light" and I tend to agree with that assessment. That isn't to say AH is not fun, but in the end it is at best gamey, maybe even more so than War Thunder. I also think that is the crux to the question why many AH players never branch out: those other games are too complex and not gamey enough.
That was very cool. Luckily I speak German and could understand what he was actually saying because that was not what they were subtitling.
Let me give you an example, at the 8:03 mark he actually says:
"Are you kidding me? This is a joke right? This isn't even close. Who is writing the code for this, it's complete crap"
Then at 9:16:
"I hope you idiots haven't spent your kids college funds developing this crap, actually I hope you don't have kids so you don't pass off those defective genes"
At 11:21:
"I know you brought me to help so let me help, go to McDonalds and ask for a job"
at 14:44:
"Enough already. Have you guys ever played Aces High? That's where I play because they have it spot on. No mindless pushing of buttons for the sake of pushing buttons just so you can call it engine management, perfectly realistic flight characteristics and a community that loves to have fun, especially during the FSO's and Special Events. You should try it because you're wasting your time here."
At 16:51:
"Seriously, this sucks worse than your wife's burnt lunch vegetables."
Let's see, we have a multi million dollar investment Co to help create a game, with more than likey 18 developers working on the game.
Then you have AH, a small company who only has one primary developer, who has created a pretty amazing simulator, and a game model that is very complex. I give him props for that. Do I wish there was more and a few minor changes? Sure, but for HiTech to even compete with these conglomerates, says something about his abilities.
Damn why do I always miss the good threads?
All I'm going to say is this: I've been playing flight sims for.. 13 years? and I've played 99% of the active flight sims today, out of all of them I've received the most satisfaction and enjoyment out of IL2: Battle of Stalingrad. Simply keeping your plane in the air in that game can be a challenge for some people, let a lone takeoffs/landings and then shooting somebody down.. it can take people weeks to get their first legitimate kill (assuming they're new to flight sims).
To me, the difficulty of the game is what makes it enjoyable, you feel completely immersed in the game and everything that's going on around you. I enjoy it enough that I'll even hop on the game sometimes just to fly some aerobatics and practice my landings. Even the best pilots in BoS will get shot down if they're not 100% focused, in Aces High just hop in an La7, K4, 152.. and you're flippin invincible!
But whatever, that's just me... While I don't play AH as much as I used to, I certainly learned a lot from it and I won't forget that.
This is your second comment which suggest that AH is more gamey than WT, which is entirely false. WT doesn't compare in any realm to AH in terms of flight, scenarios, combat situations, and arena setups. It's a flight sim for beginners. Even comparing these two to each other leads me to believe that you and your friends who think it's similar have not taken the time to learn AH, and have very miniscule perceptions about AH that are not accurate.
Secondly, you believe that the amount of buttons it takes to turn on an engine makes the game more of a "simulator" where as games that cut out that aspect are not. I disagree with that assessment. AH provides more realistic combat scenarios, situations, and historical "simulations" that make this game an actual simulation. No other game brings this type of realistic (to an extent) combat. That tells me that BoS is not more complicated or as accurate as AH in terms of combat, which means they are both simulating different aspects to a simulation of the real thing. Ie two different niches.
Thirdly. You are wrong about "branching out" . AH IS the hardest simulator. The majority of people leave this game because it is just too hard and takes too much time. The people who have stayed enjoy the constant challenge and strategy that no other flight sim offers. People don't have the patients. They fly for 30 minutes and die to a puff ack shot to the face and quit. It's the most unforgiving of them all. People leave because the fights do not start off fairly and they are stuck dieing over and over again because they don't have the skills yet. They have to fly 20 minutes to a base hoping to find action and die instantly. It's tough and takes strategic understanding to find the fights and win them. AH is one of the most complex because you actually have to utlize ACM and SA in fighter combat situations with or without the E advantage, with or without friendly help. This game required more skills because you actually have to know what you are doing in more types of fighter situations than any other game offers.
Now, let's talk about aspects to the game that really turn people away.
A lot of people who have played for 10_15 years have made very valid points over the years, that simingly get passed over. You've been here for like 3 months and have some valid points, but I think your lack of ACM and fighter understanding in AH limits your perception about the game. If you get shot down all the time, you obviously don't understand the flight model or flight characteristics as well as you say. Ive never seen you in the game, and have no #s to judge, so it's very difficult to assess your knowledge about AH.
If you want to bring players back, it's not about the graphics, (they look good in AH3), it's not, let's make the planes harder to fly by pushing 90 buttons, it's not let's set up 8v8 h2h matches, it's not free to play.
After 13 years of me playing this game. Do you want to know what it really is?
It's Base Distance.... it's all about how long it takes to get to a base, and whether it's worth it to roll. That's it. That's the big secret.
I come top 5 every month because I know how the game works. I know how people fly and I know the full potential of all the planes in AH. At this point it's almost on accident. I don't care if it's bragging. What I'm pointing out is that I actually do know the flight model and gameplay better than most, so when I see people making irrational game play assessments, I chime in because I know what I'm talking about.
A few comments:
1.) Gamey doesn't always mean "bad", but on reflection I agree I could have used a better term. My comment really came down to certain things WT (sim mode) does that AH purposefully doesn't or can't. One big one for me is no enemy icons with sim mode. Icons (my opinion) are a "gamey" feature, but I also grant they are needed in AH because each side can fly all plane models.
2.) You are getting me mixed up with the Pineapple guy. I never said anything about more buttons needed. Do you know how many buttons BoS requires to start a plane? One. Do you need others buttons or axis to manage radiators and such? Yes, unless you fly a 109. Then it's pretty much the same startup process as AH. Click the start button, man. German engineering at it's finest. :)
It might surprise you to know one of the reasons I don't fly DCS that much is because of the long, drawn out startups. The 109K or FW109 can take up to 3 to 5 minutes to start, and only then if you know what you are doing or have a cheat sheet. Who the heck has time for that? Realism is always a balance and everyone is different. Some love it, some don't. While I'd personally love to get into BMS, the idea of having to read several hundred pages to fully understand how to start and fight in a simulated F16 just isn't for me.
3.) I think we will just have to agree to disagree on branching out. That is perfectly OK too. :)
:salute
I timed myself before starting up the K4 in DCS... it took me less than a minute I just had to wait for my Golly-geen mechanic to crank the engine. :neener:
Every product listed in the thread is a game just the same as AH. The only differences is what is emphasized in the simulation.
As far as making a more accurate claim. I have never seen any data posted that shows any other game is as accurate as AH in performance and handling flight modeling.
HiTech
Seriously though, this doesn't make any sense:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCVK3nhkOAg
You don't see me rolling with almost no air going over the ailerons? lol
https://youtu.be/ecokj6MJTDE?t=2m38s
Just FYI, Eagle Dynamics surpassed the the flight modeling and graphics of AH3 back in 2003 with their game "Lock On Modern Air Combat". They were a small company too back then, and managed to draw in many new players because their game was actually interesting and fun. :airplane:
how many players on at the same time?
semp
how many players on at the same time?
semp
how many players on at the same time?
semp
Seriously though, this doesn't make any sense:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCVK3nhkOAg
Try it with smoke on or turn trails on in AHfilm. The moving camera creates illusions. I have DCS. It's ok flying but it's not Aces High. It is clearly the best A-10 simulation.