Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: cav58d on June 09, 2017, 10:33:39 AM
-
I wish there was a way to eliminate these unrealistic and lame "maneuvers". I am seriously getting tired of dog fighting because it seems like all anyone does these days is stall and then smash stick forward left while applying maximum power. It's an arcade maneuver. So it starting and stopping your engine during a dog fight with no delay.
Surely these "maneuvers" can be penalized. Make the "flop" extremely difficult to recover from. This isn't an extra 300, it's an old heavy world war II fighter. And the fix for instant power on and off is obvious and needs to explanation.
-
So the post-stall behavior of the planes is off? Based on what?
Wiley.
-
So the post-stall behavior of the planes is off? Based on what?
Wiley.
Based on everyone isn't Sean Tucker and they're not flying the oracle.
I'm not saying airplanes don't depart controlled flight when they are purposely and aggressively flown well past the stall, but I would argue they should not recover as easy as they do, especially at low altitude.
This maneuver just cheapens the games and unfortunately it's becoming more and more common.
I don't know where you would find a statistic for this outside of oral history, but I would bet the overwhelming majority of world war 2 fighter aircraft that departed controlled flight below 1,000 feet AGL resulated in the total loss of aircraft and most likely the pilots life, yet in AH just move the rudder here, move the throttle there and you're recovered.
-
Based on everyone isn't Sean Tucker
Just a mild hijack...
Actually many of us are, in the skies of Aces High that is. In real life you often have just one try, if it goes wrong, you're dead.
In AH, we not only have guys with a huge number of (virtual) flight hours (about 14K in my case), but we have encountered a myriad of situations which would have killed RL pilots. We just go back to tower and try again... and again.. and again. We get a routine in flying on the edge about no RL pilot could even dream about.
Many combat tactics in AH are the result of that. Lot's of experience and no real risk in trying.
-
I'm not saying airplanes don't depart controlled flight when they are purposely and aggressively flown well past the stall, but I would argue they should not recover as easy as they do, especially at low altitude.
This maneuver just cheapens the games and unfortunately it's becoming more and more common.
I don't know where you would find a statistic for this outside of oral history, but I would bet the overwhelming majority of world war 2 fighter aircraft that departed controlled flight below 1,000 feet AGL resulated in the total loss of aircraft and most likely the pilots life, yet in AH just move the rudder here, move the throttle there and you're recovered.
Because we get to do it over and over without actually dying, we get to find out where the actual line is exactly. Like Lusche said.
Again, based on what? Given the same atmospheric and aircraft conditions between attempts, IRL it should also be rudder here, throttle here, stick there, recover as well. Physics are very repeatable.
Unfortunately because the game is based on math in a relatively simplified game world giving it the same inputs under the same conditions produces the same results. I'd like to see way more variables in the air conditions as well to make things like that riskier, but the amount of computing power it would take to do that would be monumental.
I personally prefer that the game reflects what the plane is doing in the air to the best of its ability versus having a "feature" where it would just decide what you've done isn't realistic so your spin is now unrecoverable. Kind of like maingunning aircraft. If the round intersects the plane, it hits it. If the plane gets airflow over its flight surfaces, it recovers from the stall.
An awful lot of people seem to know what the planes shouldn't be able to do, but it seems very few can describe exactly what they should.
Wiley.
-
Simulating how an aircraft behaves near and post-stall is very hard and requires a lot of computer power, not even FSX have done it very accurately.
Recovering from a stall in a straight wing prop fighter might not have to be that hard, it depends on how fast you reacts.
And also: most players have thousands of hours in the game and have encountered enough stalls to know how to recover. The average WW2 pilot had far less experience of stalling and were also under a lot more pressure during combat than we are.
-
I don't find a problem anywhere in this game with a flight model. Instead of being upset you are being beaten try and learn it yourself :)
-
Simulating how an aircraft behaves near and post-stall is very hard and requires a lot of computer power, not even FSX have done it very accurately.
Recovering from a stall in a straight wing prop fighter might not have to be that hard, it depends on how fast you reacts.
And also: most players have thousands of hours in the game and have encountered enough stalls to know how to recover. The average WW2 pilot had far less experience of stalling and were also under a lot more pressure during combat than we are.
We also don't have to deal with the forces throwing the pilot around the cockpit when these violent maneuvers are happening.
Wiley.
-
Physics are very repeatable, but unfortunately as previously addressed, the human factor is not. The violence, confusion and terror just cannot be emulated, and unfortunately a gamey tactic replaces ACM.
-
Physics are very repeatable, but unfortunately as previously addressed, the human factor is not. The violence, confusion and terror just cannot be emulated, and unfortunately a gamey tactic replaces ACM.
Then so is taking off 5 seconds after you've been killed.
-
stall and then smash stick forward left while applying maximum power
So, THAT's how they do it. Gotta learn that one. :D
-
Physics are very repeatable, but unfortunately as previously addressed, the human factor is not. The violence, confusion and terror just cannot be emulated, and unfortunately a gamey tactic replaces ACM.
Post stall manouevres are firmly part of my ACM and as far as I've researched, realistic.
Are you specifically complaining about the warp-inducing guns-evasion which arrived at the arrival of AH3?
-
I wish there was a way to eliminate these unrealistic and lame "maneuvers". I am seriously getting tired of dog fighting because it seems like all anyone does these days is stall and then smash stick forward left while applying maximum power. It's an arcade maneuver. So it starting and stopping your engine during a dog fight with no delay.
Surely these "maneuvers" can be penalized. Make the "flop" extremely difficult to recover from. This isn't an extra 300, it's an old heavy world war II fighter. And the fix for instant power on and off is obvious and needs to explanation.
^^this is in the same contex as heavy bombers diving on fields/towns/gv's bombers that can fly like a fighter esp if they lose their drones- hvy bombers doing loops without anything falling off, I have never seen in rl WWII footage of divebombing bombers or bombers doing loops or midair stalls. rediculous
-
^^this is in the same contex as heavy bombers diving on fields/towns/gv's bombers that can fly like a fighter esp if they lose their drones- hvy bombers doing loops without anything falling off, I have never seen in rl WWII footage of divebombing bombers or bombers doing loops or midair stalls. rediculous
The unfortunate realization of the whole situation is that the MA will further progress toward arcade gameplay, and the best hope for realism is in FSO and scenarios where clear rules are outlined and you hope those participating honor them.
In the mean time purposely departing controlled flight on the deck will remain the arenas favroite primary defensive maneuver, and M3 town resupply will continue to replace actual combat in a base defense situation.
Thank god summer is here, I think I need some time off fron AH :)
-
The gamey maneuver that gets me is the yak3, spit 16, Dora floppy fish stall into controlled flight running down a plane with more energy.
Dive on above mentioned plane from 8-10k while they are low energy at less than 2k. Plane does floppy fish stall, you overshoot at over 400, red guy instantly recovers at increased speed and runs down overshooting fighter.
Almost as bad as the old il2 f3 mode porpoise maneuver at low altitude that made the plane warp under the terrain.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I wish there was a way to eliminate these unrealistic and lame "maneuvers". I am seriously getting tired of dog fighting because it seems like all anyone does these days is stall and then smash stick forward left while applying maximum power. It's an arcade maneuver. So it starting and stopping your engine during a dog fight with no delay.
At least you can see the separate parts of the funky chicken escape maneuver. Some people only see instant snapping from side to side. When I turned off AH3 v-sync and enabled NVIDIA adaptive-sync, the funky chicken changed from snapping around instantly to the maneuvering you describe. I noticed another factor that made it impossible to hit the con during that maneuver, being 200 or closer. When I'm 300-400, a long burst usually puts an end to it. All air combat games being programs, have limitations because of computers. Compared to AW 4 DOS and subsequent AW versions, AH3 is like going from playing PacMan for 25 cents a pop to walking into a holoroom on the enterprise. Still I thought that when I got my first PII 300 Mhz upgrading from a 486DX2 66.
I bet you have a host of gripes with all your other games because computers have limits.
-
Some people's entire bag of tricks rely on "post stall modeling" here.
-
There are far better shots to play for than right on the six of your opponent.
-
I don't find a problem anywhere in this game with a flight model. Instead of being upset you are being beaten try and learn it yourself :)
LOL. You don't fly real life do you.
Not knocking Hitechs game, but the flight model isn't perfect and the post stall antics of some of the airplanes is silly.....Mossie and the 152 come to mind.
I like Aces High, it gives a good impression of flight.
-
post stall antics of some of the airplanes is silly.....Mossie...
How so?
-
1. The ability to come over the top of a loop in a TA152 at 38mph with rudder deflected and not snap into an immediate spin.
2. Pulling stick with rudder full deflected and not snapping into an immediate spin.
3. Planes pivoting like on a rotisserie and changing direction with no transverse G being applied.
That said, HTC can't model everything and that modeling everything hyper realistic will net an arena full of guys constantly spinning in.
Go back and fire up WB2 for something far less forgiving.
I have both on my machine here.
-
Then so is taking off 5 seconds after you've been killed.
Okay, your reaching there. You might as well of said we also don't need three square meals a day so it's not realistic.
And to the person who suggested learning the flop tactic, I say no thank you. I enjoy learning and employing actual ACM used during the war. You say that your research leads you to believe it's realistic? I would love to see some sources that indicate "departure"/loss of controlled flight was a common defensive maneuver.
-
Based on everyone isn't Sean Tucker and they're not flying the oracle.
I'm not saying airplanes don't depart controlled flight when they are purposely and aggressively flown well past the stall, but I would argue they should not recover as easy as they do, especially at low altitude.
This maneuver just cheapens the games and unfortunately it's becoming more and more common.
I don't know where you would find a statistic for this outside of oral history, but I would bet the overwhelming majority of world war 2 fighter aircraft that departed controlled flight below 1,000 feet AGL resulated in the total loss of aircraft and most likely the pilots life, yet in AH just move the rudder here, move the throttle there and you're recovered.
Neil Williams learned the Lomcevak in a Tiger Moth. That's like doing it in an F2b. You don't need a modern aerobatic aircraft to do torque maneuvers, you just a need a good flight model. You can't do torque maneuvers in other flight sims because they don't create flight like the Aces High flight model does. Other sims just simulate controlled flying. Aces High creates flight with simulated aircraft in a simulated environment. That's why the post stall gyrations match what you see with real aircraft in airshows, although with obvious differences from the different power/weight.
-
Are there more flight model elements which AH does that are not in other flight sims ?
-
Some people's entire bag of tricks rely on "post stall modeling" here.
There is no "post stall modeling" in the sense that it can be adjusted separately. There is only lift from numerous lift data points, thrust from the prop and from gravity, drag, and torque/slipstream with blanking. It's the same model when you're sitting on the runway, when you're flying, and when you depart controlled flight.
I'm not saying the flight model is perfectly accurate but as far as I know everybody criticizing it is simply guessing about torque maneuvers in WW2 fighters. I'm guessing inaccuracies are more likely from the generous damage model.
Are there more flight model elements which AH does that are not in other flight sims ?
Look at my youtube link airshow videos and try that in other sims. :joystick:
-
Sir, your latest Spit 3 video should be a promotion of AH with millions of views... everyone should see how the great FM is, change the music to something not copywrited and HTC should post it on the steam page.
-
How so?
They way some of these planes "hang" nose high, zero or very low airspeed and stay in that configuration. Shouldn't happen.
-
They way some of these planes "hang" nose high, zero or very low airspeed and stay in that configuration. Shouldn't happen.
Have you done this in real life? :D The Mosquito isn't as good as the P-38, was infering I could sense the counter rotation and I only have 2 hours in real aircraft :banana:
3. Planes pivoting like on a rotisserie and changing direction with no transverse G being applied.
What is the effect of transverse G on an aircraft?
You say that your research leads you to believe it's realistic? I would love to see some sources that indicate "departure"/loss of controlled flight was a common defensive maneuver.
It was two different forum members that said learn it and it's realistic. I didn't say it was a common tactic - it doesn't have to be. As FLS explained, you could do these kind of aerobatic manoeuvres in other things apart from those dedicated aerobatic planes. The most unrealistic aspect of AH is the stick time. Some players have played for three times longer that the duration of the war, have thousands of hours in a type or enjoy pushing the flight 'model' to its limit. We also enjoy the luxury of being virtual - 'yup, that was definately too low!'.
Trouble with the realism argument is when it becomes selective it is essentially a logical fallacy.
-
Have you done this in real life? :D The Mosquito isn't as good as the P-38, was infering I could sense the counter rotation and I only have 2 hours in real aircraft :banana:
Colombo likely has..........he was a pilot for the collings foundation flying WWII iron.
What is the effect of transverse G on an aircraft?
My statement has to do with the fact that a plane can change it's direction 180 degrees faster with the rudder than in a banked turn while maintaining enough airspeed to fly.
The above statement references airspeeds above stall.
There is no "hovercraft turning" type of effect........the airplane just pivots while maintaining airspeed where a real life plane would "wash out" end up with negative airspeed..
The rudder is too effective maybe since you can knife edge a warplane here that never could do it in real life.
That said, aces high is the best sim out and I believe some softening of the penalties of flying beyond limits was necessary to retain players.
Fire up warbirds 2.77 and you will see a slightly less forgiving flight model as compared to warbirds 3 and aces high.
It was two different forum members that said learn it and it's realistic. I didn't say it was a common tactic - it doesn't have to be. As FLS explained, you could do these kind of aerobatic manoeuvres in other things apart from those dedicated aerobatic planes. The most unrealistic aspect of AH is the stick time. Some players have played for three times longer that the duration of the war, have thousands of hours in a type or enjoy pushing the flight 'model' to its limit. We also enjoy the luxury of being virtual - 'yup, that was definately too low!'.
Trouble with the realism argument is when it becomes selective it is essentially a logical fallacy.
I also have about 80 hours of aerobatic time in planes from a c150 aerobat to a citabria and later on, a super decathlon and have flown way too many planes beyond they were designed for.
This includes pointing a 150 aerobat straight up until airpseed read zero with power on, without power on, changing power settings at zero kt. and all manner of full deflection control inputs.
I feel lucky that I didn't pop rivits out of the skins or snap off wings doing what I did as a kid.
When you see "maneuvering speed" in the manual, stating full control inputs can be done at that speed or below within loading and weight and balance limits, it sure feels awfully close to the limits of the airframe and I'm not sure the manufacturer was imagining a 21 year old yanking stick or stomping rudder as hard and as fast as he could.
I fly safe now and have confidence in a plane knowning I've explored a couple corners of the envelope and that a properly maintained plane will not let me down as long as I keep up my end of the bargain.
You guys know that some guys make ATP without ever having spun a plane?
-
Colombo likely has..........he was a pilot for the collings foundation flying WWII iron.
:D :aok
the airplane just pivots while maintaining airspeed where a real life plane would "wash out" end up with negative airspeed..
I'm not exactly sure I understand your terminology or meaning but I can definitely get negative airspeed in that situation (in a Ki-84). I also can't hammerhead properly despite hundreds of attempts (just get a tight-ish wingover). I thought a hammerhead necessitated an especially effective rudder or a lot of deflection. I can only do a proper hammerhead in some of the twins but that's a different kettle of fish altogether.
So a general comment - I'm not talking about the peculiar AH3 dolphinating-warping manoeuvre here, I believe that's some kind of combination lag issue - but these realism annoyances can easily be neutralized if you just change your philosophy a bit. AH is a game with plenty enough fidelity in the flight modelling to keep you engaged and fly facsimiles of interesting warbirds. I like the history too but through the years the ACM has become more like a sport. Shaw is often cited as the seminal reference book for ACM, but frankly I have at first seen and later assimilated techniques which are way beyond that content. AH is like the last of the active WWII-era ACM research environments. Miss out on that if you like. It's your $15 to pursue what interests you.
-
It's your $15 to pursue what interests you.
1 pizza costs me 10$, and I eat like 3-4 pizzas a month,,, i can live with a pizza less ! :D
-
...
There is no "hovercraft turning" type of effect........the airplane just pivots while maintaining airspeed where a real life plane would "wash out" end up with negative airspeed..
What you are describing sounds like a failed hammerhead, what our British friends called a "stall turn" in WW2. You can "wash out" in AH too if you do it wrong. You can also practice it for years and years without the war ending.
-
I miss the brutal buffeting prior to a a high nose powered stall.
Trying hanging nose-up and point your nose at something ain't going to happen.
Rudders seem to be very effective to counter torque in some planes in AH.
I haven't flown much high-powered planes, but even flying a 100hp VLA-Cub for many years give you a more of a hunch how much torque mess with you close to depart from controlled flying.
-
The gamey maneuver that gets me is the yak3, spit 16, Dora floppy fish stall into controlled flight running down a plane with more energy.
This is sooo frustrating... Somehow exploiting the physics to turn 180 degrees and somehow catch a higher E overshooting fighter.... From 0 to on your 6 and staying there faster than you can say rage quit.
-
Somehow exploiting the physics to turn 180 degrees and somehow catch a higher E overshooting fighter.... From 0 to on your 6 and staying there faster than you can say rage quit.
Do you have a film of that?
-
Do you have a film of that?
I would also like to see said film. Sounds like homework for the next month :banana:
-
LOL. You don't fly real life do you.
Not knocking Hitechs game, but the flight model isn't perfect and the post stall antics of some of the airplanes is silly.....Mossie and the 152 come to mind.
I like Aces High, it gives a good impression of flight.
No sir I don't fly in real life. This is the game we have. Either learn it love it or leave it? I'm not sure what the point of your post was.
-
I believe lyme is referring to the spazz out stall that only showed up in AH3. I have film of one occurrence it but I want to make a montage of 4 or 5 different players doing it as it can happen at any speed or angle providing the player does sufficient stick stirring.
-
Last night on simpizza I was watching a D9 chased by three friendly's from F3 mode in the tower about 1000ft off the deck perform the roll wings 90 degrees right, push nose down, roll wings 90 degrees left push nose down, level, pump nose down, pump nose up, pump nose down, repeat the full sequence.
Is your D9 not supposed to loose speed doing multiple repetitions of that maneuver even with WEP? Do maneuvers like that in real life bleed off speed or do real airplanes just keep on going at the speed they entered the maneuvering cycle at?
Might be something Bruv and company could test to see how much speed is lost by filming staged duels to duplicate all of the maneuvers in question for speed loss during the sequence. I'm sure Bruv knows a few players who can reliably duplicate these maneuvers while Bruv chases filming them.
It might have been Krup who recently posted a Russian pilot's interview on some of his combat describing turning 90 degrees and pushing his nose down(out), and even dropping gear as an evasive maneuver. In our game done just as you line up and shoot effectively screws your aim and could possibly induce an overshoot. But, shouldn't 4-6 repetition's of it slow your plane close to a stall and keep you from being able to suddenly run away even if it's a shallow dive and your attacker has only been flying level watching how masterfully you funky chicken?
-
Instead of speculating why not just fly the D9 like you saw it fly and look at your speed to see if it changed compared to flying straight with the same altitude loss?
-
Is your D9 not supposed to loose speed
Lose speed Bustr. You loose an arrow: looooooose. Takes a long time. Lose is nice and short like loss. You need to work on that before 6,000,000 Millenials show up from Steam :) :salute
It might have been Krup who recently posted a Russian pilot's interview on some of his combat describing turning 90 degrees and pushing his nose down(out)
Sounds like a description of the so-called Harttmann Manoeuvre which depends on perfect timing to defeat a deflection shot. It is not sustainable.
If people could recognize Bruv's specific AH3 so-called 'spazz out stall' as being something special (and likely partially lag-induced), this thread would be a lot shorter. Or clearer. Or more informative. Or more ACM-promotive. Or less whiny.
-
Loose, loss, los, I'll let the millenials figure it out.
From years of experience, If I do a test like this with the D9 to see what it's speed loss is, this audience will sneeze on the results and fight over who is the most about something else. If Bruv doses it, this audience will think it actually matters.
-
We already know what the result will be.
-
If Bruv doses it, this audience will think it actually matters.
It's because he can spell lose :old:
-
After reading all the posts, I'm surprised that no-one bothered to mention "controlled stall"s...
-
Do you have a film of that?
Thus far no. :uhoh Only my paranoid delusions... But I'm recording all the time now. :noid
-
I miss the brutal buffeting prior to a a high nose powered stall.
Trying hanging nose-up and point your nose at something ain't going to happen.
Rudders seem to be very effective to counter torque in some planes in AH.
I haven't flown much high-powered planes, but even flying a 100hp VLA-Cub for many years give you a more of a hunch how much torque mess with you close to depart from controlled flying.
Even the torque (and momentum) from a 100hp Engine have a significant effect, the MFI for ex only snap to the left due to the Engine torque, roll rate is also much better to the left. Approaching stall with a 2000 hp Engine at full Power... no thanks...
-
First time I did a full power on spin in the lowly 150 aerobat, it made such a loud bang, I thought something had come off.
I was going pretty fast at the time.
It was a good lesson to learn you can stall/spin at much higher speeds than the speeds at which most training of stalls occurs.
-
First time I did a full power on spin in the lowly 150 aerobat, it made such a loud bang, I thought something had come off.
I was going pretty fast at the time.
It was a good lesson to learn you can stall/spin at much higher speeds than the speeds at which most training of stalls occurs.
http://apstraining.com
If your a professional pilot, see if you can get your company to send you here. If your a hobbyist, it's not too too bad, a couple thousand I think. Best course I've ever done in aviation.
-
That stuff should be required of any pilot beyond VFR light plane SEL.
-
That stuff should be required of any pilot beyond VFR light plane SEL.
When I started flying skydivers I had just over 300 hours (basically still an ignorant, limited skill knucklehead). When I got to thinking about flying just above stall speed with 4 skydivers on the gear leg or hanging from the wing strut while producing bucket loads of drag I could imagine how quickly one could be looking up through the top of the windscreen at mother earth as the spin started. At the first opportunity I flew to Flagler Beach, Florida and hooked up with The French Connection for some training in spin recovery and recovery from inverted flight. Quite fun.
About a year later I got to experience and stall and incipient spin as a skydiver hanging from the wing strut on a 182 - not quite as much fun. :)
-
Most GA pilots that experience a spin does it when low and slow, often when turning final..
-
Just watched a nice video yesterday on aerobatics "training" in the P-51. It had some good torque effect examples in there.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63Cwn4Gb3qc
Red Beard
CO 364th C-Hawks