Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Airscrew on July 20, 2001, 02:23:00 PM
-
Been reading the posts last few days and we all seem to have an opinion about how the radar should be modeled. Everyone else has given one reason or another for and against the dar bar and radar positions, so here are my suggestions:
1. Radar at 500ft and above and 50-75 mile radius around fields or HQs. I know someone suggested 120 miles but thats almost half a map. Maybe the larger the field the larger the radius of the radar coverage. Also VH have no radar. Large bases 50ml rad, small bases 25ml rad. This would create realistic gaps in radar coverage. and all line of sight.
2. You have active radar at the tower and constant updates to your map, but once you take off from the field you can only update your map with radar by contacting your field or a field close to your intended target. This could be done with .dot commands ie: .radar -A26. this would update your map with enemy contacts at that time. You should be able to request updates as often as you like. And if radar is down at that field then no updates. However using this would reveal your current position at the moment you used the radio.
3. Get rid of dar unless enemy is flying over friendly airspace or a grid occupied by friendly field.
4. Also When map first starts only fields you can see are your own. Enemy bases, HQ, cities, factories, etc are reveled by overflying or intell from captured pilots when shot down over enemy fields. ie: you overfly a base and it now shows up on the map for all your countrymen or you shoot down enemy a/c and if pilot crashes or bails within 25miles (less or more) you can gather intelligence from him or his wreakage about the base location he left.
Anyway thats my idea for what its worth. Pilots in WW2 did not fly around with active or passive radar. They had the radio and their eyes to rely on. They got information from other fields, pilots, infantry, and ships. With the current map its like having my own personnal AWACs keeping me posted on whats going on. I would also suggest getting rid of the A/C direction indicator but then some people would have to learn how to read a compass and take bearings. And I have a hard enough time keeping my plane in the air.
-
Radar, as it stands now, sucks, IMO. All I ask for a no bar dar below 500 feet, and dot radar at any altitude for within 25 mile circumfrnce of any field...is this too much to ask for? Hell, no one would even notice!
-
Given this some thought actually fore I saw this post. Problem is that on real fields WW2 you had patrols / fighter sweeps and pilots around all airbases.
In AH you have fighters generally only at the front in hot areas, with the occasional bomber taking off from an aifeild further back. No real patrols.
The dar bar as it is, is rather annoying.
Possible Solutions:
1. Darbar not active if AC below radar
2. Simulated NPC fighter patrols, with possible detection probability increasing with growing number of AC.
3. If all aircraft, (jabo's) stayed below radar the entire time, dar bar only appearing when field is attacked. Simply put, no Airfields were ever left undefended / unstaffed, even without dar (hq destroyed) alert should still be issued when fields are under direct attack.
4. Coast watchers for CV detection, very few CV taskgroups sailed up enemy coast undetected in RL.
5. Instead of solid, state of the art radar navigation that we have in AH to find detected AC, a directional indicator only to indicate direction of enemy aircraft.
-
it's fine the way it is but if you simply want to add to it's realism then have it give altitude within a couple thousand feet. I will comprimise tho.. no dar below 100 ft.
lazs
-
Well i have good compromise..
Let radar is as he is now. But infly do update only 1 per min not in real time... it could be good solotion, because we have no AirTraficCoordinators, navigators
-
Ripsnort, I agree wholeheartedly with you. Sneak attacks are a joke the way it is now. A couple nights ago the knights were trying a lil sneak attack, how do I know? Well, as soon as they hit their own runway (!) we saw the huge bar dar, so within 2 minutes of them showing up on dar, we were razzing them on channel 1, telling them we were on our way. To make a long story short, they got 1/3 of their way to their target before they were decimated. I actually felt sorry for them.
I am for no in-flight radar, but as I'm sure that puts me so far off in the outer fringes of thinking in this game (LOL!) why not just no dar below 500ft? It's not going to ruin the game. It'll bring the fights down lower, there will be more mission-oriented gameplay, etc. I mean WB's never had in-plane radar in the main arena, did it not work? Would no radar below 500ft have a negative effect on the arena? How could it?
I heard that submarines might be introduced in the game later on. What will be interesting is to see if they show on bar dar while they are submerged.
Sorry for the semi rant, but it would be nice to hear where HTC stands on this, just some kind of hint, if its gonna stay like it is, why not tell us? It's been mentioned over and over and over, if HT or Pyro have given their position already, forgive me, I didn't see it. I'd just like to know where the game is heading is all.
-
Kill the Bar! :D
-
Radar was historically a factor to deal with. Since the MA is not a historical arena, I think it works quite well.
If you plan a sneak attack, it is not a good idea to mass everyone at one field and fly directly to the target. If you do a sneak atack, I recommend to consider radar and mask your attack. Think about what the enemy will see on dar, and plan around that.
Gunner <CAF>
[ 07-22-2001: Message edited by: GunnerCAF ]
-
If you plan a sneak attack, it is not a good idea to mass everyone at one field and fly directly to the target. If you do a sneak atack, I recommend to consider radar and mask your attack. Think about what the enemy will see on dar, and plan around that.
[/b]
Gunner CAF, no disrespect intended, but we've been doing that 1 1/2 years. I know every radar masking trick there is, everybody in my squad knows 'em too, but flying around imaginary sector blocks to "spread out" your groups bar dar signature is way cheesey.
[ 07-22-2001: Message edited by: hblair ]
-
Originally posted by hblair:
Ripsnort, I agree wholeheartedly with you. Sneak attacks are a joke the way it is now. A couple nights ago the knights were trying a lil sneak attack, how do I know? Well, as soon as they hit their own runway (!) we saw the huge bar dar, so within 2 minutes of them showing up on dar, we were razzing them on channel 1, telling them we were on our way. To make a long story short, they got 1/3 of their way to their target before they were decimated. I actually felt sorry for them.
I am for no in-flight radar, but as I'm sure that puts me so far off in the outer fringes of thinking in this game (LOL!) why not just no dar below 500ft? It's not going to ruin the game. It'll bring the fights down lower, there will be more mission-oriented gameplay, etc. I mean WB's never had in-plane radar in the main arena, did it not work? Would no radar below 500ft have a negative effect on the arena? How could it?
I heard that submarines might be introduced in the game later on. What will be interesting is to see if they show on bar dar while they are submerged.
Sorry for the semi rant, but it would be nice to hear where HTC stands on this, just some kind of hint, if its gonna stay like it is, why not tell us? It's been mentioned over and over and over, if HT or Pyro have given their position already, forgive me, I didn't see it. I'd just like to know where the game is heading is all.
no dar below will be feasable when HT
has some way to let u know a base is under attack by GVs, since they would never show
on the dar cause they below 500feet. and ud only know a attack was happening when u lost a base.
-
I know what you mean there whels, but why do we all think the game has to spoon feed us all that info? what keeps a few countryman from manually doing that? They already do it now, at the fields where there is an enemy bar dar and no friendly, people go around checking those fields all the time. The only difference would be that we would need to check all our fields or risk losing a few of them, but so would the enemy. Sounds to me like it would spread the fights out.
Something to think about...
-
Originally posted by hblair:
[/b]
Gunner CAF, no disrespect intended, but we've been doing that 1 1/2 years. I know every radar masking trick there is, everybody in my squad knows 'em too, but flying around imaginary sector blocks to "spread out" your groups bar dar signature is way cheesey.
Hblair,
I do respect your opinion, and my opinion differs. I think it is good for everyone to express there opinions even if they differ in a civilized maner. I have been playing here and in AW for about 7 years, and many in my squad even longer. I have been planning and leading weekly squad missions for several years.
The dar and sector lines may be a bit cheezy, but the strategy of hiding your intent and numbers are not. There may be a better way, and if there is, I am sure HTC will come up with it. I hear there are radar changes coming and I look forward to seeing what they are.
Gunner <CAF>
CO, Cactus Air Force
-
Again on the Top 10, here it comes the Radar thread!
I'm not posting anything else on this particular subject. Htc. looks to this pages, and I'm sure they take notes on all the things popping here.
Radar settings are one of the most dissatisfying (sp?) aspects of AH for me. Opposite to other things, there is no sign of movement, and settings remain the same.
Cheers,
Pepe
-
How about some AI?
Those of us that flew Airwarrior are used to the concept of drone goonies resuplying damaged fields.
How about an adaptation of that idea?
Going out from the standpoint that the dar, as it is, gives enough information, I propose that dar bar being directly linked to HQ status (an historical note: German radar was quite capable of spotting Lancs forming up over thier own air fields), a reduction of HQ capacity resulting in a reduction of radius of coverage from HQ.
Secondly, dot radar could be 100% coverage, from 0 feet to 50K, as perfomed by drone gooney "awacs" patrolling on a set pattern around a sector; and in a radius of 12 miles. Kill the gooney, the dot radar goes. Goony respawn time a matter of arena management, and a player should be able to take the role. This may give a use for aircraft such as the Fiesler Storch or the Lysander, for instance.
-
why not just use sector bars for ground vehicles only?
-
Originally posted by Pepe:
dissatisfying (sp?)
Perfect spelling, Pepe...much better than my Spanish!
Addressing the GV attack problem:
Why not a system radio notification when ANY friendly field takes ANY damage...FIELD A-25 IS UNDER ATTACK!!
Wouldn't that work?
PapaH
Cutthroats Mercenary Company :cool:
-
I like the radio notification thingy, and would add a mannable Flak 88 in airfields, active either as A-A or Antitank Battery.
Cheers,
Pepe
-
Dar at the moment is very anoying to some people. Stratigy and/or bombing raids are almost totaly imposible. I am also one who is AGAINST inflight dars. I think it's a stupid idea and only helps people who want to go have a big old quake style gangbang.
IMO, the way dar should be setup is like this.
1) Kill Bar Dar
2) Have Radar Towers posted around the arena with a 20 mile Radius. Which will give you dot dar.
3) All fields give you dot dar for the sector that they are in. You kill the radar at the field, you kill the radar for that sector. (sectors without a field or a Dar Station in them don't show up dots.
4)No Radar under 500ft
These simple things would DRAMATICALY boost EVERYTHING in the arena, Field Captures would be fantasicaly fun because you would not get your balls busted all the time. Long Range HQ missions would be Possible because you would be able to plot your way through empty sectors.
Darn, It would be a blast.
-
All radar threads boil down to this.... There are those who want to find the action at all times and those who want to hide from the action.
Those who want to find the action at all times want even more and better dar... Those who wish to hide from the action want even less radar so that they can hide.
dont know about you but when i come on for an hour or so i want to have radar, fuel and know where there is a fite.
lazs
-
Lazs, I'm curious about this:
Have you ever flown in a no-inflight radar environment like, for instance, WB?
Cheers,
Pepe
-
Pepe, yes he has, he came over from warbirds.
Next question, ask him if he's ever in his life participated in 1 ( one ) field capture mission. :)
-
lazs i want to be able to find the fight too
but being able to check 6 by looking at a red dot on the clipboard in flight is rediculous. at very least dot dar should be removed from in flight (still available from tower)
-
Seeker:
------------------------------------------
Those of us that flew Airwarrior are used to the concept of drone goonies resuplying damaged fields.
-----------------------------------------
I don't know, Seeker, if we had drone goons in AH, I don't think anyone here would ever shoot at anything else. :P
FWIW, I like bardar, and would have even more trouble finding a fight without it. I don't think it's any more cheesy than most of the other aspects of arena play (like pinpoint bombing, goony field caputre, the F3 view, and many many of the other concessions to gameplay.)
Dotdar, though, is more like an extra '6' view than a cheesy simulation of WWII radar, and I think it should go.
anRky
(Who, for one, has never really participated in any field capture, here or in AW.
*just sayin'*)
-
What a mess.
For all you guys that want to know where the fight is at I suggested the following ---
2. You have active radar at the tower and constant updates to your map, but once you take off from the field you can only update your map with radar by contacting your field or a field close to your intended target. This could be done with .dot commands ie: .radar -A26. this would update your map with enemy contacts at that time. You should be able to request updates as often as you like. And if radar is down at that field then no updates. However using this would reveal your current position at the moment you used the radio.
You could probably get this information at the maproom also.
I dont loggin for only an hour and look for a couple of planes to shoot down to improve my score. I logon for about 4-5 hours (which my wife really likes alot ). I like to participate in planned missions with strategic and tactical objectives, and eventually plan missions myself. Beat the enemy and win the "war" any way possible.
-
yeah!
:)
-
How does radar work now? What effect does the killing the radar at an airfield? I'm not sure everyone here knows how it works. If your using radar to check 6, you may be wondering why you died when there were no enemy dots on the map.
Has anyone tried sending fighters ahead of a deep bomber strike to take out field radar?
Thanks for the good discussion! I will be off to the airshow in Oshkosh for about a week. <S>
Gunner <CAF>
-
What about if field radar down then no dot n no dar radar in that sector until it respawns.
-
oh yeah... lets make it a squeak to find a fite so that the guys who want to spend 4-5 hors on line on "missions" getting 2 kills per day can have a good time.... maybe. Then again... they might not enjoy themselves all that much.
zig... The dots aren't even close to being a way to "check six" you dont even know what alt they are at. in a real environment you would pretty much know who was a friendly and who wasn't. In AH it's all mixed up and compressed (fortunately). The view system is the best there is but terribly limited even so.
I contend that those who would like less radar are doing so for reasons that have nothing to do with realism and everything to do with making their style more enjoyable at the expense of everyone else.
it boils down to... there are those who want to find the action and those who want to hide from it. Those who want to fite and those who want kill people who never seen em. Pick your side.
lazs
-
lazs1:
---------------------------------------
zig... The dots aren't even close to being a way to "check six" you dont even know what alt they are at.
---------------------------------------
I don't agree, even though 'check six' is probably the wrong expression. It's more like a limited god-mode, top down view. One press of a button, and I can instantly 'see' planes that might be out of my line of sight.
-------------------------------------------
in a real environment you would pretty much know who was a friendly and who wasn't
-------------------------------------------
In a 'real' environment, having my head down in the cockpit looking at a clipboard wouldn't improve my SA.
anRky
-
I agree with laz and gunnerCAF. I have participated in successful deepstrike missions as well as field capture missions as well as ones that were blown. A couple of points:
(1) Current dar bar reinforces well coordinated and executed strikes, field caps etc. I think it balances the "mission" player as well as the "furballer". Strikes have to be well planned and executed to be successful. Furballers can find a fight quickly.
(2) I think lazs1's summation is correct about those looking for a fight vs. those hiding from a fight. Never shall the two meet :). Like the eternal optimist vs. pessimist argument.
(3) Personally I have about 1 to 1.5 hours of flight time each time I get on. I've got a wife and kid to take care of :). The dar helps you find the fight. I suspect that there are many others out there with similar situations.
Okay, now thoughts on the dot dar:
==================================
I like Eaglec's concept of dot dar updating at some interval (every 1 min?). My opinion is to keep this automatic. I just think it is too much trouble to try and type a keyboard command each time you want an update. Reminds me too much of the WW2 Online 3 steps to fire a rifle thing :).
Other general thoughts:
=======================
I thought killing dar at a field takes away the dot dar for that dar's coverage area? Is this true or not? If this is the case, maybe it the dar bar should drop for the sector as well?
I could live with the below 500 ft dar limit if "field under attack" or dot dar comes active when an enemy is within ID range of a base.
-
Originally posted by lazs1:
it boils down to... there are those who want to find the action and those who want to hide from it. Those who want to fite and those who want kill people who never seen em. Pick your side.
lazs
Almost correct.
If you'd said this, you'd been closer to right:
It all boils down to... there are those who want to find the action, and those who want his 'puter to find the action for his lazy butt. Those who want to furball and those who want the historically correct "bounce" (you know, the way most planes were shot down in real life) to play at least some small part in the equation.
;)
-
For the record, I'm a furballer from way back, nothing wrong with that, but finding a fight with no in-plane dar would not require an act of Congress, people do it in WB's all the time, As I said earlier, I know this kind of thinking here makes me some kind of fringe radical, so why not just kill the dar on planes below 500ft?
-
Aren't the WB arenas like half the size?
They were about 1/8th the size when I played it... (3 fields per country or maybe it was 4) Of course the med terrain had a lot more fields, but we still had those in flight arrows to be our guiding light.
Anyways, now that I've got you thrown off on some tangent leading back to the early days...
I'm fine with removing dar on any plane moving below 500ft, only problem is I think this works on vehicles too. Might take some radical changes to the programming to allow only GVs to show up on radar below 500ft.
I've never quite understood why people would ever want to completely remove radar and make the game extremely boring.
"3 hours of boredom and 30 seconds of sheer terror" doesn't float my boat at all.
-SW
-
noooo!
with no darbar on planes below 500 feet how will i find easy to kill raiders on the deck from 25,000 feet?
I'm Skeeeerd!
-
I just thought about this again, and I've come to my senses.
Keep bar dar
Keep dot dar
Gimme more DAR!!
I'm skeeerder than citabr, I'm reeeeaaly reeeally SKEEEEEEEEERD!
:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:
-
Originally posted by whels:
no dar below will be feasable when HT
has some way to let u know a base is under attack by GVs, since they would never show
on the dar cause they below 500feet. and ud only know a attack was happening when u lost a base.
An Air Warrior-style system message "Base ## is under attack" could be a solution.
MiG
-
The problem as I see it is there are no other forces in our virtual world. A ground vehicle couldn't get close to an airfield without first going through the "lines". Planes are not going to fly hundreds of miles behind enemy lines without somebody reporting it. The types of reports that are available from many different sources not modelled in the game have to be available in some form. I personally think the dar bar is a much more accurate representation of what was available to a pilot in WW2 than the in-flight radar on the clipboard. It needs some modification, though.
Bar dar always over friendly territory (the original territory owned by a country at reset) to emulate the loyal population reporting in sightings. A time delay before this information appeared would be appropriate.
Bar dar always over the sectors in a rough line some distance (1 sector?) in front of the line of friendly bases to emulate reports from front line troops.
Bar dar never in "unfriendly" sectors behind the forward line of captured bases (sectors that originally belonged to the "enemy") unless passing within radar range of a base, or within "visual" range of a factory, or city that would be garrisoned...10 miles maybe? Just because you capture a base doesn't mean you captured the hearts and minds of the population!
Bar dar never in the ocean, unless the bogie is within radar range of a fleet or friendly base. Below radar in the ocean wouldn't show up on bar dar unless bogie comes within visual range of fleet or base.
Think about it; a sector is 625 square miles. It is in no way unrealistic to expect that a formation of enemy planes (or even 1 enemy plane) would be reported somewhere in a 625 mile area full of friendly soldiers and civilians.
As for the in-flight clipboard dar...I like the earlier idea of a timed update. Instantaneous information is a bit much. However, the current form could be made available to radar-equipped night fighters as an incentive to fly the big slow birds at night, especially if con range is reduced at night, too.
HaMmeR
-
Ok... WB style dar would be fine if we had WB style fields... By the time you get to a field in AH it is ded... no action.. what seemed like a good place to go to in the tower is a ghost town when you get there. In WB they are still there when you get there.
No matter how you cut it.... we either need the dar the way it is or make the fields fewer and closer together. either way is fine with me.
And hblair as usuall.... u are mistaken. Most pilots were not killed by being "bounced" in the sense that they couldn't see the guy or that he had spent time sneaking up on him (except in a very few LW romance novels) but... They were killed in a melee where they lost track of all the planes involved or ones that had joined the fite while they were occupied... Very much like what we now have in AH.
If I had the choice between less fields closer together and simply keeping the dar we have I would take the feilds closer and fewer but... I don't want our field setup with even less radar (read chance to find a good fite).
lazs
-
I brought this up a while back. The whole radar bit along with artificial ground ctrl of some sort to make combat more real. The AWACs screen we all have now ruins the whole WWII combat feel I think. Makes it seem more like a rumble each time rather than a mission. Anyway, my two cents... More real is better :)
-- senna of BKs
-
I would like to add my vote to hblair's and Citabria's.
MORE RADAR TO AH!!! I want to know alt and heading on the dots. I want to get rid of darbar....to have dot radar in the whole AH map. I want radar undestructable. Automatic warning when a con gets closer than 3k. No dumb, random "check 6" calls, but a useful "109/pony/La/etc. approaching fast from your low 4. Suggested break right low". Of course given by system, you can never trust that cr**py countrymen. And, last but not least, I WANT a flashing score counter on my screen. I want to see how much that increases with each and every hit I make on the bugger.
Now AH would be really useful on my training....to pinball playing :p
Cheers,
Pepe
-
now your starting to get it pepe... course people would actually have to beat their adversary with such dar so it wouldn't go over too well with the "kill em while they are at the fridge set".
lazs
-
Yes lazs, we're in complete ageement with you. We need more radar just so we can find a fight. Perhaps even have signs on 10,000 foot poles everywhere, saying "fight thisaway! -->" or "<-- cons thataway!" Now that would help us find fights even better. Oh man, I'm on a roll!
Just please don't take away my bar dar or my dot dar. :eek:
-
Hey hblair's idea might let HTC use it as a way of generating revenue from marketing and advertisements! You know "Eat At Joe's --->" etc.
Or even sky banners that you could tow around the sky behind your plane! This might even allow individual players to have companies pay them to tow around ads behind their planes!
What great ideas to subsidize and lower my monthly rates for AH!
-
hblair.. that would also work. I'll go for that. what would be the result of such changes as yours and pepes? well.... u would still have to win the fite. no amount of dar or signs or anything would incrase your sa in the melee. they would just be sensory overload once the fite started... once the fite started you would still be on your own.
you want acm to determine the outcome or patience to determine it? take your pick. LW and p51 guys get no vote tho.
the fite is the thing... the sooner and easier to find the better. everything else is just kidding yourself.
lazs
-
Lazs, you are so in love with ACM that seem to forget that the first of them all is a proper setting on the initial merge...that is, taking advantage of sun position, using enemy's blind angles, using speed (aka closure rate) instead of alt as a mean of advantage.....
Oh yeah!, How could I forget, these things are irrelevant for radar/icon lovers. These are not real ACM :p
Cheers,
Pepe
-
Originally posted by lazs1:
the fite is the thing... the sooner and easier to find the better. everything else is just kidding yourself.
lazs
I agree lazs, that's why, in addition to my sky signs proposal, I would also like to implement airstarts. I mean why fiddle around with that crazy takeoff stuff, it just keeps you out of the fight longer.
Ahh, another idea here. Lets make a button on the clipboard that says "Get in big Fight", click on it and wham!, you're in a big fight, with bullets and 'splosions! Oh man what an idea!
-
well... no, hblair... the melee needs to be a living thing. you need to be able to determine when someone is entering and have some time to react. air starts and being thrown into the middle would negate that. they can't just spawn out of nothing right in the fite like oh, say, ground vehicles. anytime u pop up next to someone it's a bad deal. the melee could be fed quite adequetly by good dar and close together fields.
pepe... how you enter the melee is what you are talking about.. that would not change. if you mean acm is killing someone who has no idea that there are any planes around then no... u are wrong.
lazs
-
I still think my "Get in big fight" idea has merit. I feel like lazs would just like to come into the fight with speed and altitude and be a big cheater head, like one of those evil nasty pony guys who use that evil speed, altitude and E retention stuff.
To Summarize:
Gimme bar dar.
Gimee dot dar.
Gimme sky signs.
Gimme "Get in big fight" button!
Regards,
hblair
-
Originally posted by hblair:
Gimme bar dar.
Gimee dot dar.
Yes and yes, just slightly refine them. All will be happy, all will be good, all will be right with the world and we will all have fun.
-SW
-
well sure hblair... of course i would, and do.. pay attention to what i say not what i do... and i thot i said lw guys don't get a vote?
lazs
-
No sky signs or "Get in big fight" button?
:(
-
Originally posted by lazs1:
pepe... how you enter the melee is what you are talking about.. that would not change. if you mean acm is killing someone who has no idea that there are any planes around then no... u are wrong.
lazs
Beg to disagree...
On the melee & radar thing:
Letting aside that not everything is melee fighting, even in this particular field there are some things I think evident:
- There is no use in risking a single feet of height to try to sneak a low 4 to 7 position, because radar (let's leave the icon stuff aside) will show attacker's dot, and ruin surprise.
- "timid" kinda guys (as you describe them) wouldn't approach a furball straight, since the dot radar allow them to pick targets ingressing/egressing.
Doesn't those make a difference in melee ingress?
On the ACM point, I thought ACM were mainly involved with use of space, not with flying itself, that would be BFM.
ACM has all to do with trying to get an advantageous position over the bogie, and, of course, includes using blind angles, sun position, and all kind of tools. It is more a matter of tactics and geometry than pulling the stick this or that way.
I honestly don't see why the absence of in flight dot radar would damage furballers' interests. First, you have tower radar, and usually furballs last long enough to get there and die a good bunch of times. Second, and being an Ex-WB you know it, people usually answer when you ask "where is the action".
Where is the problem in "finding a fight fast"?
The only situation where on-board radar would make a difference is when the furball dilutes, and you are with no cons around. In this case, you have, at least, two evident and very fast options: a) Ask your squaddies/countrymen. b) Auger.
Anyway, I don't have even the slightest hope in this particular matter. It's been put up here sooooo many times, and we have seen no changes so far, that I seriously doubt any measure will be taken. It's a thorn in my AH side, and I assume I have to live with it.
Cheers,
Pepe
[ 07-26-2001: Message edited by: Pepe ]
-
lol
-
The idea that dar is only updated when you give a .dot command is actually a *very good one*.
[ 07-26-2001: Message edited by: StSanta ]
-
hblair... no.
pepe... until you are willing to fly in finger fours and in real sqaud strength agains other planes doing the same you have no right saying anything you do is "historical" or realistic. The radar is at least as realistic as you or anyone else flying lone wolf looking for someone who has dozed off. Untill we can get the 360 degrees of real life view.. radar is a good substiture. Heck... current dar doesn't even give alt like the real stuff.... I don't think you can pick and choose the "realism" that fits your style any more than I can.
It appears that you don't want all those people in the arena finding the fight... you appear to want em all spread out and vulnerable to people who fly a certain style. it seems that a whole lot of people like to furball but very few fly finger fours at 20K or so... you would ruin the fun ao many on the off chance that a few would enjoy their "style" more.
lazs
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs1:
hblair... no.
lazs
Well, how 'bout airstarts with 'splosions everywhere?
-
Lazs,
Does the phrase "High fidelity air combat is the heart of Aces High, but it doesn't end there." rings a bell in your head? It is in AH homepage. High fidelity air combat requires two factors:
[list=a]
- a sound and accurately modelled environment, (flight/damage model, etc., including, of course, realistic radar system implementation) and
- historic behaviour within player community.
[/list=a]
I think you make an incorrect generalization equalizing "historic" with "realistic". As I expalined, I don't see them as similar concepts, but a realistic environment is a precondition to historic simulation.
The fact that I do enjoy to fly finger fours with my squaddies (or schwarms, depending on planes and mission) does nothing to do with my "right" to say I do things historical or realistically. I have the right to say so regardless my flying style. Same as you. :)
Getting to the point to "realistic" radar, you have to confront with facts. And facts were, in '39-'45 as an enunciative non exhaustive list:
- No inflight radar, except late war nightfighters.
- No GPS
- Vectors to enemy given by land crew.
- Ground radar imprecise and requiring a highly trained personnel, at least in early war stages.
I know you dislike realistic simulation. But I came here because of the phrase mentioned before. If it wasn't for that, I would have choices aplenty. I could chose between FA, Crimson Skies, CFS, etc. etc. I am sorry that this is not bread&butter for you, but this product is sold as a simulation. And a high fidelity one. I did not read "furball like there is no tomorrow" anywhere in AH homepage, or anywhere else with regards to this product.
As you like to say, It boils down to lack of alternatives. For us, the ones who like a realistic simulation, there is no choice, at the time being, but AH. For you there is plenty of them. I don't want to force anyone to do anything. I just read Htc. statement, and would like to have it true.
Again and again, and yet again, I am not trying to ruin anyone else's fun, but I try to defend mine. If Hithech Creations sells me a "High Fidelity air combat" that's what I buy. Not more, not less.
Cheers,
Pepe
[ 07-26-2001: Message edited by: Pepe ]
-
Pepe one clarification: "High Fidelity air combat"
Furball. Air combat. Furball. Air combat. Furball. Air combat.
Those words are interchangeable.
-SW
-
SW,
I think Furball is more restricted than air combat. Air combat is 1vs1, 2vs2, 1vs2, etc. etc., fighter vs bomber, even A-G operations can be taken as Air combat.....not all of this is furball. Don't you think? :)
Cheers,
Pepe
-
Air combat certainly does not include Air to Ground. A2G is included in Air operations.
Maybe I'm the only one that doesn't believe that 1vs1 or 1vs2 or 2vs2 or whatever were the common types of engagement.
WWI and WWII had large scale melees, those were the norm not the exception.
-SW
-
Think about WWIIOL.
There's no such a thing as radar or map with nice coloured dots for planes but somehow I always managed to find a fight.
Two things help in this:
You can see where the battle-front is.
You can use radio and ask if fighters/Stukas are needed somewhere.
You dont have to spend time to climbing to alt because most of fights are in low; from ground-level to 5000ft. Of course you can climb to 30000k but you're not gonna see anyone from up there, thanks to cloud layers and type of id-tags :)
Edit: Looks like that game is more accurate than AH in that part of game ;)
[ 07-26-2001: Message edited by: Staga ]
-
I'm not an authority (hehehe, VERY far from it) but I think there were not a lot of melčes in AH's way in WWII. Except for the BoB, maybe.
I stand corrected on Air to Ground definition.
Cheers,
Pepe.
-
Pepe, I understand what you desire (I think).. Everyone's preferred way of playing conflicts with another player's though so in the end we end up running around in circles trying to meet half-way.
There is no "absolute" way, so that's why I am ducking out of this discussion now.
S!
-SW
-
Staga, WWIIOl is appeasing to a totally different crowd.
-SW
-
<Rip pulls swim shorts up alittle tighter, gets ready to dive in....>
Its all about prolonged redundancy and 'need for change' that is human nature in all of us. I'd accept any change in strat, RPS, HA or whatever they thru at us, because, frankly, I get bored with the same ol' same ol'..one of the reasons I left WB's was because it was the same old crap, the first couple years it was fun, the last 3 years it was ....redundant.
-
Ripsnort:
----------------------------------------
Its all about prolonged redundancy and 'need for change' that is human nature in all of us. I'd accept any change in strat, RPS, HA or whatever they thru at us, because, frankly, I get bored with the same ol' same ol'..one of the reasons I left WB's was because it was the same old crap, the first couple years it was fun, the last 3 years it was ....redundant.
------------------------------------------
Replace the letters WB with AW, and the same goes for me. :)
anRky
-
SW,
Totally agree. You got it 100%. Outta here too.
<Hmmm....cool & nice outside, uh?> :)
<S>
-
The whole push to make AH radar more realistic seems silly.
Firstly, I was under the impression that Aces High was built to be an air combat simulation. It is supposed to simulate ww2 era combat between ww2 era aircraft. I was not aware it was supposed to be a simulation of the air war over Europe. These are two very different things. Perhaps HTC should just state what their intent on this matter is, and I suspect a lot of issues currently debated (radar, HA, RPS,) could be put to rest.
Secondly, there is this push to reduce radar capability to make things more realisitic and less "quakish". HTC has included a way to nullify radar, bombing HQ. Of course the realism camp can't be bothered spending the time "strategizing" to kill dar before doing the NOE raids. Isn't HTC offering more opportunity for strat type gameplay by forcing you to hit a strategic target represented by the HQ?
About NOE raids that are so victimized by Bar Dar. I question their historical effectiveness. Even with Bar Dar I bet its easier to pull off here in AH than it ever was in real life. In AH you have a clean sanitized arena free of virtually any ground forces/naval forces/ground fire/civilians/cities all things that would call attention, or kill, such a raid.
I suspect if it really was so easy for a formation of B17's to streak over Germany at 500ft undetected into Berlin the 8th AF wouldn't have wasted time going to 25k every hop. Sound silly? Well it is what will happen to HQ's without bar dar.
Killing dot dar gets my vote if it makes people happy, but bar dar is gameplay concession to make up for the fact that each country has a lot of unpopulated/undefended real estate that is too easy to take advantage of.
-
pepe said "A.a sound and accurately modelled environment, (flight/damage model, etc.,
including, of course, realistic radar system implementation) and
B.historic behaviour within player community."
i agree with "a" but am very much opposed to "b" being the "goal" or definition of AH. but even if it were... I contend that the radar promotes "historic behavior" far more than your lone wolf hunter hider style of air combat.
Melees are "historic" but...I don't believe that the furs we have even come close to the realism or historic (interchangeable in this case) melees that were WWII air combat... even the the smallest fites involved 8 or more planes in most cases.. and... I have seen you many times in the MA and never have I seen you in a "finger four" or for that matter, anyone else. even the 51 ballet troupes are flying in a manner that doesn't match any known WWII squad tactics. Selective realism/history
The radar we have is still inadequate for finding a fite in AH because the fields are too far apart, there are too many of em, and gv's show up on the bar. by the time you get to what looks like a fite it no longer exists in many cases. when you see a bunch of dots then you know you have a better chance of finding a fite. Why do you think the majority spend all their time between 2 close fields?? they want the "realism" of flying well modeled WWII ac in a melee.
I contend that the current or even better radar doesn't hurt you or your ilk at 25k (historic alt) flying finger fours but... less radar affects those of my ilk that want to fite in a realistic melee.
lazs
-
hblair.. no.
lazs
-
With all the posts of the same complaints about darbar and inflight radar screen and the playability mods on certain veh/ac , you should complain with your wallet and cancel, maybe then some changes will occur. Lets face it after 3-6 months of playing AH its gets a bit "quakish" with the game being 87% quake and 13% strategy. Also ith paying $30 a month once you figure out there is no strategy really you begin to feel ripped off by the "most realistic sim..bla bla bla" speel.
-
B52Charlie, didn't you get the hint before? http://www.hitechcreations.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=010611 (http://www.hitechcreations.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=010611)
Go back to blowing goats, or whatever your real world job is.
-SW