Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: 2Late4U on April 06, 2002, 04:08:46 PM

Title: Problem with adding the 163 comet
Post by: 2Late4U on April 06, 2002, 04:08:46 PM

Yea, I love to fly the comet too, problem is that with the current coding, you'd lose the perk points 90% of the time.   The  current implementation has you "ditching" if you arn't completly on the runway.  This issue needs to be addressed in the near future IMHO, the game has come so far, and yet if I nurse my wounded bird all the way back to base, I get a "ditched" even if I land perfectly, just not on the runway.  This should be expanded so any landing within a reasonable distance of the tower counts as LANDED (perhaps though halving EARNED perks to keep people trying to land on the runway).  I'd say within 1000 yards of the runway should be MORE than good enough (provided its not in the water ;)

Since the Comet lands without power, something would have to change or it would be one quick way to lose perks.

Title: Problem with adding the 163 comet
Post by: Dr Zhivago on April 06, 2002, 05:15:04 PM

Me 163 got only retractable skid and tail wheel to land  "Grass Runway"  , landing to normal  runway isnt possible as you can see from pic   ,so you will ditch every time when you land with comet.... :p .  Me 263 got conventional landing gear but only few was made...:rolleyes:


Komet Me163 - Chief test pilot Rudy Opitz tells it like it was (http://www.flightjournal.com/articles/me163/me163_1.asp)
 Me 163B Komet (http://www.sml.lr.tudelft.nl/~home/rob/me163.htm)

Title: One thought on this.......
Post by: eddiek on April 06, 2002, 06:13:35 PM

I'd love to see the Komet added too, but only available at bases near the HQ and city.  Last ditch defense weapons, ultimate perk ride in that application.  No field hopping from one friendly base to the next either to refuel and continue across the map.  Make it non-refuelable/non-rearmable to keep the gamers from exploiting it and that should keep it near the intended useage area.
As to the perk points......if you're a team player, you do what you gotta do, and losing perks to defend your HQ/city from attack would be nothing.  I think anywhere inside an airfield perimeter should count as a successful landing, have said so numerous times over the past couple years.

Title: Problem with adding the 163 comet
Post by: majic on April 06, 2002, 08:39:48 PM

so...make it 10 or 15 points.

Title: Problem with adding the 163 comet
Post by: J_A_B on April 06, 2002, 08:45:00 PM

Another problem with the Komet is the fact that with the fuel multiplier in the MA it would have power for only about 2 minutes.  

J_A_B

Title: Problem with adding the 163 comet
Post by: sling322 on April 06, 2002, 09:43:03 PM

I got it.  

Super and Nate, quit messing with those damn runway tiles...we dont need 'em.  

HT change the game code to give a successful landing if your wheels are lowered.  Thats right, lowered.  It dont matter if you touch down or not.  I mean after all, you meant to land, right?  Just like you meant to land on the runway, right?

:rolleyes:

Title: Problem with adding the 163 comet
Post by: GRUNHERZ on April 06, 2002, 10:34:09 PM

I thinh Me163 should have no fuel multiplier. All of its fuel was used in the climb to 35,000 or 40,000 feet, all in the vertical. AH is not vertically compresed like it is in distance.

Title: Problem with adding the 163 comet
Post by: Glasses on April 06, 2002, 10:40:05 PM

And by the way there is a bug with the perk thing. If you bail over enemy territory you only get 1/2 the perk value subtracted yet if you bail over friendly territory you get the full cost subtracted.

I don't know if HT intended this to be so but IMO shouldn't it BE the other way around or if you ditch without the aircraft getting destroyed  you should be substracted only 1/4 the total perk cost oh and only in friendly territory of course it should fix some of the I ditched my perk plane and I lost my points issue.