Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Nath[BDP] on April 07, 2002, 11:37:41 PM
-
Trains going up mountains at 10%+ grade.
Not sure if HTC knows this or not, but trains can't travel at grades of 5% or higher. Especially with the type of locomotive we see in AH. Trains are going up moutains like roller coasters, really takes away from the 'realism' of the game.
My solution:
Find real track plans of the different areas of land which each terrain is representing and re-model it after that. If that's too difficult then just relay the track without the 30% grades.
-
Well, metric cockpits first for our top realistic online sim...
-
1. The simple Damage model, (WORKING/NOT WORKING components)
AND the EXTREME lameness of people SHOOTING FROM 500 YARDS out... and actually (HITTING) another plane upwards to 1.2K+ yard ranges. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
2. ENGINE Managment: Overheating(lack thereof), ON/OFF kills(damage to the engine)
3. Just to RE-Itterate, the OVER SIMPLIFIED AMMO damage/Ability to damage another plane from SUCH RANGES with specific types of ammo. (It is not realistic, nor is it even remotely accurate from a ballistics standpoint).
4. The Graphics engine. Very behind in the evolution of flight sims.
I feel Aces High is a GREAT product in the sense of having MULTIPLE people play on a DEDICATED server with netcode for "smoother internet playibilty", However I feel that it is LOST in the sense of a Flightsimulation evoluntionary environment.
Perhaps Hitech can Talk with 1C Maddox games, and establish a working relationship.
IL2 shows that attention to detail is key for all areas that I have addressed here.
:: Dream Product::
1. IL2 damage model,(with even further improvements)
2. IL2 Flight Physics/Ground Physics
3. IL2 Graphics (with even further improvements)
4. IL2/Aces High Planeset/Ground war on Hightech Creations Dedicated Server.
:cool:
-
Don't hold back Jbroey, tell us how you really feel.
Nath, I didn't know that. I pretty much thought trains could chug along pretty much anything as long as they had tracks to guide em lol.
-
top this.. saw a truck convoy doin about 50 pass my lvt like it was standing still.
..while i was about 1/2 mile offshore.
-
I'd agree with the need for metric cockpits (or a way for players to be able to do their own gauge faces, similarly to creating your own gunsights, plus ability to scale the output on certain instruments) etc, but as for AH being behind the curve graphically... compare AH with the MMOL opposition.
Seems to me that the ones approaching photorealism aren't MMOL. And it also seems to me that AH and IL2 are converging on the same point, from different directions; AH starting off with the MMOL and gradually improving in appearance, whereas IL2 started with great appearance, but is a long way from MMOL as yet.
As for player - manned GV's, in a flightsim they're nice but not essential. What IS essentail is the ability to have good strategic gameplay, real jobs for bombers to do, interdicting enemy supplies and smashing their means of production. Whilst I have issues with the details of the way strat has been implemented thus far in AH (stuff like target hardness and rebuild times), nevertheless the fundamentals are there, and HTC are working on trying to improve it. Can't say that for the game I've spent two years in prior to starting to fly here; the creators of that one have NO idea of what's needed to lift a WW2 combat flightsim from being capable of bing no more than a simpleminded furball frenzy.
Back to those GVs... they aren't essential, but they've been done very nicely! Having played WW2OL before it went pay for play, I was doubtful that a game like AH could do anything with GVs that wouldnt seem lame by comparison. Whilst the AH GVs arent as sophisticated as the WW2OL ones, they are pretty good, and much better than I expected.
The crux of the matter is that if the gameplay isn't there, it doesnt matter how pretty the game is, it wont be fun. AH's visuals are more than adequate to this Bomberpiloten starved of cloudy skies and night to work with for two years!
Esme
CO of Kampfgeschwader 2 "Holzhammer"
(contact esmenhamaire@tiscali.co.uk if interested in joining a dedicated LW bomber unit for scenario games)
-
Urchin,
Did you not think that I was fair with my points? :) ;)
-
Well,.... the most unrealistic aspect in this game is that u allive after crash or being shot down :D :D :D
IMO its kinda unrealistic that u can attach a gunner while u are in flight.
Make it like AW. Do the hole long flight or stay out.:p
-
:D Ah.. das ist richtig Freezze20 ;)
-
Originally posted by fffreeze220
Well,.... the most unrealistic aspect in this game is that u allive after crash or being shot down :D :D :D
Followed closely by the ability to fly whatever plane you want, whenever you want, wherever you want, alone or with others of your choosing, without the CO having so much as a peep.
-
Well, after months of little or no flying, the first thing I've noticed is the completely unrealistic, laser-gun, radar-guided ... CV ack-ack. This is imo, the most unrealistic aspect of AH. Togheter with the absence of a (good) RPS.
-
Originally posted by Nath[BDP]
... but trains can't travel at grades of 5% or higher.
Yeah we need tunnels!!!
We really need tunnels (for GV's too)!!!
And we need rack railways and ropeways and nice skiing regions and apres ski bars and .... :D
-
I agree - gunnery and damage should be modeled so people dont even THINK of firing until inside d.400.
-
.... suicidal players with unlimited lives.
-
The most unrealistic aspect of AH is the continued, unrepenting unrealitistic demands for realism.
-
yup,,,it`s the neverending story,,craving craving.
-
I think that one of the biggest reasons for the lack of realism with the gunnery/damagemodel is that you can see huge hitsprites even if you hit the con at 1k and up..
If there would be (realistically) almost no way to tell if you hit the target that far or not, it would for sure reduce the amount of spray and pray.
-
GV damage model is easily the most unrealistic.... maybe not the right word. Needs the most attention.
Everything I've ever read about WWII tank battles said that German Armor had to be killed from the rear quarter and at extremely close range. Their armor was just to dang thick to get through anywhere else. Yet in here, 50cals regularly kill Panzers. Sherman Tanks could barely do it and then only when conditions were practically ideal. Armor thickness and projectile penetration factors need some real work. The other side of the same coin is that I have on numerous occasions hit M3/8/16s from 10 to 15 times to kill them with a 75mm gun.
I enjoy my time spent online playing, but this is the one area that causes to log in disgust when I spend 20 or 30 minutes driving my Panzer across country only to be killed by the first 50cal weilding GV or Plane.
-
If a bear farts in the forest and theres no one there to smell it, does it really stink?
And remember to:
Relax, its just a game
-
Well, I keep hearing how many people think the AH graphics engine is old and outdated and not up to todays systems.
As a programmer, I will tell you categorically, it has absolutely zero to do with the graphics engine. You know a graphics engine only pushes polys, and the amount of polys you chose to deal with (i.e. the artwork) is your limitation.
You guys are asking for more polys, plain and simple. I will also tell you Nate and Super could create the most realistic models you could ever see, but then when your frame rate is in the toilet, you would not like it.
There are inherent rules involved with game design you cannot get around today.
1) If you are a box game with limited network play, you have more processing power to work with grahics.
2) If you are a massive multi-player online game, you have to give up quite a bit of processing power from the graphics to achieve smooth game play.
I am not saying there is not room for improvement. HTC has shown the ability to move forward, but you have to consider, the mean average CPU today and answer, "what can that system do today?". Todays mean average CPU is about 550Mhz P3.
I have no doubt HTC could generate a version of AH that would make about 2 percent of the players really happy in terms of eye candy, the other 98 percent would not be able to play it. This would be a bad business call on HTC's part, but they know that already.
And before you ask, "why not create a high end of AH for those that can handle it?". Well, now you are talking about generating twice to three times the amount of work for HTC, which translates into much longer times between updates and patches. Again, another bad business call.
Also, consider the graphics cards. Did you know that until NVidia released the GF3 (non-MX), they only had support for 2 texture stages? What does this mean? Well, for graphics to look realistic, it requires at least 4 texture stages. One for the base texture, one for bump mapping, one for light mapping, and one for specular mapping. Oh, let's not talk about projected shadows, which requires more stages.
Of course, bump mapping alone adds nice subtle touches to grahics. The terrain in AH uses bump mapping, which was added some versions ago.
I admire HTC's ability to balance the graphics. They probably do that better than anyone. What does that mean? Well, if you create a model with a high poly count, and suddenly you have to render 10 of those, along with the other persistent objects, the frame rate would drop like a rock. Balancing the poly count is a true art. The goal for the game designer to to keep frame rates fluid and not fluctuating all over the place. In some cases it is impossible to not have that happen, but you want those cases to be the special case, not the normal case.
If you are a box game with limited network play, you do not have to be so concerned with this as you know you will have a limited number of objects in view at any given time.
I have no doubt that when the mean CPU is above 1Ghz, AH will look appropriately improved in the graphics area.
-
Originally posted by jbroey3
13. Just to RE-Itterate, the OVER SIMPLIFIED AMMO damage/Ability to damage another plane from SUCH RANGES with specific types of ammo. (It is not realistic, nor is it even remotely accurate from a ballistics standpoint).
Clairification of this point please.
Are you saying that MG bullets will not travel 1000 yards? Or are you saying that after traveling 1000 yards they would be unable to damage a WW2 aircraft?
Thanks.
-
Yeah, this game sucks. Why are we all playing it?
-
Originally posted by SUPERFLY
Yeah, this game sucks. Why are we all playing it?
So we can get a shot at some Hellfire Brew for the upcoming con? :p
-
Sometimes when I read threads like this one I am just dumbfounded that what is being complained about is only in Aces High! Where else have you seen trains and convoys in an online environment? So, big deal they aren’t modeled correctly. Does that mean they shouldn’t be there?
I’ll take the trains as they are at the moment rather then the trains and convoys being removed. This is not a finished product. It is open to continual improvement at all times (thank heavens). It would be silly to accept this as a finished product.
Now in Skuzzy’s post he is basically saying that you people who refuse to upgrade to GeForce 4 and 2.2Ghz machines are holding this sim back! HTC could do so much more if they didn’t have to deal with “slow machine users” (refereed to SMU’s) You SMUs are the problem not HTC!
Ok, the last paragraph is BS. I for one am glad that HTC takes into account the “average machine” playing Aces. As the average machine increases in power the more that can be added to Aces. If HTC didn’t take into account the SMUs the sim would be empty and prolly off line in a very short time. I am happy that they have found a way to balance all aspects of this online sim to make it the best that has ever graced the Internet!
The community ought to tip its hat a lot more often then we do for the efforts HTC has put forth to get Aces to the stage it is at now! Where else have we seen anything that comes close to Aces? Nowhere.
Over and out.
-
Seems to me that I saw a post from HT that said the convoys and trains run this way to insure the re-supply times. For the terrain developers to have to calculate grade and the correct area to establish a road and/or tracks would take up far to much time.
I would much rather see additional terrain’s than making sure that the concrete is pored and railroad ties are installed correctly.
-
Superfly has it wrapped up nicely. This game sucks.
Rooks REALLY suck. Bastages were shooting at me yesterday. Sociopaths.
I really did like the idea of putting ski slopes on some of the hills. Can you guys model my Rossi Bandits and put a couple high-speed lifts in, then make sure there's always at least 80 inches of base and two feet of fresh powder? :D
Perk scores for Fighter, Bomber, Vehicle, and Skiing.
-
This game is full of stupids! I am quit if it no get fixed! Now to work HTC! Be good game!:mad: :eek: :mad:
-
Originally posted by Commander rialbh
This game is full of stupids! I am quit if it no get fixed! Now to work HTC! Be good game!:mad: :eek: :mad:
ROFL :eek: :eek: :eek:
-
these are special trains.. .like we have here in colorado..
climbing a 45% grade.. yep 45%.
ok.. so it's only 1 train.
-
The ignorance of players who speak of issues they have no concept of and what it takes to implement those desired changes.
Spoiled rotten!!!
-
You'll not accomplish anything this way Nath. My advice is to wait until HiTech is on-line and assault him with a barrage of insults, accusations and total lack of respect. Then and only then can we enjoy the relative peace that the last 6 months has brought us.
AKDejaVu
-
P.S. welcome back to your comfort zone nath.
-
I remember several years ago living in an older house with
floor-to-ceiling high windows on the backside.
One bright shiney Saturday morning I was eating froot loops and watching scooby-doo on the tube when there was heard a tremendous bang and a rattle from the center window. I only saw a brief form just prior to the crash but had no ID on the con.
I went outside and looked around for a football or some other object laying on the ground but none was to be found. I returned inside and carried on with the froot loops.
Later in the evening, when the sun was setting and casting a bright glow on the window I suddenly realized what had made the crashing sound earlier that morning.
Brought out by the gleaming sunlight was the perfect image of a pigeon spread eagle on the window. I guess it was the bird dander imparted by the kinetic energy released on impact. Hell, I was laughing so hard it hurt. I could actually make out the indiviual feather vanes from the larger wingtiup feathers.
Never found the pigeon though.........
-
Lol..a whine about train climb rates!!!..:)
-
Originally posted by AKDejaVu
You'll not accomplish anything this way Nath. My advice is to wait until HiTech is on-line and assault him with a barrage of insults, accusations and total lack of respect. Then and only then can we enjoy the relative peace that the last 6 months has brought us.
AKDejaVu
Ouch, not only a mark left, but a welt! :eek: :eek:
-
Originally posted by Yeager
I remember several years ago living in an older house with
floor-to-ceiling high windows on the backside.
One bright shiney Saturday morning I was eating froot loops and watching scooby-doo on the tube when there was heard a tremendous bang and a rattle from the center window. I only saw a brief form just prior to the crash but had no ID on the con.
I went outside and looked around for a football or some other object laying on the ground but none was to be found. I returned inside and carried on with the froot loops.
Later in the evening, when the sun was setting and casting a bright glow on the window I suddenly realized what had made the crashing sound earlier that morning.
Brought out by the gleaming sunlight was the perfect image of a pigeon spread eagle on the window. I guess it was the bird dander imparted by the kinetic energy released on impact. Hell, I was laughing so hard it hurt. I could actually make out the indiviual feather vanes from the larger wingtiup feathers.
Never found the pigeon though.........
Must have been the fruit loops that attracted him?
-
Actually, the way that house was laid out the sun was shining through the house towards the bird. I think it was looking for a shortcut through the house instead of over it. I left that pigeon print on the window. I told my wife that it was natural art.
It really was.
-
I enjoy this game just how it is !!! you whinners want super photo graphics go play fighter ace 3 (u need a sub by the way), bring ur super 2.2 ghz pc with the dual processer monster video card and remember to keep whinning cause ur fps is still in the gutter .(their server cant even keep up w 50-100 players in the game)
AH plays great on bolth my sloooooooow pc's pent3 411ghz gf2 200 w/ 192 ram, and on my ancient cackling 486, intel 810 vd w/ 256 ram on a dsl connection,
silly whinners that want to wreck this game w/ photo graphic's tons of fog and give it really bad fps . go fly the 260.0 mb monster FA3 and then whine . or go get a connection (but u need that too or u wouldnt be whinning )
and this is just my two cents worth on the super sims that are out , I'm glad that HTC keeps the average pc user in mind !
Muhahahahaa
-
Strato-altitude laser bombing.
-Soda
-
Originally posted by Soda
Strato-altitude laser bombing.
-Soda
Fortunately, this is being "reworked" as we type.
-
Q for RUDE,,, we have to be astronauts to know earth is not flat ???????????????? :p
-
So we can get a shot at some Hellfire Brew for the upcoming con?
- Tronspir
Unfortunately, tronspir, there won't be any brew this con. I'm too devastated by this whole train grade thing. And if that wasn't enough, now I find the damage model is unrealistic and the planes are represented by something called "polys" instead of being actual planes I was piloting remotely. :(
After I finished weeping and gnashing my teeth from reading this, I called my friends and relatives - told them I was quitting my job and selling all my material possessions. It's time I found out what is really real. Walk the earth. Visit India.
Because if AH isn't real then we're all just playing at life and not really accomplishing anything for the populations of Rookland, Knightland, and Bishopia. Like it was a game or something . . .
Oh. Whups! Never mind then.
-sudz
PS Superfly - sell me back my computer and CH setup. I still have the $25 you gave me.
-
Complainers should try warbirds, then come back and be happy.
-
Now in Skuzzy’s post he is basically saying that you people who refuse to upgrade to GeForce 4 and 2.2Ghz machines are holding this sim back! HTC could do so much more if they didn’t have to deal with “slow machine users” (refereed to SMU’s) You SMUs are the problem not HTC!
Oz, I don't think Skuzzy was saying that at all. He was just explaining why HTC doesn't use more polygons in their art. I didn't take his post to be a slam on people with slower systems.
-
Thanks for the info Skuzzy. I had no idea about how that stuff....I just hit the "online" button and forget about everything else.
To the guys complaining about the long range bullets. I see many posts about LA7's and other fast late war planes. If you have to be under 400 to hit then the arena will be nothing but FAST late war planes that have a chance of catching something. Do you want an arena full of D9's, LA7's and P51's?
IMHO the only thing wrong with this game is a small minority of people who want to make AH so real and HARD that I can't play it due to framerates or because I am simply not good enough to get kills.
-
Also, consider the graphics cards. Did you know that until NVidia released the GF3 (non-MX), they only had support for 2 texture stages? What does this mean? Well, for graphics to look realistic, it requires at least 4 texture stages. One for the base texture, one for bump mapping, one for light mapping, and one for specular mapping. Oh, let's not talk about projected shadows, which requires more stages.
IL2 looks just fine in multiplayer, and by far better then aces without the use of advanced pixel shaders etc... Forgive me, but Whats your point again?
If you are a box game with limited network play, you do not have to be so concerned with this as you know you will have a limited number of objects in view at any given time.
IL2 currently supports up to 32 plane dogfights. This is exactly the same amount of VIEWABLE objects that the Aces High graphics engine draws. The other 32 players (in aces high are shown as dots).
I have no doubt that when the mean CPU is above 1Ghz, AH will look appropriately improved in the graphics area.
I would like to point out that (1.0 and ABOVE Ghz is the Standard Now)
When was the last time that you saw Best Buy/Comp USA/Radio Shack/ selling a Pentium 3 500 mhz? (exactly)....
I get 85 FRAMES a SECOND(refresh rate limitation) running aces high on a 1.4ghz althlon(not XP+)
THere is obviously PLENTY of room for improvement that can knock the frame rate down to a reasonable 40 fps.
Todays Standard PC is at least 1.0Ghz+ 256megs ram (more likey 512megs)
A Geforce 2 (or higher) 64 meg video card. with a 13+ Gig harddrive.
Toad in response to your question, I am not saying that ballistically it is impossible for the weapons to travel that far/inflict damage.
However what I am saying is that The simplicty of hitting a MOVING target with at those distances is more then UNLIKELY, it is almost near im possible. But yet in Aces High, It is as simple as the landings/takeoffs .. cake :)
-
IL2 looks just fine in multiplayer, and by far better then aces without the use of advanced pixel shaders etc... Forgive me, but Whats your point again?
Il-2 also displays objects at less than half the distance as Aces High displays them. This allows them leeway in other areas, oh and the LOD models are less than steller at ranges in Aces High where I can make out the definitive shape of a P38.. in Il-2 they look like washed out crayon drawings.
IL2 currently supports up to 32 plane dogfights. This is exactly the same amount of VIEWABLE objects that the Aces High graphics engine draws. The other 32 players (in aces high are shown as dots).
Supports and does are two different things. Currently the highest # of online players in servers while still achieving good framerates, very little net lag and little to no warping are 8 players... the host being a very high speed connection.
I would like to point out that (1.0 and ABOVE Ghz is the Standard Now)
When was the last time that you saw Best Buy/Comp USA/Radio Shack/ selling a Pentium 3 500 mhz? (exactly)....
Ah, well the standard on the shelves and on people's computer desks are two different things.
Businesses, if they do well, have funds to buy the top of the line PC to sell to the end user at a substantial increase. This in turn means the end user (consumer) must purchase a very expensive product...
I get 85 FRAMES a SECOND(refresh rate limitation) running aces high on a 1.4ghz althlon(not XP+)
THere is obviously PLENTY of room for improvement that can knock the frame rate down to a reasonable 40 fps.
And what about all those people still flying with 600-1.0Ghz PCs? THere isn't plenty of room for improvement for those people. Most of them only get 40fps as their high end framerate.
Todays Standard PC is at least 1.0Ghz+ 256megs ram (more likey 512megs)
A Geforce 2 (or higher) 64 meg video card. with a 13+ Gig harddrive.
Again, maybe on the shelf... but not in people's homes.
However what I am saying is that The simplicty of hitting a MOVING target with at those distances is more then UNLIKELY, it is almost near im possible. But yet in Aces High, It is as simple as the landings/takeoffs
I assume you believe takeoffs/landings are some sort of a complex sequence? Have you ever flown any kind of a plane before? Real life landings and take offs are no harder than flying, you just have to maintain the right rate of descent, speed, flaps down, gear down and you'll be down softer than a babies butt. Of course, if you are using Il-2 as your basis for this assumption I'll tell you right now... that is far from how it works. The flaps aren't even modelled within a lick of correct, and they act as air brakes deploying at any speed.
-SW
-
Il-2 also displays objects at less than half the distance as Aces High displays them. This allows them leeway in other areas, oh and the LOD models are less than steller at ranges in Aces High where I can make out the definitive shape of a P38.. in Il-2 they look like washed out crayon drawings.
Actually this is a far better way, its called creative thinking no? Why require the Graphics engine to draw everything down to a rivet at 5 miles away? NO point to do so, therefore make stair steps of what is visually identifiable.
And you are far off from saying that the planes are not identifiable, you must be running in 640x480 resolution. Try a higher (standard 1024x768).
Supports and does are two different things. Currently the highest # of online players in servers while still achieving good framerates, very little net lag and little to no warping are 8 players... the host being a very high speed connection.
lol, This is the biggest crock of crap I've heard.
:rolleyes:
Try hyperlobby bud, up to 300 people there nightly, oh and on servers (ACCEPTING up to 32) players with minimal lag issues.
Btw, I have hosted 32 player missions with average pings around 120. Not an issue is it?... :rolleyes:
AKSwulfe As a quick summerization of your previous responses.
I guess you feel that because certain people are using computers that are over 5+ years old (VERY old in computer technology/progression) The advances should not be pressed forth?
Well, I guess with that approach, Aces High will only advance as fast as its SLOWEST customers.
Upgrading when wanting to play an advanced piece of software is surely viable.
If those of you who proclaim support advancment for that of Aces High, why not jump up and upgrade that old 5+ year Cpu so the rest can enjoy an already good game become even greater.
-
Wulfe pretty much covered the points.
No need to get defensive jbroey.
The information about the NVidia cards was just information. Most people do not know much about the hardware that drives all this. It all has limitations.
1.0Ghz is not the mean average computer speed of the typical users desktop today. I never said a thing about the average of what is being sold today. It may be another 9 months to a year before 1.0Ghz is the mean average of the desktop and I might be optimistic.
I would also say the mean average video card, in terms of performance, is in the GF2 area.
32 planes viewable still does not take into account that everyone of those dots past 32 planes, is still being processed. Network packets for those 'dots' are still being sent and received. Collision detection is still being done. That is a hefty bit of work for the CPU, which low participation box games do not have to deal with.
Oh, I did not mention IL2, as I have not played it online. I was talking in general terms about the tradeoffs one makes for higher end graphics versus higher player numbers in an online game. If those tradeoffs did not exist today IL2 would be a massive online sim, but they do exist.
Hmmm, the reason AH planes look like planes at a distance is called LOD modeling. Pretty much an accepted way to express a 3D object at a distance. By using different detail models you can accurately display a plane with only a few polys, but still look like a plane at a far distance.
Sudz: sorry for bursting your bubble. BUT you better have that brew ready for the CON, or these guys are going to hang yours truly for creating the problem. :D
-
Actually this is a far better way, its called creative thinking no? Why require the Graphics engine to draw everything down to a rivet at 5 miles away? NO point to do so, therefore make stair steps of what is visually identifiable.
Actually, Aces High uses LOD models too. But they display the actual shape of the aircraft to a T at greater distances. The LOD models in Il-2 draw a larger less refined model at closer distances, thus this makes gunnery a little harder. The part you were aiming for is actually half the size and the DM is no where near it.
The LOD models in Il-2 are reminiscent of Aces Over Europe.
And you are far off from saying that the planes are not identifiable, you must be running in 640x480 resolution. Try a higher (standard 1024x768).
I never said they weren't unidentifiable, but they are very far from resembling their true plane form at distances where I can easily tell the paint scheme of a 109 in Aces High.
Try hyperlobby bud, up to 300 people there nightly, oh and on servers (ACCEPTING up to 32) players with minimal lag issues.
I have. 300 people there nightly huh? Sorry, but not like it is in Aces High. They aren't all in one arena all going at it. They are off in seperate servers. Hyperlobby is simply a 3rd party interface, you think it does any work in the network area? No, it just hooks up for games. I've played games with 13+ players on there, it was simply awful.
Btw, I have hosted 32 player missions with average pings around 120. Not an issue is it?...
I have a 56K modem, I can play Aces High just fine. Il-2 is less than acceptable when the players on that server go over 8.
I guess you feel that because certain people are using computers that are over 5+ years old (VERY old in computer technology/progression) The advances should not be pressed forth?
Well, I guess with that approach, Aces High will only advance as fast as its SLOWEST customers.
Upgrading when wanting to play an advanced piece of software is surely viable.
If those of you who proclaim support advancment for that of Aces High, why not jump up and upgrade that old 5+ year Cpu so the rest can enjoy an already good game become even greater.
Easy for you to say, you got enough cash in that fat wallet of yours to pay for everyone else to upgrade?
No? Aw, too bad. Well how about this, you got enough cash in that wallet to pay for the subscriptions HTC loses from customers who can not afford to upgrade? No? Hmmmm...
Aces High has advanced this far, I'm guessing you weren't here in the beginning so of course you are basing your opinions on your own ignorance.
You take a look at the screenshots from version 1.00, then you'll realise how far they've come in 3 years.
Oh, and Il-2 is far from MMP... it's about as massively multiplayer is as the X-Box is. There's a point at which eye candy needs to be sacrificed for the sake of network coding and speed.
-SW
-
Ohh...screen shots from 1.0. Got any? I'd be interested to see them. I downloaded AH back when only two or three planes were modeled in Beta, but like an igit I didn't realize I'd be addicted several years later and didn't keep it.
The only think I have to compare this version to is the one I played last december (or so) when I first joined and before I ran out of time to play.
-
In following these threads in the Aces High BB ( why, dont' I have anything better to do? ) I often find myself in complete agreement with Yeager. What a strange mind he seems to have.
We have dog nose prints on our glass, but i know who put them there. Once, however, she (the dog) skidded across the kitchen on her nose and left a permanent black mark on the floor
-
Puck, the screenshots page that showed the actual development shots (updated every couple of months) is now gone... but when we did have it, you could see what it was like early on.
Of course, if you want to picture AH as it was then... all you have to do is strap yourself in a C.202. The cockpit is relatively simple verse the new ones. Compare the cockpits and models of the P51B and P51D, should be pretty easy to tell which one is newer.
Here's a Typhoon flying over a beta terrain... (http://www.hitechcreations.com/pyro/typhoon.gif)
Notice how barren it is? When you get down low, there's only low res shrubs and bushes... can't see 'em in this screenshot, but the trees we have now are much higher res and detailed.
No clouds(introduced 1.03), no cloud layers either (the ones that blanket an entire sector), no sunrise/sunset (introduced 1.03), no explosions with debri, no fire!, .303 muzzle flashes were the same size as the .50 muzzle flashes, no high res texture when you get close to the ground, (http://www.hitechcreations.com/pyro/n1k2.gif) See that field in the background? That's what large fields use to look like.
If you really wanna get an idea of how far they've come, get ready to read. Go to the News & Announcements forum, on the pull down option select show threads from the beginning and go to the last page. Start there and work your way to present.
It was so simple in the beginning, and it's gotten so much more complex since then while staying as a relatively small download.
-SW
-
I have no idea where jbroey3 is basing his info from except for perhaps latest pc sales of the last month , but from my recent experience of the transition of a 70 player online squadron from Fighter ace 2.5 a 19 mb sim w/the same reqirements as AH to a 260 mb monster Fighter ace 3 with requirements of a super pc to play .
I have seen about 10 players go over to that game out of the 70 .and out of those 10 i know 4 of them had to add hardware to play it .I believe about all of us tried it .
so around 85% of this group has pc's that are slower then 600 mhz and cant play that game . so what does this say about the average pc in the sim world ?? my evaluation is based on the last 2 months for as fighter ace 2.5 is in its last month , and FA3 is a sub now w/ no free rooms (who wants to pay for a game that u cant play) now this is the reality of online sims and the average pc user is still under 800mhz (says alot doesn't it )
P.s I'm an XO in this squadron and ive addicted about 20 players to this game from there . muhahahahaa (I need to bribe the others with flight lessons to i guess )
-
Well, I guess you did confuse me then. Because in your FIRST post you said:
Originally posted by jbroey3
3. Just to RE-Itterate, the OVER SIMPLIFIED AMMO damage/Ability to damage another plane from SUCH RANGES with specific types of ammo. (It is not realistic, nor is it even remotely accurate from a ballistics standpoint).
I took the comment about ballistics to mean that you thought it wasn't even remotely accurate from a BALLISTICS standpoint, which, as you now admit, is quite ludicrous as a generalization.
("ballistics" as defined by Webster primarily with respect to definition "b""
"A: the science of the motion of projectiles in flight
B : the flight characteristics of a projectile")
Of course, then you said:
Originally posted by jbroey3
Toad in response to your question, I am not saying that ballistically it is impossible for the weapons to travel that far/inflict damage.
However what I am saying is that The simplicty of hitting a MOVING target with at those distances is more then UNLIKELY, it is almost near im possible. But yet in Aces High, It is as simple as the landings/takeoffs .. cake :)
... which sort of indicates to me NOW that you DO agree that BALLISTICALLY the guns modeled in AH do indeed have the capability to send projectiles 1000+ yards and to inflict damage, including major damage, on WW2 type aircraft when they hit, thus correcting your previous mis-spoken generalization.
Now, however, you've changed your generalization to say that "it's too easy to hit a moving target at that range in AH", because it should be "near impossible".
Do I understand your new position correctly? That it should be "near impossible" to hit a moving target (an aircraft) at 1000 yards using the the MG's and Cannon modeled in AH?
If so, I'd like to continue to discuss it with you. If I am misunderstanding you again, please let me know.
Thanks.
-
Hello Toad,
You are partially correct on what you have understood on what i said initially. I do see that the way I worded my statement left open many possiblities for interpretation.
here is a Clarification that the user "Tac" has already previously mentioned.
It sums up quite nicely (although not all of what I was speaking about)
please read...
Its not the guns, its the laser range finder icon.
IMO, there should be no rangefinder below 2k distance. It should be replaced by a "+" or "-" to signify you are gaining on it (+) or losing ground (-).
Try turning your enemy icons off when you are about to attack a buff. You will notice your aim will be waay off when you guess range. Also, when deflection shooting a con, even if he's inside d1.0, if you have no icons, chances are you will miss constantly. Why? Because people dont WATCH the plane, they watch the icon and glance at the plane to see where its manouvering towards. The major and only image used to decide how much lead to put is the rangefinder.
Without the laser range finder you have to get in CLOSE, inside d200 and at a good firing position or you will miss completely. I find THAT to be very realistic. I LOVE iconless fights, there's no sniping, very little HO's, ACM is intense as you lose sight of your opponent and he of you.. and you end up in a series of engage/disengage to reacquire visual... and of course, the BOUNCE is there!
In Addition to this, my ballistics standpoint holds firm, with the understanding that at Such ranges, and the limited planform of the target that is being attacked, I see in aces high, NO EVIDENCE of rochocheting of projectiles occurs.
However in IL2 I do see this. The combination of mass/inertial energy of the round reaching the target does hold substantial load, however, the Forces, and the angles at which the rounds "hit" the plane (aces high) I see no differential effect of point blank compared to D1.2K yards away.
I hope that this clears this up. :cool: If not, then.. well perhaps im wording it wrong again. ;)
-
You'll not accomplish anything this way Nath. My advice is to wait until HiTech is on-line and assault him with a barrage of insults, accusations and total lack of respect. Then and only then can we enjoy the relative peace that the last 6 months has brought us.
I had no idea I was that instrumental in ruining the game for you; I shall continue.
-
In Il-2 there is only a single plane which I've seen rounds richochet off- and that is the Il-2 due to it's armor. It's also limited to the 7.7mm rounds on the German side.
I've fired .303s from a LaGG-3 into Bf-109s at ranges very far out. Instead of richochets, I saw the hit debri falling away from the aircraft.
I wouldn't say that just because Il-2 has richochets the way it models weapons is better or realistic... especially since they seem to only come off of one of the planes in Il-2.
-SW
-
In Il-2 there is only a single plane which I've seen rounds richochet off- and that is the Il-2 due to it's armor. It's also limited to the 7.7mm rounds on the German side.
At least your trying to AKWulfe. :)
Are you in some form of denial by any chance? Just wondering.
-
Originally posted by SUPERFLY
Yeah, this game sucks. Why are we all playing it?
Just for these cool squad icons, we could add to our planes.
:D ;) :p :D ;) :p :D ;) :p
-
jbroey, have you even fired a real gun in your life Even then have you ever fired a gun at something other than paper targets?
Because while I notice that your trying to sound like you know alot about ballistics and weaponry, but your just showing your ignorance.
Take your average .22 caliber rifle out to a field somewhere and shoot at a coffee can with it. Fire a couple hundred rounds at one hundred yards and tell me how many bounce off. And then realize that a heavy machine gun round or a 20mm cannon round literally has thousands of times the force.
Even rifle caliber rounds such as the 7.62 NATO (effectively the same as the .30 caliber machine gun round) will punch thru an engine block of most cars. How do I know? I've done it. A .50 caliber round will go thru both sides of armored cars. And I won't even get into 20mm AP rounds. And FYI, even that very small .22 caliber round is lethal up to several miles.
Now go study what an airplane is made of, yup thats right, Aluminum. Very thin aluminum. In fact you can punch thru the skin of most aircraft with a screw driver or knife easier than you can that coffee can. Even the frames of aircraft were stressed steel tubing, which wouldn't deflect rounds except in very extreme cases and would still heavily damage the structure.
Aircraft are very delicate machines.
Armor you say? Go check a diagram on aircraft armor and you will see that very little area on an aircraft is armored. I can provide several if you don't have any handy. Usually just the pilots seatback, the forward viewscreen, portions of the firewall, and maybe small especially vulnerable area's such as the oil cooler and the 30mm ammo bin. Not much at all, and usually its not thick enough to stop HMG rounds and higher (.50's and up).
Show me guncamera footage of rounds bouncing off (and if you think you find some, watch closer, because most likely its chunks of plane coming off).
Just because IL2 does it, doesn't mean its real.
I've tried to keep this discussion simple, but if you'd rather we can pull out ballistic coefficents and other physical characteristics, force equations, and Finite Element Analysis simulations.
You see.... Aircraft guns, ballistics, and lethality are a hobby of mine. I'm no expert like Tony Williams who posts here regularly (author of the book "Rapid Fire"), but I do know enough to call roadkill when I see it.
-
So now you are saying it's the ICONS that make it too simple to hit a moving target "at those ranges"?
First, it was "ballistically impossible", which you now agree is a totally incorrect statement.
Then it was it should be "near impossible" to hit a moving target at those ranges for some reason you have failed to provide.
Because I think everyone familiar with these guns knows that the projectiles will easily travel 1000 yards and more, arriving with enough energy to do serious damage to WW2 aircraft.
Now, the explanation is shoved off on to Tac's discussion of Icons, which most of us understand as this is the not the first time he's made it.
The first line of Tac's quoted statement is "Its not the guns, its the laser range finder icon. "
So, do I now understand correctly that it is the ICONS to which you attribute the ease of hitting a moving target?
You now agree that "it's not the guns"? Or did Tac not say what you really mean?
Of course, you've now added the point that you do not believe that AH models the angle of impact of a round or, if it does so, does not modify "damage" when considering various angles of impact.
Do I understand your argument yet?
Thanks.
-
I myself don't think it's the bullet that had bad ballistics Toad but I think the problem with AH is that the tracer round has almost the same trajectory as the bullet meaning a tracer round for a POny will reach 1.2k ranges or more before it dissapears. I say this enlight of what I read in several books stating that tracer rounds had considerably worse ballistics than the bullet itself.
They had to aim above what they wanted to hit even in straight and level flight because although the tracer round itself gave you a vague idea of where the rounds were going they were not as reliable as the pilot being properly trained in gunnery. That's the main reasons why bullets in AH seem laser like for those other aicraft.
-
Hmmm Realism, where does one start? ;)
Well I guess the most unrealistic thing I have seen in AH so far is the constant clamor for more realism.
Face it, this is a game/sim; it aint real. Ballistics? The bullets aren't real ;)
Gunnery? Hell if the arena is in hyper lag mode, you won't hit the side of a barn ;)
Wouldn't it be nice to have all of the players get behind HT and support his efforts to get a new T3 line (or whatever it is) so we can play the game without weird things happening which affect gameplay.
Unrealistic? Hehe, spawn points and kamikaze dweebs who continue to spawn on a field in an Ostie which can't be killed unless you drop 2k worth of ordnance on it and annoy me as I take off. Hehe, he will then respawn to do it again.
Whats the point?
-
Hey Ammo you tosser! :) This is how you should do your thread hijacking! :D
Wasnt this post about Trains and climb-grades? ;)
-
Vermillion:
In the case of the IL2, I believe it was the only WW2 a/c armored as it was. Hence the nickname...the flying tank. The pilot was seated in a steel tub type fixture in the plane, largely because the plane was used primarily as an attack a/c specifically for use against tanks. Now this was low level work and so armored to protect the pilot against small arms fire and low level AA fire.
If IL2 models richochets, perhaps it is a bit overmodeled because, if hit in any other part of the plane, debris should come off of it.
-
At least Nath plays AH...for that, he is entitled to speak his mind.
On the other hand, jbroey must be suffering from Aces High envy...a common affliction causing disconnected and feverish speech, often giving off the impression to others that not only does he feel his own beloved IL2 is insufficient in meeting his simming needs, the afflicted also commonly speaks in ways resembling BIG FARTING SOUNDS.
Jbroey.....
Go play your superior sim and save us the self-rightous babble....if IL2 was as wonderful as you claim, AH would not have 400+ players online everyday.
Bottom line here....we don't care what you and IL2 are up to...just go have fun and grant us the same priviledge.
-
dont forget to mention that alot of ww2 planes were still made of cloth .. yes cloth and wood .
-
In denial? Of what? That Il-2 simply fudges the richochets? Nevermind the fact that they are only a very insignificant portion of a gunnery model, why do you think Il-2s gunnery model is so much better?
I want a real answer, no "it feels" or "it looks" or "it has richochets"... I want you to answer in technical terms... otherwise it's just a bunch of crap.
Roscoroo: Very few WWII planes were made of cloth AND wood. The Hurricane is the only plane I know of that is made of cloth AND wood... the other planes had wood structures or cloth control surfaces... but for the most part, after 1941 all cloth control surfaces were replaced with metal.
-SW
-
Originally posted by AKSWulfe
Roscoroo: Very few WWII planes were made of cloth AND wood. The Hurricane is the only plane I know of that is made of cloth AND wood... the other planes had wood structures or cloth control surfaces... but for the most part, after 1941 all cloth control surfaces were replaced with metal.
-SW
Vickers Wellington? Wasnt it cloth covered?
-
Very well could be MadBird, I don't know much about bombers... especially British ones- except for the Mosquito and Lancaster.
-SW
-
you can see a plane in the sky starting from five miles if you have good vision-which is not probably not the case with Aces High players :)
now,is the distance in AH measured in feet or yards? I thought it was feet and now people say yards. Also, although i did register hits from close to 1k, they weren't doing much damage.
So whoever said that the way hit power is modelled is unrealistic obviously doesn't know what they're talking about.
Plain and clear...
Come on ppl...
-
I've seen lots of different planes from over five miles away, particularly at higher altitudes.
-
Originally posted by spitfiremkv
Also, although i did register hits from close to 1k, they weren't doing much damage.
Seems like you have never been sprayed at D1.2k by a C-Hog or a Jug :D Man, it hurts :)
-
If you guys are getting hit at 1.2k, you must either have real bad connects (ie the other guy see's you much closer), or your turning on autolevel because you think your safe and making yourself an easy target ;)
As long as your not flying straight and level, its almost impossible (I've never been hit over 800) to hit anything at all.
And Don, even the vaunted IL2's armor was not proof against more than shell fragments and rifle caliber rounds. HMG's and light cannons will defeat most any armor that a period aircraft could reasonabley carry. :) In other words, don't bring up modern planes such as the A10. ;)
-
You quoted in an earlier post AH uses Bump mapping. Could you explain HOW it is used in AH? I do know what Bump mapping is, And making maps I don't know how bump mapping is used on the tiles. I do use bump mapping on some of my tiles to make it 'Appear" to have a 3d effect. But it is still a flat surface. If it is used elsewhere, then where? If it is used on the tiles, I don't see it. I am using an old Gforce 32 meg Non DDR, so would this be why i don't see Bump mapping?
Each Tile in AH is 1 square mile, it has 9 vortexs, these are twisted and independant from each other so it twist or warps the tile, But bump mapping ( as I believe) would also add 3d to each of these tiles. Am i correct?
NUTTZ
-
Thanks Skuzzy for this very interesting post. I'm not a programmer other than the great basic code I used to crank out on my COCO but I'm sure as hell an admirer of AH's programming. I only wish that short of giving away trade secrets people who do know how this is done would more often share how this or that is done.
Beeg
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Well, I keep hearing how many people think the AH graphics engine is old and outdated and not up to todays systems.
As a programmer, I will tell you categorically, it has absolutely zero to do with the graphics engine. You know a graphics engine only pushes polys, and the amount of polys you chose to deal with (i.e. the artwork) is your limitation.
You guys are asking for more polys, plain and simple. I will also tell you Nate and Super could create the most realistic models you could ever see, but then when your frame rate is in the toilet, you would not like it.
There are inherent rules involved with game design you cannot get around today.
1) If you are a box game with limited network play, you have more processing power to work with grahics.
2) If you are a massive multi-player online game, you have to give up quite a bit of processing power from the graphics to achieve smooth game play.
I am not saying there is not room for improvement. HTC has shown the ability to move forward, but you have to consider, the mean average CPU today and answer, "what can that system do today?". Todays mean average CPU is about 550Mhz P3.
I have no doubt HTC could generate a version of AH that would make about 2 percent of the players really happy in terms of eye candy, the other 98 percent would not be able to play it. This would be a bad business call on HTC's part, but they know that already.
And before you ask, "why not create a high end of AH for those that can handle it?". Well, now you are talking about generating twice to three times the amount of work for HTC, which translates into much longer times between updates and patches. Again, another bad business call.
Also, consider the graphics cards. Did you know that until NVidia released the GF3 (non-MX), they only had support for 2 texture stages? What does this mean? Well, for graphics to look realistic, it requires at least 4 texture stages. One for the base texture, one for bump mapping, one for light mapping, and one for specular mapping. Oh, let's not talk about projected shadows, which requires more stages.
Of course, bump mapping alone adds nice subtle touches to grahics. The terrain in AH uses bump mapping, which was added some versions ago.
I admire HTC's ability to balance the graphics. They probably do that better than anyone. What does that mean? Well, if you create a model with a high poly count, and suddenly you have to render 10 of those, along with the other persistent objects, the frame rate would drop like a rock. Balancing the poly count is a true art. The goal for the game designer to to keep frame rates fluid and not fluctuating all over the place. In some cases it is impossible to not have that happen, but you want those cases to be the special case, not the normal case.
If you are a box game with limited network play, you do not have to be so concerned with this as you know you will have a limited number of objects in view at any given time.
I have no doubt that when the mean CPU is above 1Ghz, AH will look appropriately improved in the graphics area.
-
NUTTZ, I only know bump mapping is used on the terrain in AH, but do not know how it is applied.
The effect of the bump mapping in the current terrains appears to increase the "feel" of speed as you fly over the terrain, especially at low altitudes.
If you are creating a terrain, bump mapping just gives the illusion of a 3D texture. This is much cheaper, graphically, than actually altering the vertices to give height to a surface.
The effect is subtle in a graphics world where lighting is uniform, but in point, or spot lighting, the effects can be very dramatic. In general, bump mapping works by adding another lighting calculation to the pixel based on the bump map texture. Bump map textures are grayscale, and the color of gray dictates how the light calculation is done. Lighter colors raise the elevation, darker colors lower the elevation.
I was not aware how the AH terrain was setup, but with 9 vertices per square mile, it makes a lot of sense to use bump mapping. It allows you to create more dramatic effects between the vertices without adding more vertices.
Many games have not used bump mapping as it requires more memory and more calculations. If you use the hardware bump mapping on the newer generation of video cards, you need quite a bit of video ram as you are loading another texture on top of the default one for the poly. If you do it in software, you do not need as much video ram, but the graphics performance could suffer.
That help?
-
Skuzzy & others...
Overall, I'm pleased with the look and feel of the game. I've got one of those "average" computers (P3 550 /Voodoo 5500) and it plays Aces High and my other games (Falcon 4, etc) very well.
However, I've got a question....you mention HTC's balance of FPS and playability. Now, call me kooky, but couldn't HTC make the tweaks the power users desire options? For example, my lowly system runs Falcon 4 really nicely. But, if I crank in the big details and such, I can really drag it down. So, for my system, the settings are cranked back.
If some of these guys have P4/XP cpu's and video memory for it, then let them have the toys ;) Every other game I've played recently (just finished Max Payne) had big option boxes for resolutions, details, etc etc. If the Art Dept wants to crank out shinier looking birds, GVs, etc, then have at!
Smoke em if you got em :)
-
Sorry to hijack or have a thread within a thread.
Skuzzy I'm aware of where bumpmapping is in AH, It's the clutter on/off now. Me and Weazel have been playing around with this. It's 2 transparent layers that give you the "feel" of speed down low. I know "brandX" say they use bumpmapping and thought they were refering bumpmapping per tile. Meaning the tile has infinate number of differences in alt within the tile, I could be wrong.
Thanx for replying
NUTTZ
-
Originally posted by -sudz-
- Tronspir
Unfortunately, tronspir, there won't be any brew this con. I'm too devastated by this whole train grade thing. And if that wasn't enough, now I find the damage model is unrealistic and the planes are represented by something called "polys" instead of being actual planes I was piloting remotely. :(
After I finished weeping and gnashing my teeth from reading this, I called my friends and relatives - told them I was quitting my job and selling all my material possessions. It's time I found out what is really real. Walk the earth. Visit India.
Because if AH isn't real then we're all just playing at life and not really accomplishing anything for the populations of Rookland, Knightland, and Bishopia. Like it was a game or something . . .
Oh. Whups! Never mind then.
-sudz
PS Superfly - sell me back my computer and CH setup. I still have the $25 you gave me.
ROFL, sudz. That is the funniest post I've seen in a long time. Thanks for the laugh. :D